The evolution of counterterrorism: will tactics trump strategy?

Counterterrorism efforts over the past five years have yielded important progress against Al‐Qaeda abroad, even with heightened anxiety about the threat of attacks at home. There was certainly no ‘clash of civilizations’; violent Salafism engendered a muscular backlash in Muslim‐majority countries, which threatened Al‐Qaeda's ability to recruit and even survive. At the same time, the policies of major states became more effective and better aligned. A nascent counterterrorism coalition emerged with unprecedented sharing of intelligence, operations and deradicalization techniques (especially bilaterally). In the face of these developments, a defensive Al‐Qaeda scrambled to exploit vulnerabilities so as to regain a mental edge. The result was two tactical setbacks for the allies: first, Al‐Qaeda and its associates redoubled their efforts to kill civilians on western soil, focusing particularly on radicalized home grown amateurs; and second, they leaned more heavily on reinvigorated affiliates, some of whom tried to project force beyond their local operating areas for the first time. As a result, terrorist operations in the US and UK were more frequent, unpredictable and unsophisticated, but nonetheless potentially lethal. As the period drew to a close, the crucial question was whether the two western allies could maintain their nerve, luck, skill and sufficient equilibrium to both fend off a domestic attack and plan for an effective strategic response in the event that one occurred.     

Civil risk and landscapes of marginality in Canada: a pluralist approach to social justice

The geographies of civil risk, human rights and social justice in relation to a pluralist notion of justice lie at the heart of this paper. We define civil risk as a failure of human rights, brought about by institutional processes constructed over time, space and place, which create disadvantages for marginalized social groups. Geography is integral both to civil risk and social justice because marginalization is a spatial process articulated through the deployment of institutional power across space to create socially constructed differences between dominant and subordinate groups. In this respect, we emphasize that rights are constructed in relation to dominant interests, and not according to the conditions of risk that give rise to marginalized individuals and groups. Drawing on research in social theory that emphasizes the importance of positionality and social difference, the paper argues that a principle of risk rather than rights must motivate social justice. We examine distinct forms of marginalization in Canada ‐ gender, sexual orientation, ‘race’ and aboriginal status ‐ to illustrate the importance of the historico‐geographical context of marginalization and the paradoxical nature of the relationship between risk and rights. In considering these forms of marginality and their landscapes, we argue the need for a pluralist notion of justice that will explicitly take positionality into account in achieving equality rights, reducing civil risk and mediating shared spaces. Les géographies du risque civil, des droits de la personne et de la justice sociale en relation avec une conception pluraliste de la justice sont au coeur de cet article. Nous définissons le risque civil comme un échec des droits de la personne créé par des processus institutionnels qui sont eux‐mêmes construits à travers le temps, l'espace et le lieu. Ces processus, et leur expression géographique, créent des désavantages pour les groupes marginaux dans notre société. La géographie est impliquée dans le risque civil et la justice sociale parce que la marginalisation est un processus spatial qui s'articule par le déploiement du pouvoir institutionnel à travers l'espace pour créer les différences socialement construites entre les groupes dominants et subordonnés. En ce sens, nous soutenons que les droits sont construits en relation aux intérêts dominants, mais pas en accord aux conditions de risque qui créent les individus et les groupes marginalisés. Utilisant des études en théorie sociale qui mettent un accent sur l'importance de la ‘positionnalité’ et la différence sociale, nous suggérons que le principe de risque plutôt que les droits doit motiver la justice sociale. Nous examinons quelques formes distinctes de marginalisation au Canada ‐ les rapports sociaux entre les sexes, l'orientation sexuelle, la ‘race’ et le statut autochtone ‐ pour illustrer l'importance du contexte historico‐géographique de la marginalisation et le caractère paradoxal de la relation entre le risque et les droits. En considérant ces formes de marginalité et leurs paysages, nous argumentons pour la nécessité d'avoir une notion pluraliste de justice qui considérera explicitement la ‘positionnalité’ dans tous ses efforts de réaliser les droits d'égalité, la réduction du risque civil et la médiation des espaces partagés.     

GPC Ten Years On: is self-reflexivity enough?

In the 10 years since the first issue of Gender, Place and Culture was published, feminist geography has grown, matured, become part of the normal curriculum in most departments of geography. The need to consider gender as a fundamental aspect of social life has become accepted wisdom. We have much to celebrate. Over the same period, increasing attention has been paid to questions of racialisation, and to projects that set anti-racism on the academic agenda. While I would argue that, socially as well as academically, we have made more progress in overcoming gender barriers than racial barriers, a growing body of work recognises the intersection, indeed the simultaneity, of sexism and racism, as well as classism, ableism and homophobia. Such recognition has characterised the pages of Gender, Place and Culture from its very first issue. Indeed, no paper that addresses issues of social exclusion from a geographical perspective would fail nowadays to make several references to articles in this journal. Theoretically, the connection between gendered and racialised social constructions heightens social awareness of the ways in which social exclusion occurs. It is now received wisdom, well beyond the narrower confines of feminist and anti-racist scholarship, that human attributes are the result of social construction and, while many controversies rage over the findings—and the social effects—of the postmodern ‘turn’, this fundamental theoretical tenet is hardly questioned by intellectuals of the early twenty-first century. Broader attention has now been focused on issues of what kind of society—and what kind of theoretical underpinnings—will replace a world in which social constructions such as gender and ‘race’ are taken for granted. Perhaps the most significant general trend of the last decade, then, has been the fact that our journal has played such an active role in the transition from the early 1990s' struggle to overcome essential ideas to today's struggle to re-place essential ideas with a new geometry of human relations. Significant historical events on every social front emphasise the difficulties of that transition, both theoretically and empirically.