Terrorism and counter‐terrorism in a multi‐centric world: Challenges and opportunities

  • Published on

  • View

  • Download


<ul><li><p>This article was downloaded by: [Australian Catholic University]On: 01 October 2014, At: 08:51Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number:1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street,London W1T 3JH, UK</p><p>Terrorism and PoliticalViolencePublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ftpv20</p><p>Terrorism andcounterterrorismin a multicentricworld: Challenges andopportunitiesRonald D. Crelinsten a ba Professor of Criminology at the University ofOttawa , Canadab Visiting Professor in the Department ofPolitical Science and Public Administration ,Middle East Technical University , Ankara,TurkeyPublished online: 21 Dec 2007.</p><p>To cite this article: Ronald D. Crelinsten (1999) Terrorism and counterterrorismin a multicentric world: Challenges and opportunities, Terrorism and PoliticalViolence, 11:4, 170-196, DOI: 10.1080/09546559908427539</p><p>To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09546559908427539</p><p>PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE</p><p>Taylor &amp; Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of allthe information (the Content) contained in the publications on ourplatform. However, Taylor &amp; Francis, our agents, and our licensorsmake no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy,</p><p>http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ftpv20http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/09546559908427539http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09546559908427539</p></li><li><p>completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Anyopinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinionsand views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed byTaylor &amp; Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be reliedupon and should be independently verified with primary sources ofinformation. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions,claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and otherliabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectlyin connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.</p><p>This article may be used for research, teaching, and private studypurposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution,reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &amp; Conditions of accessand use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions</p><p>Dow</p><p>nloa</p><p>ded </p><p>by [</p><p>Aus</p><p>tral</p><p>ian </p><p>Cat</p><p>holic</p><p> Uni</p><p>vers</p><p>ity] </p><p>at 0</p><p>8:51</p><p> 01 </p><p>Oct</p><p>ober</p><p> 201</p><p>4 </p><p>http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditionshttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions</p></li><li><p>15</p><p>Terrorism and Counter-Terrorism ina Multi-Centric World: Challenges</p><p>and Opportunities1</p><p>RONALD D. CRELINSTEN</p><p>Introduction</p><p>This article looks at the future of terrorism and counter-terrorism byexamining the past. It does this in two ways. First, I compare twoincidents that happened 22 years apart: one in 1999 and one in 1977.The capture in Nairobi, Kenya, of Abdullah Ocalan, leader of theKurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) by Turkish intelligence agents inFebruary 1999 highlights some of the most salient features of thecurrent environment in which terrorism and counter-terrorism unfoldtoday, especially when we compare it with a similar incident thatoccurred some two decades previously involving the Palestinianterrorist, Abu Daoud. Second, I examine two discourses that happenedsome 18 years apart: one in 1980 (and the late seventies) and one in1999 (and the late nineties). The current discourse over whetherterrorists will use weapons of mass destruction (WMD terrorism) iscompared with an article that was published in 1980 concerning thesame topic. The 1999 discourse, like the 1999 incident, reveals otherfeatures of the environment in which terrorism and counter-terrorisminteract today, especially when compared with the 1980 discourse. It isthese features as revealed in the comparative incidents and thecomparative discourses - that may provide important clues to futuredevelopments in terrorism and its control over the coming decade,particularly as they may affect Europe and the Middle East as opposedto the United States. In addition, they may also explain why current(primarily American) discourse on the future of terrorism may be both</p><p>Dow</p><p>nloa</p><p>ded </p><p>by [</p><p>Aus</p><p>tral</p><p>ian </p><p>Cat</p><p>holic</p><p> Uni</p><p>vers</p><p>ity] </p><p>at 0</p><p>8:51</p><p> 01 </p><p>Oct</p><p>ober</p><p> 201</p><p>4 </p></li><li><p>TERRORISM IN A MULTI-CENTRIC WORLD 171</p><p>misleading as far as Europe is concerned and, more importantly,dangerous in terms of misrepresenting future threats and blindingeveryone to more likely scenarios. It is both at the level of phenomena(incidents) and at the level of discourse (analysis, prediction, threatassessment) that future developments in terrorism and counter-terrorism will be played out and the interaction between the two levelsis a crucial part of understanding them.</p><p>1999 vs. 1977 - The Abdullah Ocalan and Abu Daoud CasesCompared</p><p>After some 12 days of peripatetic travel by Abdullah Ocalan, leader ofthe Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), in the vain search for somecountry that would accept his request for political asylum, he wasfinally flown to the Greek embassy in Nairobi, where the circumstancesof his capture on February 15 remain uncertain. From the time he wasexpelled from Syria some months before, his whereabouts were thesubject of intense media speculation. First he was in Russia. Russiadenied this. Then he appeared in Italy and the newly elected socialistcoalition government refused to extradite him to Turkey. Germany,which had an international arrest warrant out for the Kurdish leader,ultimately decided to rescind the warrant and refrain from requestingextradition. The newly elected socialist government was trying to passlegislation allowing dual citizenship for Turks who had lived in thecountry for decades - or had even been born there and did not wantthe spectacle of Kurdish/Turkish confrontations turning the Germanpublic against this legislative initiative. Germany had already witnesseda wave of violent protest by Kurdish groups and did not relish any more.Meanwhile, Turkish-Italian relationships deteriorated and a Turkishboycott of Italian goods and services began. Tourist travel from Turkeyto Italy plummeted as travel agents in Turkey claimed a significant dropin business to Italy. Italian imports were affected as well.2 Finally,Ocalan was refused refugee status in Italy but was allowed to leave thecountry and he disappeared again. He was said to be back in Russia.Russia denied this. Then he was said to have gone to The Netherlands,presumably to seek a hearing from the International Court of Justice inThe Hague. The Dutch government claimed they refused him access.Belgium revealed that they had prevented a private plane with Ocalanaboard from landing there. When the Turks seized him in Nairobi,</p><p>Dow</p><p>nloa</p><p>ded </p><p>by [</p><p>Aus</p><p>tral</p><p>ian </p><p>Cat</p><p>holic</p><p> Uni</p><p>vers</p><p>ity] </p><p>at 0</p><p>8:51</p><p> 01 </p><p>Oct</p><p>ober</p><p> 201</p><p>4 </p></li><li><p>172 THE FUTURE OF TERRORISM</p><p>Ocalan was carrying a fake Greek Cypriot passport with a false nameand had been a 'guest' of the Greek government which had secretlyflown him to its embassy there. According to one rumour circulating inthe wake of his capture, Ocalan had used his cellular telephone to makea call, despite Greek warnings not to do so, and either Israeli or USintelligence was thereby able to locate him and notify the Turks of hiswhereabouts. Some two weeks later, CNN Interactive, the Internetversion of CNN, carried an article on CIA 'disruption operations'against terrorism, in which it was revealed that it was the CIA that hadhelped the Turks: 'Typically, a disruption operation begins with a scrapof information - an intercepted cellphone call, word that a knownterrorist has crossed into another country, a report from a fieldsurveillance team'.3 The article goes on:</p><p>The recent arrest by Turkish forces in Kenya of Kurdish rebelleader Abdullah Ocalan is one of the rare examples where thedisruption tactic gained public notice. The CIA and otherintelligence agencies refuse to comment on whether they played arole in assisting Turkey. But other US officials say the UnitedStates provided Turkey with critical information about Ocalan'swhereabouts.4</p><p>As soon as Ocalan's seizure became public knowledge, Greekembassies in London and Copenhagen were attacked by Kurdishprotesters. The London embassy was occupied for several days. TheGreek embassy in The Hague was occupied and the Ambassador's wifeand child were held hostage for 24 hours, until the incident wasresolved peacefully. The Dutch government promised to pressure theTurkish government to give Ocalan a fair trial and not to invoke thedeath penalty. While most protests were concentrated in Europe, therewere incidents as far away as Vancouver, Canada and Sydney,Australia. Kurdish protesters appeared outside the Kosovo talks inRambouillet, France, calling for similar international intervention insupport of their cause. Then rumours spread that Israeli intelligence hadprovided information to Turkish intelligence that helped them traceOcalan to Nairobi (see above). The Israeli consulate in Berlin wasattacked by Kurdish protesters and three of them were shot dead bysecurity guards. The Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu,categorically denied the rumour, but Israel temporarily closed allconsulates across Germany. Kurdish protesters outside the Greek</p><p>Dow</p><p>nloa</p><p>ded </p><p>by [</p><p>Aus</p><p>tral</p><p>ian </p><p>Cat</p><p>holic</p><p> Uni</p><p>vers</p><p>ity] </p><p>at 0</p><p>8:51</p><p> 01 </p><p>Oct</p><p>ober</p><p> 201</p><p>4 </p></li><li><p>TERRORISM IN A MULTI-CENTRIC WORLD 173</p><p>embassy in London discussed the events on CNN. German policestruggled with protests in Hamburg, Bonn and other cities.</p><p>As all these events unfolded, the Turkish Prime Minister, BulentEcevit revealed in an interview on CNN that Ocalan had beentransported to the small prison island of Imrali in the Marmara Sea andthat all other prisoners had been transferred out to the mainland. Avideo of Ocalan being flown to Turkey with his captors was broadcastaround the world. His blindfold was removed and he was 'welcomed'by his captors to Turkey. He replied that he loved Turkey and waswilling to serve his country in any way. This was immediatelyinterpreted and analysed by commentators on television and in chatrooms on the Internet. CNN's programme Q&amp;A (Questions andAnswers) focused on the Ocalan arrest and the Kurdish protests overseveral days, fielding calls and email messages from around the world.The story was headline news everywhere. Two days after Ocalan'scapture, the Foreign Minister of Greece, Theodore Pangolos, plus theInterior and Public Order Ministers, resigned over their handling of theaffair. The Kurdish protesters in London ended their occupation of theGreek Embassy there, amidst rumours that the English government, likethe Dutch government before it, had promised to pressure Turkey toensure a fair trial. And in Turkey, when the Turkish lawyers who wereto defend Ocalan were driven to the boat that was to take them acrossto their client's prison island, angry mobs attacked their car, impedingtheir progress - and the whole scene was broadcast on Turkishtelevision.</p><p>Compare these events with the expulsion from France of Palestinianterrorist Abu Daoud in 1977. Widely believed to have masterminded the1972 Munich Olympics attack on Israeli athletes, Daoud entered Franceon 7 January 1977 from Beirut, using a false name and a false Iraqipassport. He had slipped into France to attend the funeral of a PLOrepresentative who had been murdered. Tipped off by Israel, the Frenchpolice arrested him. Both Israel and West Germany applied for hisextradition. The French government refused both requests on flimsytechnical grounds and within four days, he was flown to Algiers.5 It waswidely believed that France acted in its own national interest, notwishing to antagonize Arab states with which it wanted to maintaingood relations.6</p><p>The two incidents have much in common: a Western European statefirst detains, then releases a known terrorist, while refusing extradition</p><p>Dow</p><p>nloa</p><p>ded </p><p>by [</p><p>Aus</p><p>tral</p><p>ian </p><p>Cat</p><p>holic</p><p> Uni</p><p>vers</p><p>ity] </p><p>at 0</p><p>8:51</p><p> 01 </p><p>Oct</p><p>ober</p><p> 201</p><p>4 </p></li><li><p>174 THE FUTURE OF TERRORISM</p><p>requests from other states, including the one most directly interested incapturing the fugitive. That both Israel then (and in 1999) and Turkeyin 1999 are to a significant extent pariah states in many European eyesis another interesting similarity. The increasing military and security co-operation between Turkey and Israel in the late 1990s is probably oneof the most significant developments in the region in recent times. Asfor the other requesting country in each case, though probably acoincidence, the fact that in both incidents it was Germany - aEuropean and a NATO ally - is all the more striking. More importantly,both incidents, though separated by two decades, show how nationalinterest can still prevail over international co-operation in the area ofextradition of known terrorists. The lesson for the future of terrorismand its control is depressing, suggesting that the proliferation ofinternational regimes and conventions over the past years can still beignored when a particular state chooses to do so. Plus qa change, plusc'est la mime chose.1</p><p>There are of course some differences between the two cases as well.Italy refused Ocalan asylum, while Daoud did not seek it. Germanywithdrew its extradition request in 1999, while in 1977 it dragged itsfeet and was refused on technical grounds. But these are not the mostsignificant differences. What is significant is that France was trying toplease other states - the Arab states with which it was trying togain/maintain influence - while Italy was probably trying to please adiaspora community within its borders - and within the EuropeanUnion. True, France may also have feared retaliatory terrorist attacks ifDaoud had indeed been tried, convicted and imprisoned in France. Italy,too, may have been concerned about Kurdish unrest and Germany inboth cases probably had similar concerns. However, in 1977 there wereno widespread boycotts of France by Israelis, nor were there protests orembassy seizures by Palestinian, pro-Arab or anti-Israeli/Zionist groupsafter Daoud's arrest. Granted, in 1999, the embassy attacks occurredafter Ocalan's capture by the Turks and were actually directed againstTurkey's arch-enemy, Greece, who was blamed for letting him fall intoTurkish hands. Daoud got away, so we don't know what might havehappened if he had been captured, though I strongly suspect nothingapproaching what happened in 1999.</p><p>When Ocalan was first apprehended in Rome, there was widespreadpublic reaction in Italy, across Europe and in Turkey. Publics made theirvoices heard, debated the issue, and followed developments closely. In</p><p>Dow</p><p>nloa</p><p>ded </p><p>by [</p><p>Aus</p><p>tral</p><p>ian </p><p>Cat</p><p>holic</p><p> Uni</p><p>vers</p><p>ity] </p><p>at 0</p><p>8:51</p><p> 01 </p><p>Oct</p><p>ober</p><p> 201</p><p>4 </p></li><li><p>TERRORISM IN A MULTI-CENTRIC WORLD 175</p><p>1977, the incident was limited in scope and apart from attentive publicsspecialized in counter-terrorism and international co-operati...</p></li></ul>


View more >