Policing, Counterterrorism, and the Balance of Civil Liberties
Policing, Counterterrorism, and the Balance of Civil Liberties
By Dr. Michael L. Beshears
Introduction
Law enforcement in the United States faces a complex challenge: preventing terrorism while upholding the constitutional rights of citizens. Since the September 11 attacks, this dual responsibility has grown more critical, as terrorism continues to pose both domestic and international threats. High-profile attacks globally underscore the need for strategies that balance public safety with respect for civil liberties (Alblooshi & Kassim, 2022; Alexander & Al-Harbi, 2022; Montasari, 2023).
Counterterrorism Policing Models
Scholars and practitioners identify two primary approaches to counterterrorism policing: centralized, security-focused models, and intelligence-driven, community-oriented models. Centralized models emphasize a unified, highly coordinated police or security force capable of rapid response and proactive intervention. Intelligence-driven approaches prioritize data collection, analysis, and collaboration with local communities and other agencies to detect and prevent terrorist activities before they occur (Alblooshi & Kassim, 2022; Montasari, 2023).
Lessons from Centralized Policing
Countries such as the United Arab Emirates (UAE) utilize centralized policing structures to manage terrorism risks. Police and security forces actively gather intelligence, monitor potential threats, and maintain high visibility in public spaces (Alexander & Al-Harbi, 2022). Citizens are encouraged to remain vigilant, report any suspicious behavior, and adhere to security protocols. Such proactive engagement has proven effective in reducing the success of terrorist operations.
However, centralized and highly militarized approaches carry challenges. Concentrated authority and visible security measures can create tension between law enforcement and the public if citizens perceive that their freedoms are being restricted. While centralization facilitates rapid counterterrorism action, it requires careful management to maintain public trust and prevent perceptions of overreach (Alblooshi & Kassim, 2022).
Intelligence-Led Policing in the United States
In the United States, intelligence-led policing (ILP) aligns with existing community-oriented practices. ILP relies on the collection and analysis of data, interagency collaboration, and information sharing with the public to identify and mitigate potential threats (Montasari, 2023). By analyzing patterns and pre-incident indicators, ILP enables law enforcement to deploy resources where threats are most likely to emerge, allowing for proactive deployment.
Community trust is a cornerstone of ILP. Citizens are more likely to report suspicious activity if they feel confident that police will act responsibly and respect civil liberties. Without public cooperation, actionable intelligence may remain undiscovered, limiting law enforcement’s ability to prevent attacks (Alblooshi & Kassim, 2022). Transparency, accountability, and ethical use of data are therefore essential components of an effective intelligence-led strategy.
Balancing Security and Civil Liberties
Counterterrorism requires that law enforcement not only act effectively but also uphold democratic principles. Excessive reliance on militarized tactics, surveillance, or centralized authority risks eroding public trust and undermining the legitimacy of policing efforts (Alexander & Al-Harbi, 2022). In contrast, intelligence-led approaches foster collaboration, enable preventive interventions, and respect constitutional protections, creating a framework suitable for the American context.
Conclusion
Since 2001, law enforcement has been tasked with integrating counterterrorism into its daily operations. Lessons from centralized models abroad, such as in the UAE, demonstrate the benefits of vigilance and proactive intervention, while also highlighting the importance of maintaining public trust. Intelligence-led policing, with its emphasis on data, interagency collaboration, and community engagement, offers a balanced approach that enables U.S. law enforcement to address terrorism threats effectively while preserving civil liberties.
Figure 1
Comparison of Centralized (UAE) and Intelligence-Led (U.S.) Counterterrorism Policing Models
| Feature | Centralized / Militarized Model (UAE) | Intelligence-Led Policing (U.S.) |
|---|---|---|
| Structure | Unified national police/security force | Decentralized: local, state, federal collaboration |
| Focus | Rapid response, visible deterrence, proactive intervention | Data-driven prevention, pattern analysis, and community engagement |
| Community Role | Primarily compliance and reporting | Active partnership, intelligence sharing, trust-building |
| Use of Technology | Surveillance, monitoring, cyber intelligence | Predictive analytics, interagency data sharing, and AI-assisted threat assessment |
| Potential Challenges | Public perception of militarization, reduced trust, and civil liberty concerns | Requires strong community cooperation, ethical data management, and interagency coordination |
Note. Adapted from Alblooshi & Kassim (2022), Alexander & Al-Harbi (2022), and Montasari (2023). This table highlights key differences between centralized/militarized counterterrorism policing and intelligence-led policing approaches, illustrating their respective strengths and limitations.
References
Alblooshi, F., & Kassim, N. (2022). An analysis of counter-terrorism strategies in the United States and the United Arab Emirates. International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice, 70, 100531. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlcj.2022.100531
Alexander, K., & Al-Harbi, E. (2022). Terrorism and counterterrorism in the UAE. In Facets of security in the United Arab Emirates (pp. 63–75). Routledge. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781003025566-9/terrorism-counterterrorism-uae-kristian-alexander-ebrahim-al-harbi
Montasari, R. (2023). Countering cyberterrorism: The confluence of artificial intelligence, cyber forensics, and digital policing in US and UK national cybersecurity (Vol. 101). Springer Nature. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/366777395_Countering_Cyberterrorism_The_Confluence_of_Artificial_Intelligence_Cyber_Forensics_and_Digital_Policing_in_US_and_UK_National_Cybersecurity
About the Author:
Dr. Beshears holds an associate degree in general studies, dual bachelor’s degrees in criminal justice and psychology from Drury University, a master’s in criminology from Indiana State University, a master’s in health services management from Webster University, and 18 additional graduate hours in public administration. He earned his Ph.D. in Business with a specialization in Criminal Justice from Northcentral University. A retired U.S. Army Master Sergeant with 22 years of honorable service, he was named Non-Commissioned Officer of the Year at two commands and is a graduate of the Army Leadership Academy. As a civilian, he has worked with local sheriff’s departments, a state drug task force, and the FBI. Dr. Beshears brings over 30 years of teaching experience, both online and in traditional classrooms, having instructed more than 50,000 students in criminal justice, corrections, and management. He has also mentored colleagues in online instruction and strategies for student success.
