Suchergebnisse

How does electoral accountability affect the effectiveness of terrorism prevention in a democ- racy? We analyze the connection between electoral accountability and policy effectiveness in the context of terrorism prevention. We develop a formal model of an interaction between a government, a minority community, and a representative voter. All actors share the objective of terrorism prevention and have symmetric information. We show that electoral pressures to be successful in terrorism prevention create a commitment problem for the government and this can lead to less security. If the representative voter cares more about terrorism prevention, the government intensifies anti-terrorism activities that are under its direct control, but cooperation by the minority community weakens, and, as a result, security may decrease. We also show that commitment to ex-post suboptimal anti-terrorism activity is desirable for the government, but such commitment is difficult to achieve without explicit institutional constraints such as an effective judicial review on government's antiterrorism actions.

How does electoral accountability affect the effectiveness of terrorism prevention in a democracy? We analyze the connection between electoral accountability and policy effectiveness in the context of terrorism prevention. We develop a formal model of an interaction between a government, a minority community, and a representative voter. All actors share the objective of terrorism prevention and have symmetric information. We show that electoral pressures to be successful in terrorism prevention create a commitment problem for the government and this can lead to less security. If the representative voter cares more about terrorism prevention, the government intensifies anti-terrorism activities that are under its direct control, but cooperation by the minority community weakens, and, as a result, security may decrease. We also show that commitment to ex-post suboptimal anti-terrorism activity is desirable for the government, but such commitment is difficult to achieve without explicit institutional constraints such as an effective judicial review on government's antiterrorism actions.

Researchers examined past U.S. countering violent extremism and terrorism prevention efforts and explored policy options to strengthen terrorism prevention in the future. This document summarizes findings from the main report, including that current terrorism prevention capabilities are relatively limited and that there is a need for federal efforts to help strengthen local capacity. However, any federal efforts will need to build community trust to be successful

Terrorism is a criminal act or extraordinary crime that is of concern to the world today, especially in Indonesia. Terrorism that has occurred in Indonesia recently has ideological, historical and political linkages and is part of the dynamics of the strategic environment at the global and regional levels. the approach method uses normative juridical, the results of the study state that the legal politics of eradicating criminal acts of terrorism in Indonesia is a proactive policy and anticipatory step that is based on prudence and is long-term in nature. The use of Act No. 15 of 2003 to regulate the eradication of criminal acts of terrorism is based on the consideration that the occurrence of terrorism in various places has caused material and immaterial losses and caused insecurity for the community. It can be stated that the government's policy to tackle criminal acts of terrorism is by taking legal steps, so that unwanted things can be anticipated.

Abstract
The article analyzes the investigations conducted by the Berlin police into the subsequent perpetrator of the vehicle-ramming attack at a Berlin Christmas market on December 19, 2016. We explore why the police closed these investigations prematurely and thereby focus on an attempt to prevent lone actor terrorism. The analysis shows that the police closed its investigations owing to organizational dynamics driven by an increasing need to justify further resource investments in the face of absent conclusive evidence and scarce resources in relation to the organizational case ecology. We propose hypotheses for future research and formulate three contributions to existing research on the sociology of police, terrorism prevention, and lone actor research.

This article appeared in Homeland Security Affairs (January 2008), v.4 no.1 ; The Provisional Irish Republican Army (PIRA) was the basic internal security threat to the United Kingdom over the past 100 years. In particular, more than 3,600 people died during the 'Troubles' (1969-1996). However, authorities no longer consider Irish paramilitary organizations the country's major terrorist threat. The major terrorist challenge to the UK today comes from international terrorist groups affiliated with al Qaeda. Until recently, the nexus of the affiliation with al Qaeda was Pakistan and Afghanistan. Recent attacks suggest a nexus with Iraq as well. However, the emergence of a new threat such as al Qaeda does not mean that intelligence analysts' thinking, conditioned to meet one threat, e.g. PIRA, adjusts readily to the new threat. The analysis here highlights this issue in the recent patterns of terrorism prevention in the UK. Three agencies make up the national intelligence and security services in the UK, The Secret Intelligence Service (MI6)-the nation's external intelligence agency overseen by the foreign secretary; the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ)-which develops signals intelligence, also overseen by the foreign secretary; and the Security Service (MI5), which operates under the authority of the home secretary to conduct surveillance operations. Observers often refer to the three services as the Agencies. MI5 has no arrest powers of its own, meaning its effectiveness in preempting terrorist operations depends largely on collaboration with the Special Branch (SB) of local police forces', especially the Metropolitan Police Department's Special Branch (MPSB). ; Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

In recent decades, fear of terrorism has increased among voters in liberal democracies. In response, governments have adopted counterterrorist measures that curtail civil liberties, at times prompting allegations that political expediency underlies such measures. I study politicians' strategic design of counterterrorist policies in a model of valence competition under threat of terrorism. The incumbent chooses a counterterrorist strategy that combines observable (state of emergency) and unobservable (effort) actions. In equilibrium, emergencies and terrorist attacks become endogenously informative about valence. The low-valence incumbent underprovides effort relative to the high-valence incumbent, and at times declares a state of emergency in the absence of a terrorist threat. Increasing voters' information about the incumbent's valence improves politician selection, but at the expense of a higher incidence of unwarranted emergencies and, under some conditions, terrorist attacks.

Psychological evaluations of immigration applicants have been widely used for over two decades in the U.S. Federal legal system. The principal purpose of these assessments was and remains to assist immigration authorities in making determinations regarding the status of applicants of various categories. This article proposes that the same evaluations conducted to help adjudicate asylum petitions, removal proceedings, and inadmissibility hearings are also essential vetting devices for terrorism prevention. The systematic application of the now elective psychological evaluations for immigration courts to all immigrants could help identify would-be terrorists and help law enforcement prevent future attacks on the United States.