Securitizing America: Strategic Incapacitation and the Policing of Protest Since the 11 September 2001 Terrorist Attacks

Abstract

During the 1970s, the predominant strategy of protest policing shifted from 'escalated force' and repression of protesters to one of 'negotiated management' and mutual cooperation with protesters. Following the failures of negotiated management at the 1999 World Trade Organization demonstrations in Seattle, law enforcement quickly developed a new social control strategy, referred to here as 'strategic incapacitation'. The US police response to the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks quickened the pace of police adoption of this new strategy, which emphasizes the goals of 'securitizing society' and isolating or neutralizing the sources of potential disruption. These goals are accomplished through (1) the use of surveillance and information sharing as a way to assess and monitor risks, (2) the use of pre-emptive arrests and less-lethal weapons to selectively disrupt or incapacitate protesters that engage in disruptive protest tactics or might do so, and (3) the extensive control of space in order to isolate and contain disruptive protesters actual or potential. In a comparative fashion, this paper examines the shifts in United States policing strategies over the last 50 years and uses illustrative cases from national conventions, the global justice movement and the anti-war movement to show how strategic incapacitation has become a leading social control strategy used in the policing of protests since 9 ⁄ 11. It concludes by identifying promising questions for future research.

Strategic incapacitation and the policing of Occupy Wall Street protests in New York City, 2011

“…Required permits facilitated the collection of information about protesters and planned events by the police, opened lines of communication with protest groups and helped police avoid on and in the job troubles like excessive force, brutality, burnout and high profile investigations of police conduct (Waddington 1994). It also reduced conflicts between police and protesters by making each better known and more predictable to the other (Noakes et al 2005, Noakes and Gillham 2006, Gillham and Noakes 2007, Gillham 2011 P.F. Gillham et al…”

“…Repertoires predominant prior to 11 September 2001 Changes in repertoires of protest control employed in the United States since the end of World War II are well documented (Gillham 2011). Until the 1970s, the predominant police response to protest has been called 'escalated force', a repertoire of tactics revolving around the use of arrests, beatings, tear gas, bullets and other weapons meant to quell protests by inflicting pain and suffering.…”

Policing unacceptable protest in England and Wales: A case study of the policing of anti-fracking protests

“…Work on transgressive protest -by those that 'articulate more abstract demands, use unpredictable and often illegal tactics, do not negotiate with police, and are generally younger' (Tilly in Gillham 2011: 640) -in the US has suggested that the tactics, organisational structure, and decision-making processes employed by some protest groups has posed a significant challenge to police (Gillham 2011;Gillham and Noakes 2007;Gillham, Edwards and Noakes 2013). In the US, police have responded with what Patrick Gillham and colleagues have referred to as a 'strategic incapacitation' approach, a selective use of repressive techniques through which 'bad' transgressive protesters are isolated or neutralised as threats to security to prevent disruption (Gillham 2011). An unwillingness to engage with police and the adoption of tactics that transcend legal and cultural norms pose a clear challenge to a police view of protest facilitation premised on negotiation and agreement.…”

From Overcoming the fear to Protest, to using Fear as a repressive strategy towards the 15M movement

“…Además, hay un fuerte control del espacio y es la policía la que determina cuándo y dónde puede tener lugar la protesta. También se emplean detenciones preventivas y armas menos letales para neutralizar temporalmente a los manifestantes real o potencialmente disruptivos (Gillham, 2011;Gillham y Noakes 2007).…”

“…Hemos llevado a cabo el análisis en este período, teniendo en cuenta varias dimensiones de la actuación policial, que construimos a partir del marco teórico (della Porta y Diani, 2011;Gillham, 2011;Mcphail et al, 1998). Para analizar la estrategia policial ante la protesta nos fijamos en las siguientes variables: el respeto de la ley y del derecho a manifestación por parte de la policía, el grado de comunicación con los manifestantes, el uso de la fuerza y las agresiones policiales, el grado y el tipo de detenciones, el grado de tolerancia a la disrupción, el grado de selectividad de los sujetos, el grado y tipo de control del espacio y el grado de vigilancia hacia los activistas.…”