Suchergebnisse

Istraživanje političkog nasilja, uključujući terorizam, moguće je općenito podijeliti u dvije faze: u prvoj, kvantitativnoj, istraživanja su tražila odgovore na pitanje: tko je što učinio, kada i gdje. Takav se pristup mnogo upotrebljavao u literaturi društvenih nauka. Druga faza vodi k produbljenom istraživanju ljudskog ponašanja postavljajući pitanja o tome zašto određene osobe učestvuju u terorističkim akcijama ili akcijama političkog nasilja. Usprkos činjenici da se uzročnost ne može generalizirati do stupnja u kojem postaje neprimjenjiva, istraživanje uzroka pokazalo se mnogo probitačnijim. Ono omogućava istraživanje problema rješavanja političkog nasilja kroz proces tretiranja njegovih uzroka, umjesto da se orijentira na kažnjavanje zbog njegovih konzekvenci. Osim toga, čini se pomak od deskribiranja i kategoriziranja onoga što se desilo k predviđanju onoga što će se najvjerojatnije dogoditi. Podaci o političkom nasilju koji su već prikupljeni i sistematizirani čine dobar okvir za istraživanje njegovih uzroka. Međutim, zahtjev znanstvene objektivnosti traži oprez kada se analiziraju takvi podaci; informacije često nisu objektivne, a statistika je često nekomparabilna. To je istodobno i jedan indikator da konsensus o tome što je zapravo političko nasilje još nije postignut. Objektivni kriterij za njegovo definiranje često je dopunjen subjektivnim konotacijama, kao što su motivi, težnje i percepcije istraživača i javnosti uopće. Identifikacija uzroka političkog nasilja u posljednje vrijeme privlači mnogo pažnje u literaturi o terorizmu. U osnovi, postoje četiri tipa terorizma determinirana uzrocima. Na prvom je mjestu potrebno uzeti u obzir politički i ideološki terorizam koji je često povezan s pojavom strategije nove ljevice. Drugo, terorizam je također jedan od konzekvenci etničkih i rasnih separatističkih ili emancipatorskih pokreta. Treći je tip karakterističan za aspiracije marginaliziranih društvenih slojeva kao što su studenti na pretrpanim univerzitetima, nezaposleni radnici ili radnici — migranti. Četvrti tip moguće je definirati kao patološki terorizam u koji je moguće svrstati i kriminalne terorističke akcije. Iako terorizam ne može biti objašnjen jednim određenim brojem uzroka, budući da objašnjenje mora računati na veći broj uzroka od četiri spomenute klasifikacije, može to poslužiti za početak identifikacije njegovih uzroka. ; Research on political violence, including terrorism, can broadly be divided into two phases: the first one, quantitative, could be described as seeking answers to questions: who did what, when and how. That one has been extensively dealt with in the current social science literature. The second phase leads into a more thorough research of human behaviour by posing the dilemma why did particular people do such a thing as an act of terrorism or a political murder. In spite of the fact that causality cannot be traced all the way neither generalized without becoming inapplicable, research on causes is far more advantageous. It enables us to look for more definite solutions for the problems of political violence by curing its causes instead of merely punishing for its consequences. Besides, we are thus moving from describing and categorizing what has happened to predicting what is likely to happen. Data on political violence, already gathered and systematized, form the framework for research of its causes. However, the quest for scientific objectivity requires utmost caution when analyzing such data: information is often biased, statistics are frequently incomparable. That is an indication that consensus on what political violence really is has not yet been reached. Objective criteria for its definition are generally supplemented by subjective connotations, such as motives and aims of the perpetrators and perceptions of researchers or of the general public. Identification of causes of political violence has recently gained much attention in literature on terrorism. There are basically four types of terrorism determined by the causes established so far. First, we have to take account political and/or ideological terrorism often tied to the appearance and strategy of the New Left. Secondly, terrorism is also one of the consequences of ethnic and racial separatist or emancipatory movements. The third type could be attributed to socio-economic conditions and aspirations of marginalized social strata, such as students at over-crowded universities, the unemployed or migrant-workers. The fourth type could be defined as pathological terrorism, and criminal terrorist acts can be subsumed into that category. Although terrorism cannot be explained by one set of causes only, as it usually falls into more than one type of the four enumerated above, such a classification serves as a beginning of identification of its causes.

S obzirom da je terorizam poslednjih godina prerastao u globalnu pretnju bezbednosti i alarmantnu vrstu nasilja u savremenom svetu, utvrđivanje njegove strukture, sadržine i uzroka, jedan je od ciljeva političkih, pravnih i bezbednosnih nauka. Terorizam u osnovi predstavlja istorijsku pojavu, koja je stara koliko i sama država, mada se često posmatra kao fenomen savremenog ljudskog društva. Međutim, savremeni oblici terorizma imaju sasvim novu dimenziju koja proističe iz različitih istorijskih, društvenoekonomskih i političkih razloga, kao i iz razvoja nauke i tehnologije.Iako terorizam predstavlja pošast savremenog civilizacijskog poretka, još uvek ne postoji jedna opšteprihvaćena i univerzalna definicija terorizma, s obzirom da sam pojam terorizam nije lako definisati. Terorizam ima mnoštvo pojavnih oblika, pa ga, sem složenosti, karakteriše i promenljivost. Značenje reči terorizam menjalo se tokom istorije, kako bi se prilagodilo riziku svakog narednog perioda, stoga nije nimalo iznenađujuće što je veoma teško odrediti trajniju definiciju ovog pojma. Takođe, jedan od razloga je što politika koju vode moćne države ima dvostruke standarde, a neke od njih čak koriste terorizam kako bi izazvale sukobe i nestabilnost u određenom regionu, ali bez učešća sopstvenih vojnih snaga. --- Given that terrorism in recent years has grown into a global threat to security and alarming form of violence in the modern world, the determination of its structure, content and causes, is one of the aims of political, legal and security studies. Terrorism is essentially an historical phenomenon that is as old as the state itself, although it is often seen as a phenomenon of human society. However, the current forms of terrorism are completely new dimension arising from different historical, socio-economic and political reasons, as well as the development of science and technology.Although scourge of terrorism is a modern civilized order, there is not yet a generally accepted and universal definition of terrorism, as the notion of terrorism is not easy to define. Terrorism has many forms, and it is, except the complexity, characterized with variability of the features. The meaning of terrorism changed the course of history, in order to accommodate the risk of any subsequent period, so it is not surprising that it is very difficult to determine the lasting definition of the term. Also, one of the reasons is that the politics of the powerful states has a double standard, and some of them even use terrorism to avoid potential conflicts and instability in a particular region, but without the involvement of its own military forces.

Rad se bavi analizom reakcija Ujedinjenih naroda na zločin terorizma u obliku inkriminacije terorizma u nizu konvencija prihvaćenih u krilu te organizacije, no još više u obliku moralnih, ali i pravnih sankcija sadržanih u političkim osudama neobvezujućih rezolucija Opće skupštine, posebice tijekom hladnog rata, kao i u obvezujućim sankcijskim rezolucijama Vijeća sigurnosti počevši od 90-ih godina prošlog stoljeća. Pritom rad upućuje na specifičan razvojni proces koji počinje sankcijama prema državama odgovornima za tzv. "državni terorizam", a u posljednjih 15-ak godina sankcije su se gotovo potpuno usmjerile prema terorističkim organizacijama kao nedržavnim akterima te su razvojem međunarodnoga kaznenog pravosuđa otvorile prostor i individualnoj međunarodnoj kaznenoj odgovornosti za taj zločin. ; This paper analyzes the United Nations' reactions to the international crime of terrorism. It focuses on counter-terrorism international conventions adopted within the UN, as well as on moral and political sanctions contained in non-binding resolutions of the General Assembly during the period of the so-called ˝Cold war˝. However, the main focus of this research is on the analysis of legally binding resolutions adopted by the Security Council starting from the 1990s. The analysis of the development of the Security Council's resolutions adopted under Chapter VII of the UN Charter indicates that these resolutions, initially addressed to states responsible for the so- called ˝state terrorism˝, gradually became directed exclusively towards terrorist organizations as non-state actors. In this context, the ˝ISIL (Da'esh) and Al-Qaida Sanctions List˝ of the Security Council is being continuously expanded with names of individuals as well as of other non-state ˝entities and other groups˝ affected by these sanctions. Unfortunately, compared to the beginnig of 2015, when only 70 ˝entities and other groups˝ were listed, in March 2017 their number increased to over 360. These ˝entities and other groups˝, which originate from Tunisia, Mali, Albania, Afghanistan, Ethiopia, Bangladesh, the Comoros, Pakistan, Indonesia, Somalia, Kenya, Tanzania, Arabian Peninsula, Libya, Sudan, Egypt, the Caucasus region, Uzbekistan, and even Bosnia and Herzegovina, differ in various ways. Some of the above mentioned ˝entities˝ aim at overthrowing the government of their country, just like ˝classical˝ insurgents as temporary subjects of international law. Other non-state actors' activities are directed towards establishing a new state (for example, Ansar Eddine, Mouvement national de libération de l'Azawad – MNLA in Mali, Sudan People's Liberation Movement – SPLM in South Sudan). International crimes committed by these organizations are not only the object of the resolutions of the Security Council, but they are also in the focus of interest of the International Criminal Court (the ICC). Although the international crime of terrorism is not covered by the jurisdiction of the ICC under the Rome Statute, certain international crimes committed by terrorists or under the auspices of terrorist organizations share some common features with crimes against humanity, which fall under the jurisdiction of the ICC. Thus, the ICC indirectly contributes to the sanctioning for the crime of terrorism. Further evolution of the international criminal justice, both through the jurisprudence of the ICC and other ad hoc international and ˝hybrid˝ courts, will most certainly contribute to the development of international criminal liability of individuals for the crime of terrorism.

Ovaj diplomski rad pruža svojevrstan pregled razvoja sigurnosne i antiterorističke politike EU temeljene na idejama manjeg zla, ravnoteže i trgovanja između slobode i sigurnosti, uz analizu samih ideja. Analizirajući izvanrednost sigurnosne politike EU s jedne, te terorizma kao glavnog izazova sigurnosti EU (uz etničke sukobe) s druge strane, u radu se prikazuju određene proturječnosti sigurnosnih mjera EU utemeljenih na ideji ravnoteže sigurnosti i slobode. Proturječnosti su vidljive, ne toliko u smislu neprestanog pozivanja na nužnost i važnost očuvanja sigurnosti i slobode i paralelnom ograničavanju istih, koliko u smislu ograničavanja ili ukidanje ljudskih prava i sloboda kao načina podizanja općeg stanja sigurnosti bez pružanja konkretnih procjena o učinkovitosti istih, bez stvarnih jamstava ili dokaza o postizanja sigurnosnih uspjeha. Europska integracija počiva na vrijednostima mira, slobode, jednakosti i tolerancije od samih svojih početaka. U kompleksnosti odnosa europskih liberalnih vrijednosti i ciljeva s jedne, te sigurnosne nužnosti i opravdanja s druge strane, ovaj rad svoju tezu temelji na nekoliko primjera ograničavanja temeljnih ljudskih i građanskih sloboda. Građanska prava koja se obrađuju temelje se na Ugovoru iz Maastrichta, dok se ljudska prava temelje se na Europskoj konvenciji o ljudskim pravima. Kada se govori o postizanju, povećanju ili ugrozi sigurnosti, sigurnost se definira kao (I.) "Sigurnost kao stanje osjećaja zbrinutosti i smirenosti, slobode od straha ili tjeskobe" i (II) "Sigurnost kao poduzimanje mjera i postupaka s ciljem poboljšanja sigurnosti države ili organizacije". Europska sigurnost je shvaćena kao strategija vrlo bliska konceptu europskog identiteta tj. kao artikulacija zajedničkih europskih vrijednosti i interesa. ; This master's thesis provides an unique overview of the development of security and counter-terrorism policies of the EU based on the ideas of the lesser evil, balance and tradeoffs between freedom and security, along with an analysis of the ideas ...

Predmet ovoga rada je proučavanje učestalosti samoubilačkog terorizma s obzirom na politička uređenja napadnutih država. Budući da su teroristički napadi uvijek udar na društvo i društveni poredak, područje nacionalne sigurnosti predstavlja svojevrsnu poveznicu između promatranih varijabli. Od početka 80-ih godina prošloga stoljeća kampanje samoubilačkih napada u stalnom su porastu, a vrhunac doživljavaju nakon 2001. godine. Napadi na Sjedinjene Američke Države 2001. označavaju i početak novog, globaliziranog načina djelovanja terorističkih organizacija. Mete samoubilačkih napada su države svih političkih sustava (autokracija, anokracija i demokracija), što znači da ne postoji obrazac djelovanja organizacija koje u svojim napadima koriste samoubilački terorizam, ali su anokratske države češća meta. Nadalje, rezultati istraživanja pokazuju da su mete napada najčešće sigurnosne prirode te da su najviše napada izvele vjerske terorističke organizacije. Na kraju je prikazana kratka ilustracija zaključnih razmatranja na primjeru Iraka. ; The subject of this research paper is the connection between the occurrence of suicide attacks and the political system of the countries that are attacked. Since terror attacks represent an attack on the society and social order, national security represents a kind of connection between those two variables. Suicide attack campaigns are on the rise since the 1980s and they have reached their peak in 2001. That very well-known attack on the United States marks the beginning of a new kind of globalised activity of terrorist organizations. The results show that all countries, no matter their political system, are targets of suicide attacks, which means that there is no pattern in the activity of terrorist organizations that use suicide attacks. There is also a difference in the number of suicide attacks, where anocratic countries are attacked more often. Furthermore, the results show that the targets of most attacks, in all political systems, are security targets, and most of the attacks were carried out by religious terrorist organizations. Finally, we provide a brief illustration of the concluding remarks on the example of the Republic of Iraq.

Utemeljen na polazištima kritički orijentiranih sigurnosnih studija i studija terorizma, rad propituje metodološke, epistemološke pa i ontološke aspekte fenomena državnog terorizma. Tvrdi se kako je državni terorizam sustavno zanemareno područje znanja o terorizmu, iako je empirijski vrlo evidentan fenomen. U prvom dijelu rada propituje se klasična i suvremena politološka, sociološka, pravna i filozofska misao važna za razumijevanje države, sigurnosti, terorizma i državnog terorizma. Počevši od Weberove definicije države kao nositeljice monopola na nasilje i njegova koncepta razlikovanja vladavine (Herrschaft) i sile (Macht) tvrdi se da monopol na silu ne podrazumijeva korištenje svakog oblika sile i da država ne može biti ekskulpirana u situacijama kada koristi silu koja ima sva obilježja terorizma. Upravo za ključnim obilježjima terorizma traga se u drugom dijelu rada gdje se analizira postojeće znanje o terorizmu i državnom terorizmu. Na temelju postojećih definicija koje čine bazu od ukupno 373 definicije, sadržajnom i frekvencijskom analizom, dolazi se do operacionalne definicije terorizma i državnog terorizma. Izlučenih šest konstitutivnih elemenata terorizma ukazali su da je državni terorizam organizirana upotreba sile i nasilja ili prijetnja upotrebom nasilja kojom se posredstvom intencionalnog širenja straha odnosno terora, a na temelju anticipiranih reakcija širih psiholoških učinaka, nastoje ostvariti politički ciljevi, a kojega provodi i/ili sponzorira država. U fokusiranoj studiji s mnogo slučajeva u trećem dijelu analizira se državni terorizam na empirijskim primjerima dvadeset i jedne države (N=21). Slučajevi su selektirani na stogodišnjem dijakronijskom kontinuumu, počevši od 1914. godine i sarajevskog atentata na austro-ugarskog prijestolonasljednika Franju Ferdinanda pa do recentnih primjera protuterorističkih politika. Kroz povijesnu perspektivu, komparativnom metodom uz primjenu dizajna najrazličitijih slučajeva, potvrđena je polazna pretpostavka: terorizam jest ciljno racionalno sredstvo za postizanje političkih ciljeva država i njegova je pojavnost neovisna o tipu političkog režima. Kvalitativna i kvantitativna obilježja državnog terorizma nerijetko se razlikuju kako između tako i unutar triju poduzoraka (režima), no usprkos kontekstualnim razlikama, može se utvrditi da je u totalitarnim režimima državni terorizmu ekstremnih razmjera i predstavlja važnu polugu vladavine, dok je u autoritarnima, a napose u demokratskima riječ o fokusiranijem državnom nasilju, najčešće sa specifičnim oblicima djelovanja. ; The basis of this doctoral work rests on the fact that the state terrorism is ignored in the context of mainstream security and terrorism knowledge. Security studies as well as rapidly growing terrorism studies are predominantly focused on non-state terrorism. Critical voices which indicating the importance of the state terrorism phenomenon have emerged in the mid-1990s. Based on the starting points of critically oriented security studies and terrorism studies, this work analyzes the methodological, epistemological and even ontological aspects of the phenomenon of state terrorism. It is argued that the state terrorism is systematically neglected area of knowledge, although it is very evident phenomenon. In the first part of this doctoral work the classical and the contemporary political, social, philosophical thought and jurisprudence important for the understanding of the state security, terrorism and state terrorism have been examined. Max Weber's concept of the state and difference between legitimate domination (Herrschaft) and coercive power (Macht) in the exercise of sovereign state functions is at the center of theoretical discussions. We claim that this distinction remained outside of much Western scholarship. Their concepts are based on logic of what the state and its relations to society should be not what it is. In contrast to this mainstream normative oriented model we examine the empirical reality which is laden of state terrorism examples. Therefore, the second part of this work is dedicated to analysis of existing knowledge about terrorism and state terrorism. The emphasis is on the definitions of terrorism, so for this purpose the database of 373 terrorism definitions was constructed. Definitions collected from the scientific and academic sources, the expert sources, the available official sources of various institutions and organizations, news, etc. were subjected to content and frequency analysis. Those analyses indicated six key elements used for defining state terrorism, which is relevant to the selection of empirical cases. It is found that the state terrorism is the use of organized force and violence or threat to use violence as a means of intentional spreading fear and terror based on the anticipated reactions of broader psychological effects which seeks to achieve political objectives and which is conducted and/or sponsored by the state. It is not an ideology, but the strategy and tactic that can be used by all, including the states. Despite the fact that the most of the definitios are actor-neutral and that their contents coincide, there is no unified definition. According to such understanding, the third part is a focused study with a lot of cases (N=21) where the unit of analysis was state terrorism and analytical sub-units were states (cases) selected from the one century time span (1914th-2014th) complemented with the most recent cases (until the end of 2016th). Thus, it is a diachronic analysis (cross-historical analysis). Since the selected cases differ in several relevant independent variables (social, economic, geographic, cultural) the comparative analysis is based on the most different systems research designs. The basic criterion of comparison was the regime (totalitarian, authoritarian and democratic) in accordance with the tipology of Juan Linz. The main aim of such typology and case selection was to test the general thesis: terrorism is an integral instrument of state action that occurs in all types of political regimes and which states used/use as a form of rational choice to achieve their goals. The third part includes political and sociological analysis of primary and secondary sources for each case (state). The analysis of state terrorism included Italy during Mussolini, Nazi Germany, Lenin and Stalin Russia/Soviet Union, communist Poland, Mao Zednog's China, North Korea regime and Idi Amin's Uganda as a totalitarian regimes. The second group of states are, according to Linz proposal, authoritarian regimes. Here is a Serbian example of state sponsored terrorism in Sarajevo 1914 and assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand. Another example is Yugoslavia from the mid of 1960 even if it is not purely clear is it predominantly totalitarian or authoritarian regime. Other examples are the rule of Francisco Franco in Spain, death squad in Argentina, Gaddafi's Libya, the rule of Shah Reza Pahlavi in Iran and Suadi Arabia sponsoring of terrorism. Within a democratic cluster the United States of America, Israel, United Kingdom, France, Russian Federation, modern Turkey and Macedonia were analysed. The main findings in turn suggest that the state terrorism was/is practiced in totalitarian, authoritarian and democratic systems, was/is used in war or peace, was/is used by the rich and the poor countries of different cultural, political, economic, geographic and other features. In other words, terrorism is an universal form of state action, but the specific context of each of the analyzed cases does not provide the right to generalize or compare countries according to the basic independent variables - the type of regime. Divided societies and various social cleavages like political (ideological), ethnic, cultural, language, religious, economic and other are evident in the most of the internal state terrorism cases. Although the contexts of countries are quite heterogeneous, in each case analyzed rationality is a common feature of state terrorism. Statet are trying to achieve political goals in the most effective way, what is decisively for using a specific form of violence or threats of violence that we call terrorism. Although it is one of the most frequently used terms in the social sciences, it is evident that terrorism is not conceptually cleared. It is deeply socially constructed concept which depends on a variety of interests. This also affects the contemporary counterterrorism policy. Within the science and policy, terrorism is predominantly viewed as a war and/or criminal. Terrorism is not treated as a phenomenon that is generated from the political area and counterterrorism policies do not target the real causes of terrorism. The perspective of terrorism as a war and crime which is imposed by politics that cooperates with science, leads to a spiral of violence. Illegal and immoral state counterterrorism actions lead to the even more brutal reactions of non-state groups. This trend is especially noticeable from September 9/11 when the "war on terror" started. From this moment it is especially evident that in the name of national security, the degradation of democratic values and endangering human rights and civil liberties have begun. This is best reflected in the new security policies, counterterrorism laws and the state of emergency institute. Also, the democratic deficits are obvious in the examples of interventions in other countries. Illegal character of the war in Iraq shows that international law is not a guarantee nor law nor justice. Those are some contemporary examples of state illegal actions which could be classified as state terrorism in democratic states, but the history is full of state terrorism evidence. Totalitarian and authoritarian regimes in the 20th century, as well as some actual examples, suggesting that the scientific community is biased and ignores the important historical facts as well as contemporary trends. By securitization of terrorism concept, the state harnessed science to its own interest – first of all creating counterterrorism policies. Instrumented science can act only within the limits defined by the state. The main characteristic of the joint state and scientific activity is hypocrisy where identical phenomena do not have identical names. State and science are taking a morally superior position, so state terrorist actions are called "necessary security measures", and terrorism as a pejorative term is reserved only for non-state actors. Further scientific and political ignoring of state terrorism topic, denying a unique definition of terrorism, refusing the recognition of state crimes that fall into the category of terrorism and insistence on counterterrorism as war strategy only feeds the modern evil of non-state terrorism. As long as there is not a change of paradigm in which the force will be firmly under the auspices of the law and policy of double standards will not exist, it is not realistic to expect that the state will eliminate the problem of contemporary non-state terrorism.

Rad se bavi prikazom položaja kurdske manjine u Turskoj te nastoji istražiti mogućnosti rješenja kurdskog pitanja s obzirom na okolnosti, unutarnje i vanjske, kroz koje je Turska prolazila i koje danas oblikuju političku situaciju te države. Cilj je procijeniti perspektivu za rješavanjem kurdskog problema s obzirom na interpretaciju istog od strane turskih vlasti kao vodećeg izazova za nacionalnu sigurnost. Nadalje, navođenjem i analizom faktora koji se pokazuju ključnim u oblikovanju politike vlasti prema Kurdima, rad opisuje status kurdskog pitanja kao ugroze turskog identiteta i sigurnosti. Isto tako, nastoji pokazati potencijale za drugačijim pristupom tematiziranom problemu. Promotrivši sve činitelje, njihova preklapanja, pozitivne i negativne učinke, u konačnici se ispostavlja kako trenutno ne postoji perspektiva za boljim položajem Kurda u Turskoj, na koje će se i dalje gledati kao na vodeću prijetnju unutarnjoj sigurnosti države. Razlozi tome zaključku su slabosti turskog političkog sustava u obliku nedostatka demokratskih vrijednosti, terorističke prijetnje PKK i Islamske države, regionalnih sukoba i nedostatka pozitivnog utjecaja iz međunarodne sfere. Prema svemu navedenom, mogućnost rješenja pitanja Kurda ostaje neostvarena. ; This paper presents the condition of Kurdish minority in Turkey and attempts to explore the possibilities of finding solution to the Kurdish question regarding the circumstances, internal and external, through which Turkey went through and which mold the political situation in that country today. The goal is to estimate a perspective for finding a solution to the Kurdish issue considering the interpretation of the same from Turkish government as a leading national security challenge. Furthermore, through listing and analysis of key factors in shaping government's policy towards the Kurds, this paper describes the status of Kurdish issue as a threat to Turkish identity and security. Also, it attempts to manifest potentials for a different approach to the question at hand. By ...

Ovaj rad pokušava prikazivanjem međunarodnog sustava za sprječavanje financiranja terorizma odgovoriti na pitanje uspješnosti tog sustava. Terorizam je jedan od najsloženijih fenomena današnjeg svijeta te zasigurno najizazovnija pojava društva u kojem živimo i kao takav zahtijeva dubinsku analizu svih svojih aspekata u svrhu što učinkovitije borbe protiv istoga. U prvom djelu rada prikazan je način na koji se terorističke organizacije financiraju: izvori njihovih sredstava, načini prijenosa tih sredstava te je prikazano na što sve terorističke organizacije i teroristi troše ta sredstva. Drugi dio rada prikazuje međunarodni okvir za sprječavanje financiranja terorizma i to: UN-ove konvencije i rezolucije, FATF-ove Posebne preporuke i europsko zakonodavstvo o sprječavanju korištenja financijskog sustava za pranje novca i financiranje terorizma. Na kraju je prikazan zakonodavni i institucionalni okvir Republike Hrvatske za sprječavanje financiranja terorizma. Zaključuje se kako je međunarodna borba protiv financiranja terorizma i dalje daleko od potpunog uspjeha zbog činjenice da se terorističke organizacije bez većih problema konstantno prilagođavaju novonastalim uvjetima i novim oblicima financiranja. ; This paper attempts to show international system for prevention of the financing of terrorism and to answer the question of its efficiency. Terrorism is one of the most complex phenomena of today's world and certainly the most challenging phenomena of society in which we live, and as such requires an in-depth analysis of all its aspects in order to ensure a more efficient fight against it. In the first part of the paper it is showen the way in which terrorist organizations are being financed: sources of their funds, methods of transfer of these funds, and it shows on what the terrorist organizations and terrorists spend these funds. In the second part of the paper it is showen the international framework for the prevention of terrorist financing: UN conventions and resolutions, FATF Special recommendations and ...