Foreign experience in the fight against terrorism. The effectiveness of international and domestic experience in the legislative fight against terrorism in the aspects of its prevention. Russia's role in the world community

Terrorism has long been a global threat and, therefore, the fight against it automatically acquires a global dimension. In 1996 alone, two international summits were devoted to this problem in March in Sharm el-Sheikh (Egypt) and in July in Paris. Russia can probably borrow a lot from the law enforcement agencies of those countries for which terrorism has been a scourge for several decades and which have accumulated considerable baggage in the area of ​​its prevention. In this sense, the most interesting, apparently, is the experience of the USA, Germany, Great Britain, France and Israel. For the United States, over the past thirty years, it has been and remains the main problem of violent acts against various missions, military bases and citizens outside the state. West Germany in the 70s and 80s was swept by a wave of leftist terrorism, primarily in the person of the RAF, and now the threat of right-wing, neo-fascist extremism has become urgent. In Great Britain, since the late 1960s, the IRA has been waging a real terrorist war against the government, while for France the problem of Islamic terrorism and the activities of the extremist "Action Direct" have been unresolved for a long time.

It is advisable to analyze the foreign experience of combating terrorism and highlight the elements applicable to Russian law enforcement agencies in three dimensions: 1) general principles of anti-terrorist activity; 2) the creation of anti-terrorist systems, special structures and special forces; 3) interdepartmental and interstate coordination in this area.

More on 3.3. International experience in combating terrorism and its use in the Russian Federation:

1. The supremacy of the Constitution of the Russian Federation in its relation to the norms of international law and international treaties.
2. 3.3. International experience in the fight against terrorism and its use in the Russian Federation
3. §1. Historical experience of combating tax crime. 1.1. The emergence of taxation
4. § 2.2. Legal framework for international cooperation between the European Police Organization and the Russian Federation
5. Benefit to Citizens Involved in the Fight against Terrorism
6. 1.3. Historical experience of legal regulation of organizational forms of corporate relations in the Russian Federation

Terrorism today has become the number one socio-political problem, since its scale has acquired truly global significance. In the fight against terrorism, Russia is making every effort to avoid dangerous and unpredictable consequences that humanity is already experiencing.

Without Borders

Terrorism is a threat to the security of the whole world, all countries and all citizens inhabiting them, it is economic and political losses, it is a huge psychological pressure on people. The scope of banditry in modern times is so wide that there are no state borders for it.

What can an individual state do against terrorism? Its international character dictates response measures, building a whole system of counteraction. This is exactly what Russia is doing in the fight against terrorism. The Russian Federation is also feeling its offensive on an international scale, so the question arose about the participation of its army even outside the territory of the country.

Countering the Forces of Terror

The forces of local governments carry out hourly vigilant work to ensure the safety of the country's population. The methods of combating terrorism within Russia are used as follows.

1. Prevention: preventing terrorist attacks by identifying and eliminating conditions and causes that contribute to the commission of terrorist acts.
2. In the fight against terrorism, Russia follows the chain of detection, prevention, suppression, disclosure and investigation of each such case.
3. The consequences of any manifestation of terror are minimized and eliminated.

the federal law

Counteraction was legally announced in 2006. According to the Federal Law, Russia can use the RF Armed Forces in the fight against terrorism. The following situations of the use of the Armed Forces were agreed upon.

1. Suppression of the flight of any aircraft hijacked by terrorists or used for a terrorist attack.
2. Suppression of a terrorist attack in the territorial sea of ​​the Russian Federation and in internal waters, at any object of activity in the seas located on the continental shelf, where the territory of the Russian Federation is located, ensuring the safe operation of shipping.
3. In the fight against terrorism, Russia participates in counterterrorist operations, as provided for in this Federal Law.
4. The fight against international terrorism outside the borders of the territories of the Russian Federation.

Suppression of terrorism in the air

The Armed Forces of the Russian Federation can use military equipment and weapons in accordance with the regulatory legal acts of the Russian Federation to eliminate the threat or suppress a terrorist act. If the aircraft does not respond to the commands of ground tracking points and to the signals of the raised aircraft of the Russian Federation for interception, or refuses to obey without explaining the reasons, the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation interrupt the flight of the vessel, using military equipment and weapons, forcing it to land. In case of disobedience and the existing danger of an ecological disaster or death of people, the flight of the ship is stopped by destruction.

Suppression of terrorism on the water

Inland waters, the territorial sea and its continental shelf and national maritime navigation (including underwater) of the RF Armed Forces must also be protected using the above methods of combating terrorism. If sea or river craft do not respond to commands and signals to stop violating the rules for the use of the water space of the Russian Federation and the underwater environment, or refusal to obey, the weapons of warships and aircraft of the RF Armed Forces are used for coercion in order to stop the craft and eliminate the threat of a terrorist attack even by means of it destruction. It is necessary to prevent loss of life or environmental disaster by applying any measures to combat terrorism.

Internal and external counter-terrorism

The normative legal acts of the Russian Federation determine the decision of the President of Russia in attracting military units and subdivisions of the RF Armed Forces to participate in the counter-terrorist operation. Military units, subunits and formations of the RF Armed Forces use military equipment, special means and weapons. The fight against international terrorism through the involvement of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation is carried out in accordance with international treaties of the Russian Federation, this Federal Law with the use of weapons either from the territory of the Russian Federation against terrorist bases or individuals located outside the Russian Federation, as well as with the use of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation outside the country. All these decisions are made personally by the President, currently V. Putin.

The fight against terrorism is the most important task of the modern world and a very responsible one. Therefore, the total number of the formation of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, the regions where it will operate, the tasks facing it, the length of stay outside the Russian Federation and other issues related to counter-terrorism activities outside the Russian Federation are also decided personally by the President. The Federal Anti-Terrorism Act makes this provision separately. The military units that are sent outside Russia consist of contract servicemen who have undergone special preliminary training and are formed on a purely voluntary basis.

National security

Terrorism can be represented both by organizations and groups, and by individuals. The national security strategy of the Russian Federation until 2020 provides for any manifestations of terrorist activity. The orientation can be of any plan - from a violent change in the basis of the constitutional system of the Russian Federation and the disorganization of the functioning of the state. authorities to the destruction of industrial and military facilities, as well as institutions and enterprises that support the livelihoods of the population, and to intimidate society with the use of chemical or nuclear weapons.

The problems of the fight against terrorism are that there is no consolidation of all public and state structures in uniting efforts to counter this most dangerous phenomenon. Any specially created counter-terrorism centers, even special services and law enforcement agencies, will not be able to effectively help here. We need a joint activity of all structures, branches of government, media.

Sources of terrorism

Any terrorist manifestations must be clearly traced to the very source and the reasons for their occurrence must be honestly named. An expert survey conducted among employees of the anti-terrorist units of the FSB of the Russian Federation revealed that the determinants (factors of occurrence) of terrorism are most often the following: a sharp decrease in the standard of living and the degree of social services. protection, political struggle and legal nihilism, the growth of separatism and nationalism, imperfect legislation, low authority of power structures, ill-considered decisions.

Growing terrorism is fueled mainly by contradictions in society, social tension, from which political extremism appears. The fight against extremism and terrorism requires the inclusion of a comprehensive program, in which it will have not only political, but also economic, social, ideological, legal and many other aspects. The anti-terrorist policy of the Russian Federation is trying to solve the main, but only investigative tasks - the preservation of territorial integrity and sovereignty. And we should start with the reasons.

Fundamentals of Counter Terrorism

An integral part of state policy is the fight against terrorism in the Russian Federation, the purpose of which is, as already mentioned, to ensure the integrity and sovereignty of the country. The main points of this strategy are as follows:

• the causes and conditions conducive to the emergence of terrorism and its spread must be identified and eliminated;
• persons and organizations preparing for terrorist acts must be identified, their actions prevented and suppressed;
• subjects involved in terrorist activities should be held accountable in accordance with Russian legislation;
• forces and means intended for suppression, detection, prevention of terrorist activities, minimization and elimination of the consequences of terrorist acts must be maintained in constant readiness for their use;
• places of mass gathering of people, important objects of life support and infrastructure must be provided with anti-terrorist protection;
• the ideology of terrorism should not spread and advocacy should be intensified.

Security measures

Objects that can be targeted by terrorist operations have recently become much better equipped with engineering and technical means of protection, and security personnel have significantly improved their level of training. Nevertheless, the anti-terrorist protection of places where people are in large numbers is still clearly insufficient, since there were no uniform requirements for ensuring this at the facilities.

In 2013, on October 22, the Federal Law on Anti-Terrorist Security of Facilities came into force. Now the Government of the Russian Federation, according to this document, receives the right to establish mandatory requirements for all individuals and legal entities for the anti-terrorist security of objects and territories. Also, the requirements relate to their category, control over the fulfillment of requirements, the form of the safety data sheet. Only transport infrastructure, vehicles and fuel and energy facilities are excluded from these facilities, where anti-terrorist protection is built much more rigidly.

Global threat

Terrorist organizations operate in Russia most often with the participation and under the guidance of foreign citizens who have received training abroad and are financially supported by sources associated with international terrorism. According to the FSB of the Russian Federation, already in 2000 there were about 3,000 foreign fighters in Chechnya. The armed forces of Russia in the hostilities of 1999-2001 destroyed more than a thousand foreigners from Arab countries: Lebanon, Palestine, Egypt, United Arab Emirates, Jordan, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Tunisia, Kuwait, Tajikistan, Turkey, Syria, Algeria.

In recent years, international terrorism has intensified to the level of a global threat. In Russia, this is precisely the reason for the creation of the National Anti-Terrorism Committee (NAC). This collegial body, which coordinates the activities of the executive power of both federal and subjects of the Russian Federation, local self-government, and also prepares relevant proposals to the President of the Russian Federation. The NAC was established in accordance with the 2006 Decree on Countering Terrorism. The chairman of the committee is the Director of the FSB of the Russian Federation, General of the Army A.V. Bortnikov. Almost all heads of power structures, government departments and chambers of the Russian parliament work under his leadership.

The main tasks of the NAC

1. Preparation of proposals to the President of the Russian Federation regarding the formation of state. policy and improvement of legislation in the field of countering terrorism.
2. Coordination of all anti-terrorist activities of the federal executive power, commissions in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, interaction of these structures with local government, public organizations and associations.
3. Determination of measures to eliminate the causes and conditions conducive to terror, ensuring the security of facilities from potential encroachments.
4. Participation in the fight against terrorism, preparation of international treaties of the Russian Federation in this area.
5. Provision of social protection for people already engaged in or involved in the fight against terrorism, social rehabilitation of victims of terrorist attacks.
6. Solving other tasks stipulated by the legislation of the Russian Federation.

Terror of the North Caucasus

In recent years, state bodies. the authorities have made significant efforts to normalize the situation in the North Caucasus Federal District by implementing measures to counter terrorism. In December 2014, the director of the FSB of the Russian Federation A. Bortnikov noted the result of the coordination of preventive and military operations - terrorist crimes became three times less compared to the same period in 2013: 218 crimes against 78.

However, the tension in the region is still high - both the North Caucasian bandit underground and international terrorism are active, despite the direct participation of all law enforcement agencies, security forces and special services in the fight against it. Operational and combat measures are carried out, terrorist acts are detected, prevented, suppressed, disclosed and investigated. Thus, during 2014, the special services and law enforcement agencies managed to prevent 59 crimes of a terrorist nature and eight planned terrorist attacks. Thirty people associated with the gangster underground were persuaded to renounce terror.

When you can't persuade

To combat terrorism, there is a complex of operational-combat, special, military and many other measures, when military equipment, weapons and special means are used to suppress a terrorist act, neutralize militants, ensure the safety of people, institutions and organizations and minimize the consequences of a terrorist attack. Here, the forces and means of the FSB bodies are involved, together with the grouping being created, the composition of which can be replenished both by units of the RF Armed Forces and federal executive bodies in charge of defense, security, internal affairs, civil defense, justice, the Ministry of Emergency Situations and many others.

As a result of such powerful counter-terrorism operations in the North Caucasus in 2014, 233 bandits were neutralized, including 38 leaders. 637 members of the bandit underground were detained. 272 explosive devices, many firearms and other means of destruction were withdrawn from illegal circulation. Law enforcement agencies investigating terrorist acts brought 219 criminal cases to court in 2014, as a result of which the criminals were punished, among them four perpetrators of terrorist attacks in Volgograd.

Terror and international relations

Cross-border forms of terrorism are the most dangerous form of crime. Modern realities have turned it into a factor destabilizing the development of international relations. Terrorist attacks on the use of weapons of mass destruction (nuclear weapons) are a serious threat to the existence of all mankind. And due to the overestimated ambitions of some of its members, he cannot even determine the exact terminology concerning this phenomenon, although in general there was a certain joint understanding of the main components of this phenomenon.

First of all, terrorism is illegal violence with the use of weapons, the desire to intimidate the public of the world in the broadest layers of its population, these are innocent victims. If the interests of more than one country are affected, naturally there is also an international element there. The international community does not regard the political orientation as a feature of international terrorism, oddly enough. However, in recent years, when it has grown incredibly strong around the world, the UN General Assembly Committee is trying to start working again on a definition relating to international terrorism.

Russia's role in the world community

The Russian Federation is very consistent on the path to uniting efforts in the fight against terror. She has always stood for the elimination of barriers - religious, ideological, political and any other - between states opposing terrorist crimes, because the main thing is to organize an effective rebuff to all manifestations of terrorism.

As the successor of the USSR, the Russian Federation participates in the existing universal agreements on this struggle. It is from its representatives that all constructive initiatives come, it is they who make the most tangible contribution both to the theoretical development of new agreements and to practical decisions on the creation of a common anti-terrorist international front.

Terrorism has long been a global threat and, therefore, the fight against it automatically acquires a global dimension. In 1996 alone, two international summits were devoted to this issue in March in Sharm el-Sheikh (Egypt) and in July in Paris.

Russia can probably borrow a lot from the law enforcement agencies of those countries for which terrorism has been a scourge for several decades, and which have accumulated considerable baggage in the field of its prevention. In this sense, the most interesting, apparently, is the experience of the USA, Germany, Great Britain, France and Israel. For the United States, over the past thirty years, it has been and remains the main problem of violent acts against various missions, military bases and citizens outside the state. West Germany in the 70s and 80s was swept by a wave of leftist terrorism, primarily in the person of the RAF, and now the threat of right-wing, neo-fascist extremism has become urgent. In Great Britain, since the late 1960s, the IRA has been waging a real terrorist war against the government, while for France the problem of Islamic terrorism and the activities of the extremist "Action Direct" have been unresolved for a long time.

It is advisable to analyze the foreign experience of combating terrorism and highlight the elements applicable to Russian law enforcement agencies in three dimensions: 1) general principles of anti-terrorist activity; 2) the creation of anti-terrorist systems, special structures and special forces; 3) interdepartmental and interstate coordination in this area.

1. Basic principles of counterterrorism. Since the 1970s, Western countries have been making efforts to develop a unified approach to solving the problem of terrorism. However, along with some successes achieved in this regard (the adoption of bilateral and international agreements, changes in the legislation of a number of countries, etc.), there are still differences in the implementation of practical measures to combat crimes of this kind. To date, three points of view have developed abroad on this score:

1. Not to enter into any negotiations with terrorists and immediately carry out a police or military operation is an extremely tough line. The blame for the possible victims among the hostages should be completely laid on the terrorists. The cases when the lives of ambassadors and diplomatic representatives are endangered should not be an exception. This position is adhered to by Israel, Argentina, Colombia, Jordan, Turkey, Uruguay and a position close to it was held by the United States until recently. Governments of other countries are also inclined to refuse to satisfy the demands of terrorists. Many countries in Europe and Latin America are adopting sanctions against firms that insure their employees against kidnapping by terrorists and agree to ransom for captured or kidnapped representatives.

The government's refusal to pay terrorists a ransom for the release of hostages or renunciation of criminal intentions is motivated by the fact that otherwise it could push other extremist groups to kidnap people, lead to significant financial costs, damage political stability, strengthen terrorists' claims to their role in social - the political life of the country, and can also strengthen the material and financial situation of extremist groups (experts believe that one million dollars is enough for the activities of a group of 20 people for a year).

In some countries, individuals and companies are allowed to negotiate and pay ransoms, provided the terrorists waive additional political demands. This approach to solving the problem is manifested in international agreements. Thus, in July 1978, Canada, France, Italy, England, the United States and the Federal Republic of Germany agreed to adopt sanctions against those states that would satisfy the demands of terrorists in the event that the latter seized vehicles.

2. Many countries, adhering to the concept of "no concessions to terrorists" as a fundamental principle, nevertheless tend to use more flexible tactics in dealing with terrorists. They believe that the most effective method of resolving conflict situations, especially if several states are involved, is to negotiate. According to the leaders of these countries, negotiations with terrorists are necessary in order to achieve the release of at least some of the hostages (women, children, patients). In addition, negotiations provide the official authorities with a number of advantages and can contribute to a peaceful outcome of the incident. Specialists-psychiatrists and psychologists should be involved in the negotiations, with the help of whom it is possible to try to establish psychological contact with criminals, to find out their strengths and weaknesses, to monitor their mental and physical condition in order, if necessary, to choose the most favorable moment for carrying out police or military operation. In general, the practice of negotiations boils down to wasting time, exhausting terrorists (“exhaustion strategy”), and putting pressure on them to give up their demands. Summarizing the experience of conducting such negotiations, Western experts emphasize that it is important not to miss the moment of the onset of the crisis, when there is a real threat to the life of the kidnapped. They also propose to take into account that in case of an excessive delay in negotiations, terrorists are looking for various ways to exert additional pressure. This requires the adoption of the necessary measures to prevent new terrorist attacks and the abduction of relatives or friends of the kidnapped. England, France, Holland, recently the USA and a number of other countries adhere to this position. As practice shows, such an approach to a greater extent ensures the successful resolution of terrorist incidents. Its use saved many hostages' lives. No hostage casualties have been reported in recent years. This tactic is widely used in resolving conflict situations affecting the interests of several countries.

3. The third principle: when choosing a method of action in an act of terrorism, proceed from the nationality of its participants. If, for example, the hostages are citizens of the country on the territory of which the seizure took place, then the operation to release them should be started immediately. If they are foreigners, then the actions of local authorities must be coordinated with the governments of the countries of which they are citizens. The actions of anti-terrorist units should be based on the positions of these governments. This point of view is shared, in particular, by Belgium. Such a soft approach can be applied in countries with a low level of terrorism and seems unacceptable for Russia.

In general, we can conclude that most Western countries are inclined towards the second of the indicated principles, that is, the tactics of coming into contact with terrorists, meaning the maximum use of this opportunity to assess the situation and reduce the risk to the life of the hostages and the preservation of the seized objects. In the opinion of the bulk of the interviewed police officers, this particular option is the most effective in Russian conditions, however, with a great emphasis on the toughness of the authorities in relation to terrorists. The choice of this option is extremely important, since in Russia, at least as the experience of anti-terrorist operations of recent years shows (the authorities often hesitate between the use of entire military units and “liberalism” in relation to criminals), a common approach to solving the problem has not yet been developed.

3. Creation of anti-terrorism systems and the activities of special forces.

Foreign experience shows that the main form of combating terrorism in modern conditions is the conduct of special operations, so many Western countries have taken the path of forming special units and special services equipped with modern technology, weapons and transport. They were created in more than 15 Western countries, but their actions fit into the framework of a clear state system, in which special forces receive comprehensive support (legal, informational, moral and psychological, etc.) from other institutions of structures.

Currently, in the main Western countries, there are two types of special units designed to combat terrorism: units directly subordinate to the special services and formed from among the employees of these services, and units of the "commando" type, which are recruited from special forces and enter the operational subordination to the special services for the period of a specific operation. Examples of this kind of special forces are the British SAS, the German GHA - 9, the Italian R detachment, the French GIGN detachment, the Israeli General Intelligence Unit 269, the American Delta Force and others.

The question of the participation of special units in counter-terrorism operations is usually decided on a case-by-case basis at the highest government level, taking into account the nature of the terrorist act. As practice shows, these units are more often used in the event of the seizure of hostages, vehicles and other objects by terrorists and begin to carry out an operation from the moment the incident occurs. For the release of abducted persons, special units are involved much less often and begin to act from the moment the place of detention of terrorists' victims is discovered.

The management of the actions of special units is entrusted to state bodies (ministries, specially created committees, headquarters, etc.). In the United States, for example, the Department of Justice and the FBI are responsible for the elimination of a terrorist incident on the territory of the country, and the Department of State is responsible for the operations to free hostages from among Americans captured on the territory of foreign countries.

Legal, organizational and technical support for countering terrorism is usually expressed in the creation and continuous improvement of the state system of combating terrorism, within which special forces operate. Thus, in the United States to date, a package of laws has been adopted that form a solid legal basis for the activities of the administration, law enforcement agencies and special services in the fight against terrorism. A national program for combating terrorist acts has been developed, the structure of the bodies involved in this fight under the auspices of the National Security Council has been determined, funding for this program has been ensured (for 1986-1991, $ 10 billion was allocated) / At the same time, this kind of state system did not appear all of a sudden this was preceded by a rather lengthy process of formation.

Until 1972, the United States did not have a formal government structure specifically designed to fight terrorism. However, the tragic incident at the Munich Olympics in 1972 radically changed the position of the American administration on this issue. On September 25, 1972, President R. Nixon signed a memorandum, which provided for the formation of a special government committee and a working group to combat terrorism. It was decided that the committee will be engaged in the development of measures aimed at preventing international terrorism, as well as the preparation of proposals for financing anti-terrorist programs. This Government Committee lasted until 1977. During this time, it included: the secretary of state (chairman), the ministers of finance, defense, justice, transport, the US representative to the UN, the directors of the CIA and the FBI, and presidential aides for national security and domestic policy.

In 1974, representatives of the following ministries and departments were added to the committee and working group: the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, the Energy Research and Development Directorate, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the Law Enforcement Assistance Directorate, the Metropolitan Police Directorate, the Commission on nuclear energy, the National Security Agency, the Office of Management and Budget, the US Information Agency and the Treasury Secret Service.

This expansion of the membership of the committee had a negative impact on the effectiveness of its activities. To get out of this situation, an Executive Committee was created in 1974, which included representatives of only those organizations whose responsibilities in the fight against terrorism are defined by law, namely: the State Department, the Department of Defense, Justice (FBI), Finance and Energy, CIA, Federal Aviation Administration, Joint Chiefs of Staff. In 1977, a special anti-terrorist unit "Delta Force" was created from specially selected servicemen. For the FBI, anti-terrorism is one of eight areas of activity along with the fight against organized crime, crimes among officials, illegal drug trafficking, foreign counterintelligence, etc. -

Three critical functions have been identified for the JCC: overseeing the activities of an interdepartmental group to ensure coordination between government bodies involved in the fight against terrorism; solving legal problems that may arise as a result of the actions of terrorists; ensuring the necessary priority in the implementation of anti-terrorist programs.

Two new bodies were created under the auspices of the CCM:

Terror Response Organization;

Organization for planning, coordination and policy formulation in the field of anti-terrorism (within the country and abroad). In 1978, five Policy Review Committees were created under this structure. They have been involved in organizing various security studies, contingency planning, crisis management, public relations, international cooperation issues, testing the ability to respond appropriately.

Under President R. Reagan, the Supreme Interdepartmental Group on Foreign Policy was entrusted with the issues of terrorism, which assumed the functions and responsibilities of the JCC. Within the framework of the Interdepartmental Group, permanent bodies were created:

The technical support group is engaged in the development of new means and techniques for combating terrorism;

The Coordination Group for Anti-Terrorism Activities, is responsible for the unification of programs of the State Department, the CIA, the Ministries of Defense and Energy in the field of anti-terrorism;

The group of trainings and exercises, is engaged in modeling the development of the situation;

The Maritime Transport Security Group, which deals with vulnerability assessments of ports, ships and communications;

The Legal Group, which considers legislative initiatives and is responsible for the development of new proposals in the field of international law in the field of combating terrorism;

The Remuneration Committee, responsible for the development of special programs for financial incentives for providing information on impending terrorist acts;

Public Diplomacy Group.

"The basis of the state mechanism for countering terrorism at present in the United States is made up of federal ministries and departments, endowed with appropriate powers and their practical activities are built within the framework of the" concept of the head department ", the main principle of which is that if an incident falls under the jurisdiction of one department or another , then it is this department that is responsible for coordinating all response measures.

The process of creating the necessary organizational, technical and legal support for the fight against terrorism is also going on in Europe, which can be seen in the example of the FRG. After heated debate, the German Bundestag approved new anti-terrorism legislation (Anti-Terror Gesetz). The following amendments and additions have been made to the Criminal Code of the Federal Republic of Germany:

The wording of the paragraphs concerning “creation and participation in terrorist organizations” has been significantly expanded; actions aimed at destroying railway and port mechanisms, airport facilities and industrial enterprises, especially atomic ones, were recognized as dangerous;

The article "on incitement to socially dangerous acts" now includes persons who print and distribute various leaflets and proclamations (instructions for the manufacture of improvised explosive devices or methods for disabling the masts of high-voltage lines, etc.);

A new article has been introduced that expands the prerogatives of the Prosecutor General of the Federal Republic of Germany, who is now obliged to directly participate in the proceedings related to the activities of foreign terrorist organizations on the territory of the Federal Republic of Germany and their prosecution.

The powers of the country's counterintelligence agencies were also expanded in the unhindered receipt of information on terrorist issues. All federal ministries and departments are now obliged to report to the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution of all known cases and facts of possible damage to state security and, in particular, terrorist acts.

To solve special tasks in emergency situations, including the fight against terrorism, in the last 20 years, special units have been formed in the Federal Republic of Germany. After the incident during the Olympic Games in Munich, the German government organized the GHA-9 paramilitary anti-terrorist unit (a special unit of the FRG border guard for the release of hostages and the fight against terrorism), numbering 180 people. It is commanded by a professional military man. Employees receive extensive training in many areas, from swimming to karate and throwing knives, and are proficient in small arms from a revolver to a sniper rifle. The unit has a significant budget that is used to acquire the latest anti-terrorist weapons and equipment.

In modern conditions, according to experts from the Federal Border Guard of the Federal Republic of Germany, the expansion of cooperation and interaction of special units for the fight against terrorism of different countries is of great importance. For example, the GHA-9 maintains contacts with the American special forces "Delta Force", the British brigade "SAS" and the Austrian "Kohra". #

In France, the fight against terrorism is structured somewhat differently. In this country, there is no cumbersome highly specialized service dealing with this issue. Instead of this, is the mobilization and coordination of the actions of the units of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the army, and all interested services that can contribute to both the prevention and suppression of terrorism? To this end, on October 8, 1984, under the direct leadership of the Director General of the National Police, a structure was created, called the Unit for the Coordination of the Fight Against Terrorism (U.C.L.A.T.). It has a dedicated Investigation, Assistance, Intervention and Recovery (R.A.I.D.) department. The latter provides its assistance at the request of the services during counter-terrorist actions, when high professional skills are required, or for carrying out special missions such as surveillance and surveillance on national territory. Head of U.C.L.A.T. if necessary, in crisis situations, gathers its correspondents (representatives) from the services involved in the fight against terrorism. In addition, there is a coordination unit that coordinates in France the work of German, Spanish, Italian, British services involved in the fight against terrorism and the activities of French police units in countries united by bilateral agreements on cooperation in the fight against terrorism (Germany, Italy, Spain, Great Britain ).

Inter-ministerial coordination is ensured by the Inter-ministerial Committee on Counter Terrorism (CILAT), chaired by the Minister of the Interior, high-level representatives from the Prime Minister, Minister of Justice, Foreign Affairs, Defense, Overseas Departments and Territories and other high-ranking officials to the head of UCLAT and the Director General of the National gendarmerie.

Finally, terrorism issues are discussed and decisions are made within the framework of the National Security Council under the leadership of the Prime Minister, in which the Minister of Justice, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Ministers of the Interior and Defense are personally involved. Information support is mainly carried out by two departments of the National Police, one of which is in charge of general information on all issues related to domestic terrorism and its possible consequences on the international plane, and the second - monitors the actions of foreign terrorist groups or groups inspired from abroad on the territory of the country. ... Nevertheless, other services also collect information through their channels, in particular, counterintelligence and military intelligence. All other entities of the National Police, especially the Air and Border Police and the City Police Directorate, as well as the National Gendarmerie, contribute to the prevention and suppression of terrorism.

Repressive actions are mainly provided by the criminal police, who conduct investigations. As for the special forces, anti-terrorism units operate in France, which carry out their activities on the basis of the experience accumulated by the anti-bandit formations that have functioned over the past decades with large units of the national police (for example, in Paris, Lyon, Marseille).

In the capital, the fight against terrorism and banditry is carried out by the anti-bandit brigade of the Paris prefecture of the police, from which in 1972 a search and action brigade was formed, which at that time consisted of 37 people and was called the brigade for combating criminal gangs or brigades anti-commando. This unit is formed from the most trained employees of the various services of the Paris prefecture of the police, and the system of occupations is dominated by various forms of improving shooting skills (accuracy and speed). The brigade is capable of operating outside the country. In 1976, as part of the Parisian brigade against banditry, a special sector for combating terrorism was created, which includes three groups with a total of 25 people, which was supposed to strengthen the search brigade and conduct actions.

The search and action brigade can operate quickly throughout the country, and the police assault squads to combat banditry and terrorism carry out tasks of a local nature.

The counter-terrorism service also exists within the Foreign Ministry, consisting of operational units coordinating their activities thanks to the efforts of the official travel agency and the security of VIPs.

In the army, the gendarmerie is engaged in the fight against terrorism. Its status is of interest in that, on the one hand, it is an integral part of the country's armed forces, and on the other, it is a police formation, operatively subordinate to the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Ministry of Justice, whose employees are engaged in the "civil" sphere, the prevention, suppression and disclosure of crimes, and on behalf of the judicial bodies and participate in their investigation. (In some ways, the status of the internal troops of Russia is similar to the status of the gendarmerie). To counter terrorists, back in 1973, immediately after the massacre in Munich, a special unit was created - the Intervention Group of the National Gendarmerie (GIGN). From the point of view of domestic experience, we are talking about the special forces of the French internal troops. Its recruitment is carried out on a voluntary basis through a multi-stage selection from among gendarmes with at least four years of service. The average age of the applicant is about 35 years. The scope is almost the whole world. The group is equipped with the most modern technical facilities. Over the 20 years of its existence, the GIGN conducted over 600 military operations, during which more than 250 hostages were freed, and not a single fighter of the group was killed, which testifies to the highest professionalism. An important area of ​​activity of the GIGN is to assist the security services of different countries in the creation and training of similar formations.

In exceptional cases, such as, for example, the threat of explosions in crowded places or similar actions that can entail a large number of human casualties, the government actively uses army units equipped with armored vehicles to support police actions. Their task in such situations is mainly to patrol in order to maintain public order, suppress manifestations of panic, and exert psychological pressure on terrorists, which is also an important circumstance and can prevent some bloody actions. For example, the authorities resorted to help from the military during a series of explosions in the capital in the summer of 1995, including in the metro, organized by Algerian extremists from the “Armed Islamist Group”. Then the victims of these acts were about two hundred people, eight of whom were killed. (A year later, something similar was happening in Moscow.)

The creators of the French counterterrorism system attach great importance to the introduction and use of modern technical means in their practice, primarily at train stations, airports and other crowded places, as well as the use of specially trained dogs to detect explosive devices and neutralize the actions of dangerous criminals.

With regard to the legal basis for the activities of all these numerous units and services, internationally, France has consistently ratified the Tokyo Convention of 1963, the Hague Convention of 1970, the Montreal Convention of 1971, the Protocol on the Safety of Airport Platforms, signed in Montreal in 1988. , The European Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism of 1977. Nationally, the fight against terrorism is regulated primarily by Law No. 36-1020 of September 9, 1986 on the fight against terrorism and encroachments on state security.

Israel has accumulated vast experience in combating all kinds of violent extremist manifestations. The history of this state and the violence have become something inseparable, and at the same time it is not only about what happened after 1947, but about events in a wider historical and geographical context. The past of the Middle East is literally permeated with a spirit of violence. It is this region that can be considered the birthplace of terrorism in the modern sense of this term (the activities of the Jewish terrorist sect of the Sicarii and the Islamist sect of assassins, not to mention the numerous manifestations of state terror). Such traditions not only exist today. In modern conditions, while transforming, do they acquire new forms? Half a century history of the present

Israel and terrorism form a single whole. The state was created in the conditions of a fierce political struggle, and its entire existence is a permanent conflict with the Islamic community, which has adopted terrorism as the main means of achieving its goals. However, one should not forget that the Jews, following the example of their ancient predecessors - the Sicarii, never renounced this weapon, especially during the struggle for independence in the 30-40s of the XX century? The consequence of all this has been the imparting of special specific qualities to Middle East terrorism that distinguish it from European or American terrorism. First, it is largely of a state nature, using the system of official "sponsorship": from the very beginning of their vigorous activity, Arab terrorists received full support from neighboring states (Egypt, Syria, Jordan) and acted as an instrument of a big political game. thanks to which terrorism acquired the character of a full-fledged war. For many years, the Arabs adhered to the concept that Israel should be destroyed and also the principle of the three famous no: no - peace with Israel, no - recognition of Israel, no - negotiations. The El Fattah organization, created in 1965, under the leadership of Yasser Arafat, which became the most powerful in the PLO, also strictly followed this until the beginning.

Secondly, Middle East terrorism, unlike its European counterpart, is based on a religious-ethnic and territorial background, rooted in the millennial past.

Thirdly, the aforementioned circumstances predetermine the extreme fierceness of the struggle and the exceptional intransigence, intransigence of the parties, which greatly complicates the process of dialogue and the prospects for a peaceful settlement of the conflict. (Such features allow, by the way, some experts to divide terrorism into two types: European, when the participants after the action want to stay alive and legalize, and Asian - suicidal.)

Proceeding from this, the anti-terrorist activities of the Israeli security services are based on the uncompromising principle of "no concessions to terrorists", because "it has long been proven that concessions to terrorists only generate new terror"! According to Shimon Peres, “The Palestinians cannot defeat Israel. Neither organized nor spontaneous terror, nor explosions, nor hostage-taking, nor hijacking of planes, nor murders will destroy the national spirit of Israel. " Although, of course, such a position, fraught with enormous difficulties and often sacrifices, requires from the authorities exceptional restraint and enormous responsibility to citizens. According to G. Meir, "... no one will ever know what it costs the Israeli government to answer" no! " to the demands of the terrorists and understand that none of the Israeli representatives working abroad is immune from the bomb in the letter, not to mention the fact that any quiet border town in Israel can be (and it has happened) turned into a massacre with the help of a few madmen raised in hatred and in the conviction that they can squeeze out of Israel its ability to remain steadfast in the face of suffering and sorrow. " And further: “But we have learned to resist terror, to guard our planes and our passengers, to turn embassies into small fortresses, to patrol schoolyards and city streets. I felt a sense of pride that I belong to a nation that managed to endure all these sneaky and cowardly blows and not say, “Enough! We have had enough. Give the terrorists what they want, because we can no longer. "

This development of events forced the Israeli authorities to go for the creation of special forces to combat terrorism. General A. Sharon was engaged in this in the 60-70s, whose anti-terrorist brigade carried out a number of successful operations, in particular, the release of 90 passengers of the Sabena aircraft, seized by terrorists at Lod airport in 1972. Later, the General Intelligence Unit was created on its basis. 269 ​​”, whose most brilliant action was Operation Jonathan (Uganda, 1976). Israel is one of the states that are actively conducting operations on their territories and abroad. About 98% (9 out of 10) of all planned terrorist attacks are disclosed at the stage of preparation and 2% are “extinguished” in the process of implementation.

The Israeli experience in the fight against terrorism is valuable not only from a purely technical point of view, but above all in terms of exceptional consistency in pursuing an uncompromising, tough line against extremists, excluding, among other things, their evasion of responsibility. Thus, in the end, all the terrorists who participated in the Munich tragedy were eliminated (although in this case, the government itself, to a certain extent, is likened to terrorists). However, it is valuable for the domestic law enforcement agencies and the errors it contains, ‘Repeated by the Russian authorities in modern conditions. These mistakes are primarily due to the fact that at a certain moment the Israelis began to massively use armed forces in the fight against terrorists from the PLO, de facto giving the criminals the status of a belligerent party. Peres wrote that “when the Israel Defense Forces became involved in direct hostilities with the PLO and other irregular militant groups as a result of the unwise decisions of the Israeli government, blinded by its own desire to change the strategic situation by invading Lebanon. During the offensive, the army used all its operational power (ground, air, naval forces), the latest military equipment, but a very primitive strategy. The impression was that the war was going on between equal adversaries: not a war against terrorists who mercilessly trample on international law, but a war between two opposing camps. With astonishing shortsightedness, the then Israeli government neglected the moral superiority of the Israel Defense Forces, an advantage that has always been one of the main components of the national strength of the Jewish state. Although the war forced the PLO to withdraw from Lebanon, it did not remove it from the national scene as a decisive factor in determining the mood of the Palestinian front. ”

An absolutely similar mistake was made by the Russian federal government, sending troops to Chechnya in 1994 in an attempt to solve a similar problem by purely forceful means, without taking into account ethno-political factors, relying only on military power (although in this case there is also a significant difference, in contrast to Lebanon , Chechnya, at least legally, was part of the territory of the Russian Federation). This led to two most important consequences, namely, to the fact that, firstly, the action to restore the constitutional system and establish law and order turned into a fierce war, and secondly, it actually legalized the terrorists, creating around them a halo of fighters for national independence. That is, the result was achieved exactly the opposite of what was expected.

The Israeli experience convincingly demonstrates that the main role in the fight against terrorism should be played by specially designed services and units, relying on all the variety of methods, methods and means in their arsenal and using flexible tactics. The involvement of the armed forces should not, however, be completely excluded, but they can only perform auxiliary functions (guarding important objects, supporting anti-terrorist operations, ensuring the psychological effect of being present in the most likely places of holding actions, etc.).

3. Interdepartmental and interstate coordination in the anti-terrorist sphere. As the analysis of the available materials shows, the modern period is characterized by the fact that, despite certain differences in approaches to organizing the fight against terrorism, both on a broad international and regional or bilateral basis, there has been a steady tendency in the world to strengthen the coordination of anti-terrorist activities. In addition to the fact that a number of international legal acts have already been adopted, to which many states have acceded (Tokyo Convention on Crimes and Certain Other Acts Committed on Board Aircraft, 1963; Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft, 1970; Hague Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation, 1971; Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Persons, including Diplomatic Agents, 1973; International Convention against the Taking of Hostages 1979; European Convention on the fight against terrorism in 1976, etc.), coordination is carried out at the level of departments and governments of interested countries within the framework of existing international unions, for example, the EU. Thus, in 1976, the EEC created the TREVI system (terrorism, radi calization, extremism, violence international) as a coordinating body for the fight against terrorism and other manifestations of radicalism, which is still in effect and is developing to this day. It includes ministers from the countries of the Community dealing with immigration, counter-terrorism, drug problems, including the ministers of justice and the interior. Since 1987, the USA, Canada and Austria have taken part in the work. The system includes a conference of ministers of the interior and ministers of justice, to which representatives of other interested departments, including representatives of the special services, are invited. The direct organization of interaction is entrusted to specialized groups: TREVI - 1 (interaction of EU law enforcement agencies); TREVI - 2 (issues of operational use of special police units, their special training and equipment); TREVI-3 (suppression of international drug trafficking, money laundering, etc.); TREVI - 4 (interaction within the Schengen group). To organize the interaction of TREVI with the national police services, back in 1977, a liaison office was established to exchange operational information. By the end of the 1980s, all anti-terrorist activities on the territory of the Union were essentially carried out through the channels of the system. In addition, in accordance with the provisions of the Maastrichst Treaty, in November 1993 it was decided to create a new governing body in the EU structure - the Council of Ministers of Justice and Home Affairs. The structure of the new body was formed by TREVI groups, renamed committees. The Council was given the right to make decisions that are binding on the law enforcement authorities of the EU member states. Within the Union, the Ministry for Combating Terrorism, Radicalism and Extremism has also been created as a coordinating body (within its structure there is a Committee of High Officials, a specialized group and three independent departments), and a national communications bureau operates, which ensures the exchange of operational information. In the states of the embassies of the EU member states in various countries, the position of an adviser on the problems of combating terrorism is provided. Such a system could serve as a scheme for cooperation in this area within the CIS.

In conclusion, it should be noted the importance of, albeit a small, but still available, experience of Interpol in the fight against terrorism. Moreover, our country has been a member of this organization for several years, and given the internationalization of terrorism, its role will sharply increase in the near future.

Until the mid-1980s, the international police organization, fearing to be accused of violating its own charter prohibiting it from interfering in politics, practically did not deal with the problem of terrorism, since the latter traditionally belonged to the category of precisely political crimes. However, the development of international crime forced to reconsider this point of view. In September 1984, the General Assembly in Luxembourg approved new Guidelines to enable Interpol to operate when terrorists operate outside their national territory. At the Belgrade session in 1986, the Interpol Principles on Combating International Terrorism were approved, and at the beginning of 1987, the Anti-Terrorism Group (Group on Counter-Terrorism), or as it is also called TE, was created in the General Secretariat. It had four police officers and one leader in its composition. As Secretary General R. Kendall remarked on this occasion: “It took 15 years from the day of our disgrace at the Olympic Games in Munich in 1972 to do what could be done in one or two years”.

By the beginning of 1988, little but significant progress had been made and a framework had been established for the responsibilities of the group's staff, not only in dealing with current international terrorist crimes, but also in specific areas: the relationship between drug trafficking and terrorism, civil aviation issues, explosives and firearms. , computer information, special reports and reports, international alerts, symposia on international terrorism, special events and the expansion of coherent activities and organizational contacts in terms of ensuring compliance with international law. Member countries are willing to use Interpol's channels on an ever-increasing scale for the useful exchange of police information on terrorism and crime in general.

The Anti-Terrorism Group believes that its main function is to provide services to the member countries of the Organization. To this end, each member country and, to some extent, each region must determine how the Organization can be useful to it, since its main task is the useful exchange of police information and international cooperation in the fight against international criminal terrorism.

The role of Interpol in the fight against terrorism will increase, because, as noted ten years ago in the report of the General Secretariat on the activities of the anti-terrorism group, presented at the 57th session of the General Assembly in Bangkok in November 1988, for the foreseeable future, “international terrorism will remain a major problem for law enforcement. International cooperation is necessary and Interpol can serve as one of the means of coordinating this international cooperation. ”

Analysis of international experience allows us to draw the following conclusions.

1. The main principle in the fight against terrorism for the Russian law enforcement agencies should be extreme rigidity combined with the necessary flexibility, as indicated by the practice of most European states.

2. Maximum results in anti-terrorist activities can be achieved only if there is a well-coordinated system that includes special forces focused on conducting military operations and various services that comprehensively support their work - coordination, analytical, legal, technical, operational and others. In Russia, such a system is at the stage of formation and it could be based on the European experience.

3. The efforts of one state to prevent terrorism are not enough; coordination at the interstate level is required. The most urgent tasks for the Russian Federation on this path are: a) interaction with the CIS countries, a model of which could be the experience of the EU anti-terrorist structures, b) closer cooperation with Interpol, of which Russia has been a member since 1990.

The experience of many foreign states in the fight against terrorism, of course, must be studied, and, having studied, it should be used for the benefit of society. The political leadership of the main countries of the European West and the United States views countering terrorism as one of the most important national tasks.

The main areas of activity in this area are:

improving the legal framework;

strengthening interaction between the relevant federal authorities;

the formation of special units and an increase in the number of employees of federal structures dealing with the problem of terrorism, improvement of their technical equipment.

The policy of most Western states is based on the following principles: not to make any concessions to terrorists, to exert maximum pressure on countries that support terrorism, to fully use the forces and means at their disposal, including military ones, to punish terrorists, provide assistance to other states, and interaction with them.

So, for example, in the USA for the period from 1958 to 1999. more than 40 legal acts were adopted, in varying degrees, related to strengthening the fight against terrorism, including a special Presidential Directive (June 1995) and the Law on Strengthening the Fight Against Terrorism (1996).

These legislative acts significantly expand the rights of the federal leadership, law enforcement agencies and state administrations to identify and suppress impending terrorist acts, both in the United States and abroad.

What are the main directions of the fight against terrorism?

First, the rejection of double standards for assessing and using terrorism in foreign and domestic state policy. Terrorism cannot be seen as a form of national liberation movement or religious self-assertion. Countries supporting terrorist organizations and movements should be subject to tough international sanctions, the implementation of which could be monitored by the relevant international structures.

Second, the identification and establishment of strict control by the world community over the activities of international terrorist networks, their centers and headquarters, training bases and other terrorist structures.

Third, the unification of the entire world community against the ideology of terrorism. It is only through joint efforts that it is possible to deprive the ideological grounds of terrorist movements, reduce their social base, and reduce the level of support through information-political and social events. This is achieved by identifying and suppressing the centers of ideological support and support for terrorist movements, public isolation of terrorist groups, depriving them of internal and external support, stratification of the terrorist environment.

An effective fight against terrorism at the state, interstate level is possible only if civil society and all sections of the public join it.

Fourth, the control of the world community over international financial flows. The International Convention on the Suppression of Terrorist Financing can be used as a legal basis. It opens up the possibility of arresting, prosecuting persons involved in the financing of terrorism, taking preventive measures to identify and eliminating the sources of terrorists' income and restricting the movement of such funds across borders. For example, in 2002, in Moscow alone, 14 commercial banks were identified under the control of private organized groups, including 4 banks providing targeted assistance to the leaders of illegal armed groups in Chechnya.

Fifth, strengthening the coordination of anti-terrorist activities at the international level, deepening interaction with foreign law enforcement agencies engaged in the fight against terrorism, creating a single world anti-terrorist center within the UN.

It is necessary to conceptually change the mechanisms of combating terrorism.

Now it is entrusted mainly to the special services, which simultaneously conduct intelligence and counterintelligence activities. The interests of special services in different countries, and even sometimes within the same country, often do not coincide. The fight against terrorism should become a priority function of all law enforcement agencies and law enforcement agencies. Today, as practice shows, the police (militia) bodies of different countries interact most effectively with each other.

Sixth, the development by the Security Council of the Concept of Combating Terrorism that meets modern realities. It should be a system of scientifically grounded, internationally recognized and enshrined in international legal documents provisions on the fight against terrorism.

Over the entire period of its existence, the UN has done a lot to combat terrorism. However, despite the abundance of international legal acts and bodies coordinating the fight against international terrorism in international law, there is still no single universal agreement that defines the concept of international terrorism, its legal nature and responsibility. Nor is there an exhaustive list of acts of international terrorism.

Our analysis of international agreements allows us to give the following list of such acts:

• a) explosions of premises of embassies, missions, missions or headquarters of international organizations;
• b) acts of sabotage on the streets, at airports, at train stations, cultural centers, industrial buildings, in premises for commercial and professional activities, related to the destruction or damage of property and causing bodily harm or death to people;
• c) deliberate use of explosive devices embedded in parcels, parcels, letters and other postal items;
• d) any act of sabotage against public buildings;
• e) conspiracy to commit acts of international terrorism and complicity in them in any form, etc.

In various sources, acts of international terrorism include: hostage-taking, piracy, acts against the safety of civil aviation, as well as the illegal seizure and use of nuclear material. However, due to their special international danger, prevalence and variety of forms of commission, in order to combat them, states, among other things, adopt special conventions, distinguishing them as separate crimes of an international character.

Taking into account the above, I would like to note that a clear conceptual characteristic of terrorism as a social and legal phenomenon, the definition of its features in the modern world will serve as a guideline in order to clearly define the directions, tasks, legal, organizational and resource aspects of the fight against terrorism in the structure of development and implementation of large-scale measures, taking into account the new volumes of threats and challenges that the world community meets at the beginning of the III millennium.

Terror, terrorism is not a new phenomenon, but many new forms of terrorism have appeared in more than one millennium of its existence, and recently society has faced manifestations of computer and biological terrorism. In connection with the rapid development of scientific and technological progress, the emergence of space terrorism is not excluded. Terrorism is multifaceted and exhibits an amazing ability to adapt to changes in the surrounding world. Currently, it poses a threat not only to a single state, but also to humanity as a whole.

As a rule, the immediate goals that are achieved through terror are the following:

elimination (physical elimination) of a state, public, political or religious figure who, in the opinion of individuals or groups of people (corporations, organizations, associations and entire states), by their activities interferes with the achievement of their specific goals;

physical or psychological impact on public authorities and administration in order to induce them to fulfill certain requirements (political, economic, etc.);

disorganization of the normal activities of various bodies and structures, intimidation of the population as a way to prove the inconsistency of the existing government in the state to resist violence, etc.

The overwhelming majority of terrorist acts originate from organized formations, are carried out in conditions of serious funding and preliminary preparation. It is these actions that are accompanied by the most serious consequences.

Terrorism at the beginning of the 21st century is unanimously regarded as one of the most dangerous phenomena threatening international security in the context of its connection with transnational organized crime and requiring the most energetic measures to suppress and eliminate it.

Numerous forums are devoted to terrorism, and a variety of actors, regardless of their profession and competence, strive to be involved in the fight against it.

Meanwhile, the success of responding to any undesirable phenomenon is determined by awareness of it: the definition of its content, boundaries, essence; knowledge of its laws, features of determination, causality, sensitivity to various measures taken.

With all the variety of scientific and other publications on terrorism, international legal and state legal documents on the fight against it, it is necessary to state the absence of a clear uniform understanding of this phenomenon. In international legal documents, legislative acts of states and literature, it is defined extensively, not always unambiguously and, ultimately, vaguely. Definitions of this kind are subject to varying interpretations.

Sometimes it is difficult to distinguish between acts of terrorism and hooligan actions that grossly violate public order, vandalism, murder committed in a generally dangerous way, or other acts. The murder of a state or public figure out of revenge for his specific state or other political activity is also difficult to assess from this point of view as a manifestation of terrorism.

Perhaps we are talking about violations of the law in the course of such activities, gross violation of the rights of people, as a result of which the direct victims subjectively do not find other means to stop the arbitrariness against them. Another thing is such motivation as influencing the adoption by the authorities of decisions that are beneficial to terrorists.

The analysis can be continued, but the general conclusion: in this definition, diverse phenomena are united by one term.

Some legal acts define terrorism as a complex social phenomenon, others practically indicate specific acts classified as terrorist, and still others combine these two approaches.

Terrorist actions can be very diverse; over time, they change and are modified. It is difficult in the law to determine exactly their circle in advance.

When analyzing international legal documents, as well as practice, one has to meet with a wider range of acts of a terrorist nature than is provided for by national legislation, in particular, Russian. We are talking about the illegal seizure of aircraft and other actions against the safety of civil aviation, the safety of maritime navigation; illegal acts related to nuclear materials; destruction and various forms of humiliation of part of the population. Including by committing rape, maiming and turning into a state of dire need of persons of non-indigenous or other nationality, other religion, as well as in other actions.

From these positions, it is more productive in the law, first of all, to single out terrorism on the basis of its general distinctive characteristics and only then give a list of various crimes that fall under such a characteristic. The nature, motivation and circumstances of the latter can vary significantly from person to person and in different circumstances.

The foregoing provides a basis for a comprehensive professional (and not political or publicistic discussion of the initial concept - what is terrorism after all. direct participation in anti-terrorist operations and, as they say, "suffered" the situation of terrorism.

Terrorism is the commission of socially dangerous acts in relation to the life, health of people, the rights and legitimate interests of various subjects for the sake of forcing a third party to take the decisions required by terrorists.

Here, firstly, it is essential to state that there is no conflict between the terrorists themselves and their direct victims. Such victims never happen, they are to blame for the appropriate behavior of terrorists, they are not even characterized by simply victim behavior.

Under this understanding, an act of terrorism does not act as a link in a chain of complex relationships between the perpetrators and their direct victims. If, for example, we talk about murder and non-victim behavior of the victim in a specific situation of deprivation of her life, then when studying the relationship between the killer and the victim in a long time interval, one can see that the murder of the herd is the result of the unlawful and even outright criminal behavior of the murdered person.

Nevertheless, in terrorism, no matter how deep the study into the history of the relationship between terrorists and their direct victims, it will not bring anything new: terrorists, as a rule, do not happen, they are familiar with such victims, and they do not happen in anything, they are guilty of terrorists ...

Citizens and organizations, innocent and not participating in relations between terrorists and "third parties", their rights and interests in this case act as "hostages" of making the decisions the terrorists need.

The outlined approach provides a moral basis for using the most energetic means to suppress specific acts of terrorism and to free innocent people, to protect their lives, health, rights and legitimate interests. The use of the aforementioned means in accordance with the generally accepted approach in law is subject to consideration in the coordinates of the circumstances excluding the crime of the act - the salvation, of course, of innocent victims, the deliverance of the civilian population from the fear of losing loved ones or other losses.

At the same time, when eliminating an immediate terrorist threat, it is always necessary to analyze the relationship between terrorists and the third party to which they are making demands, in order to find out the motivation for terrorist acts, understand their causes, conditions, identify the actors guilty of creating a situation of terrorism and accept adequate legal measures to them. Without this, there can be no effective fight against terrorism.

In the interaction between terrorists and the "third party", we often see moments that give rise to criminal behavior, in the creation and aggravation of which the terrorists and the "third party", or even mainly the latter, are to varying degrees to blame. In particular, it can create conditions unbearable for the life of certain strata of the population, in which such strata, groups, their representatives do not see any other way out to designate and defend their rights and legitimate interests. Including the right to life, especially a dignified one.

However - and this is important to recognize - assaults on life and other criminal acts against people who are not guilty of the behavior of a third party are always crimes that cannot be justified.

Terrorism is one of the dastiest ways to fight. It consists in using the most dangerous forms of violence as a means to an end.

Secondly, a "third party" can be a variety of actors: international institutions, states, political parties, other public associations, the population of the whole state or a smaller territory, various state institutions, political or public figures. For example, intimidation of the population in order to ensure a certain model of its behavior through the use of demonstrative violence against individuals is quite consistent with the understanding of terrorism, which was stated earlier.

At the same time, such facts of the use of violence within the framework of an armed or other conflict between two parties should be distinguished from terrorism, when representatives of one conflicting party harm the representatives of the other party who are actively involved in the conflict. In terrorism, the victims are never involved in a terrorist conflict and the "third party" is usually unaware of such a conflict.

Thirdly, the subjects of demanding a third party are mainly not the perpetrators of specific crimes of a terrorist nature, but their organizers. The perpetrators may not be aware of the specific requirements at all and often die in explosions or other terrorist acts. As a last resort, they only voice the relevant requirements. Exceptions, of course, are rare cases of committing acts of terrorism by individuals.

Requirements are either formulated by the organizers of terrorist acts at each terrorist act, or put forward at some point, and a series of terrorist acts are viewed as convincing confirmation of the corresponding demands and threats. In such cases, it is simply declared that such and such a subject (collective or individual) is taking responsibility.

Thus, from the standpoint of this understanding, it is important to classify terrorism in Russian legislation as a crime against the peace and security of mankind with all the ensuing legal consequences, including the non-application of the statute of limitations.

This is important in conditions when terrorism has assumed an international character and the number of victims of terrorist acts is so great that it is practically impossible to accurately count. And this is especially important at the present time, when at the turn of the century terrorism began to hide behind the actual military aggression of some states against others while veiling the true subjects of such aggression. In such cases, the blame is often laid on various public organizations of a religious or other extremist persuasion, although the leaders of such organizations are trained and controlled by the special services of various states. It is necessary to distinguish between true terrorism and quasi-terrorism, behind which other most dangerous crimes against the peace and security of mankind are hidden.

It should be agreed that terrorism is a specific method of controlling the behavior of subjects to which requirements are imposed. This is a special method of violence used, as a rule, in achieving ambitious goals by organized collective actors.

At the same time, terrorism itself is just a method that happens to be subordinated to the achievement of different goals and is generated by various motives. It is important to see behind the method the motivation, reasons and other circumstances of its use.

Foreign governments are fighting the terrorist threat in two main directions. First, by implementing special and military-technical measures aimed at reducing the effectiveness of terrorist activities. Secondly, by carrying out ideological and socio-psychological measures aimed at enlisting the support of the majority of its citizens in the fight against terrorists, isolating them from the population. At the same time, the successful implementation of such a policy would be impossible without pooling efforts and coordinating the actions of all competent organizations involved in countering terrorist activity. States strive to toughly and consistently combat terrorist manifestations, both at the national and international levels, which is reflected in the laws in force on their territory. In a number of normative acts, one can trace the firm position of the legislative and executive authorities in relation to both individual terrorists and extremist organizations that resort to violence. Such an uncompromising approach, in particular on the part of the United States, France and a number of other states, to the solution of the existing problem of international terrorism is motivated by the fact that the manifestation of the slightest concessions contributes to the rapid growth of the activity of other terrorist groups, activates their activities and tightens the demands put forward.

In all leading Western countries, the state tightly controls the main measures to combat terrorism and suppresses any attempts to propagate terrorist activities. In recent years, the fight against terrorism has acquired a wide scale corresponding to the reality of its threat. Due to this, the law enforcement forces and special services of these countries, promptly reacting to changes in the tactics of the activities of terrorist groups and extremist organizations, are actively developing new forms and methods of combating the terrorist threat. For example, in many Western European countries and the United States, methods have been developed for recognizing terrorists, detecting bombs they planted and various types of weapons hidden by them, obtaining information about terrorists necessary for the police, security agencies, etc. activities, at the present stage, the fight against this phenomenon, which has taken on a global scale, is still not effective enough.

According to Western expert estimates, despite all the measures taken, in 79 cases out of 100 terrorists managed to avoid punishment for their crimes. This is partly due to the effect of surprise and unpredictability in the actions of extremists. They are well equipped with modern means of destruction. The main nucleus carrying out terrorist acts is deeply conspiratorial, highly disciplined and usually consists of fanatics who are ready for any action. On the side of terrorists - speed of action in the most vulnerable places, relying on panic, free choice of suitable targets and a wide range of various means of terrorist execution, as well as unlimited choice of place and time for committing a terrorist act.

The accumulated experience in the fight against terrorism and the analysis of the violent actions associated with it make it possible to single out the most typical terrorist acts, which can be reduced to the following types: hijacking of aircraft with hostages; taking hostages in the buildings of embassies, missions, banks, other large departments and institutions; kidnapping of people, including public and political figures, diplomats, representatives of the propertied classes, party leaders, members of affiliated organizations; murder; explosions of bombs in buildings, vehicles and other places of mass gathering of people, laying of explosives
devices in parcels, parcels, letters, etc .; threats and blackmail of committing a terrorist attack.