No abstract

The term ‘Islamic terrorism’ has become a ubiquitous feature of Western political and academic counter‐terrorism discourse in recent years. Examining over 300 political and academic texts and employing a discourse analytic approach, this article attempts to describe and dissect the central terms, assumptions, labels, narratives and genealogical roots of the language and knowledge of ‘Islamic terrorism’ and to reflect on its practical and normative consequences. It concludes that for the most part, political and academic discourses of ‘Islamic terrorism’ are unhelpful, not least because they are highly politicized, intellectually contestable, damaging to community relations and practically counter‐productive.

The conditions under which negotiation or mediation are chosen in international conflict have been little studied. Previous research has tended to focus on the motivations and rational calculations of the states involved. Scant attention has been given to examining the effect of the context on this choice. In this article, we present a framework for studying the contextual conditions under which negotiation or mediation is likely to take place. Employing an original data set, we find that negotiation tends to be used when conflicts are relatively simple, of a low intensity, and when both parties are relatively equal in power. Mediation, on the other hand, tends to be used in disputes characterized by high complexity, high intensity, long duration, unequal and fractionated parties, and where the willingness of the parties to settle peacefully is in doubt.Wherever conflict occurs, the potential exists for violence or other harmful consequences. In the international arena, in the absence of any generally accepted -rules of the game,‖ conflicts can easily escalate into highly destructive and destabilizing wars.The course of a conflict depends on how the parties manage their disagreements. Typically, international actors deal with conflict by taking one or more of three possible actions: unilateral, bilateral, or third-party interventions (Bercovitch and Houston 1996: 11). The unilateral mode may involve an attempt to win over the opponent through violent struggle, or it may involve withdrawal or avoidance. The bilateral mode implies some form of bargaining and compromise (i.e., negotiation). The third-party mode means the intervention of a party not directly involved in the conflict (i.e., adjudication or mediation). In this essay, we shall examine the conditions which influence the choice of negotiation or mediation as the preferred way of dealing with an international conflict.A significant amount of research on conflict has centered on the processes of international negotiation and mediation and the general effectiveness of those processes. The question of how negotiation or mediation begins, why parties choose one method or the other, has been relatively ignored. While institutionalized mechanisms exist for dealing with some types of conflict, giving specifications about the process and how to initiate it (e.g., arbitration for labor-management disputes), conflicts in the international arena generally lack such procedural guidelines. Very often, states apply conflict management procedures on an ad hoc basis only, choosing (implicitly or explicitly) from a broad range of techniques, including among others negotiation, mediation, arbitration, inquiry, conciliation, or referral to international organizations. The study presented here focuses on the conditions for negotiation and mediation. It is part of a broader effort to place international conflict management within an empirical context, and to analyze the conditions under which parties will enter negotiation or mediation. This essay is divided in three sections...

Critical terrorism studies (CTS) is founded firstly on a series of powerful critiques of the current state of orthodox terrorism studies, including: its poor methods and theories, its state centricity, its problem-solving orientation and its institutional and intellectual links to state security projects. Defined broadly by a sceptical attitude towards accepted terrorism 'knowledge', CTS is also characterised by a set of core epistemological, ontological and ethical commitments, including: an appreciation of the politically constructed nature of terrorism knowledge; an awareness of the inherent ontological instability of the 'terrorism' category; a commitment to critical reflexivity regarding the uses to which research findings are put; a set of well-defined research ethics and a normative commitment to an emancipatory political praxis.

A supplemental appendix to this article is published electronically only at http://jdr.sagepub.com/supplemental. AbSTRACTThe purpose of this study was to identify risk factors to predict caries progression in toddlers in primary-healthcare settings for the cost-effective targeting of preventive and referral strategies. We examined 329 children (26 ± 6 mos old) twice, one year apart, in Indiana, USA. A 107-item structured interview was used to collect information from the primary caregiver and child on factors/beliefs/perceptions/behaviors that could affect caries development, transmission of bacteria, medical-dental health, and access to care. Bacterial levels, gingivitis, dental plaque, and caries experience were assessed. Multiple-variable logistic regression models of caries progression toward cavitation included family caries experience, transmissionrelated behaviors, dietary factors, health beliefs, and lower income, but differed in selected predictors/ predictive power by race/ethnicity. Addition of clinical variables did not significantly improve the prediction.