Chapter 24 Discussion Question Pointers

End of Chapter Question Pointers

Chapter 24 – International Organizations and Counter-terrorism

Christian Kaunert and Ori Wertman

  1. Do international organizations help or hinder counter-terrorism?
    2.

    Think back to the roots of terrorism and the increasing transnational nature of the phenomenon. Since the 1970s, terrorism has increasingly become a transnational phenomenon that crossed international boundaries, from the early PLO, to PKK, to Al-Qaeda, ISIL, and other movements. International Organizations are able to govern transnational spaces through international regulations.

    Now try to locate these elements in the case study outlined above. How might the actions of the EU, ASEAN, NATO, and others be able to fight international terrorism in a manner that is complementary to state action? However, are there problems related to international governance through international organizations? How do they overcome problems of democratic accountability? Who defines the legal order?

  2. Who should lead counter-terrorism efforts at the global level? Can the United Nations be a world legislator in counter-terrorism?
    3.

    In answering this question, it might be useful to consider your answer to the previous question. You might consider the advantages and disadvantages of state action. Further you might consider the centrality of international boundaries, border and legal jurisdictions, both at the domestic and international level. Where might we see problems with state actions? Who has a responsibility and capability to fight terrorism and to protect citizens? Finally, you might consider notions of the democratic character of all the nations involved in the United Nations. If only a minority of UN member states are democracies themselves, can UN decisions have the same democratic accountability and legitimacy as national democratic decisions?

  3. How can international organizations cooperate with one another more efficiently in counter-terrorism?
    4.

    You may consider the example of the European Union and NATO. How easy is it for international organizations to cooperate? Do they always have the same interests? What if their membership differs? How do they align interests even when membership diverges? You can then extend your analysis to outlining the case of ASEAN. How does this international organization differ from the EU? Is there an ASEAN way of cooperating?

  4. Does the EU provide an effective framework for counter-terrorism cooperation at the European level?
    5.

    You may consider the example of terrorism before 9/11 in Europe. What were the main issues in terms of state cooperation in Europe in important areas, such as extradition, criminal justice cooperation, and borders? What changes did the European Union bring to the governance of counter-terrorism after 9/11? How easy is it for member states to cooperate? Do they always have the same interests? How about other institutional actors, such as the European Commission, the European Parliament, or the European Court of Justice?

  5. How effective is the EU in counter-terrorism compared to other regional organizations, such as ASEAN or NATO?

    6. You may consider your answers to the previous questions. What are the main problems for states in terms of cooperating on transnational security threats? What can they achieve well? Where are the main problems? You then want to consider what changes the European Union brought to the governance of counter-terrorism after 9/11. How easy was it for member states to cooperate? Do they always have the same interests? You can then extend your analysis to outlining the case of ASEAN. How does this international organization differ from the EU? Is there an ASEAN way of cooperating?

Back to top