An analysis of EU counterterrorism discourse post-September 11

Jackson, Richard

doi:10.1080/09557570701414617

Cited by 41 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To that extent, the EU and the United States shared a common concern. This has proved to be particularly the case with the reification of Muslim migrants into the mythologized personification of an exaggerated threat and thus the object of securitized policies (Jackson, 2007, pp. 236–7).…”

Section: The Focus On Counter‐terrorism Since 2001mentioning

confidence: 99%

The European Union, Democracy and Counter‐Terrorism in the Maghreb

Joffé

2007

J of Common Market Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since 2001, the nature of the European Union's external action in the Mediterranean, particularly with respect to North Africa, has undergone significant change. The normative objectives of the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership have become securitized in that co-operation to achieve economic and political development between South Mediterranean states has been effectively replaced by co-operation to combat a shared threat: transnational terrorism. The signifier of this process has been the way in which the approach to the issue of migration as a security concern has been modified but the consequence has been to downplay the role of norms of democratization and human rights in intra-Mediterranean political relationships. Copyright (c) 2008 The Author(s); Journal compilation (c) 2008 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

show abstract

Section: The Focus On Counter‐terrorism Since 2001mentioning

confidence: 99%

The European Union, Democracy and Counter‐Terrorism in the Maghreb

Joffé

2007

J of Common Market Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Flowing from this is a perception that the 'new' type of terrorist is committed to inflicting 'massive casualties' on European societies, through the acquisition and application of WMD or CBRN agents. As was highlighted earlier, all of these narratives are not new but reflect an 'accepted knowledge' about terrorism (Jackson, 2007), which have also underpinned the 'war on terror' discourse, and have been reproduced through the 'fight against terrorism' meta-narrative. As such, it can be argued that the construction of terrorism as an all encompassing and multi-faceted threat has played a key role in the justification for, and legitimisation of, a whole range of EU security measures that cut across the various dimensions of internal and external security policy.…”

Section: Functioning Of the Discoursementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The empirical analysis below focuses on the construction of the 'fight against terrorism' discourse from its re-emergence in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks, in 2001, through until May 2012 This is done for two reasons. First, relatively few studies have analysed EU counter-terrorism policy through a discourse approach (Tsoukala, 2004;Jackson, 2007). Second, this discursive approach is intended to complement the other approaches outlined above by investigating or illuminating the connection between the ideational and the material, shedding light on the important role that language has to play in our understanding of the formulation of EU counter-terrorism policy.…”

Section: Empirical Application: Analysing the Eu Counter-terrorism DImentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, it is important to note that the EU counter-terrorism discourse is extremely large and has not operated in isolation. For example, although 'the 'fight against terrorism' is different from the 'war on terror', in many ways it remains intimately linked to and draws heavily on (or reproduces) a number of different narratives that are central to the constitution of the 'war on terror' (Jackson, 2007). Furthermore, there are overlaps with the policy guidelines put forward by the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation on counter-terrorism (NATO, 2012), as well as with other international organisations, such as the United Nations (UN), which has put forward its own counter-terrorism strategy (UN, 2006).…”

Section: Empirical Application: Analysing the Eu Counter-terrorism DImentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The evolution of the European Union’s ‘fight against terrorism’ discourse: Constructing the terrorist ‘other’

Baker-Beall¹

2013

Cooperation and Conflict

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The purpose of this article is to explore the ways in which the EU's counterterrorism discourse, the 'fight against terrorism', is constructed, and the ways in which it functions both rhetorically and in practice. It argues that that 'EU identity' is constituted through and is central to the constitution of EU counter-terrorism policy. The approach taken is constructivist in nature drawing on a discourse analysis of primarily European Council policy documents, as well as the reports and speeches of the EU CounterTerrorism Co-ordinator. In particular, it identifies three strands of the discourse that it is argued play a key role in the construction of a terrorist 'other'. These three strands include: terrorism as crime and as an emotive act of violence; terrorism as an act perpetrated solely by non-state actors;http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cac Cooperation and Conflict F o r P e e r R e v i e w and terrorism as a 'new' and 'evolving' threat. The article proceeds in three steps. First, it outlines the theoretical considerations that underpin this research, including its empirical application. Second, it demonstrates how each strand of the discourse is constructed. Third, it discusses the functioning of the discourse, including the contested nature of the 'terrorism knowledge' that underpins the EU's counter-terrorism approach. The article concludes by reflecting on what this case study contributes to our understanding of EU counter-terrorism policy. AbstractThe purpose of this article is to explore the ways in which the EU's counter-terrorism discourse, the 'fight against terrorism', is constructed, and the ways in which it functions both rhetorically and in practice. It argues that that 'EU identity' is constituted through and is central to the constitution of EU counter-terrorism policy. The approach taken is constructivist in nature drawing on a discourse analysis of primarily European Council policy documents, as well as the reports and speeches of the EU Counter-Terrorism Co-ordinator. In particular, it identifies three strands of the discourse that it is argued play a key role in the construction of a terrorist 'other'. These three strands include: terrorism as crime and as an emotive act of violence; terrorism as an act perpetrated solely by non-state actors; and terrorism as a 'new' and 'evolving' threat. The article proceeds in three steps. First, it outlines the theoretical considerations that underpin this research, including its empirical application. Second, it demonstrates how each strand of the discourse is constructed. Third, it discusses the functioning of the discourse, including the contested nature of the 'terrorism knowledge' that underpins the EU's counter-terrorism approach. The article concludes by reflecting on what this case study contributes to our understanding of EU counter-terrorism policy, as well as explaining how the notion of the terrorist 'other' could provide the basis for a future research agenda that deepens our understanding of how the identity of the EU is consti...

show abstract

“…10 With regard to EU counter-terrorism, Jackson and Baker-Beall problematised the given nature of both terrorism as a threat and counter-terrorism as a natural reaction. 11 Hassan pointed out how the vast output of policies addressing terrorism in the quest for security also contributes to creating greater insecurity. 12 De Goede challenged the perception that the EU is less belligerent than the US in terms of tackling terrorism by pointing to the adoption of precautionary security practices that undercut accountability and legitimacy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conducting Government: Governmentality, Monitoring and EU Counter-Terrorism

Wittendorp¹

2016

Global Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article draws on Foucault's concept of governmentality in order to challenge the view of EU counter-terrorism as simply a response to terrorism. Rather than focusing on the policies directly targeting terrorism, it is concerned with technologies designed to improve the governance process. The article examines three technologies designed for shaping the conduct of government. These technologies are not value-free but underpinned by specific assumptions of what governing can achieve and, as such, they are implicated in the (re)production of insecurity rather than, as institutionalist accounts do, locating the source of insecurity as external to these institutions. In other words, insecurity is in part brought about by the governance process. The article looks at three technologies targeting the gap-this latter term referring to the difference between a current state of affairs diagnosed as undesirable and the ideal situation (lagging policy implementation for instance). The technologies-the action plan, the timetable and the CounterTerrorist Coordinator-are premised on the understanding of bridging the gap as instrumental to the provision of security. This mode of governing fuels a circular logic whereby the need to perform better leads to calls for improved monitoring and vice versa.

show abstract

An analysis of EU counterterrorism discourse post-September 11

Cited by 41 publications

References 25 publications

The European Union, Democracy and Counter‐Terrorism in the Maghreb

The European Union, Democracy and Counter‐Terrorism in the Maghreb

The evolution of the European Union’s ‘fight against terrorism’ discourse: Constructing the terrorist ‘other’

Conducting Government: Governmentality, Monitoring and EU Counter-Terrorism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About