{"title":"The key elements of the LIBE Committee’s compromise proposal on e-evidence: a critical overview through a fundamental rights lens","authors":"Athina Sachoulidou","doi":"10.1080/23340460.2021.1999173","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23340460.2021.1999173","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article examines the compromise proposal for a Regulation on cross-border access to electronic information in criminal matters the European Parliament Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs voted in favour of in December 2020. It explores the origins of the e-evidence initiative as a whole by placing it in the context of the EU cooperation on counter-terrorism and digitalization strategy. On this basis, it presents the key elements of the compromise proposal with a focus on the envisaged function of the so-called European Production and Preservation Orders. To contribute to the ongoing debate on the suitability of that proposal compared to the one released by the Commission in April 2018, it argues that the LIBE Committee’s proposal fits better into a Union of Security and Freedom, but further improvements are needed to increase the protection of fundamental rights, given the intrusiveness of the suggested investigative measures.","PeriodicalId":36949,"journal":{"name":"Russia in Global Affairs","volume":"49 1","pages":"777 - 793"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78520290","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Ontological security: a framework for the analysis of Russia’s view of the world","authors":"Dina Moulioukova, R. Kanet","doi":"10.1080/23340460.2021.2000173","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23340460.2021.2000173","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Recent studies have noted the human need for ontological security as an important factor of a state's foreign policy. Ontological security builds on the major role that embedded and routinized biographical narratives of a state play in its identity: how it sees itself, and how it wants to be seen by others. While there is rich research connecting the importance of the great power narrative to Russia's sense of ontological security, less attention has been paid to operationalization of such “greatness.” This article seeks to “decode” some aspects of Russia's ontological security. It focuses on the continuity of three narratives that in our opinion have historically formed a cornerstone of the country's ontological awareness as a great power (strong leader, imperial expansion, and the West's impact on Russia's sense of identity), and on the rupture of that continuity that followed the dissolution of the Soviet Union and its more recent revival.","PeriodicalId":36949,"journal":{"name":"Russia in Global Affairs","volume":"185 1","pages":"831 - 853"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77450695","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Countering Iran’s influence in Iraq from Obama to Trump: instruments and implications, 2009–2020","authors":"Nawzad Abdullah Shukri","doi":"10.1080/23340460.2021.1987840","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23340460.2021.1987840","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article seeks to determine the key instruments that both Barack Obama and Donald Trump adopted to undermine Iranian influence in Iraq, along with explaining their implications in practice. Since 2003, diminishing Iranian influence in Iraq was regarded to be vital U.S. interests. This is due to the fact that Iranian domination in Iraq would bolster its expansionist policy in the region. Both the Obama and Trump administrations, in varying ways, used common instruments to counter the Iranian influence in Iraq, including attempting to establish an anti-Iranian government in Baghdad, prioritizing stability through the use of strongmen over supporting democratic institutions and empowering meaningful power sharing. However, unlike the Obama administration, Trump exerted maximum political and economic pressure along with military threats against Iran and its allies in Iraq rather than pursuing dialogue with the nations. Yet these various instruments had a limited impact on diminishing Iran’s influence in Iraq.","PeriodicalId":36949,"journal":{"name":"Russia in Global Affairs","volume":"4 1","pages":"855 - 870"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88133070","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The collective securitization of aviation in the European Union through association with terrorism","authors":"C. Kaunert, B. Callander, Sarah Léonard","doi":"10.1080/23340460.2021.2002099","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23340460.2021.2002099","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article analyses the expansion of European Union cooperation on aviation security using the framework of collective securitization. It establishes how 9/11 was a precipitating event that put terrorism and aviation security in the spotlight. 9/11 changed the collectively held understanding of the security threat posed by terrorism sufficiently to establish aviation security as a common policy framework rather than a national issue. 9/11 was therefore used by EU actors to convince the EU Member States that they all faced one collective terrorist threat. The subsequent institutionalization of this cooperation contributed to a routinization of aviation practices in the EU. As a result of the association between terrorism and aviation, 9/11 pushed EU Member States into taking action on aviation security. This caused the Member States to acknowledge the need for both the highest possible standards of aviation security and the harmonized enforcement of these standards.","PeriodicalId":36949,"journal":{"name":"Russia in Global Affairs","volume":"27 1","pages":"669 - 686"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78900654","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The new EU counter-terrorism Agenda: preemptive security through the anticipation of terrorist events","authors":"Christopher Baker‐Beall, G. Mott","doi":"10.1080/23340460.2021.1995461","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23340460.2021.1995461","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article argues that the new EU Counter-Terrorism Agenda is based on logics of anticipatory action. Three types of anticipatory action that are central to the development of EU counter-terrorism are identified: preparedness, precaution and preemption. We argue that while the original EU Counter-Terrorism Strategy contained a mixture of these three forms of anticipatory action, the new Counter-Terrorism Agenda places a renewed emphasis on preemptive measures with preparedness given less prominence. The reinforcing of preemptive security practice is most vividly reflected in the CT Agenda's new Anticipate workstream, which emphasises the utility of preemptive computer-based technologies, including Artificial Intelligence and algorithms, as key dimensions of the response to terrorism. The article identifies challenges of transparency and effectiveness that arise when applying computer-based technologies to counter-terrorism, highlighting the importance of regulatory oversight if the EU's commitment to the development of security policies that respect fundamental rights is to be guaranteed.","PeriodicalId":36949,"journal":{"name":"Russia in Global Affairs","volume":"96 1","pages":"711 - 732"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83369044","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Collective securitization and crisification of EU policy change: two decades of EU counterterrorism policy","authors":"C. Kaunert, Sarah Léonard","doi":"10.1080/23340460.2021.2002098","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23340460.2021.2002098","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT One of the founding fathers of the European Union (EU) was very correct in suggesting that people would only recognize the necessity of change once a crisis was upon them, as the “war on terror” would show. The EU, as this special issue shows, joined in this “war on terror”, whereby it collectively securitized the threat to become a European, rather than a national security threat – a European “war on terror”. It aims to assess the collective securitization process in EU counterterrorism, evaluating this as a process between a construction of security threats and the development of supranational governance through crisification. It posits that EU counterterrorism needs to be analysed as a process driven by collective securitization as part of an ongoing process of crisification that leads to increased supranational governance.","PeriodicalId":36949,"journal":{"name":"Russia in Global Affairs","volume":"31 1","pages":"687 - 693"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88145735","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Will the US’s economic containment draw Japan and China closer?","authors":"Jane Du, Cheng King","doi":"10.1080/23340460.2021.1995462","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23340460.2021.1995462","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Through the prism of Japan's trade and investment linkages with China and the US, this article evaluates the potential of Japan in providing a balance to China under the US's economic containment. The empirical results turn the conventional views on their head, showing that the US and Japan are more influential with each other. China's rising economic capacity and fierce competition with Japan also make it less likely for Japan to accept greater trade partnership with China, not to mention the long-term bilateral diplomatic instability and uncertainties that do not allow Japan to risk becoming overly dependent on China economically. By analysing trade and investment structures of the three, this article examines the possibility that the Japan-China cooperation could draw Japan away from its existing economic alliance with the US.","PeriodicalId":36949,"journal":{"name":"Russia in Global Affairs","volume":"57 1","pages":"871 - 884"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76068075","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"EU counterterrorism, collective securitization, and the internal-external security nexus","authors":"A. Shepherd","doi":"10.1080/23340460.2021.2001958","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23340460.2021.2001958","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The first two decades of EU counterterrorism policy are emblematic of the emergence of an internal-external security nexus. This has occurred through the EU’s collective securitization of terrorism as a transboundary threat that blurs the traditional divide between internal and external security requiring multidimensional and transboundary EU counterterrorism policies and practises. The EU’s status quo discourse of terrorism as primarily a national and internal security threat to be dealt with by domestic security agencies has transformed into strategic discourses, policies and practices that frame terrorism as a transnational threat to the EU requiring a transnational response that integrates internal and external policies, institutions, and capabilities. While institutional silos, turf wars, and differing institutional cultures continue to hamper the routinization of a transboundary response, this collective securitization of terrorism as a transboundary threat, within a wider internal-external security nexus, is reshaping the nature of the EU as a security actor.","PeriodicalId":36949,"journal":{"name":"Russia in Global Affairs","volume":"18 1","pages":"733 - 749"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85519633","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Still the absent friend? The European Union’s global counter-terrorism role after twenty years","authors":"Alex Mackenzie, C. Kaunert","doi":"10.1080/23340460.2021.1998920","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23340460.2021.1998920","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Over a decade ago, it was claimed that the EU was an “absent friend” in foreign policy counter-terrorism. Much has changed since then, however. Al Qaeda and Islamic State are shadows of what they were. The contribution of this article is to re-evaluate and offer a theoretically-informed account of the development of the EU’s global counter-terrorism role, drawing on collective securitisation. We advance two arguments here. Firstly, EU global counter-terrorism activity has occurred, grown, and become routinised due to terrorist threats and attacks, institutional developments, and interactions with interlocutors. Secondly, the characterisation of the EU as an “absent friend” is unsustainable in 2021. While the EU remains secondary to its member states in many ways, it has developed tools of its own that have enhanced its capabilities in external counter-terrorism.","PeriodicalId":36949,"journal":{"name":"Russia in Global Affairs","volume":"12 1","pages":"615 - 630"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83910193","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Securitization across borders – commonalities and contradictions in European and Arab counterterrorism discourses","authors":"Lars Berger","doi":"10.1080/23340460.2021.2001763","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23340460.2021.2001763","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT As securitization often involves transnational issues, we need a better understanding of how such securitization processes mutually reinforce or contradict each other. Differences in political systems and political cultures increase the risk that audience reactions as well as routinizations run counter the interests informing the initial securitizing move. In the case of relations between European and Arab countries, the overlap and tensions associated with different political calculi behind such transnational processes are particularly relevant in terms of the fallout, which the securitization of the so-called Islamic State’s terrorism produces for political reform in the Arab world as well as for political discourses on Islam and Islamism in Europe.","PeriodicalId":36949,"journal":{"name":"Russia in Global Affairs","volume":"1 1","pages":"813 - 830"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86344621","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}