<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Valeri Ratchev</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The Growing Threat: Homeland Security Issues of Bulgaria</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Information &amp; Security: An International Journal</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">homeland security</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Human Security</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">security sector reform</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Societal Security</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Terrorism</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2005</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2005</style></date></pub-dates></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">17</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">61-74</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">This article presents the main problems in adapting security establishments of democratic countries to the challenges of spreading terrorism in a globalized world. The focus is on problems facing post-communist countries. The author argues that, both during the early stages of democratization and in the ongoing security sector reform, the emphasis is on democratic civilian control and too little attention is paid to operational effectiveness. Furthermore, all democratic countries face the problem of achieving effectiveness of the security organizations while preserving and protecting democratic values. The concept of homeland security, among others, may be used to strengthen international and interagency cooperation in dealing with the security challenges of the Twenty First century.</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Lionel Ponsard</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Homeland Security and the Russian Approach</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Information &amp; Security: An International Journal</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Asymmetric Threats</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">homeland security</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Russian Transnational Organized Crime</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Russia’s Security Concepts.</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2005</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2005</style></date></pub-dates></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">17</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">50-60</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Homeland security remains a vague notion in the Russian understand¬ing, but essentially refers to the safeguard of key national interests, the struggle against global threats, with a strong focus on international terrorism, and eventually the fight against transnational organized crime. Homeland security tasks are usually performed in the Russian Federation by several security agencies distributed among three different ministries, i.e. the Interior Ministry, the MOD, and the Ministry for Civil Emergencies (EMERCOM). However, this trilateral structure is perhaps not sufficient to ensure concrete results in Russia’s attempts to fight against organized crime. Although having repeatedly stated the need to re-establish the rule of law, the current Russian government appears to deal with oligarchs in a discretionary way. It would therefore be rather utopian to expect any real improvement without a radical change of attitude from the top leadership. Russian approach towards homeland security is rather close to the European standards in terms of structural implementation, but much closer to the U.S. approach in terms of response and the preference for the use of force. The analysis of Russia’s security concepts demon-strates that security threats to the country are assessed as having clearly increased in the last ten years. A gloomier worldview combined with a reduced influence on the international scene obviously calls for more assertive security documents. In the same logic, the Russian perception advocates force as the preferred solution to deal with asymmetric threats, such as international terrorism. This became even more apparent in the wake of the 11 September attacks on the United States and the renewed strategic partnership between Moscow and Washington. The recognition of Russia’s key role in the fight against international terrorism did indeed bring Russia back into the Western security community. On the Russian side, the Russian leadership soon understood that Russia was too weak to counter these new threats on its own and would lose any prospective benefit by openly confronting the West.</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Peter Faber</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Homeland Security: General Templates and Options for the Future</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Information &amp; Security: An International Journal</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Civil-Military Combination Strategies</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">homeland security</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Regional Strategies</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Southeast Europe</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Strategy Pyramid</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">US Global Strategy</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">US-Europe Security Issues</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2005</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2005</style></date></pub-dates></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">17</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">9-22</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Homeland Security (HLS) encompasses the combined efforts of government agencies, non-government organizations, and the private sector to protect a nation-state, either offensively or defensively, against violent attacks. If attempts at protection fail, HLS then focuses on the management of and the response to such attacks. This generic, two-part definition of Homeland Security may be accurate enough, but it should not obscure a contradictory truth – HLS strategies invariably fluctuate by country and by region even though the era of exclusively national defense in Greater Europe is over, as is the era of narrowly designed national defense strategies themselves. Slowly but inevitably, all security strategies in the area, including Homeland Security strategies, will have to become “layered” if they are to account for the growing security roles of multiple actors operating on multiple levels. One user-friendly example of layering is the Pyramid Model of Strategy. This model attempts to be as reality-inclusive as possible by working from the bottom up – i.e., by working through 5 successively specific rungs (or types) of strategy. By adapting to and reflecting the influence of the first four rungs, the top-most national HLS strategy can maximize its potential for success in ways that otherwise might not be possible.</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">ISIJ Monitor</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Total Information Awareness  (DARPA’s Research Program)</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Information &amp; Security: An International Journal</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">automatic translation</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">biometric identification</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">collaborative decision-making</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">data mining</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">early warning</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">homeland security</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">preemption</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">speech recognition</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">structured argumentation</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">terrorist threat</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">ultra-large database</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2003</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2003</style></date></pub-dates></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">10</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">105-109</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;The most serious asymmetric threat facing the United States is terrorism, a threat characterized by collections of people loosely organized in shadowy networks that are difficult to identify and define. In response, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) created the Information Awareness Office (IAO). IAO plans to develop technology that will allow understanding of the intent of these networks, their plans, and potentially define opportunities for disrupting or eliminating the threats. To effectively and efficiently carry this out, sharing, collaborating and reasoning shall be promoted to convert nebulous data to knowledge and actionable options. The &amp;lsquo;Total Information Awareness&amp;rsquo; is the main program of IAO aimed to &amp;ldquo;revolutionize the ability of the United States to detect, classify and identify foreign terrorists &amp;ndash; and decipher their plans &amp;ndash; and thereby enable the U.S. to take timely action to successfully preempt and defeat terrorist acts.&amp;rdquo; The program objective is to create a counter-terrorism information system that increases information coverage, provides focused warnings, automatically queue analysts based on partial pattern matches, supports collaboration, analytical reasoning and information sharing so that analysts can hypothesize, test and propose theories, and mitigating strategies about possible futures, so decision-makers can effectively evaluate the impact of current or future policies and prospective courses of action.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract></record></records></xml>