EN(COUNTERING) TERRORISM

On November 23, 2022, Dr. Mia Bloom, Communications and Middle East Studies professor at Georgia State University, presented on “En(countering) Terrorism” at the 2022 Annual CASIS Vancouver West Coast Security Conference. The key points discussed were the changing roles of women in terrorist groups, the relationship between social media and terrorist groups, and the emergence of the QAnon movement.   Received: 2023-01-08Revised: 2023-01-1

Counter Cyber Terrorism Governance In Indonesia

Information and communication technology has a significant impact on various aspects. Its developments affect daily life, and also give a new color to the political-security dynamics, especially in Indonesia. This depends on the purpose of using information and communication technology, which if not regulated, will become a double-edged sword. The typology of threats is also increasingly varied and transforming, including in the context of security threats in the form of terrorism which involves many dimensions ranging from religion-based terrorism to cyber-based terrorism. The state's response to cyber terrorism as a new security threat phenomenon is examined in this paper in a balanced way using an inward-looking and outward-looking perspective. By using qualitative research methods and descriptive research types, the existing data related to what has been done by Indonesia are interpreted into the form of a governance conception in the context of countering cyber terrorism. Indonesia has identified domestic conditions to be able to optimize its resources. At the same time, Indonesia is also trying to improve its capabilities by conducting international cooperation. So that the governance of countering cyber terrorism in Indonesia still leaves several problems that need to be resolved, such as institutional barriers including organizational culture which is the key to coordination between institutions related to countering cyber terrorism in Indonesia

Upholding Human Rights and International Law in the Combat against International Terrorism

The question of human rights protection remains a big puzzle in the combat contrary to international terrorism. Terrorism remains a complicated concept that has posed great challenges in countering without compromising the human rights. Some of the methods used by states leaved a lot to be desired under international law. It is another issue for states to be seen countering terrorism which in most cases is not state actors but using the UN Charter and its systems to justify their actions. It is prohibited in the United Nations Charter of 1945 under Article 2(4) for States to adopt the use of force among themselves in cases of self-defense. UN Charter under Article 51 does not provide for non-state actors for instance terrorists and this has posed a great challenge to the implementation of various Treaties and Conventions. States’ attacks against non-state actors continue to take place without any condemnation. Human rights have been violated in the pursuit of terrorists and the act has not been condemned. What then is supposed to be done?, several counter-terrorism measures have been putted in place but there is also an argument that it is close to impossible to combat terrorism without compromising human rights. In other words, countering terrorism is synonymous with violating human rights and international law. These contradictions among others make one wonder whether it’s the inefficiency of the prevailing laws or mere international politics that is making the combat against terrorism a complex matter. Keywords: Terrorism, Human rights, International law, International politics, Upholding DOI: 10.7176/JLPG/110-12 Publication date:June 30th 202

Security through aid: countering violent extremism and terrorism with Australia’s aid program

Overview This paper argues that countering violent extremism (CVE) and terrorism are international security and development issues. Australia’s foreign aid should be used to strengthen resilience to violent extremist ideologies. Improving governance in weak states can help to deny terrorists the easy recruiting grounds of lawless communities. The ASPI report argues that there are several ways to better leverage our foreign aid program to counter terrorism and violent extremism. Where a clear need has been identified, implement direct CVE aid programs Apply a CVE and counter-terrorism ‘filter’ to our aid programs Develop targeted reporting on CVE aid programs Use InnovationXchange to explore avenues for implementing CVE into the aid strategy Share information on CVE and aid Lead the debate to modernise official development assistance (ODA) reportin

Civil Remedies for Uncivil Wrongs: Combatting Terrorism Though Transnational Public Law Litigation

How do we respond to terrorism? In my view, we must distinguish among three possible legal responses-direct action, criminal remedies, and civil remedies-or, if you prefer, countering terrorism, making terrorists pay, and making terrorists pay up. The first category-direct action, or countering terrorism-encompasses a wide variety of responses: Monitoring terrorist groups, detecting terrorist attacks before they happen, coping with terrorist incidents while they occur, and formulating appropriate responses in the immediate aftermath of terrorist strikes. Although this type of response raises numerous troubling legal problems, the most difficult questions posed are political and logistical. At the international level, how can the United States coordinate a unified and effective multilateral political and economic response against terrorism? At the national level, how can the United States Government best mobilize its military, intelligence, and state and federal law enforcement organizations to respond effectively to particular terrorist incidents

Modeling Terrorist Radicalization

Recent high-profile terrorism arrests and litigation in New York, Colorado, and Detroit have brought public attention to the question of how the government should respond to the possibility of domestic-origin terrorism linked to al Qaeda. This symposium essay identifies and discussing one emerging approach in the United States and Europe which attends to the process of terrorist “radicalization.” States on both sides of the Atlantic are investing increasingly in developing an epistemology of terrorist violence. The results have implications for how policing resources are allocated, whether privacy rights are respected, and how religious liberty may be exercised. This essay traces the development of state discourses on “radicalization” in the United States and the United Kingdom. It argues that understanding this new “radicalization” discourse entails attention to interactions between nations and between the federal government and states as well as to the political economy of counter-terrorism