Comments on: Social networks and the war on terror http://www.martincoward.net/2010/03/social-networks-and-the-war-on-terror/ Martin Coward, Lecturer in International Politics, Newcastle University. Research and writing on: global and international politics (empire and globalisation); critical international theory (Heidegger, Nancy, Foucault); war, violence and security; genocide and ethnic nationalism; urbanisation and conflict; urban security; urbicide. Wed, 25 Aug 2010 11:28:37 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Nate http://www.martincoward.net/2010/03/social-networks-and-the-war-on-terror/comment-page-1/#comment-439 Nate Mon, 15 Mar 2010 10:19:21 +0000 http://www.martincoward.net/?p=460#comment-439 Hey Martin, regarding the trope of networks expanding the battlespace, you might want to look into a report by the Reut Institute in Israel. Indications seem to be that they are an influential security/policy think tank and they've now identified international networks which criticize Israel as an existential and national security threat -- as much as or more than Iran. They're lobbying -- apparently with some success -- for the government of Israel to begin targeting activist networks in key "hubs" around the world which criticize Israeli actions. We're getting lots of press about the "friendly" side -- the Foreign Ministry trying to get Israeli travelers to be PR bodies for them. But classifying these networks as security threats suggests we'll also eventually see a more hostile side, whether that means infiltration, accusations based on planted information or whatever. You can find the report online here: http://reut-institute.org/en/Publication.aspx?PublicationId=3769 They claim an alliance of the "radical European left, Arab and Islamic groups .. negate Israel's right to exist based on a variety of political and philosophical arguments". Israel has long infiltrated and harassed international and NGO groups inside the West Bank and Gaza Strip (and now there's even some targeting of Israeli groups and their funding -- see the recent scuffle around the New Israel Fund). It will be interesting to see what they do now that they've begun targeting international groups. It certainly suggests your point -- that the idea of the network tends towards an expansive conception of the enemy and of valid battlespaces. Hey Martin, regarding the trope of networks expanding the battlespace, you might want to look into a report by the Reut Institute in Israel. Indications seem to be that they are an influential security/policy think tank and they’ve now identified international networks which criticize Israel as an existential and national security threat — as much as or more than Iran.

They’re lobbying — apparently with some success — for the government of Israel to begin targeting activist networks in key “hubs” around the world which criticize Israeli actions. We’re getting lots of press about the “friendly” side — the Foreign Ministry trying to get Israeli travelers to be PR bodies for them. But classifying these networks as security threats suggests we’ll also eventually see a more hostile side, whether that means infiltration, accusations based on planted information or whatever.

You can find the report online here:

http://reut-institute.org/en/Publication.aspx?PublicationId=3769

They claim an alliance of the “radical European left, Arab and Islamic groups .. negate Israel’s right to exist based on a variety of political and philosophical arguments”.

Israel has long infiltrated and harassed international and NGO groups inside the West Bank and Gaza Strip (and now there’s even some targeting of Israeli groups and their funding — see the recent scuffle around the New Israel Fund). It will be interesting to see what they do now that they’ve begun targeting international groups.

It certainly suggests your point — that the idea of the network tends towards an expansive conception of the enemy and of valid battlespaces.

]]>