Abstract
Following the armed assaults by al-Qaeda on the World Trade Centre on the 11th of September 2001, the Global War on Terror emerged and has taken on various phases ever since, with each phase involving more actors in the counter-terrorism space. Explanations surrounding the emergence, conceptualisation, classification, and ordering of counter-terrorism actors remain lukewarm within the literature.
In response to this scholarly gap, this thesis introduces a mesotheory which makes use of Systems Theory and elements of Network Analysis to make its contribution. The system employed in this research views the current (counter-)terrorism discourse as its input, as it denotes an absence of clarity on the subject of counter-terrorism actors and their actorness. The process of the system engages elements of Network Analysis as counter-terrorism actors are viewed as a network of actors who collaborate to coordinate counter-terrorism practice. This network initially consists of eight actors spanning both state and non-state actors, namely: the state, the diplomatic mission, international organisations, the community, the non-governmental organisation, big business, social media, and religious leaders and their institutions. Taken collectively, these actors constitute a typology of counter-terrorism actors.
In order to qualify as a counter-terrorism actor, the above-mentioned actors must demonstrate four characteristics: purpose, relevance, cohesion, and mobility. The plethora of counter-terrorism practice necessitates the promotion of the typology. It is acknowledged that the non-static nature of counter-terrorism activity requires the typology to be a working mechanism, as the positionality of counter-terrorism actors may change as time progresses. This means that actors are organised into three categories, including the core, the semi-periphery, and the periphery.
Using qualitative desktop analysis, a selection of eight miniature case studies, and the outcomes of a semi-structured online questionnaire, this research applies the criteria for counter-terrorism actorness. The application process finds that the individual is both a standalone counter-terrorism actor and the central means, which provides the other eight actors with the means with which to practice counter-terrorism. This means that the tally of counter-terrorism actors currently resides at nine.
Against this backdrop, the individual emerges in four distinct categories, which include the political leader, the specialist, the former, and the grassroots or ‘everyday’ individual. An individual-centric research agenda is proposed to advance the individual as a unit of analysis in (counter-) terrorism actors.
To enhance counter-terrorism scholarship and practice, scholars and governments would do well to use the outcomes of this research by adapting them to their regional and national contexts, as not doing so may result in the individual being seen and not heard.