Search results

The Claim that Iraq possessed Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) led to the invasion of frag in 2003 by the US army. For the George W. Bush administration, the likely presence of WMD in Iraq was the major justification for boing to war. However, Bush' opponents suspected he used the WMD-dispositive as a legitimation for an invasion that was already set in motion for different reasons. The Iraq invasion and the underlying ideas about the presence of WMD thus provide a tangible case for the analysis of theories of conspiracy and security. The development of the WMD-dispositive will be contextualized using the toolkit of securitization theory. The article explores the notions of security and conspiracy that were used to build the dispositive and shows how it ultimately failed and turned into a counter-narrative in which the Bush administration itself became the Great Conspirator.

The shift towards preventism in security refers to the process in which national security becomes the focal point of policymaking. Within this preventative shift, more and more policy instruments, including criminal law, are being drawn into the realm of national security. The determining argument in this debate is the idea that we are faced with wicked problems, unknown threats and unpredictable risks that we must somehow control. Potentially catastrophic consequences demand exceptional measures here and now to control the risks and govern the future. In recent years, there has been a growing trend in Europe to criminalise preparatory acts related to terrorism. This article examines this trend in The Netherlands and analyses how it plays out in the courtroom and to what extent the preventative logic has permeated the legal sphere.