Trendsetters, Trend Followers, and Individual Players: Obtaining Global Counterterror Actor Types from Proscribed Terror Lists

Ilbiz, Ethem; Curtis, Benjamin L.

doi:10.1080/1057610x.2014.974400

Cited by 8 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 22 publications

(33 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…After the establishment of the U.S. FTO list, other states and institutions started their own similar lists. Scholars who analyzed six such lists describe the Unites States as a "trendsetter," exerting substantial influence on other countries' lists (Ilbiz and Curtis 2015). There is overlap across lists regarding which groups are included, although the U.S. list is more global, while other countries' lists are more regional (Freedman 2010).…”

Section: Terrorist Group Designation and Its Consequencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Foreign Terrorist Organization designation, international cooperation, and terrorism

Phillips

2018

International Interactions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How does branding militant groups as "foreign terrorist organizations" affect them? Beyond its obvious policy importance, this question speaks to debates about counterterrorism, terrorism financing, and organizational dynamics of subnational violence. This article analyzes Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) designation, a key policy used by the U.S. government since 1997 to impose costs on foreign terrorist groups and those who might support them. Contrary to arguments that sanctions are ineffective and that terrorism is too "cheap" to be affected, it is argued that designation should weaken terrorist groups, reducing their attacks over time. However, the effect is probably conditional. FTO designation should be especially effective against groups operating in U.S.-aligned countries, given the importance of international cooperation in counterterrorism. Global quantitative analyses suggest that FTOs operating in U.S.-aligned countries carry out fewer attacks over time than other groups, taking many other factors into consideration.

show abstract

Section: Terrorist Group Designation and Its Consequencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Foreign Terrorist Organization designation, international cooperation, and terrorism

Phillips

2018

International Interactions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Given the significance of these powers, and – indeed – the post-9/11 glut of counter-terrorism scholarship, analysis of proscription in the UK and beyond has been surprisingly limited, especially from within security studies, international relations and political science (although see Sentas, 2010 ; Marques da Silva and Murphy, 2013 ; Ilbiz and Curtis, 2015 ). Legal scholars have, to date, led the way (e.g.…”

Section: Proscription and Its Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

‘I am somewhat puzzled’: Questions, audiences and securitization in the proscription of terrorist organizations

Jarvis

Legrand

2017

Security Dialogue

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A recent wave of scholarship has drawn attention to the need for further engagement with the role of ‘the audience’ in securitization ‘games’. This article contributes to this discussion both theoretically and empirically by exploring the types of question an audience may ask of a securitizing actor before a securitizing act meets with success or failure. To do this, it offers a discursive analysis of all 27 UK parliamentary debates on the extension of proscription powers to additional terrorist organizations between 2002 and 2014. We argue first that these debates are characterized by a wide range of questions relating to the timing, criteria, mechanics, consequences and exclusions of proscription; and second, that these questions function as demands upon the executive to variously justify, explain, clarify, elaborate and defend decisions to extend the UK’s list of designated groups. Taking these questions seriously, we suggest, therefore allows insight into a variety of ways in which audiences might participate in security politics that are not adequately captured by notions of consent or resistance, or success or failure. This has empirical and theoretical value for understanding proscription, parliamentary discourse and securitization alike.

show abstract

“…Morocco has not been either as strong a counterterrorism player at the global level as the US 78 or at the regional level as Turkey. Therefore, the EU is not dependent on Morocco's recognition of Europol as a counterterrorism partner, which means that it is less likely that Europol and the EU will be flexible with Morocco on data protection.…”

Section: Political Conditionality and The Morocco-europol Agreementmentioning

confidence: 99%

The counterterrorism agreements of Europol with third countries: Data protection and power asymmetry

Anagnostakis

Kaunert

Ilbiz

2015

Terrorism and Political Violence

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Trendsetters, Trend Followers, and Individual Players: Obtaining Global Counterterror Actor Types from Proscribed Terror Lists

Cited by 8 publications

References 22 publications

Foreign Terrorist Organization designation, international cooperation, and terrorism

Foreign Terrorist Organization designation, international cooperation, and terrorism

‘I am somewhat puzzled’: Questions, audiences and securitization in the proscription of terrorist organizations

The counterterrorism agreements of Europol with third countries: Data protection and power asymmetry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About