| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
188024
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Gendarmerie forces are actively deployed by many states in the world to fight terrorism, but their impact on terrorism has not been explored. This study fills this gap in the literature and examines the effect that having gendarmerie forces has on terrorist activities in a state. I discuss competing arguments about the relationship between having these forces and terror incidents and also address the conditioning effect of bureaucratic capacity on this relationship. By constructing a time series cross-sectional data that identifies the countries having gendarmeries in given years, I test these arguments, and the results of the empirical analyses suggest that states having gendarmerie forces experience more terrorist violence than those without gendarmeries. However, the number of terror incidents in states with gendarmeries decreases as these states have greater bureaucratic capacity. The results have implications in terms of the role of militarized policing on terrorism and countering terrorism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
137638
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In recent years, policebuilding has moved centre stage in international security. Not only have the numbers of police officers deployed externally significantly increased in the last decade, but the police have also come to be regarded as key with regard to the stabilizing of weak or failed states. It is hereby assumed that the police, as a civilian force, are better trained and equipped to establish order and stability than the military. This article challenges such a military–police divide, according to which the police are understood to be a civilian institution that mainly ‘serves and protects’ while the military ‘breaks things and kills people’. It argues that while the blurring between military functions and police functions might be more bleak and observable as part of international interventions in so-called zones of disorder, we need to understand the police theoretically as part of a single continuum of state institutions designed to simultaneously serve and protect the population and to establish and maintain liberal state power through (sometimes) forceful, exclusionary means. The article will illustrate this theoretical argument through a detailed analysis of the evolution of European Union international police power.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
188052
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
While existing research on terrorist group termination examines numerous factors explaining why some terror groups end their campaigns of violence, these studies do not sufficiently address the impact that the actors who actively fight these groups have on the probability of a group’s demise. This paper explores the effect of gendarmeries on terrorist group termination. Gendarmeries may either contribute positively to the counterterrorism efforts of the state with their policing and military operations, or they may undermine these efforts to the extent that they become unaccountable to the state for their actions. Lax accountability may lead to principle-agent problems, resulting in an increase in the risk of those groups engaging in repressive or rent-seeking actions, which can undermine support for the government and contribute to the survival of the terror group. It is argued that the competing ways in which gendarmeries can affect counterterrorism efforts are conditioned by the bureaucratic effectiveness of the state in managing the activities of gendarmerie forces and by the state’s commitment to upholding the rule of law. The results of empirical analyses reveal that having gendarmeries increases a terrorist group’s chance of ending their campaign of violence but decreases the likelihood of a group’s demise in states marked by lower bureaucratic effectiveness and weak rule of law.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|