| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
170969
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The focus of the paper is the evolution of progress in the theory and practice of creating an integrated information environment, discovery of its role and place within the system of national defense and security of the Russian Federation, and also a set of priority measures to develop the above in order to raise the efficiency of national defense control of the state in the current international situation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
187082
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In this article, we explore the security politics of EU database interoperability, inquiring how knowledge infrastructures underpin European security integration. Sitting at the intersection of Science and Technology Studies (STS) and critical approaches to European security, we unpack the co-constitutive relation between database anxieties and interoperability mechanisms. By database anxieties, we refer to what European institutions identify as the main epistemic and operational concerns that emerge from the current use of databases by security authorities across Europe. These anxieties are expected to be resolved by mechanisms that foster interoperability. We argue that the relation between database anxieties and interoperability mechanisms shapes the novel conditions of possibility for European security integration in a datafied world. While far-reaching in technological terms, interoperability is not about introducing a new overarching system, but about the management, re-organisation and re-purposing of datasets. Such formatting matters politically because it eventually informs sovereign acts of policing and mobility control.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
145843
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The issues of increasing efficiency of search-and-rescue and underwater engineering works due to the integrated employment of underwater vehicles and carrying vessels as well as fuller using advantages of the internal sources of information gathering and processing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
160886
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Britain has long taken a firm public line against terrorist ransom, insisting that yielding to terrorist demands only encourages further acts of intimidation and kidnapping. Hitherto, academic research has tended to take these assertions of piety at face value. This article uses a historical approach to show that the British position has shifted over time and was often more complex and pragmatic. Indeed, Britain’s position with regard to kidnap and ransom insurance has, until quite recently, been rather ambiguous. We use the British case to suggest that, rather than dividing states into groups that make concessions and those that do not, it is perhaps better to recognise there is often a broad spectrum of positions, sometimes held by different parts of the same government, together with the private security companies that move in the shadows on their behalf. One of the few things that unites them is a tendency to dissemble and this presents some intriguing methods problems for researchers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|