| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
090201
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2009.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In attempting to explain Israel's retaliatory policies toward Palestinian violence, new institutionalist and rational choice theories vie for dominance. This article argues that both approaches can contribute to understanding the severity of Israel's response if they are viewed as nested explanations appropriate to different threat levels. The article makes its case using data from 74 interviews with senior Israeli counterterrorist experts (2006-07), counts of Israeli and Palestinian fatalities due to state and collective violence (1987-2007), and a database of collective violence events during the Second Intifada (2000-05). Institutional effects are evident at low threat levels, as new institutionalists predict, but these effects are overwhelmed at high threat levels, as rational choice theorists assert.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
138198
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The authors examine the methodological problems facing development of nonlethal weapons (NLW) for delivery to military and police units. They offer a practical approach to the classification of NLW based on physical, chemical, and biological principles and a methodological approach to the development of an NLW targeted program for the Russian Armed Forces and other law enforcement ministries and agencies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
118133
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article analyzes counterterrorist lawmaking as an instance of security politics. It does so through archival parliamentary analysis of British counterterrorism legislation at three different times: in the wake of a perceived security emergency (2001); when the impact of an emergency is fading (2008); and when there is no emergency (2000). The findings show that over time, legislative exceptions and emergencies become normalized. By taking a parliamentary, legislative, and historical perspective, the article also challenges some of the assumptions of the exceptionalism debate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|