Ethics and Security: Terrorism and Transnational Organized Crime

该项目将伦理研究引入全球不确定因素方案，并为方案中正在进行的安全研究增加价值。伦理学研究将恐怖主义和跨国有组织犯罪相提并论。在一些理解上，恐怖主义只是一种特殊的跨国有组织犯罪，需要在司法管辖区内和司法管辖区之间通过既定的警务技术来对付。警务行动--至少在西方--受到严格的道德和法律约束，特别是在针对受警务管辖的公民时，特别是在这些行动旨在预防犯罪而不是拘留和审判犯有已犯罪行的罪犯的情况下。在其他理解中，恐怖主义是一种军事威胁，恐怖分子是战斗人员，而反恐实际上是一场战争。在战争中，可以在法律和道义上对战斗人员使用致命武力，通过秘密或狡猾的手段渗透军事机密通常不被认为是不道德的，因为其目标是敌人，而不是具有公民身份的人。因此，恐怖主义是被视为需要警察应对的跨国有组织犯罪，还是被视为一种军事威胁，这一点意义重大。即使它被视为警务问题，特别是预防性警务问题，但对于可以用来对付它的手段，仍存在相当大的争议。反恐包括在机场进行大规模搜查，秘密窃听、窃听、摄像头监控和互联网监控，可疑的数据共享，即使有证据也要对人进行可疑的拘留，最极端的是酷刑和法外杀戮。由于反恐影响到公众的广泛领域，一些相关的预防性警务技术比以更有针对性的方式打击恋童癖、人口贩子、毒贩和武器走私者更具争议性。也许在监管非恐怖主义的严重犯罪方面，利用族裔和其他陈规定型观念带来的不良后果的余地较小；一些类型的跨国严重犯罪比恐怖主义更普遍，更频繁地伤害更多的人，这可能会有所不同。英国立法中与恐怖主义相关的一些活动，如美化恐怖主义，可以说受到言论和结社自由人权的保护；另一方面，战争期间对方的宣传活动经常被另一方颠覆，没有道德色彩。简而言之，反恐和打击(其他类型)跨国有组织犯罪的措施之间的伦理差异本身就是研究的重点。识别和解释这些差异，并建议如何将它们反映在公共政策中，是该项目的重要研究任务。但该项目也在为全球不确定因素中的其他项目增值方面发挥了作用。这些其他项目有时旨在发现表明可能的犯罪阴谋或甚至暴力倾向的行为模式。他们还加快了嫌疑人的识别速度。所有这些类型的研究都带有伦理风险，其中一些可能对科学研究人员来说并不明显。该项目的领导职能将涉及与其他GU资助项目的互动，目的是识别此类风险，帮助研究人员适应它们，甚至撰写关于它们的文章。这项研究的另一个功能将是组织GU支持的研究人员、英国和欧洲安全部门的公司以及伦理学家之间的互动。这种相互作用是PI在之前的欧洲研究中率先提出的。

This project introduces ethics research into the Global Uncertainties programme and adds value to on-going security research in the programme. The ethics research juxtaposes terrorism and transnational organized crime. On some understandings, terrorism is just a special kind of transnational organized crime, to be dealt with by established policing techniques within and between jurisdictions. Policing operations, at least in the West, are subject to stringent ethical and legal constraints, especially when directed at citizens of the jurisdiction being policed, and especially where the operations seek to prevent crime rather than to detain and try offenders guilty of an offence already committed. On other understandings, terrorism is a military threat, terrorists are combatants, and countering terrorism is literally a war. In a war, lethal force can legally and morally be used against combatants, and the penetration of military secrets by secret or underhand means is not typically considered immoral, because its target is an enemy rather than people who have the status of citizens. So it makes a great difference whether terrorism is seen as transnational organized crime that requires a policing response, or as a military threat. Even if it is seen as a policing matter, and especially as a preventive policing matter, there is considerable controversy over the means that can be used against it. Counter-terrorism involves mass searches at airports, secret wire-tapping, bugging, camera-surveillance and internet monitoring, questionable kinds of data-sharing, questionable kinds of detention even of people there is evidence against, and, at the extreme end, torture and extra-legal killing. Because of the way counter-terrorism affects a wide cross section of the public, some of the associated preventive policing techniques are more controversial than they would be if employed in a more targetted way against paedophiles, people traffickers; drug dealers; and weapons smugglers. Perhaps there is less scope, in policing non-terrorist, serious crime, for the use with bad consequences of ethnic and other stereotypes; and it may make a difference to that some kinds of transnational serious crime are much more prevalent, and harm many more people more frequently, than terrorism. Some activities associated in UK legislation with terrorism, such as glorifying it, are arguably protected by human rights to free speech and association; propaganda activities by the other side during a war, on the other hand, are routinely subverted by the other side, with no moral overtones. In short, the ethical differences between counter-terrorism and measures against (other kinds of) transnational organized crime are themselves of research interest. Identifying and explaining these differences, and suggesting how they should be reflected in public policy are important research tasks of this project. But the project also has a role in adding value to projects elsewhere in Global Uncertainties. These other projects sometimes aim at detecting patterns of behaviour that indicate possible criminal conspiracy, or even a tendency to violence. They also speed up identification of suspects. All of these kinds of research carry ethical risks, some of which may not be obvious to scientific researchers. The Leadership function of the project will involve interaction with other GU-funded projects for the purpose of identifying such risks and helping researchers to accommodate them, and even to write about them. Another function of the research will be to organize interactions between GU-supported researchers, companies in the UK and European security sector, and ethicists. Such interactions have been pioneered by the PI in previous European research.