poses. It is clear that both of the models of counterterrorism discussed possess their own unique benefits and drawbacks. The war model addresses the concerns of the heightened threat of terrorism through pre-emptive and unilateral action, whilst policing policies are seemingly more applicable in the case of more conventional terrorist threats. Therefore, to suggest that either model is explicitly more favourable than the other would be ill-conceived. Moreover, to suggest that both models illustrate distinct approaches to counterterrorism would also be mistaken. Instead, it can be seen that military and policing policies have empirically been employed as interrelated measures in attempts to more effectively combat the terrorist threat. As such, determining between two allegedly contrasting counterterrorism models would fail to appreciate the true nature of their use within the field of terrorism. Consequently, by noting the relationship between military and policing policies, it allows for a reconsideration of a broader discussion than simply assessing the efficacy of the two counterterrorism approaches. The inconsistencies within the field of terrorism, most notably relating to the lack of a cohesive definition, are undoubtedly exacerbating the issues that exist within the discipline. The failure to implement consistent counterterrorist-related legislation in the international sphere is also noted as a significant factor within these inconsistencies. The efficacy of counterterrorism models, therefore, is not the only issue within which definitive answers are required. Accepting the interconnected relationship between the models allows us to view the issues within counterterrorism at a broader and more appropriate angle. The true issue within the field relates not to choosing the most effectual policy with which to pursue counterterrorism, but to
43
Made with FlippingBook HTML5