Master of Arts (MA), Wright State University, 2014, International and Comparative Politics

From the 1970s to the 1990s, Western European democracies embraced multiculturalist public policy (MCPP). This was in an effort to address and accommodate the minority rights of immigrants who found their way to Europe during its post-WWII labor force recovery. By the mid-1990s, there was a backlash against such policy and movement towards integrationist values. This has been exacerbated in the wake of radical Islamist terror attacks like those of 9/11, the London 7/7 bombing, and the Paris Metro Bombings of 1995. Attention has been focused on the threat, incidence, and causal factors of homegrown jihadism within Europe. The research presented here will analyze the degree of MCPP adopted in specific European Union member states and their incidence of radicalization in an effort to determine the strength of the relationship between the two.

Committee: Liam Anderson Ph.D. (Committee Chair); Vaughn Shannon Ph.D. (Committee Member); Carlos Costa Ph.D. (Committee Member) Subjects: International Law; International Relations; Political Science; Sociology

Master of Arts (MA), Wright State University, 2019, International and Comparative Politics

In the following research, I investigate whether hard offensive counterterrorism results in the failure or success of a counterterrorism strategy. In the second chapter, the academic literature of counterterrorism strategies is examined. Next, a hypothesis is put forth that if a hard offensive counterterrorism strategy is utilized, indicators such as high troop levels, more civilian casualties, more negative public opinion, and an increased rate of terrorism, will point to a failed counterterrorism strategy. Then, I put forth a methodology to test the hypothesis while introducing troop level databases, various public opinion polling sources, and terrorist attack databases to investigate the given variables. In the third chapter, a case study of the Iraq War is utilized, in which the initial invasion from 2003-2006 and the Surge/Withdrawal eras from 2007-2011 are examined. Both time periods are compared to see if hard offensive counterterrorism used in 2003-2006 resulted in a less effective counterterrorism campaign than the softer counterinsurgency strategies from 2007-2011. Data from the Brookings Iraq Index, Iraq Body Count, and Global Terrorism Database are then analyzed to investigate the variables of casualties, public opinion, and rate of terrorism during each era in Iraq. In the fourth chapter, the war in Afghanistan is presented as a case study. I then evaluate whether hard offensive counterterrorism used from 2001-2008 resulted in less terrorism than the counterinsurgency strategies of Surge and withdrawal used from 2009-2016. Data from the Congressional Research Service, UNAMA, Physicians for Social Responsibility, the BBC, the Asia Foundation, and the Global Terrorism Database are then utilized to assess each variable. Finally, I present my findings and conclude that evaluating a strategy primarily using hard offensive counterterrorism strategies is rather complex and then present ideas for future research in counterterrorism strategy.

Committee: Vaughn Shannon Ph.D. (Committee Chair); Liam Anderson Ph.D. (Committee Member); Pramod Kantha Ph.D. (Committee Member) Subjects: Political Science

Bachelor of Arts (BA), Ohio University, 2019, Political Science

America's `War on Terror' has been a cornerstone of US foreign policy for nearly two decades now. Although what is commonly understood to be terrorism has been in existence long before the 9/11 attack, it is only after that event that there is a major shift in policy approaches to this phenomenon. This comes about for many reasons, but the most prominent catalyst for this change is how people understand and conceptualize the nature of these threats. The violent extremist organizations that have risen to the focus during the beginning of the century are those who claim to be motivated by Islamic beliefs, sparking a worldwide debate on the nature of not only these groups, but of Islam as well. The discussion on whether Islam was similar to other religions or stood in a category of its own circulated and remains as the foundation for how groups that claim that their operations and goals are inspired by Islam are understood. The idea that Islam is inherently different than other religions and because of this, is less likely to naturally arrive at the conditions for democracy within a state is called `Islamic exceptionalism.' The groups that are perceived through this lens are almost exclusively Salafi-Jihadi in nature and are said to seek to promote what they claim is the only true form of Islam. This focus on the religious dimension of violent extremism is a newer phenomenon. As the idea of Islamic exceptionalism spread, counterterrorism policy grew to adapt to the changing circumstances and evolved into what is known today as CVE policy. This shift was necessitated by the increase of the interest in Salafi-Jihadi violent extremist organizations and meant as a new response to what seemed like a new type of group. This intentional policy shift is a component of Salafi-Jihadi exceptionalism, the idea that these groups are inherently different than non-Salafi-Jihadi groups and therefore must be treated differently. But these groups are not different, they follow the sa (open full item for complete abstract)

Committee: Brandon Kendhammer Dr. (Advisor); Andrew Ross Dr. (Other) Subjects: Islamic Studies; Middle Eastern Studies; Peace Studies; Political Science

BA, Oberlin College, 2018, Anthropology

This thesis examines the production and circulation of discourses related to (counter)terrorism at a university-affiliated terrorism and security studies research center in eastern Massachusetts. Drawing on participant observation, documentary analysis, and interviews with faculty and students at the research center, I suggest that expert discourses of (counter)terrorism at the center traffic in an archetypal construction of the terrorist that I call the “depoliticized radical.” This construction locates the root of terrorism in individual morality and psychology, tending to abstract the terrorist from the political conditions in which they enact violence. I further propose that the depoliticized radical functions as a boundary object in Star and Griesemer's (1989) conception, serving the interests of both expert regimes that take the terrorist as a subject to be known and counterterror regimes that take the terrorist as a subject to be controlled and/or corrected. Through fine-grained case studies, I track the strategic deployment of the depoliticized radical by different actors at the center within distinctive professional contexts. My discussion of the practices by which actors at the center seek to consolidate their expertise within the contested fields of terrorism studies and security studies draws on and develops Gieryn's (1983) concept of “boundary-work” as a rhetorical and theatrical strategy for demarcating legitimate from illegitimate knowledges. I conclude by contemplating the political stakes of terrorism expertise as a project of knowledge production that seeks to establish the "terrorist" as an archetypal subject to be both known and controlled.

Committee: Crystal Biruk (Advisor) Subjects: Cultural Anthropology; Higher Education

Doctor of Philosophy, Miami University, 2017, Political Science

The purpose of this sequential mixed methods study is to provide policymakers with a more-complete understanding of the varying effectiveness of leadership decapitation as a counterterrorism technique. To this end, my central research question asks, “why do certain terrorist groups endure despite experiencing leadership decapitation?”. Drawing on previous studies of terrorism and theories of organizational behavior, I suggest that a high degree of bureaucratization and the provision of social services reduce the destabilizing effects of leadership decapitation by decreasing a group's functional dependence on any single individual to secure the resources necessary to survive. The first phase of this study is a qualitative exploration of two existing explanations of organizational endurance, bureaucracy and incentive-based organizational maintenance, that should, prima facie, explain leadership decapitation's varying outcomes. I use a deviant case study of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, one of the oldest and most important politically-violent groups in history, to illustrate existing explanations' weaknesses and to find evidence linking my proposed characteristics to the outcome of survival. Based on my qualitative findings, I generate a set of hypotheses about the relationship between select organization-level factors and the effectiveness of leadership decapitation. I then test these hypotheses on a unique dataset of 138 terrorist organizations using both descriptive and binary logistic regression statistical analyses to determine their applicability to a wider class of cases. The quantitative results indicate that my hypotheses are partially supported by the data: While providing social services is by far the strongest predictor of an organization's likelihood of surviving leadership decapitation, the relationship between bureaucracy and survival was found to be non-significant. After discussing the implications of these findings, I present a preliminary set of c (open full item for complete abstract)

Committee: John Rothgeb (Committee Chair); Venelin Ganev (Committee Member); Warren Mason (Committee Member) Subjects: International Relations; Political Science

PHD, Kent State University, 2014, College of Arts and Sciences / Department of Political Science

To test the proposition that international regimes influence state behavior, this study evaluates the impact of two potentially competing regimes on U.S. foreign policy. Specifically, it examines the effects of the international human rights regime and the international counterterrorism regime on U.S. foreign economic assistance from fiscal years 1996-2009, comparing the influence of each of these pre- and post-9/11. Using an innovative mixed methods approach, the study first analyzes the presence of regime-based rhetoric (RBR) in Senate subcommittee hearings, producing an original dataset. Then, merging this unique data with key variables established in the literature, the research draws out the statistical effect of regimes in foreign aid obligations. Results from the first stage demonstrate that the human rights regime continued to exert strong influence during aid appropriations hearings even following the terrorist attacks. Results from the second stage indicate that although the human rights regime continued to exert this influence following 9/11, it operated in a foreign policy space in which the counterterrorism regime altered the aid calculus and emerged as an important statistical determinant. By properly conceiving of regimes, deriving an accurate measure of their influence, and grounding interpretations of statistical results in appropriate evidence, this research sheds new light on the importance of the international human rights and counterterrorism regimes in the U.S. foreign aid appropriations process.

Committee: Steven Hook (Committee Chair); Patrick Coy (Committee Member); Daniel Hawes (Committee Member); John Vasquez (Committee Member) Subjects: International Relations; Political Science

Master of Arts (MA), Wright State University, 2011, International and Comparative Politics

Democratic states are more susceptible to terrorist attacks and yet have the most responsibility to ensure their counterterrorism responses are in accordance with democratic principles. Respect for the rule of law and the freedoms of speech and press are just a few of the principles ingrained in democratic philosophy and likewise, by the very nature of a democracy, democratic states must be held accountable to their citizenries. These factors, however, can be a cause of dissention and can lead to a dangerous overreaction or a disproportionate response by democratic states in their counterterrorism policies, including leading to the very undemocratic response of restricting civil liberties. This thesis researches and analyzes the counterterrorism policies of Britain and Spain and applies the theory of Moral Panics to evaluate how Moral Panics has influenced their respective counterterrorism policies to account for the discrepancy found between the British and Spanish state responses to terrorism.

Committee: Donna Schlagheck PhD (Committee Chair); Liam Anderson PhD (Committee Member); Vaughn Shannon PhD (Committee Member) Subjects: International Relations; Political Science

Doctor of Philosophy, The Ohio State University, 2009, History

This dissertation examines the international history of the Palestinian armed struggle from late 1967 until the beginning of the Lebanese Civil war in 1975. Based on multi-archival and multilingual research in Lebanon, the United States, and the United Kingdom, I argue that the Palestinian guerillas won the struggle for international recognition by identifying themselves with the cultural forces of anti-colonialism and Third World internationalism. By laying claim to the status of a national liberation struggle, Palestinian fighters tapped into networks of global support emanating from places like Beijing, Hanoi, Algiers, and Havana that allowed them to achieve a measure of political legitimacy in the international community and provided for the continued survival of their movement. At the same time, these efforts to emulate revolutionary movements from other parts of the world helped to reshape Palestinian national identity into a profoundly cosmopolitan organism; a product of twentieth century globalization. However, these radical visions of national liberation ran headlong into U.S. designs for global order; if radical Palestinians could create a “second Vietnam” in the Middle East, the implications for U.S. authority in the Third World could be disastrous. Through support for regional police powers like Israel and Jordan, Washington was able to mount a sustained counterinsurgency campaign that prevented a guerilla victory.

Committee: Peter Hahn (Advisor); Robert McMahon (Committee Member); Stephen Dale (Committee Member); Kevin Boyle (Committee Member) Subjects: History; International Relations; Middle Eastern History

Master of Science (MS), Ohio University, 2006, Journalism (Communication)

This study examines sourcing and framing of U.S. elite newspapers' coverage of the reauthorization of the USA PATRIOT Act. A content analysis of stories in three U.S. newspapers between December 1, 2005 and March 10, 2006 indicates that a majority of news stories relied heavily on government sources and that the press failed to do its job of including a variety of sources and viewpoints. Regarding topics, counterterrorism, government powers, civil liberties concerns and privacy concerns are the aspects stressed in the media coverage of the renewal. Additionally, the study found that the three newspapers have standardized their own style and wording to cue their readers about what the law is. An examination of the tone in editorials and Op-Ed pieces shows that a majority of those articles are critical of the Act or express mixed feelings towards it. The only supportive voice was from supporters of Bush administration policies.

Committee: Anne Cooper-Chen (Advisor) Subjects: Journalism

Master of Science (MS), Ohio University, 2004, Journalism (Communication)

This study examined print news media coverage of the USA PATRIOT Act before it was passed into law. Seventeen publications, including fourteen top-30-circulation newspapers and three news magazines were selected to represent American print news media. This three-part content analysis examined: 1. Sourcing: The use of sources in news stories through direct and indirect quotation. The incidence, opinion, direct quotation, and prominence of various sources were analyzed to compare the use of government and non-governmental sources in the coverage. 2. Framing: The aspects of the legislation that were highlighted by the coverage, and the aspects of the legislation that were overlooked or underplayed. The most frequently used frames of coverage were counterterrorism, government powers, civil liberties, privacy, and non-citizen issues. 3. Editorial treatment: The tone (supportive, critical/cautionary, or mixed/ambiguous) of the editorials was examined overall, and over time. The framing of the issue in editorial coverage was studied and contrasted with the overall framing trends in coverage.

Committee: Joseph Bernt (Advisor) Subjects: Journalism

PHD, Kent State University, 2011, College of Arts and Sciences / Department of Political Science

This dissertation focuses on post-9/11 counterterrorism and analyzes how the “war on terror” has affected ways of addressing ethno-nationalist separatist conflicts. With the US-led counterterrorist operations in Afghanistan and Iraq following September 11, 2001, military means of fighting terrorism have become more widespread and more acceptable in the eyes of the international community. Ways of addressing terrorism have changed. However, such changes have not been limited exclusively to the threat of terrorism but have affected other phenomena, including ethno-nationalist separatism. The “war on terror” has presented governments with a discursive construct that some states have extrapolated to their separatist challenges. The dissertation analyses how the “war on terror” has enabled some governments to frame their ethno-nationalist separatist conflicts as a terrorist threat and to justify the use of military force against them under the banner of counterterrorism. The findings of the dissertation indicate that the evolution of the concept of “new” terrorism following September 11 has resulted in a tendency to blur the distinctions between the different types of terrorist threats (ethno-nationalist, religious, left- and right-wing). The subsequent blurring of the boundaries between Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups has resulted in the extension of the application of the term terrorism to other phenomena. As the case study of the Russo-Chechen ethno-nationalist separatist conflict reveals, the “war on terror” has been instrumental in the efforts of the Russian government to frame the unpopular conflict as part of the war, and to justify the use of military force as a counterterrorist operation. Similarly, the dissertation investigates how governments in China, Turkey, and Sri Lanka have resorted to terrorist framing in efforts to employ the military solution against separatism while receiving domestic and international support for their actions.

Committee: Andrew Barnes PhD (Committee Co-Chair); Landon Hancock PhD (Committee Co-Chair); Steven Hook PhD (Committee Member); Karl Kaltenthaler PhD (Committee Member) Subjects: Political Science

PHD, Kent State University, 2010, College of Arts and Sciences / Department of Political Science

This research seeks to discover the nature of Turkish law enforcement officers' (LEOs) perceptions of terrorism and terrorist organizations through the application of Q technique. Turkish LEOs' perceptions reflect their personal experiences with terrorism as well as their agencies' accumulated learning in a country that has had a terrorism history. The study uses Q methodology and research findings to create a typology of terrorist organizations in the Republic of Turkey, and it demonstrates that the methodology facilitates the investigation of terrorist organizations and their typical characteristics (i.e., distinguishing traits), including their methods of operation. Q technique permits the quantitative assessment of terrorist organizations and facilitates predictions about terrorist organizations, or types of terrorist organizations, that have likely been the perpetrators of past terrorist incidents. The study demonstrates how to make such predictions through application of quantitative assessments. Participants, providing data about terrorist organizations, are police investigators of counterterrorism units within the Turkish National Police and serve as expert informers in the research project. Nonprobability and snowball sampling of expert informers has resulted in 49 participants, who have produced 61 Q sorts comprised of 80 characteristics that are used in assessing 11 terrorist groups: Al Qaeda's Turkish elements, Hizbullah, Revolutionary People's Liberation Party Front, Marxist Leninist Communist Party, the Kurdistan Workers Party, and others. The correlation and factor analysis of individual Q sorts have resulted in comparative judgments about organizational profiles of different terrorist groups and types of groups. Factor analysis has also led to the discovery of five functional categories (or types) of terrorist organizations: ethno-separatist, intimidator religious, self-conscious religious, provocative religious, and communist.

Committee: Steven R. Brown (Committee Chair); Mark Colvin (Committee Member); Eric S. Jefferis (Committee Member); Mark S. Fleisher (Committee Member); Stephen Webster (Other) Subjects: Criminology; Political Science