Since philosophers Beccaria and Bentham, criminologists have been concerned with predicting how governmental attempts to maintain lawful behavior affect subsequent rates of criminal violence. In this article, we build on prior research to argue that governmental responses to a specific form of criminal violence—terrorism—may produce both a positive deterrence effect (i.e., reducing future incidence of prohibited behavior) and a negative backlash effect (i.e., increasing future incidence of prohibited behavior). Deterrence-based models have long dominated both criminal justice and counterterrorist policies on responding to violence. The models maintain that an individual's prohibited behavior can be altered by the threat and imposition of punishment. Backlash models are more theoretically scattered but receive mixed support from several sources, which include research on counterterrorism; the criminology literature on labeling, legitimacy, and defiance; and the psychological literature on social power and decision making. In this article, we identify six major British strategies aimed at reducing political violence in Northern Ireland from 1969 to 1992 and then use a Cox proportional hazard model to estimate the impact of these interventions on the risk of new attacks. In general, we find the strongest support for backlash models. The only support for deterrence models was a military surge called Operation Motorman, which was followed by significant declines in the risk of new attacks. The results underscore the importance of considering the possibility that antiterrorist interventions might both increase and decrease subsequent violence.

The impact of british counterterrorist strategies on political violence in northern ireland: comparing deterrence and backlash models*

Concerns have been raised that counter-terrorism laws and policies are increasingly alienating Muslims, especially young people and students, and that counter-terrorism measures may themselves feed and sustain terrorism. This paper relies on extracts from a report on this issue commissioned by the Equality and Human Rights Commission to develop and deepen understanding of the impact of counter-terrorism legislation and policies in general, and on Muslim communities in particular. Building on existing studies, this report contributes to the research and wider public discussion of this matter through an examination of the experiences of counter-terrorism legislation and policies on Muslim communities in four local areas across Britain and interviews with practitioners and officials at a national and local level. The areas focused on relate in particular to various uses of technology to further counter-terror strategies and the reaction to them of those interviewed.

/pdf/the-impact-of-counter-terrorism-measures-on-muslim-1jp7pv1e9q.pdf

The impact of counter-terrorism measures on Muslim communities

Transitional Justice discourses have largely focused on "paradigmatic transitions." Such analyses emphasize dealing with the human rights abuses committed by prior authoritarian or illegitimate regimes. But, authoritarian entities may not be the only kind of states with a legacy of serious and systematic rights -violations, A similar legacy may manifest in broadly democratic states that have experienced prolonged political violence. These "conflicted democracies present a number of paradoxes, which come to the fore when peace and transitional political process are agreed, thereby providing unique challenges in political and legal transformation. This article explores these paradoxes and challenges. It further draws out a more nuanced understand of the transitional process by conceptually separating war/peace transitions from illiberal polity/democracy transitions.

The Paradox of Transition in Conflicted Democracies

This article asserts that ‘transitional justice’ analyses provide important tools in understanding how societies emerge from violent politics. It argues for a conception of transitional justice that goes beyond the question of dealing with the legacy of past human rights violations; rather, its focus is on a range of inter-related dilemmas relating to the role of law in transitional societies. Specifically, the article explores the pivotal and paradoxical role played by law and legal process in times of transition. It examines the tensions inherent in simultaneously reforming the law while utilizing legal form to bring about institutional transformation. These broad theoretical issues are addressed using Northern Ireland as a case study. The role of law is examined (and a reassessment of transition offered), through an exploration of five inter-linked areas: The relationship between law and conflict; the transformation of legal institutions; dealing with the past; political accommodation and minority rights; and the gap which occurs around gender and political transition. The article concludes by suggesting that only through a broader understanding of transitional justice, coupled with a nuanced reassertion of law’s domestic and international legitimacy, can the role of law in transitional societies be adequately understood.

Justice Discourses in Transition

/pdf/p-stones-and-provos-group-violence-in-northern-ireland-and-3l8cmksv20.pdf

P stones and provos : group violence in Northern Ireland and Chicago

This paper questions the claim that British militarized security strategy in Northern Ireland offers a model for the global 'war against terrorism' by exploring the critically important (though neglected) 'Falls Curfew' episode. Part one explores the relationship between law, legitimacy, and the role of the military in democracies experiencing violent conflict. Part two examines the operationalization of the law on military intervention during the curfew, drawing on archival material and employing empirical studies. Part three draws overall conclusions, relating the contribution that the curfew made to the escalation of the conflict to its operational aspects and legal underpinnings. Failings are identified, and some general lessons drawn out about the dangers of a 'war' model in complex and violent political disorders.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/jols261.pdf?abstractid=437760&mirid=5

A Model for the 'War Against Terrorism'? Military Intervention in Northern Ireland and the 1970 Falls Curfew

This paper questions the claim that British militarized security strategy in Northern Ireland offers a model for the global ‘war against terrorism’ by exploring the critically important (though neglected) ‘Falls Curfew’ episode. Part one explores the relationship between law, legitimacy, and the role of the military in democracies experiencing violent conflict. Part two examines the operationalization of the law on military intervention during the curfew, drawing on archival material and employing empirical studies. Part three draws overall conclusions, relating the contribution that the curfew made to the escalation of the conflict to its operational aspects and legal underpinnings. Failings are identified, and some general lessons drawn out about the dangers of a ‘war’ model in complex and violent political disorders.

A Model for the 'War against Terrorism'? Military Intervention and the 1970 Falls Curfew

In place of the simple modelling employed in anti-terrorist legal discourse, this article posits an interactive model of the relationship between the state and violent political actors, exploring law's role in both the repression and mobilisation of challengers. Drawing on social movement theory, it hypothesises a process of ‘legally implicated mobilisation’ which takes account both of law's presence and its partial absence in ‘legal grey zones’ during violent conflict, and it suggests how law may impact upon key elements of the mobilisation process. The hypothesis is applied to qualitative data from Northern Ireland on violent challengers. The data point to the importance of ‘messaging’ about law in the state of exception, supporting claims that law can have a ‘damping’ effect on violent conflict. The relationship between repression and violence is partly symbiotic, and in the global ‘war on terror,’ prisoner-abuse may have a mobilising effect on violent challengers.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/4123368.pdf

Making War on Terror? Global Lessons from Northern Ireland

While ex-combatant and disarmament, demobilization and reintegration issues have generated rich literatures, transitionary armed opposition movements – actors central to transitional justice processes – have been neglected. This article addresses part of this research gap, focusing on the agency of armed movements with respect to three key transitional justice themes: transition, law and truth processes in the law-based rechtsstaat. Drawing on examples from South Africa, Namibia, Israel/Palestine and the Basque country, the article offers a framework for analyzing this agency by exploring the political opportunity structures presented by truth processes, as well as their implications for the movements’ mobilizing structures and framing processes. This analytical framework is grounded in original Northern Ireland data drawn from interviews with former Irish Republican Army (IRA) activists, IRA public statements and

Ita Connolly

Papers

A Model for the 'War Against Terrorism'? Military Intervention in Northern Ireland and the 1970 Falls Curfew

A Model for the 'War against Terrorism'? Military Intervention and the 1970 Falls Curfew

Making War on Terror? Global Lessons from Northern Ireland

The Sharp End: Armed Opposition Movements, Transitional Truth Processes and the Rechtsstaat