Nothing on Sprol: Worst Places in the World, since December last year. Now, since the quakes in China, the world has a new worst place.

Still, no one’s shooting at anybody there, right? 

See here for a high-powered conference that just took place at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, on Exploring the Need for Additional Norms to Govern Contemporary Conflict Situations. H/T (again) to Bobby Chesney. 

[Slow day, so I’m covering new readings…. come to think of it, I’ve just decided to compile and post a Reading List on Regulating Complex Terrain in Counterinsurgency to the CTLab blogsite – consider it a corollary to Abu Muqawama’s COIN Reading List. Stay tuned.] 

Back to the conference – among the papers that were presented:

Prof. David Kretzmer
Hebrew University of Jerusalem; Ramat Gan Academic Center of Law and Business; University of Ulster
Rethinking application of IHL in non-international armed conflicts

Prof. Dino Kritsiotis
University of Nottingham; University of Michigan
War, armed conflict and characterizations of the war on terror

Prof. Yuval Shany
Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Possible directions for regulating the situation in Gaza

Adv. Rotem Giladi
University of Michigan
Hidden agenda: The broad normative setting of occupation law

Adv. Michael Lieberman
Steptoe & Johnson LLP, Washington DC
Pragmatism and principle in International Humanitarian Law

Ms. Daphné Richemond-Barak
Tel-Aviv University
Private military companies and combatancy status under IHL

Prof. Emiliano Buis
University of Buenos Aires
From La Tablada to Guantanamo Bay: The challenge of new conflict situations in the experience of the Inter-American system of human rights protection

Mr. Gilad Noam
Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Complementing IHL: Is there a role for international criminal courts and tribunals?

Dr. Ralph Wilde
University College London
Complementing occupation law? Selective judicial treatment of the suitability of human rights norms

More on regulating complex terrain in global counterinsurgency, from Katherine Strandburg at NYU and De Pau Law:

Abstract: Recent controversies about the National Security Agency’s warrantless wiretapping of international calls have overshadowed equally disturbing allegations that the government has acquired access to a huge database of domestic call traffic data, revealing information about times, dates, and numbers called. Although communication content traditionally has been the primary focus of concern about overreaching government surveillance, law enforcement officials are increasingly interested in using sophisticated computer analysis of noncontent traffic data to map networks of associations. Despite the rising importance of digitally mediated association, current Fourth Amendment and statutory schemes provide only weak checks on government. The potential to chill association through overreaching relational surveillance is great. This Article argues that the First Amendment’s freedom of association guarantees can and do provide a proper framework for regulating relational surveillance and suggests how these guarantees might apply to particular forms of analysis of traffic data.

Strandburg, Katherine J. "Freedom of Association in a Networked World: First Amendment Regulation of Relational Surveillance." Boston College Law Review 49:741 (2008).

H/T to Bobby Chesney. 

 

Go check out the latest issue of International Security on "TALIBS, TRIBES, AND TROUBLE IN SOUTH ASIA." Table of contents with hyperlinks is pasted below.

Press Release

May 2, 2008

Spring 2008
Vol. 32, No. 4

Table of Contents

TALIBS, TRIBES, AND TROUBLE IN SOUTH ASIA

"The Rise of Afghanistan’s Insurgency: State Failure and Jihad"
Seth G. Jones
pp. 7-40

In 2001 U.S. and Afghan forces overthrew the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. Less than a year later, insurgents began a sustained effort to bring down the government of Hamid Karzai. Fueling this insurgency was the collapse of governance following the ouster of the Taliban. To counter the insurgents, the government must extend governance into Afghanistan’s rural areas and establish effective law and order. Also needed is greater cooperation by the Pakistani government to capture or kill jihadists and undermine their ideological support.

FULL TEXT AVAILABLE>>

"No Sign until the Burst of Fire: Understanding the Pakistan-Afghanistan Frontier"
Thomas H. Johnson and M. Chris Mason
pp. 41-77

The portion of the Pakistan-Afghanistan border area dominated by Pashtun tribes poses the greatest challenge to U.S. national security interests. Here, extremist groups such as the Taliban and al-Qaida continue to enjoy safe haven. The Pashtun, whose tribal structures have been subverted since the 1970s, represent a unique cultural challenge that the U.S. foreign policy establishment has failed to appreciate. To reverse the trend of radicalization in this area, the United States and the Afghan government must strengthen and rebuild the Pashtuns’ tribal structures while reducing the external pressures on them. Maintaining the current policy of extending the central government into this region will only foment insurgency among a proto-insurgent people.

FULL TEXT AVAILABLE>>

________________________________________________________________________

"What Terrorists Really Want: Terrorist Motives and Counterterrorism Strategy"
Max Abrahms
pp. 78-105

The strategic model—the dominant paradigm in terrorism studies—claims that terrorists are rational actors who attack civilians to achieve political goals. To defeat terrorism, policymakers have sought to decrease its political utility by adhering to a no concessions policy, engaging in political accommodation, and promoting democracy. The evidence suggests, however, that terrorists are not motivated primarily by a desire to achieve political objectives. Rather, they use terrorism to develop strong affective ties with fellow terrorists. Counterterrorism strategies must therefore find ways to diminish the social utility of terrorism.

_________________________________________________________________________

FIXING FAILED AND FRACTURED STATES

"Postconflict Reconstruction in Africa: Flawed Ideas about Failed States"
Pierre Englebert and Denis M. Tull
pp. 106-139

Africa has the highest percentage of failed states in the world, making it a top priority for external donors engaged in state reconstruction. Yet such efforts have a poor record of success because of three flawed assumptions shared by many donors: first, Western state institutions can be transferred to Africa ; second, donors and African leaders have the same understanding of failure and reconstruction; and third, donors are capable of rebuilding Africa states. In contrast, Uganda and Somaliland have succeeded in rebuilding and without external assistance. This success suggests that donors should shift their efforts toward encouraging indigenous state-building efforts and constructive bargaining between local groups and the governments of failed African states.

"Partitioning to Peace: Sovereignty, Demography, and Ethnic Civil Wars"
Carter Johnson
pp. 140-170

Partitioning states along ethnic lines is a debatable solution to solving ethnic civil wars. Advocates argue that partition offers the best chance for lasting peace, while opponents claim that it takes a huge toll on the populations involved and that its effectiveness has yet to be proven. The evidence suggests that only partitions that completely separate the warring groups succeed in creating peaceful states. Policymakers should thus consider partition as an option only where populations are already separated or where population transfers can be accomplished safely. Partitioning Kosovo into distinct ethnic districts could lead to lasting peace, whereas partitioning Iraq would most likely increase human suffering and violence.

____________________________________________________________________________________

CORRESPONDENCE

"The Role of Hierarchy in International Politics"
Paul K. MacDonald
David A. Lake

Strains on the sovereign entitlements of states, indeed…

A fascinating new article on "The Principles of Distinction and Neutrality in Cyberwarfare", by Jeffrey T.G. Kelsey, is the only recent bit of scholarship that I’ve seen that links cyber issues to radio broadcasting. It’s not explicitly what the piece is about – Kelsey’s points hover around embeddedness, non-lethality, and violations of sovereign neutrality – but he links the two through a case study that requires analogous reasoning. The lessons of radio and mass-mediated ethnic slaughter in Rwanda and Liberia, and broadcast nationalism in the former Yugoslav states, have been generally forgotten or ignored in the current wave of interest in information operations and strategic communications. So this is worth a read – as is past work by Jamie Frederick Metzl.

Metzl wrote fantastic early articles on radio jamming and the Rwanda genocide, and on IT and human rights. He was also a While House Scholar in the late 1990s, and in a position to strategize the bombing campaign in Kosovo that Kelsey refers to in his article – which, incidentally, included specifically targeting Serbian hacker units and broadcast media. Kelsey doesn’t mention any of this; in Metzl’s case, the lessons of Rwanda fed directly into the decision-making processes for the Kosovo campaign, which in turn have some bearing on issues of distinction and targeting raised in this new piece.

H/T to Bobby Chesney, who’s part of the outstanding National Security Advisors blog (and he teaches law, too…).