To understand the world left behind. Host what is one of the examples of the interaction of government and terrorists that you speak of . There are many but one or two of the most emblematic take me back to russia as you know, i have a vast canvas i looked at. Russia echo of the zeroth latin america and others as well. One of the best examples takes place in russia. One example in it to the not the most common but an exaggerated example of what goes on all the time. A person hired by the Security Agency of the government in the insurgent organization and will try not to mention names but you are familiar. They are on the payroll of the government enjoys the insurgency to overthrow the government. One day that person is charged with the tactic is essentially assassinating his bosses and the government which is a Prime Minister during the revolution of russia. The person has a choice. Does he blow his cover or carry out the assignment with all the perils involved . Decided not to blow their cover the ended up killing their boss the Prime Minister. The interactive process at that point was so intense that there are documents produced at the time by the government in the insurgents the says they are fascinated by the other side to try to take them now. Host did 9 11 change our understanding of terrorism max . Huge. A huge. Please read the page redact is what i tell my state students all the time. Not very many people read it but it explains the passion and cahow dash and the post in 9 11 world. I have been using this for the first time and one of my students made a wonderful comment. We are the children of an 11 how can we possibly understand our government might be in fall did what we call terrorism . That shows how difficult the cap from where i come from which is the experience from the 60s and 70s doing research to the passion and to understand the islamic world is what other enemies of the state have have been. The plant the black panthers were terrorist groups . Yes. But the terrorism and false the understanding that the fbi and cia were deeply involved sending their own agents hid to these organizations. A and i have the evidence as well as this is not the secret city more but actually pokey supposed to do at that moment but said they would provoke the situation from within to take it upon himself so that allows the forces of law and order to make the rest. So that happened over and over again. Was 9 11 a political act . That is a complicated story and four historians we dont fully understand yet to tell lee get the distance and the documents that greedy to fully understand. And with the political transition a number of acts not what it seems to be but a climactic movement to a number of different streams. The 1953 cia sponsored overthrow with a capital love to rob it is public information. The irradiance never forgot about that. Is and our support of the shot turning into the ayatollah was the consequence. And many have to put together 9 11 in the political manner. Host professor miller would you define the 1953 overthrow as a terrorist act a statesponsored terrorist act . Yes i would. Indeed i have trouble with the statesponsored i might add because finding the difference between what estate sponsors and what it does but there are instances where it is quite clear. But in terms of the operation here they were directly involved in a campaign. May be a footnote to your question i found out again that the Ayatollah Khamenei was on the payroll of the cia in 1953. As a young theological student who was happy to support the demonstrations to support the overthrow of the government. Host why . Why was he involved . Guest no evidence of his motives may be he wanted money because they were paid to demonstrate with the british mi and cia. Host so why do have trouble with the terms statesponsored . It seems to distance the government from actions that it is responsible for it seems as though that did is actually doing a. Taking rendition except the condition that as i am sure you know, captured insurgents to places to be tortured because were not allowed to do it in this country. I think that is not terrorism that is all the amendment to make that distinction. Host is the patron back to a terrorist act . Guest no. And amazing legislative act. Passed by 99 one o the Bernie Sanders of vermont voted against it there has never been a foe like that in the senate in my lifetime. But it provided an atmosphere that governments can involve themselves of the activities legally. And legal terrorism exists in many governmental situations. Host over the course of u. S. History has there been terrorist tax . One of the best examples in the books is slavery. You referred to it as jim crow laws but they were part of the judicial system ratified it to the Supreme Court which permitted not only segregation but violent acts of regina and public demonstrations which were reported in the newspaper the next day. I found this extraordinarily shocking when i came upon that evidence. I dont know another country that had that longstanding involvement with Political Violence and it was political all the way through precisely because the denial of Voting Rights in to the judiciary that protected those sacks of lynching. As an aside, there was a collection of post cards discovered about 20 years ago which is called without a sanctuary. They were sent by people that are at the lynchings back to their relatives as if they missed a great deal tranten and had described what they had seen some time scotch tape fingernails fingernails, hair singed were taped onto the postcard for a photograph of a africanamerican person hates being from a tree. Horrible stuff. Host given what you just said, can you then justify it reaction to that political terrorism of the jim crow era from africanamericans . Guest again to try to rectify one way or another it is a massive environment of courageous behavior so it seems to me now in retrospect. It is understandable that violent actions provoked violent reactions. I understand it. I dont justify it but i understand it. Host terrorism has been part of the American Experience . Even before that. I hope this is what you ask about is the episode euphemistically referred to as the native american removal which has its origins prior to the revolutionary war but in a sense flowers under president jackson from terrorism and a democracy to talk about registers of this phenomenon. But the evidence is so clear. Family whose homes or lee and perhaps century were ripped out and violently treated and nothing to them in the west. That goes back to the involvement during the revolutionary war. A very complicated story. Host what is this photograph on the cover . Guest that goes back to my editor searching for the appropriate photograph is the scene from what is known because it wusses it strikes me like to understand why a this happened with this carnage. Given the history of the irish english with a conflict how could that have been prevented . Political and violence that sometimes it is only to with catholics and protestants and the british government. How could that have been stopped . The only answer i like to give is the way it was stopped from sender mitchell senator mitchelle e e edh6t until that time because diplomacy works, one of the things i say is i hope that by revealing disinformation is we try to find ways to negotiate in order to achieve the same ends. And in the 1990s and yet how much weve managed that. Host has a u. S. Presence in afghanistan cut down on terrorism . Guest again it is the question i cannot make predictions i cannot help but think of the damage we have done to keep what has happened since then 11 but we are about to leave. I am worried. Yes we have created more problems than we have solved. But that is a guess. Host 1923 wall street was bombed. Who did it and why . Before there was is islamic tenets islamist militants the enemy of the day were the anarchists. In italian who would come to this country before the First World War was very open. They did most anarchist were not violent dash all. And with islamic militants they have always done it symbolically 9 11 with every terrorist act is this is the purpose behind it. So what better position to attacked capitalism choose the wall street as the symbolic partner. Debt was seized at the time. Host and state society is the subtitle of your book here is the book dr. Miller what you teach your . I teach it the foundations of modern terrorism if i could have a moment to tell you i have been teaching this subject since the early 90s. Only a few people in my class until line 11 then hundreds came because everyone wanted to understand suddenly what this was about. I started to shave this is in the early 90s after the lockerbie crash if you remember i was invited to give a paper and led me ultimately to the largest subject but it has grown increasingly important taken up by the media something that i wish never would have happened that one of the things that harrison became a permanent part of western civilization it is a terrible thing to have to it mitt. And what is part of this to become an agent for the Security Services or the in the ground insurgency. You cannot ever know who to trust. That is pretty scary also. That is what we really need to find out. In where he came from. We just had this so she olympics was talk of terrorism and the iron gates around the olympics. What is going on in russia . And then to understand it the analysis goes back it is david mower singlehanded involvement. But to have that power of that sort but he craig is a divided country. With the first russian and state was in kiev in what is now ukraine moscow became the second space st. Petersburg but then there is hardly any difference of the two languages it is the complicated story maybe it is a way to understand it. If you take a vote with the recent referendum has shown us that to Pay Attention antril of that caribbean population is muslim is a population from stalled in the second world war. They have a population with that referendum but whether putin will seek to take over the eastern half of the ukraine. Thereby severing perhaps the western part of the country if it remains to be seen. Host what about chechnya . That works on both sides said they sympathized with i have been talking about. They are engaged with Political Violence themselves and are responsible for outrageous acts the government does its share of the same. When bruited was asserting his power taken over from yeltsin and there was speculation in to this day as to the Russian Security forces tried to blame the chechens. But again there is a mix that i dont think we know the answers to yet. Host in march another professor at duke the foundations of modern terrorism is the book. Tv College Series and it is about 20 minutes. Duke professor ken Judith Kelley, thauorof host to professor Judith Kelley author of the book monitoring democracy. Whd International Election monitoring come in to vote . This started ticking off in the late 80s, beginning 90s. I think, you know, there had been election monitoring under un regimes in different ways, but this is a new flavor of it. Outsiders going in the sovereign state some of turner elections. And the way it came and, the way it rose is very important for understanding how works today. Initially we had all lot of governments toward the end of the cold war that had not been democratic. Now they wanted to show off their intentions to behave more democratically. And so they have an incentive to invite monitors and even though this is sort of a sacred thing. It is the heart of democracy, one could cite. But to invite someone in and say, are we doing hardcore exercise of collective our government the right way, often times especially toward the end of the cold war there was so many oldtimers as continued. They needed external verification. And so invitations starts to become more common. As this was happening this started happening where the ones that had no incentive and the ones that were not with honest intentions started looking obviously bad for not doing so. It became a self declaration of cheating. And so you get this tipping where if you dont invite someone in your look bad. And some more and more countries start inviting monitors and. That starts to create a dilemma of who should be the monitors. Where should this authority reside. There was a push within the united nations. A lot of latin american countries were quite wary. They have the oas which had been doing formal symbolic monitoring for a long time. There was a push back on the u. N. Being the watch dogs and overall monitor. Of fragmentation of the monitoring regime. Became regional organization, ngo that took off this mantle of monitoring which then led to his use down the road of who gets to act as a monster and are they all of equal quality. Where today does the Authority Like . Know where really. There is no accreditation. Should there be . It would probably be a good idea. As the declaration of principles that came out. And some organizations of signon to that, but that does not in any way guarantee that they abide by it. Whether that is actually following the practice is that that declaration seeks. But then if you want to have accreditation process, who does the accreditation . Who watches the monitors . It is the old question. Who is going to be watching the watchman. Host Judith Kelley, when people think of election monitoring that think of jimmy carter. Guest and rightfully so and he deserves a lot of credit for building election monitoring he and his center, people there, and they have been on the forefront of helping to develop the standards and the u. N. As well. They have been major movers the election monitoring, defining what it is. And carter has done all lot of good work, but it is important. No organization out there has complete ability to rid itself of any kind of constraint, you know, and position by concerns about donors. There are other operations within countries. Even jimmy carter faces dilemmas about how to conduct his missions in different countries. Host lets start. Where has it worked well . Guest so, it works best where it is least glamorous, shall we say. And that is the problem from the perspective of organizations are trying to drive and survive. You know, it is for some of these organizations it is their livelihood, what they do. Even when they are within intergovernmental organizations you have some agencies that that is what they do. Tens to work when the train, shall we say, is already in motion. When there are reforms under way, when companies 55 countries want to make reforms and are receptive to people coming in way in advance looking at the systems, providing advice and help the war with the board of registers, helping to build domestic monetary capacities. So this is not a revolutionary tool. It works on the margins to my would say, and places where there is not, you know, a conflict that is just quelled. May still be simmering. Conflict is the worst setting for this type of election monitoring. There were about stoking the violence its not a winnertakeall system. To push further everything. So in the middle ground, the middle countries. That is the way it works best. Host we all remember purple figures. Were there election monitors . Or have there been . Guest it has not been a highprofile thing. It is not a big issue there. Host the condo 2007 im sorry, kenya 2007. That was a big you