Intelligent terrorism as a security threat to critical infrastructure

• Autorzy: Heino Ossi

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.35467/sdq/152422

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

This paper considers terrorism as potentially ‘intelligent’, as a threat capable of abusing the critical infrastructures of societies and the related methods for knowledge production. Respectively, it sees critical infrastructures as attractive mediums for terrorist influence. The paper describes the contrast between the logic of providing security and certainty for critical infrastructures and the threat of terrorism, which is evolving in terms of its systemic capacities and intelligence. The way security is provided within critical infrastructures and the way intelligent terrorism could operate seem to separate from each other, thereby creating vulnerability. The paper seeks to enhance the conceptual understanding of this question by describing and closing the gap created by the intellectual separation. By doing so, the article will shed light on the conceptual dimension of the (in)security that has gone unnoticed in the interface between critical infrastructures and terrorism. It outlines the aforementioned dilemma and provides conceptual understanding that makes it easier to grasp and communicate further. The paper shows that the intellectual separation has weakened the possibilities for theoretically understanding and practically recognising terrorism as a phenomenon that is becoming systemically more conscious, more intelligent and potentially increasingly capable in a form of violence that exploits the basic structures of societies and the related knowledge methods for its own purposes. As a conclusion, the paper stresses the importance of profoundly critical tools. Such tools are often perceived as being undesirable or even counter-productive in figuring out the mechanism through the very means utilised in providing for security.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

security; threat; critical infrastructures; intelligent terrorism; technical rationality

• Wydawca: Akademia Sztuki Wojennej
• Czasopismo: Security and Defence Quarterly
• Rocznik: 2022
• Tom: Vol. 39, No. 3
• Strony: 33--44
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 60 poz.

Twórcy

autor

Heino Ossi

• Faculty of Social Sciences, Tampere University, Arvo Ylpön katu 34, FI-33520, Tampere, Finland

• https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0818-3879

Bibliografia

• 1. Abrahams, M. and Gottfried, M.S. (2014) ‘Does terrorism pay? An empirical analysis’, Terrorism and Political Violence, 28, pp. 72–89. doi: 10.1080/09546553.2013.879057.
• 2. Aradau, C. (2010) ‘Security that matters: critical infrastructure and objects of protection’, Security Dialogue, 41, pp. 491–514. doi: 10.1177/0967010610382687.
• 3. Aradau, C. and van Munster, R. (2011) Politics of catastrophe. Genealogies of the unknown. Oxon: Routledge.
• 4. Aven, T. and Guikema, S. (2011) ‘Whose uncertainty assessments (probability distributions) does a risk assessment report: the analysts’ or the experts’?’, Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 96, pp. 1257–1262. doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2011.05.001.
• 5. BaMaung, D., McIlhatton, D., MacDonald, M. and Beattie, R. (2018) ‘The enemy within? The connection between insider threat and terrorism’, Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 41, pp. 133–150. doi: 10.1080/1057610X.2016.1249776.
• 6. Beck, U. (2002) ‘The terrorist threat: world risk society revisited’, Theory, Culture and Society, 19, pp. 39–55. doi: 10.1177/0263276402019004003.
• 7. Bennett, B.T. (2018) Understanding, assessing and responding to terrorism: protecting critical infrastructure and personnel. 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
• 8. Bieder, C. (2017) ‘Conclusion’, in G. Motet and C. Bieder (eds.), The illusion of risk control: what does it take to live with uncertainty? Cham: Springer, pp. 107–112.
• 9. Botha, A. (2020) ‘Prevention of terrorist attacks on critical infrastructure’, in A.P Schmid (ed.) Handbook of terrorism prevention and preparedness. The Hague: ICCT Press Publication, pp. 867–896.
• 10. Cedergren, A., Johansson, J. and Hassel, H. (2018) ‘Challenges to critical infrastructure resilience in an institutionally fragmented setting’, Safety Science, 110, pp. 51–58. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2017.12.025.
• 11. Chen, C., Reniers, G. and Khakzad, N. (2019) ‘Integrating safety and security resources to protect chemical industrial parks from man-made domino effects: a dynamic graph approach’, Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 191, 106470. doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2019.04.023.
• 12. Collier, S. and Lakoff, A. (2007) ‘The vulnerability of vital systems: how “critical infrastructure” became a security problem’, in M. Dunn and K.S. Kristensen (eds.), Securing ‘the homeland’: critical infrastructure, risk, and (in)security. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 17–39.
• 13. Coward, M. (2009) ‘Network-centric violence, critical infrastructure and the urbanization of security’, Security Dialogue, 40, pp. 399–418. doi: 10.1177/0967010609342879.
• 14. Critical Five. (2014) Forging a common understanding for critical infrastructure. Shared narrative. Available at: https://www.cisa.gov/publication/critical-five-shared-narrative-2014 (Accessed: 10 June 2022).
• 15. Daase, C. and Kessler, O. (2007) ‘Knowns and unknowns in the “war on terror”: uncertainty and the political construction of danger’, Security Dialogue, 38, pp. 411–434. doi: 10.1177/0967010607084994.
• 16. De Rosa, M. (2018) ‘Land use and land-use changes in life cycle assessment: green modelling or black boxing?’, Ecological Economics, 144, pp. 73–81. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.07.017.
• 17. Delanty, G. and Harris, N. (2021) ‘Critical theory and the question of technology: the Frankfurt School revisited’, Thesis Eleven, 166, pp. 88–108. doi: 10.1177/07255136211002055.
• 18. Enders, W. and Sandler, T. (2012) The political economy of terrorism. 2nd ed. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
• 19. Feyyaz, M. (2019) ‘Terrorism can and should be defined. But how?’, Strategic Analysis, 43, pp. 310–327. doi: 10.1080/09700161.2019.1626581.
• 20. Gill, P., Horgan, J., Hunter, S.T. and Cushenbery, L.D. (2013) ‘Malevolent creativity in terrorist organizations’, Journal of Creative Behavior, 47, pp. 125–151. doi: 10.1002/jocb.28.
• 21. Godefroidt, A. and Langer, A. (2018) ‘How fear drives us apart: explaining the relationship between terrorism and social trust’, Terrorism and Political Violence, 32, pp. 1482–1505. doi: 10.1080/09546553.2018.1482829.
• 22. Goldman, S.L. (2018) ‘Compromised exactness and the rationality of engineering’, in C. García-Díaz and C. Olaya (eds.), Social systems engineering: the design of complexity. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
• 23. Gómez, A. (2015) ‘Risk, uncertainty, and the dimensions of technological rationality’, in W.J. Gonzalez (ed.), New perspectives on technology, values, and ethics: theoretical and practical. Cham: Springer, pp. 105–122.
• 24. Graham, S. (2005) ‘Switching cities off’, City, 9, pp. 169–194. doi: 10.1080/13604810500196956.
• 25. Graham, S. (2010) Disrupted cities: when infrastructure fails. New York, NY: Routledge.
• 26. Gunderson, R., Petersen, B. and Stuart, D. (2018) ‘A critical examination of geoengineering: economic and technological rationality in social context’, Sustainability, 10, p. 269. doi: 10.3390/su10010269.
• 27. Hausken, K. (2017) ‘Special versus general protection and attack of parallel and series components’, Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 165, pp. 239–256. doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2017.03.027.
• 28. Hellström, T. (2007) ‘Critical infrastructure and systemic vulnerability: towards a planning framework’, Safety Science, 45, pp. 415–430. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2006.07.007.
• 29. Hempel, L., Kraff, B.D. and Pelzer, R. (2018) ‘Dynamic interdependencies: problematising criticality assessment in the light of cascading effects’, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 30, pp. 257–268. doi: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2018.04.011.
• 30. Hoffman, A.M. and Shelby, W. (2017) ‘When the “laws of fear” do not apply: effective counterterrorism and the sense of security from terrorism’, Political Research Quarterly, 70, pp. 618–631. doi: 10.1177/1065912917709354.
• 31. Horgan, J. (2005) The psychology of terrorism. London: Routledge.
• 32. Hubbard, G.W. (2009) The failure of risk management: why it’s broken and how to fix it. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
• 33. Kahan, J. (2017) ‘Critical infrastructure protection: can we defend against terrorism?’, Homeland Security Affairs, 13, pp. 1–41.
• 34. Latour, B. (1999) Pandora’s hope. Essays on the reality of science studies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• 35. Latour, B. (1994) ‘On technical mediation: philosophy, sociology, genealogy’, Common Knowledge, 3, pp. 29–64.
• 36. Latour, B. (1987) Science in action: how to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• 37. Logan, M.K., Ligon, G.S. and Derrick, D. (2019) ‘Measuring tactical innovation in terrorist attacks’, Journal of Creative Behavior, 54, pp. 926–939. doi: 10.1002/jocb.420.
• 38. Maras, M.-H. (2013) ‘Risk perception, fear, and its consequences following the 2004 Madrid and 2005 London bombings’, in S.J. Sinclair and D. Antonius (eds.), The political psychology of terrorism fears. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, pp. 227–245.
• 39. Miller, E. (2016) Terrorist attacks targeting critical infrastructure in the United States, 1970–2015. College Park, MD: START.
• 40. Mitcham, C. (2015) ‘Rationality in technology and in ethics’, in W.J. Gonzalez (ed.), New perspectives on technology, values, and ethics: theoretical and practical. Cham: Springer, pp. 63–88.
• 41. Moore, S.A., Torrado, M. and Joslin, N. (2019) ‘Knowledge production for interdependent critical infrastructures: constructing context-rich relationships across ecosociotechnical boundaries’, Environmental Science & Policy, 99, pp. 97–104. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2019.05.018.
• 42. Muro, D. (ed.) (2019) When does terrorism work? London: Routledge.
• 43. Peerenboom, J.P. and Fisher, R.E. (2010) ‘System and sector interdependencies: an overview’, in J.G. Voeller (ed.), Wiley handbook of science and technology for homeland security. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc, pp. 1161–1171.
• 44. Piekarski, M. and Wojtasik, K. (2022) ‘Protection of polish critical infrastructure (CI) against air threats’, Security and Defence Quarterly, 39, pp. 1–12. doi: 10.35467/sdq/14767.
• 45. Quijano, E., Insua, D.R. and Cano, J. (2018) ‘Critical networked infrastructure protection from adversaries’, Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 179, pp. 27–36. doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2016.10.015.
• 46. Ramsay, G. (2015) ‘Why terrorism can, but should not be defined’, Critical Studies on Terrorism, 8, pp. 211–228. doi: 10.1080/17539153.2014.988452.
• 47. Ranstorp, M. and Normark, M. (2009) ‘Detecting CBRN terrorism signatures – challenges and new approaches’, in M. Ranstorp and M. Normark (eds.), Unconventional weapons and international terrorism. Challenges and new approaches. New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 1–10.
• 48. Reniers, G.L.L. and Audenaert, A. (2014) ‘Preparing for major terrorist attacks against chemical clusters: intelligently planning protection measures w.r.t. domino effects’, Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 92, pp. 583–589. doi: 10.1016/j.psep.2013.04.002.
• 49. Richards, A. (2014) ‘Conceptualizing terrorism’, Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 37, pp. 213–236. doi: 10.1080/1057610X.2014.872023.
• 50. Rodríguez, H. (2015) ‘Risk and trust in institutions that regulate strategic technological innovations: challenges for a socially legitimate risk analysis’, in W.J. Gonzalez (ed.), New perspectives on technology, values, and ethics: theoretical and practical. Cham: Springer, pp. 147–166.
• 51. Runciman, D. (2006) The politics of good intentions. History, fear and hypocrisy in the new world order. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• 52. Rydin, Y., Natarajan, L., Lee, M. and Lock, S. (2018) ‘Black-boxing the evidence: planning regulation and major renewable energy infrastructure projects in England and Wales’, Planning Theory & Practice, 19, pp. 218–234. doi: 10.1080/14649357.2018.1456080.
• 53. Schön, D. (1983) The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action. London: Temple Smith.
• 54. Shindell, M. (2020) ‘Outlining the black box: an introduction to four papers’, Science, Technology, & Human Values, 45, pp. 567–574. doi: 10.1177/0162243919883414.
• 55. The 9/11 Commission Report. (2004) Final report of the national commission on terrorist attacks upon the United States. Available at: https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/GPO-911REPORT (Accessed: 1 September 2021).
• 56. Van Der Does, R., Kantorowicz, J., Kuipers, S. and Liem, M. (2019) ‘Does terrorism dominate citizens’ hearts or minds? The relationship between fear of terrorism and trust in government’, Terrorism and Political Violence, 33, pp. 1276–1294. doi: 10.1080/09546553.2019.1608951.
• 57. Wang, S., Hong, L., Ouyang, M., Zhang, J. and Chen, X. (2013) ‘Vulnerability analysis of interdependent infrastructure systems under edge attack strategies’, Safety Science, 51, pp. 328–337. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2012.07.003.
• 58. Wiśniewski, M. (2016) ‘Concept of situational management of safety critical infrastructure of state’, Foundations of Management, 8, pp. 297–310. doi: 10.1515/fman-2016-0023.
• 59. Żaboklicka, E. (2020) ‘Critical infrastructure in the shaping of national security’, Security and Defence Quarterly, 28(1), pp. 70–81. doi: 10.35467/sdq/118585.
• 60. Zio, E. (2016) ‘Critical infrastructures vulnerability and risk analysis’, European Journal for Security Research, 1, pp. 97–114. doi: 10.1007/s41125-016-0004-2.