Page 160 - 《国际安全研究》2021年第4期

Journal of International Security Studies
objectives and pathways, constitute a prerequisite for how much counter-terrorism
governance could bring into full play its effectiveness. Ever since the September 11
attacks, three perceptions of terrorism threat have taken shape in the Western world
that include “conventional wisdom,” “homegrown terrorism,” and “extremist
ideology.” Accordingly, governance-related policies have undergone such three
phases as “global war on terror,” “counter-radicalization,” and “de-extremalization.”
Policy objectives have evolved from “cultural securitization” and “community
securitization” to “ideological securitization,” while policy paths have witnessed the
transformation from “collectivization” and “putting equal weight on collectivization
and individualization” to “individualization.” The three-phased evolution of
terrorism threat perceptions is more a passive reaction to new terrorist threats than
an active response to problems in previous phases. Consequently, limitations
inherent to the existing policies concerning contemporary Western counter-terrorism
governance will persist in some form and hence the counter-terrorism burden will
become increasingly heavier, which may even give rise to a dilemma in which “the
more you fight terrorism, the worse the situation gets.” Against the backdrop of the
continuous change and development of international terrorism, counter-terrorism
governance in Western countries and across the world has reached a crucial juncture
when perceptions of terrorism threat need to be upgraded, which may further exert a
profound impact on the effectiveness of current counter-terrorism governance.
[Keywords] counter-terrorism governance, threat perceptions, policy evaluation,
counter-radicalization, de-extremalization, homegrown terrorism
[Author] SHEN Xiaochen, Resident Researcher, China National Institute for SCO
International Exchange and Judicial Cooperation, Shanghai University of Political
Science and Law (Shanghai, 201701).

57 Obligation-based Cooperation: Role Theory and Sino-US Security
Interactions in East Asia
LI Kaisheng
[Abstract] Common interests are generally recognized as the foundation for
international security cooperation. However, given a multitude of conflicts of
interests in Sino-US relations, it is imperative that the role-based cooperation model
that emphasizes obligations rather than interests serve as a complementary path for
achieving security cooperation. In terms of international security relations, the roles
and obligations of relevant countries are featured by “objectivity,” thus making it
possible for the role-based cooperation to provide relatively objective and neutral
guidelines and solutions for relevant issues as well as for cooperation among actors.
Considering that the nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula and the South China Sea
disputes remain two major challenges to East Asian security, the complementary
roles assumed by China and the United States over the two issues could serve as an
entry point for them to facilitate positive security interactions. However, for the sake
of safeguarding its regional hegemonic interests and for the lack of regional restraint
mechanism, the United States has shown a strong tendency of role dislocation and
obligation anomie as regards the two issues. The United States, as a direct party on
the Korean Peninsula nuclear issue, evades its responsibilities. At the same time, it
attempts to take sides as a third party on the South China Sea disputes, making the
security situation in East Asia more complicated with increased possibility of

· 158 ·