Rethinking the US Global War on Terror in the Sahel (2001–2017) between deterrence and defeat of violent extremist groups

IF 0.2 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Abdellatif Djedei, Salim Kerboua
{"title":"Rethinking the US Global War on Terror in the Sahel (2001–2017) between deterrence and defeat of violent extremist groups","authors":"Abdellatif Djedei, Salim Kerboua","doi":"10.1057/s41284-023-00413-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The protracted war against violent extremism provides plausible evidence about the ineffectiveness of purely militaristic approaches. The G-5 Sahel region witnessed an overall trend of mounting insecurity (2001–2017) despite a plethora of programs by multiple actors to defeat terrorism. Deterring rather than defeating terrorism gained momentum in the fourth wave of deterrence research. Contemporary Deterrence Theory (CDT) suggests a toolkit of punishment, denial and delegitimization to face asymmetric threats posed by violent non-state actors. The present article analyzes the US policy instruments and the upward pattern of terrorist attacks in the G5 Sahel states based on the data of global terrorism database (GTD). It also examines the concepts of ungoverned space and state fragility, which represent the bedrock of US intervention in the region. The study argues for a shift of US policy instruments in the Sahel from defeating to deterring terrorism based on the tenets of CDT. Much more attention should be diverted towards a nuanced approach that distinguishes between domestic and transnational extremist groups, and prioritizes robust homegrown delegitimization initiatives in conjunction with more inclusive political processes and socio-economic resilience programs.</p>","PeriodicalId":47023,"journal":{"name":"Security Journal","volume":"313 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Security Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41284-023-00413-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The protracted war against violent extremism provides plausible evidence about the ineffectiveness of purely militaristic approaches. The G-5 Sahel region witnessed an overall trend of mounting insecurity (2001–2017) despite a plethora of programs by multiple actors to defeat terrorism. Deterring rather than defeating terrorism gained momentum in the fourth wave of deterrence research. Contemporary Deterrence Theory (CDT) suggests a toolkit of punishment, denial and delegitimization to face asymmetric threats posed by violent non-state actors. The present article analyzes the US policy instruments and the upward pattern of terrorist attacks in the G5 Sahel states based on the data of global terrorism database (GTD). It also examines the concepts of ungoverned space and state fragility, which represent the bedrock of US intervention in the region. The study argues for a shift of US policy instruments in the Sahel from defeating to deterring terrorism based on the tenets of CDT. Much more attention should be diverted towards a nuanced approach that distinguishes between domestic and transnational extremist groups, and prioritizes robust homegrown delegitimization initiatives in conjunction with more inclusive political processes and socio-economic resilience programs.

Abstract Image

反思美国在萨赫勒地区的全球反恐战争(2001-2017 年)在威慑和击败暴力极端主义团体之间的关系
打击暴力极端主义的持久战为纯粹军事手段的无效性提供了可信的证据。萨赫勒地区五国集团目睹了日益不安全的总体趋势(2001-2017 年),尽管多方行为体实施了大量计划来打击恐怖主义。威慑而非击败恐怖主义在第四波威慑研究浪潮中获得了发展势头。当代威慑理论(Contemporary Deterrence Theory,CDT)提出了一套惩罚、拒绝和去合法化的工具,以应对暴力非国家行为者构成的不对称威胁。本文基于全球恐怖主义数据库(GTD)的数据,分析了美国的政策工具和萨赫勒五国恐怖袭击的上升模式。文章还探讨了无人治理空间和国家脆弱性的概念,这两个概念是美国在该地区进行干预的基石。研究认为,美国在萨赫勒地区的政策工具应根据 CDT 的原则,从击败恐怖主义转向威慑恐怖主义。应将更多的注意力转移到区分国内和跨国极端主义团体的细致入微的方法上,并优先考虑强有力的本土去合法化举措,以及更具包容性的政治进程和社会经济恢复计划。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: The?Security Journal?is a dynamic publication that keeps you informed about the latest developments and techniques in security management. Written in an accessible style it is the world's premier peer-reviewed journal for today's security researcher and professional. The journal is affiliated to ASIS International and has an advisory board which includes representatives from major associations expert practitioners and leading academics.The?Security Journal?publishes papers at the cutting edge in developing ideas and improving practice focusing on the latest research findings on all aspects of security. Regular features include personal opinions and informed comment on key issues in security as well as incisive reviews of books videos and official reports.What are the benefits of subscribing?Learn from evaluations of the latest security measures policies and initiatives; keep up-to-date with new techniques for managing security as well as the latest findings and recommendations of independent research; understand new perspectives and how they inform the theory and practice of security management.What makes the journal distinct?Articles are jargon free and independently refereed; papers are at the cutting edge in developing ideas and improving practice; we have appointed an Advisory Board which includes representatives from leading associations skilled practitioners and the world's leading academics.How does the journal inform?The?Security Journal?publishes innovative papers highlighting the latest research findings on all aspects of security; incisive reviews of books videos and official reports; personal opinions and informed comment on key issues.Topics covered include:fraudevaluations of security measuresshop theftburglaryorganised crimecomputer and information securityrepeat victimisationviolence within the work placeprivate policinginsuranceregulation of the security industryCCTVtaggingaccess controlaviation securityhealth and safetyarmed robberydesigning out crimesecurity staffoffenders' viewsPlease note that the journal does not accept technical or mathematic submissions or research based on formulas or prototypes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信