\ Journal of Social Political Sciences JSPS Vol. 1, No. 2, May, 2020 ISSN: 2715-7539 (Online) 117 POST TRUTH AND ROLE OF INTERNATIONAL RELATION STUDY CASE STUDY: SECURITY CONCEPT ON TERRORISM CASE IN ASIA REGION ‘ Amaritasari, Indah Pangestu Bhayangkara Jakarta Raya University, Indonesia Abstract: Post truth era is defined as the era when the truth seems right but actually not always correct. It is also an era characterized by media and journalism concerns, especially in the face of false statements by politicians. It flourishes post-truth society, phenomenon, and politics especially when referring to the two big political moments in 2016: The discharge of the United Kingdom from the European Union (Brexit) and the election of Donald Trump as president of the United States. Post truth is also connected with the issue of war on terror where Trump was criticized to be a post-truth and demanded for such response. Thus, security becomes an issue, which is being discussed, debated, and applied in this situation in international relations, which emerge onto deepening and broadening security. One subject that can be the material to support the discussion is the International Relations, which associated with realism and liberalism approach. This paper explores the post truth and analyses using two main approaches of international relation study by extracting and examining the security concepts and terrorism in Asia Region. Keyword : security, securitization, extremism, human rights, and post truth Submission : Feb, 11th 2020 Revision : March 11th 2020 Publication : May 30th 2020 INTRODUCTION International politics congested with the context of post truth phenomena in 2016 to 2017, which can be seen in Europe and USA. The United Kingdom’s decision to leave European Union and Donald Trump’s won that shocked many polluters, journalists, academics (Crilley, 2018). In international relations, it gave three responses: (1) international relations as a form of combat between strategic narratives fought upon the complex media terrain; (2) the norms underpinning the current international order such as human rights and international law constitute a robust architecture that imposes cost of falsehood (Forst and Michelsen, \ Journal of Social Political Sciences JSPS Vol. 1, No. 2, May, 2020 ISSN: 2715-7539 (Online) 118 2017); (3) reflection made by international relation study on what ‘post-thruth’ means today in relation to the legitimacy of its knowledge claims (Forst and Michelsen, 2017). In 2017, the Munich Security Conference addressed the rise of the maximum uncertainty due to international relationship and security. It was the year when huge changes began. The new elected president of US and elections in some countries in Europe raised the issue of populism and the question of the relationship with Russia. At the same time, Syria was involved as a catastrophic giant and can be considered to be associated with a western foreign policy. Additionally, Europe is facing a crisis with the East, too(Conference, 2018). In Asia, the region is growing with some significant powers including economic power. Asia plays a pivotal role in globalization and as the main driver in growth of worldwide market today. Some analysis predicted that the global power is shifting from the west to the east particularly in economic issues (Guardian, 2017). The potential power is challenged with the potential risk of post truth era and terrorism. Currently, countries in Asia are categorized as medium to low development of human index(Wikipedia). In the international relation security studies (ISS), the term is used as third world even though it has been criticized. The issues of peace and security become significant in Asia as the shift to interest in war in the Third World (Zinckle, 1996) also created a turn from inter-state war to wars within states(Berdal, 1996). The situation is contested with the development of technology that can speed up the distribution of information and communication, which has a tendency to disregard the correctness of the news. In technology and communication, the use of social media in Asia has grown 21 percent year- on-year, with 482 million new users signing up over the course of 2016. Just five countries accounted for more than half of that growth: China (with 134 million new social media users over the past year), India (+55 million), Indonesia (+27 million), the US (+22 million), and Brazil (+19 million)(Technicasia, 2017). The rapid development of technology brings the reality of current social political feature in different phases and stages that challenge many aspects of people’s life in terms of security, communication, interaction, and belief. Opinion and narrative can be manipulated and misleading, but in many aspects, they can also be beneficial to prevent and give understanding of a conflict. New ways of using innovative technology create a term called ‘post truth’ that is actually associated with the progress of technology long before it becomes advanced like now. Insufficient understanding of human rights associated with freedom of speech and information in connection with post truth can be counterproductive for peace and security. The data can also be manipulated in the case of post truth, which can lead to a malfunction of democracy. How does this situation affect Asia? How is security interpreted in order to produce an effect on the development of international and regional peace especially after the cold war and particularly in the post truth era? What is it like with regard to war on terror? What is exactly post truth particularly in relation to widener and deepener? \ Journal of Social Political Sciences JSPS Vol. 1, No. 2, May, 2020 ISSN: 2715-7539 (Online) 119 METHOD This paper uses qualitative method in analyzing the problem with secondary recourses that accessible publicly. The data can be reports, journal, books, and media that verified though triangulation mechanism. The analysis made using international relations theoretical by scooping detail to a case to get more results. RESULT AND DISCUSSION Realism perspective on the issue of post truth and security The term of ‘post truth’ came into Oxford Dictionaries in 2016 after the United Kingdom (UK) left the European Union (EU) and Donald Trump was elected as US president. The Dictionaries define ‘post truth’ as a situation “in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief.”( dictionaries, 2018) The word becomes word of the year in the same year as it is produced. The ecosystem of media nowadays refers to what President Barack Obama states, as new media ecosystem of everything is true and nothing is true(Romerick, 2017). Post truth politics was used to describe the paradoxical situation in the US where the Republican Party was nevertheless able to present itself as more bipartisan since individuals of the Democratic party were more likely to support Republican policies than vice versa (Grits, 2010). In the environmental politics, the situation of the post truth techniques to attack environmental measures were meant to combat climate change to benefit industry donor (John, 2011). The Munich Security Conference 2017 addresses post truth with post west and post order. In the Conference, the concept of post truth was interpreted as people are dealing with a new level of fake news, public warfare, of using the digital words to disseminate information that is nothing but propaganda. The instrument used for distributing the propaganda is more effective today by using social media; it can influence many millions of people with not true and not so-true information, as it is the case with Cambridge Analytica and the victory of Trump as president of the US and the referendum that led to Brexit (Guardian, 2018). The former director of Cambridge Analytica, Alexander Nix, argued that cooperation like Google, Facebook, Amazon, are large companies that are monetizing people’s data. This situation is a challenge to world peace and cooperation in the international system. Post west refers to the questioning of an era of illiberalism where authoritarian government is going to replace more and more traditional west value-based democracy. This is a decline of classic leader of the US and the disappearance of the classic leader of the west lead by US. The post truth and post west raise the issue of post order in general. It is questioning the work of global governments such as OSCE or UN(Ischiger, 2018). Security cannot be defined in a single term in this complex situation. Buzzan and Weaver treat a security sector as a lens and a value-based logic, rather than a well-defined part of society (Buzan, Barry, Ole Wæver and Jaap de Wilde, 1998:8). It argues that security discourse as a prism (Andrej Zwitter and Jaap de Wilde, 2008). As a prism, there is a \ Journal of Social Political Sciences JSPS Vol. 1, No. 2, May, 2020 ISSN: 2715-7539 (Online) 120 derivative concept of security. There are three elements – security as a derivative concept, the idea of a broadened security agenda, and challenging the assumption of the state as the referent object of security – might be said to be common points of discussion in all the ‘critical’ approaches to security: emancipation, community, and identity. Emancipation means that the Critical Security Study (CSS) argue that the corporeal, material existence of human beings should be the central focus of security studies: that is, security should ultimately be concerned with the real world security of human beings. Consequently, for CSS, the study of security should seek to illuminate the wide range of constraints on human well being that exist in many parts of the world, and challenge the forms of security knowledge and practices that perpetuate these constraints (Williams, Nick Vaugh. 2010: 24). Security is usually identified as the concept to secure something using the means of control, but also what security does (Buzan and Wæver, 2003: 491). Discussing security is unable to be detached from the context of securitization. It is because security is not understood as its substance but through its performance namely securitization (Guzzini, 2011: 330). It is a process when state actors transforming subjects into matters of security (Buzan and Wæver, 2003: 491). The securitisation underlies concept on subjective and objective In the context of security study, the concept and/or definition of security is challenged after the end of the cold war especially by widening and deepening security in the study of international relations (ISS). The main drivers of post cold war traditionalism are great power politics, technology, events, institutionalism, and academic debate (Hansen, 2009). Terrorism is one of the items that contributes as sub-drives under events. The academic debate on epistemology can also supply for the post cold war traditionalism. As the nature of cold war is changing after the cold war, the post cold war traditionalism and the approaches of security concept are expanding including the issue of the legitimate contestants between widening and deepening approaches, namely conventional and critical, constructivism, post colonialism, human security, critical security studies, feminism, Copenhagen School, and Post structuralism. The challenge is mainly on the issue of operational definition and/or normative one and where is the UN materials particularly on human rights standards position to shape and/or help the problem particularly the post truth era. Mohammad Ayoob, Ole Waever, Michael Klare and Daniel Thomas definitions are considered as the wideners to the concept and definition of security whereas Ken Booth and Spike Peterson are regarded as deepeners. Tarry argued that all of these definitions are fundamentally normative and so general as to be analytically meaningless (Tarry, 2018). There is a risk of having the concept of security unstable since there is a widespread disagreement. Tarry argued that it is only on methodological grounds that this apparent gap between perspectives can be bridged and the widespread disagreements resolved with respect to this "essentially contested concept." The unresolved security concept is more complex and contested in the post truth era and the case of the war on terrorism. The securitization highly occurs in many aspects, which can, to \ Journal of Social Political Sciences JSPS Vol. 1, No. 2, May, 2020 ISSN: 2715-7539 (Online) 121 certain extent, jeopardizing the goal of security at individual and national level especially when it comes to the issue of human rights. The securitization as the concept to discursive construction of issues in relation to the process between ‘security’ and ‘security threats’ and is applied into the context war on terror (McDonal, nd). The European states had been built on an understanding of security as oriented towards external threats, and rested upon ‘a strong identification of the security of the state with the security of its citizens’ (Krause, 1996). This understanding of security implies that state-centric conceptions of security provide neither an analytical nor a normative position from which to identify the threats that regimes may pose to their own citizens. While the concept of security is still varied in definition among international relations scholars, the theory of securitization arises. It is being contested, but some scholars still use it to provide an explanation about security. Securitization theory seeks to explain the politics through which (1) the security character of public problems is established, (2) the social commitments resulting from the collective acceptance that a phenomenon is a threat are fixed and (3) the possibility of a particular policy is created. In the last decade, research on securitization has grown significantly (Balzacq, 2015). It is argued by Balzacq that securitization theory is agnostic as to the reality of threats. Indeed, according to securitization theorists, the collective acceptance that something counts as a threat is not decided solely on the basis of the correspondence between discourse and reality. Exposure to relevant evidence cannot, in itself, account for the belief of a community in a phenomenon; the interests and the needs of the community are equally constitutive of how a community sees, thinks about and deals with a phenomenon. This argument is supported by most of the empirical studies examined above and has important consequences. In the Post cold war era, the definition of the issue of securitization can highly occur with the involvement of state centric and traditionalist approach concept of security and it is the beginning of a fundamentally different political environment both in a real and in a theoretical sense. As discussed in the previous paragraph, securitization was agnostic to the reality of threats and it is also something that a community sees and thinks through: the use of technology for disseminating information and communication with the possibility of disregarding the concept of correctness of facts and/or through fact-checking methods seems to be accepted under the securitization processes. This argument is supported by most of the empirical studies examined above and has important consequences. However, this phenomenon can be highly manipulated using technology by expanding any mechanism to support the argument of securitization using strategies such as through algorithm system, psychological mind fraud/trickery, hoax, etc. This becomes more complex to explain about war on terror as measure to combat terrorism. In general the typology of a counter terrorism strategy (CTS) is divided into three: (1) war model of CTS; (2) Extended criminal justice of CTS; and (3) Criminal Justice of CTS (Privedarshi, 2010). Each of this typology has the risk of human rights violation while proceeding the case, but one can contribute a greater risk than the other. Human Rights \ Journal of Social Political Sciences JSPS Vol. 1, No. 2, May, 2020 ISSN: 2715-7539 (Online) 122 standard produced by United Nations can be as guidance for states’ CTS. The Human Rights Standpoint Responding to Terrorism and Post Truth While the ISS remains difficult to justify security, the United Nations (UN) with human rights instruments are trying to provide a ‘solution’ toward the problem of terrorism and post truth in the name of security by ‘putting aside’ the debate of security and leaving security and terrorism undefined. The United Nations (UN) and key regional human rights experts have actually responded to this phenomenon of post truth by calling on State actors to ensure that they disseminate reliable and trustworthy information, including about matters of public interest, such as the economy, public health, security and the environment. In the UN-Joint Declaration states that “State actors should not make, sponsor, encourage or further disseminate statements which they know or reasonably should know to be false (disinformation) or which demonstrate a reckless disregard for verifiable information (propaganda),” The latest UN CTS is concerned with tackling the root cause of terrorism. The approach is so- called ‘prevention of violent extremism’ (PVE). Before the UN launched the Plan of Action on PVE, there have been a number of Resolutions issued by the UN Security Council addressing terrorism and extremism. After the September 11, 2011 attacks, the UN adopted Resolution 1373 on the Counter Terrorism Committee (CTC). Five years later, (2006), there was a consensus to change from reactive action toward prevention and more comprehensive approaches to terrorism by working on areas of "conducting the spread of violent extremism", including strengthening the state, and law and human rights enforcement as a basis for rejecting terrorism. Another resolution issued was 2122, i.e Resolution on the importance of increasing attention to women, religion and security, which are relevant areas. Resolution 2129 was the Establishment of Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate (CTED). Resolution 2178 encourages states to strengthen local communities, non-state actors to create counter narratives, including empowerment of young people, families, women, religion, culture and education. In addition to a resolution directly responding to terrorism and extremism, the UN also issued a more specific resolution to address the conditions of women in conflict areas known as Resolution 1325 on women, peace and security. In October 2015, the United Nations organized a global study on the implementation of resolution 1325 in various parts of the world. This resolution is in the form of the National Action Plan (NAP), and the increased commitment of many countries related to the women's agenda, peace and security. There are also very serious findings related to the rise of fundamentalism and extremism in conflict-affected and post-conflict countries, which was then responded by the UN Security Council by issuing resolution 2242 on the integration of PVE into the women's agenda of peace and security. The emergence of the PVE approach announced on 15 January 2016 by the UN Secretary General marked a shift in both counter terorism and counter violent extrimism approaches, as it still features a security-oriented approach. PVE approach with seven pillars that exist are: 1) Dialogue and Prevention of conflict; 2) Strengthening of \ Journal of Social Political Sciences JSPS Vol. 1, No. 2, May, 2020 ISSN: 2715-7539 (Online) 123 governance, human rights and rule of law; 3) Strengthening Community Involvement; 4) Youth Empowerment; 5) Gender Equality and Women's Empowerment; 6) Education, Skills and Working Facilities; 7) Strategic Communication, the Internet and Social Media, is expected to shift the approach of UN member states to pay more attention and intervene in the root causes of problems that foster terrorism. Of these resolutions, the question is still remaining to address is in relation to the new phenomenon of terrorism called lone wolf. It becomes more complex and problematic in the post truth area where the use of the Internet can actually influence someone to be a lone terrorist fighter without having to directly affiliate with a terrorist group. At the same time the new strategy played by ISIS where it wants its members to go back to their home country to be terrorists. Of this ISIS approach to terrorism, UN has issued a resolution; take an example of one of the UN Resolutions on CT, 2178. However, this resolution is difficult to be implementable. In regard to banning the fund that supports terrorism, UN issued a list of suspected organizations, which are assumed to fund terrorism activity. The list was developed and/or formed based on the resource from the Internet. As what happens in the case of the Cambridge Analytic, the source of the Internet can be manipulative in the Era of Post Truth. At national level, it becomes more complicated, the state is forced to ‘criminalise’ certain groups and/or individuals, which might breach the concept of fundamental human rights, namely presumption of innocence and/or due process of law. Thus, it is not surprising that the UN Security Council’s report on Countering Terrorism announce that there are two countries in ASEAN that implement preventive/administrative detention to prevent terrorism and rehabilitate and reintegrate foreign terrorist fighters into society, rather than prosecuting them under the criminal justice system. Such initiative of UN Resolutions without proper human rights guidance can be misleading. This creates the possibility for the state to breach human rights and fundamental freedom that might foster violent extremism. Of these measures, how can they prevent lone wolves and/or someone to be a lone wolf? If the term of lone wolf is still debated, the question that is still remaining to address is how all of the UN measures in balance between human rights and counter-terrorism strategy can prevent individuals from being attracted to and/or getting involved in violent extremism and/or terrorism act? It is still a question that remains to be asked. The logic behind the UN PVE strategy was the identification of grievances and push and pull factor of violent terrorist ultimately can prevent someone from not becoming a lone wolf. But, this logic remains to be challenged with evidence and data. Projecting Asia’s Security in the Post Truth in Relation to War on Terror and the Use of Human Rights Standards Asia’s security in this section is divided into South Asia and South East Asia regions. The regional threat of South Asia, which consists of Afghanistan, India, Bangladesh, Maldives, Pakistan and Srilanka, is victimized region. Attacks in this region represent the continuation of a pattern that began to emerge more than two decades ago and shows no signs of \ Journal of Social Political Sciences JSPS Vol. 1, No. 2, May, 2020 ISSN: 2715-7539 (Online) 124 abatement. India continues to be among the world’s most consistently targeted States. Since the 1990s, it has endured multiple terrorist attacks linked to individuals who have trained or fought with Al-Qaida associates in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Veterans of terrorist networks in Afghanistan have conducted a number of terrorist attacks in Pakistan (UN, 2015). The use of social media to spread news in the post truth era has indicated that abuse of the Internet to recruit foreign terrorist fighters is a major concern. States have taken steps to prohibit recruitment and counter violent extremism in accordance with resolution 1624 (2005). Although these steps are encouraging, it should be noted that an overly vigorous response by law enforcement to counter the recruitment of foreign terrorist fighters, especially through the Internet, may violate fundamental rights, such as the freedom of expression and the freedom of association. In regard to South East Asia, although many States of South-East Asia continue to be vulnerable to the threat of international terrorism, many positive trends and developments have emerged in the past few years, and the nature of the threat has evolved significantly. The capacity of some terrorist groups (including the Al-Qaida-related Jemaah Islamiyah)1 to commit terrorist acts has been undermined by robust law enforcement and community engagement. In addition, recent peace agreements2 between Governments and separatist groups have helped to prevent terrorist incidents. However, the region faces a new terrorism threat in the form of foreign terrorist fighters travelling from South-East Asia to fight with ISIL. A special military unit called “Katibah Nusantara”, mostly consisting of Malaysian and Indonesian foreign terrorist fighters, was created inside ISIL six months after its establishment. In April 2015, the unit demonstrated military capability by capturing several Kurdish-held territories in Iraq. Katibah Nusantara is assisting ISIL in achieving its ambition to make South-East Asia part of its worldwide “caliphate”. ISIL uploads propaganda to its websites in the Malaysian and Indonesian languages,3 and Katibah Nusantara is thought to be taking care of families of South-East Asian foreign terrorist fighters and developing a network in the region. The threat of ISIL has expanded rapidly across South-East Asia since the summer of 2014. The number of foreign terrorist fighters from South-East Asia has significantly increased. Governments officially acknowledge that 209 Indonesians, 80 1 Jemaah Islamiyah has stated that it aims to establish an Islamic State in South-East Asia, including Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, southern Thailand, Brunei Darussalam and the southern part of the Philippines.
 2 The Philippines concluded a comprehensive peace agreement with the Moro Islamic Liberation Front in March 2014; Indonesia concluded a peace agreement with the Free Aceh Movement in 2005; and Myanmar has concluded peace agreements with several ethnic groups. 3 Around 10 Malaysian language websites and 70 Indonesian language websites had been detected in June 2015.
 \ Journal of Social Political Sciences JSPS Vol. 1, No. 2, May, 2020 ISSN: 2715-7539 (Online) 125 Malaysians and two Singaporean families are fighting for ISIL.4 The linkage between Katibah Nusantara and experienced returnees exacerbates the terrorist threat in the region. Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore have detected several terrorist plots organized by ISIL returnees. Around 30 South-East Asian terrorist groups, including Jemaah Islamiyah in Indonesia and the Abu Sayyaf Group in the Philippines, have publicly pledged allegiance to ISIL.5 However, the linkage between the Abu Sayyaf Group and ISIL has not yet been proved. Since the Group is considered to be more money-oriented than ideological (it frequently engages in kidnapping for ransom and extortion), this alliance may be a means to generate financial and logistical support from ISIL. Two States use preventive/administrative detention to prevent terrorism and rehabilitate and reintegrate foreign terrorist fighters into society, rather than prosecuting them under the criminal justice system. UN Security Council has noted that this could raise human rights concerns. This region is also under threat of the use of social media to recruit the terrorist foreign fighters. In a much bigger scope, the use of social media and the Internet can be highly manipulated by owner politics people and/or wealth class. In the case of Indonesia, the growth of Cyber 4 As at January 2015, the Government of the Philippines was aware that two Filipinos had been killed in the Syrian Arab Republic, but had no evidence of Filipinos having fought for ISIL. 5 The Moro Islamic Liberation Front and the Moro National Liberation Front in the Philippines have condemned ISIL. Picture 1: Cyber Muslim Army \ Journal of Social Political Sciences JSPS Vol. 1, No. 2, May, 2020 ISSN: 2715-7539 (Online) 126 Army for disseminating the concern of Muslim friends-foes through the use of social media whatsApp is a raised (Picture 1). In the recent cases of Indonesia bombing in East Java and police stations has a connection with the Mako Brimob (paramilitary police headquarters) detention facility’s riot, in which the facility was housing terrorist prisoners. Manzi, Ali Fauzi's nickname on the battlefield, said the Surabaya bombs was part of a revenge related to the incident at Mako Brimob. In the video clip, Instagram, it was clearly picturizing extremist prisoners being fed by the police because their both hands were handcuffed on a bus journey to Nusakambangan, a penal island off the south coast of Java. This trigger anger among the terrorist prisoners networks that are all affiliated with ISIS (Kompas, 2018). The future of Asia security in the Post Truth Era is blended with hope and fear as the development of technology can be hijacked for the use of weapons for war whether physical or psychological. CONCLUSION In the Era of Post Truth where facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief because of the use of Internet and Social Media does increase a concern for the future of Asia’s security especially in relation to countering violent extremism. While terrorism is still the global impended threat, an unstable concept of security and/or national security in the study particularly in international relations and terrorism can lead to an arbitrary and/or possible breach of human rights standards with the concept of securitization. On the other hand, the breach of human rights standard can foster the growth of violent extremism as indicated by the UN National Action Plan for the Prevention of Violent Extremism that can lead to terrorism. In-depth study is needed to identify an effective measure to use human rights standards for protecting the life of individuals and society as a whole especially in relation to the situation in the post truth era. In the Asian context, the threat of the Internet and social media may pose a different impact compared to the other regions because this region has its largest and populous continent in the world with most various ethnicity and beliefs. Thus, the security concept, and the use of social media and information technology combined with the measure of using human rights needs to pay close attention to the social construct of Asia in order to avoid an improper approach of security measures which can lead to instability and make an impact on peace for the region. \ Journal of Social Political Sciences JSPS Vol. 1, No. 2, May, 2020 ISSN: 2715-7539 (Online) 127 REFERENCES Balzacq, T., Léonard, S., & Ruzicka, J. (2016). ‘Securitization’ revisited: theory and cases. International Relations, 30(4), 494–531. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047117815596590 Biddle, S., & Zirkle, R. (1996). Technology, civil‐military relations, and warfare in the developing world. Journal of Strategic Studies, 19(2), 171–212. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402399608437634 Booth, K. (2011). The Evolution of International Security Studies, Barry Buzan and Lene Hansen (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009), 400 pp., $99 cloth, $30.99 paper. Ethics & International Affairs, 25(1), 85–87. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0892679410000080 Buzan, B., & Hansen, L. (n.d.). Widening and deepening security. In The Evolution of International Security Studies (pp. 187–225). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511817762.009 Buzan, B., & Wæver, O. (2003). Regions and Powers. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511491252 Crilley, R. (2018). International relations in the age of ‘post-truth’ politics. International Affairs, 94(2), 417–425. https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiy038 Frost, M., & Michelsen, N. (2017). Strategic communications in international relations: practical traps and ethical puzzles. Defence Strategic Communications, 2(1), 9–33. https://doi.org/10.30966/2018.riga.2.1 Guzzini, S. (2011). Securitization as a causal mechanism. Security Dialogue, 42(4–5), 329– 341. https://doi.org/10.1177/0967010611419000 Krause, K., & Williams, M. C. (1996). Broadening the Agenda of Security Studies: Politics and Methods. Mershon International Studies Review, 40(2), 229. https://doi.org/10.2307/222776 Krebs, S. (n.d.). Israel. In Comparative Counter-Terrorism Law (pp. 511–542). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781107298002.018 McDonald, M. (2008). Securitization and the Construction of Security. European Journal of International Relations, 14(4), 563–587. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066108097553 \ Journal of Social Political Sciences JSPS Vol. 1, No. 2, May, 2020 ISSN: 2715-7539 (Online) 128 Securitization Theory and the Copenhagen School. (n.d.). In Security in Translation. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137307576.0007 Skidmore, D. (1999). Security: A New Framework for Analysis. By Barry Buzan, Ole Weaver, and Jaap de Wilde. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1998. 239p. $55.00 cloth, $19.95 paper. American Political Science Review, 93(4), 1010–1011. https://doi.org/10.2307/2586187 Spear, J. (1999). The disarmament and demobilisation of warring factions in the aftermath of civil wars: Key implementation issues. Civil Wars, 2(2), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/13698249908402404 Vaughan-Williams, N. (2008). Introduction. In Terrorism and the Politics of Response (pp. 1– 15). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203889336.ch0