The terrorist watch list is a political space in which actors can bargain over broader counterterror policy, including the basic question of which groups are considered terrorists and which are deemed to have legitimate political goals. This dissertation looks at three facets of communication related to the use of terrorist watch lists as a part of an overall counterterrorism policy. First, I examine what factors affect the listing process in 15 states that publish terrorist watch lists. That is, I look at what characteristics of listed and unlisted groups have significant impacts on the choice to designate, as well as what geopolitical concerns seem to be significantly weighed by designating states. Second, I explore the process dynamics of decision-making about terrorist designation in the United States. Through interviews with decision- makers and interested parties, I look at how the State Department’s Foreign Terrorist Organization watch list is constructed and how the individual interests of politicians, bureaucrats, and interest groups affect which groups are chosen for listing. Additionally, I explore how these same elites publicly discuss the threat of terrorism and terrorist groups through textual analysis of Congressional hearings related to terrorism policy. Third, I examine the effect of listing on how certain groups are treated by the public. Content analysis of media coverage of groups shows that listing choices impact the dissemination of information about state interests and group activities to the public. This study seeks to make clear that labeling is a policy choice in its own right. The prominence of counterterrorism in foreign policy feeds interest in labeling certain groups, individuals and actions as ;;terrorist,” and the choice to designate shapes policy concerns and outcomes.
PDF
download
878987797
028-85220240
