1. Globalization, technology and terrorism
Monica Dulos I33015
Globalization, technology and terrorism

2. Video

3. Technology Central to both terrorism and counter-terrorism
Governments:
Technology as an advantage
The more advanced technology is the higher the chances of winning the battle against terrorists.
Terrorists:
Advancement of technology does not matter as long as it can enable an effective attack to be carried out.

4. Terrorism and Technology
Information Source and Content Dissemination
Spread of Ideology

5. Terrorism and Technology

6. Video

7. Terrorism and Technology
Planning, Coordination and Communication
Synchronized bomb attacks
US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania 1998
Simultaneous detonations of bombs in Madrid in 2004
 Mumbai Bombing by Lashkar-e-Taiba, the 
Pakistan-based militant organization.

8. Terrorism and Technology
Fund raising
Online transactions
Online Banking
Money Transfer
Credit Cards

9. Terrorism and Technology
Security
Limitation of communication between Clandestine cells
Password
Encryption
Terrorist Group

10. Terrorism and Technology
Mobility
Disappearance of geopolitical borders allows terrorist to move freely

11. Terrorism and Technology
Mobility
Use of aircraft
9/11 attack
Container s and vehicles used to transport goods are used as means of transporting weapons of mass destruction
Customs officials cannot inspect all the vehicles passing through the border due to the huge number of containers and vehicles passing everyday.

12. Terrorism and Technology
Lethality

13. Terrorism and Technology
Lethality
Creation of Weapons of Mass Destruction
“WMD use must involve mass casualties, especially deaths. In some situations, conventional weapons have created “mass destruction,” such as the fire bombings by Allied troops during the Second World War. Civilians were targeted, and the deaths numbered in the tens of thousands for Dresden and 100,000 for Tokyo. A true WMD would create similar casualties with a single weapon.
Nuclear weapons destroy not only human lives but also infrastructure. We know from the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki the destructive power of these weapons. In Hiroshima, the 15-kiloton bomb killed 140,000 people; in Nagasaki, the 21-kiloton device killed 70,000.5 Both of these cities were turned into wastelands from the blasts’ shock waves and associated fires. Modern nuclear weapons in the stockpiles of nuclear weapons states (of which there are about 30,000) average more than 100 kilotons yield.”

14. Terrorism and Technology
Lethality
Biological Weapons
“Biological weapons are more difficult to characterize in terms of lethality. The reason for this is perhaps a good one: A large-scale biological weapons attack using well-dispersed agent has never occurred. The Office of Technology Assessment estimated that depending on climate conditions, 100kg of anthrax could result in 130,000 to 3,000,000 dead in an urban region of 3,000 to 10,000 people per square kilometer.
Actually, a number of studies of biological weapons’ lethality generate an enormous range, from 66 deaths to 88 billion deaths per kilogram of agent used for anthrax. This variance underscores the uncertainty involved in predicting the lethality of these agents as weapons.”

15. Terrorism and Technology
Lethality
Chemical Weapons
An Office of Technology Assessment report suggests 1,000 kilograms of sarin gas aerially dispersed on a city of density 3,000 to 10,000 people per square kilometer would result in 300 to 8,000 deaths, depending on the climatic conditions at the time of the attack. The “success” of a chemical weapons attack depends on the purity of the agent; climatic factors, such as wind, cloud cover, temperature, and precipitation; the physical properties of the chemical, including density, vapor pressure, and boiling point; persistence in the environment; and delivery mechanism.8 Moreover, the lethality of a chemical weapons attack depends on whether the targets are defended. Gas masks and protective clothing provide full protection against chemical weapons—defenses that do not exist for explosive or incendiary attack.

16. Counter-terrorism Response of states Passing of anti-terrorism laws
Ex. Prevention of Terrorism Acts of the UK to repel acts of terrorism, which was mainly done by Irish Republican Army.
Airport Security Measures
Creation of Counter Terrorism Forces
Ex. West German Grenzschutzgruppe – an elite counter-terrorism and special operations unit of the German Federal Police formed in 1973.
Conventions
Ex. With International Civil Aviation Organization – to improve info sharing and legal cooperation

17. Counter-terrorism The Long War
Response of states – Cooperation between states
The Long War
US plan to involve governments in an expanded, all-out campaign against Islamist extremism from north Africa to south-east Asia, using beefed-up special forces, hi-tech weaponry and more intrusive surveillance and intelligence gathering.
This includes boosting the number of special operations forces and unmanned drones used for surveillance and targeted assassinations, the creation of special teams trained to detect and render safe nuclear weapons anywhere in the world, and a long-range bomber force.

18. Counter-terrorism
Response of the States to War on Terror - Terrorism as crime
Military actions can lead to reprisals or to the state’s use of power to repress citizenry.
Terrorism is best dealt as a crime, a police problem ; military forces should only be involved if the situation is already grave.
The problem of terrorism should be solved within the borders
Suspects should be given due process.

19. Counter-Terrorism Response to War on Terror Conspiracy theories
Control
Oil
And many more!
Human Rights violation
Human Rights Watch
Provides monitoring and online reporting of human rights violations done by the government
Guantanamo Bay

20. Counter-terrorism

21. Thank You!