WP 03 : Securitization, Technology and the Transformation of Warfare

Articles

• Norwegian Dispute over Passenger Information

  5 June 2008, by Aftenposten
  The Norwegian police are to an increasing degree controlling the airline companies’ passenger lists. Especially passengers coming from other Schengen countries are controlled, because they are (through the Schengen agreement) exempted from regular passport checks. Estimates show that between 250 and 450 passengers travelling with Norwegian companies are checked every day. The police check the passengers up against their own registries, as well as the Schengen Information System

• Swedish Municipality Buildings Close their Doors

  21 May 2008, by SVT
  Fear of terrorism has boosted the level of security measures in Sweden. Harbors and power plants have already undergone major changes, in order to prevent potential terrorist attacks. The time has now come to the municipality buildings, where the public is being physically closed off from its local decision makers.

• Norwegian Annual Threat Assessment 2008

  28 March 2008, by The Norwegian Police Security Service (PST)
  The Annual Threat Assessment outlines the anticipated developments within PST’s areas of responsibility. It focuses on threats that may influence Norwegian security or harm important national interests. The assessment is based on PST’s operational activity and information from equivalent services and related institutions.

• Poor Privacy Rights in Scandinavia

  4 February 2008, by Privacy International
  The recently published Privacy and Human Rights Report 2007 reveals that privacy rights in Norway, Sweden and Denmark are unsatisfactory.

• Norway Criticized for Extradition to Regimes Practicing Torture

  4 February 2008, by Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation
  Several human rights organizations have claimed that the Norwegian military intentionally extradite Afghan prisoners of war to regimes that evidently practice torture.

• Flaws in Expanded EU Police Cooperation

  4 February 2008, by Swedish Data Inspectorate
  Implementing the Prüm Convention into the EU legal framework will result in good access to other countries’ criminal records – in some cases better access than the country’s own police force.

• EU Data Retention Directive Sparks Debate in Norway

  4 February 2008, by Norwegian Data Inspectorate
  The controversial EU directive 2006/24/EC that imposes companies to store data on telecommunications is currently debated in the Norwegian Parliament.

• Devant la commission des lois, le président de la CNIL Alex Türk se montre préoccupé par l’évolution des pratiques sécuritaires et technologiques

  30 octobre 2007, par Sénat
  Entendu par la commission des Lois du Sénat, présidée par M. Jean-Jacques Hyest (UMP, Seine-et-Marne), M. Alex Türk, président de la Commission nationale informatique et libertés (CNIL), a souligné les risques au regard des libertés individuelles des évolutions en cours dans les pratiques sécuritaires et technologiques.

• Commission takes first step towards improving critical infrastructure protection

  5 February 2007, by European Commission
  How can the protection of European critical infrastructure in the energy and transport sectors be improved if no common definition has been agreed? To answer this fundamental question, the European Commission today adopted a Communication on the protection of critical infrastructure in energy and transport setting out criteria which can be used to identify European infrastructure in this area.

• La Commission lance la première étape pour améliorer la protection des infrastructures critiques

  5 février 2007, par European Commission
  Comment peut-on mieux protéger les infrastructures critiques européennes dans les secteurs de l’énergie et des transports si on ne sait pas comment les identifier ? Afin de répondre à cette question primordiale, la Commission européenne a aujourd’hui adopté une Communication sur la protection des infrastructures critiques d’énergie et de transport qui décrit des critères pouvant être utilisés pour identifier ces infrastructures européennes.

• Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council concerning terrorist recruitment –– Addressing the factors contributing to violent radicalisation (COM/2005/0313 final)

  20 November 2006, by Burgess Peter
  The immediate post-September 11 period produced a flourish of activities on the European level. These activities are characterized by three types of action: political reorientation with respect to transatlantic politics of the newly declared «war on terror», activities aimed at quickly creating legal and operational tools for use in addressing real and perceived threat in Europe, and a re-examination of the European «homeland» as the possible origin of terrorist threat. The latter type of response, which is most relevant to the Commission’s communication on terrorist recruitment, is however also the slowest to emerge. Though already in its communication of 17 October 2001 the Commission affirms that «efforts to stamp out international terrorism must be underpinned by policies addressing sources of radical discontent», the Council Framework Decision of 23 June 2002 on Combating terrorism makes no mention of either radicalisation or recruitment. In March 2004 the European Security Strategy «Fight against terrorism» affirms that «action must also be taken to address the root causes of insecurity and the factors which contribute to the emergence of terrorism».

• Pour une évaluation critique de la Communication de la Commission au Parlement européen et au Conseil concernant le recrutement des groupes terroristes – Combattre les facteurs qui contribuent à la radicalisation violente (COM/2005/0313 final)

  20 novembre 2006, par Burgess Peter
  La Communication de la Commission se propose d’être une contribution préliminaire au développement d’une stratégie de long terme de l’UE visant les facteurs contribuant à la radicalisation et au recrutement en vue d’activités terroristes. La Communication est construite autour d’un ensemble important de postulats sur la nature du recrutement et de l’extrémisme et de sa relation aux questions d’immigration, d’intégration, d’éducation et de dialogue interculturel. Elle propose une série de mesures pour prévenir ou décourager le recrutement de terroristes. Cependant, ce faisant, elle omet de répondre à nombre de questions concernant les dimensions sociales et culturelles de la radicalisation violente et sur les manières appropriées de mettre en relation principes juridiques, exécution de la loi et motivations individuelles d’une part et terrorisme d’autre part. Mais, dans ce contexte, l’aspect le plus important est que la Communication suppose que la radicalisation est un ensemble de faits statiques qui peuvent être abordés au travers d’un éventail fixe d’actions. La recherche sur le sujet suggère, au contraire, que la radicalisation est un processus social et culturel nécessitant une réponse dynamique tenant compte des facteurs culturels.

• Report from the conference : 9/11 Five Years After : Values, Risk and Identity in the War on Terror

  15 November 2006, by Burgess Peter
  Considerable attention was attracted to the conference in the Norwegian research and diplomatic communities. In addition to the members from the COST Action, Challenge and PRIO, 86 external people registered which included diplomats, journalists, academics and students.

• The National Infrastructure Simulation and Analysis Center (NISAC): A New Contributor to Strategic Leader Education and Formulation of Critical Infrastructure Policies and Decisions

  6 September 2006, by Sterling Jeffrey, Wimbish William
  The paper outlines the work done at the U.S. National Infrastructure Simulation and Analysis Center (NISAC). NISAC assists the military’s Senior Service College (SSC) community in educating future strategic leaders about the U.S. infrastructure system and researching the effects that new government security policies and actions would have on the nation’s critical assets and public/private sector services.

• Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council Establishing the European Network and Information Security Agency

  6 September 2006, by European Commission
  The paper outlines the proposal to establish a regulatory agency (the European Network and Information Security Agency) as a means of achieving closer cross-border cooperation on network and information security in the EU.

• EU Critical Infrastructure Protection (CIP) : Note from the Presidency to the Delegations

  5 September 2006, by European Presidency
  This paper draws on the seminars and discussions in the Council regarding the establishment of a European Programme for Critical Infrastructure Protection (EPCIP). It sets out the Presidency’s thoughts on: the areas of the Programme that have met with broad agreement across Member States, and/or progress already achieved; issues that require priority attention prior to the full launch of EPCIP; and issues to be addressed by EPCIP during 2006.

• Critical Infrastructures: Background, Policy, and Implementation

  5 September 2006, by Moteff John D.
  The report provides a background of U.S. policy developments in the area of critical infrastructure protection, starting from the establishment of the President’s Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection in 1996 and President Clinton’s Presidential Decision Directive No. 63 in 1998, and including initiatives pursued under the Bush administration following the September 11 attacks.

• The CIP Report

  5 September 2006, by Critical Infrastructure Protection Program
  This issue features an update on the Private Sector Program (PSP), which is focused on the private sector’s role in protecting critical infrastructure. The issue outlines the sectors that PSP supports and the work of those sectors regarding critical infrastructure protection. The issue also includes information on the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Office of Infrastructure Protection’s security awareness campaign and a DHS pilot project that seeks to better prepare executives for critical security and emergency preparedness challenges.

• Cyber Security: A Crisis of Prioritization

  4 September 2006, by President’s Information Technology Advisory Committee (PITAC)
  The President’s Information Technology Advisory Committee (PITAC) is appointed by the President to provide independent expert advice on maintaining America’s preeminence in advanced information technology (IT). PITAC members are IT leaders in industry and academia with expertise relevant to critical elements of the national IT infrastructure such as high-performance computing, large-scale networking, and high-assurance software and systems design. The Committee’s studies help guide the Administration’s efforts to accelerate the development and adoption of information technologies vital for American prosperity in the 21st century.

• Critical Infrastructure Protection: Department of Homeland Security Faces Challenges in Fulfilling Cybersecurity Responsibilities

  4 September 2006, by United States General Accounting Office
  The purpose of the report is to determine (1) the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) roles and responsibilities for cyber critical infrastructure protection, (2) the status and adequacy of DHS’s efforts to fulfill these responsibilities, and (3) the challenges DHS faces in fulfilling its cybersecurity responsibilities.

0 | 20 | 40