Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-dvmhs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-10T16:54:50.590Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Physical Integrity Rights and Terrorism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 June 2010

James A. Piazza  and
James Igoe Walsh
James A. Piazza
Affiliation:
The Pennsylvania State University
James Igoe Walsh
Affiliation:
University of North Carolina at Charlotte
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Can states afford to protect human rights when facing a terrorist threat? Contemporary academic literature suggests that the answer to this question is no, concluding that states that afford their citizens basic political rights and civil liberties leave themselves more exposed to terrorist attacks (Piazza 2008; Wade and Reiter 2007; Pape 2003; Eubank and Weinberg 1994). American policymakers seem to agree. Both the Bush and Obama administrations regard the curtailment of physical integrity rights as a necessary element of effective counterterrorism policy. The Bush administration responded to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, with policies permitting indefinite detention, extraordinary rendition, use of physically abusive interrogation practices, and increased and largely unchecked surveillance and wiretapping of suspected terrorists. Although it banned abusive interrogation and announced plans to close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, the Obama administration has maintained the practice of wiretapping, reserved the option of rendition, and dramatically increased unmanned drone attacks against suspected terrorists in Pakistan, which often results in civilian casualties. Both presidents have claimed that these policies are necessary to keep Americans safe from terrorism (Hosenball 2009; “Bush Defends Policy on Terror Detainees” 2005).

Type
Symposium
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 43 , Issue 3 , July 2010 , pp. 411 - 414
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

“Bush Defends Policy on Terror Detainees.” 2005. Associated Press. November 7.Google Scholar
Chenoweth, Erica, and Duggan, Laura. n.d. “Does Repression Decrease Terrorist Attacks? Evidence from Israel.” Unpublished paper.Google Scholar
Cingranelli, David L., and Richards, David L.. 2008. The Cingranelli-Richards (CIRI) Human Rights Dataset. CIRI Human Rights Data Project, Binghamton University SUNY. http://ciri.binghamton.edu/ (accessed July 2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eubank, William Lee, and Weinberg, Leonard. 1994. “Does Democracy Encourage Terrorism?” Terrorism and Political Violence 6 (4): 417–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eyerman, Joe. 1998. “Terrorism and Democratic States: Soft Targets or Accessible Systems.” International Interactions 24 (2): 151–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibney, Mark, Cornett, Linda, and Wood, Reed. 2008. “The Political Terror Scale (PTS), 1976 to 2008.” http://www.politicalterrorscale.org/ (accessed March 2010).Google Scholar
Hosenball, Mark. 2009. “The Drone Dilemma.” Newsweek. December 21, 13.Google Scholar
Jaeger, David A., and Paserman, M. Daniele. 2009. “The Shape of Things to Come? On the Dynamics of Suicide Attacks and Target Killings.” Quarterly Journal of Political Science 4 (4): 315–42.Google Scholar
Li, Quan. 2005. “Does Democracy Produce or Reduce Transnational Terrorist Incidents?” Journal of Conflict Resolution 49 (2): 278–97.Google Scholar
Mickolus, Edward F., Sandler, Todd, Murdock, Jean M., and Flemming, Peter A.. 2007. International Terrorism: Attributes of Terrorist Events (ITERATE). Database.Google Scholar
Pape, Robert A. 2003. “The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism.” American Political Science Review 97 (3): 343–61.Google Scholar
Perkoski, Evan, and Chenoweth, Erica. 2010. “The Effectiveness of Counterterrorism in Spain: A New Approach.” Paper prepared for the Annual Meeting of the International Studies Association, New Orleans, March 15–17.Google Scholar
Piazza, James A. 2008. “Do Democracy and Free Markets Protect Us from Terrorism?” International Politics 45 (1): 72–91.Google Scholar
Piazza, James A., and Walsh, James Igoe. 2009. “Transnational Terrorism and Human Rights.” International Studies Quarterly 53: 125–48.Google Scholar
Ryals-Conrad, Courtenay, and Moore, Will. 2010. The Ill Treatment and Torture (ITT) Data Collection Project. NSF Grant 0921397. http://myweb.fsu.edu/cnr05e/Courtenay_Ryals/ITT_Data_Collection.html (accessed March 15, 2010).Google Scholar
Shellman, Stephen M. 2004. “Time Series Intervals and Statistical Inference: The Effects of Temporal Aggregation on Event Data Analysis.” Political Analysis 12 (1): 97–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wade, Sarah Jackson, and Reiter, Dan. 2007. “Does Democracy Matter?” Journal of Conflict Resolution 51 (2): 329–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walsh, James I., and Piazza, James A.. 2010. “Why Respecting Physical Integrity Rights Reduces Terrorism.” Comparative Political Studies 43 (5): 551–77.Google Scholar
Warrick, Joby. 2009. “Intelligence Chief Says Methods Hurt U.S.” Washington Post. April 22, A04.Google Scholar
Wood, Reed M., and Gibney, Mark. Forthcoming. “The Political Terror Scale (PTS): A Re-introduction and a Comparison to CIRI.” Human Rights Quarterly.Google Scholar
Young, Joseph, and Findley, Michael. 2009. “Promise, Problems and Pitfalls of Terrorism Research.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL, March 10–12.Google Scholar