Though Britain and France have faced a similar threat from Islamist terrorism in the years following September 11 2001, they have often responded in different ways to the challenges it posed. This groundbreaking work offers the first in-depth comparative analysis of counterterrorist policies and operations in these two leading liberal democracies. Challenging the widely held view that the nature of a state's counterterrorist policies depends on the threat it is facing, Foley suggests that such an argument fails to explain why France has mounted more invasive police and intelligence operations against Islamist terrorism than Britain and created a more draconian anti-terrorist legal regime. Drawing on institutional and constructivist theories, he develops a novel theoretical framework that puts counterterrorism in its organisational, institutional and broader societal context. With particular appeal to students and specialists of International Relations and Security Studies, this book will engage readers in the central debates surrounding anti-terrorist policy.

‘This is a thought-provoking and exceptionally well-researched book. It is essential reading for anyone interested in terrorism or European security.’

Richard J. Aldrich - University of Warwick

‘With impressive command of both history and theory, Frank Foley addresses a critical but surprisingly neglected question: why would two major Western democracies facing similar threats of terrorism respond so differently? His original and persuasive explanation, based on an astute analysis of Britain and France, is that national counterterrorism policies are filtered through dense layers of norms, institutions, experiences, and routines that produce divergent outcomes.’

Martha Crenshaw - Senior Fellow, Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC), Stanford University

‘In his outstanding book, Frank Foley shows convincingly how and why different institutions, norms and routines made Britain and France respond so differently to a common threat. This is a major scholarly study in a field too often predisposed to quick policy analysis.'

Peter J. Katzenstein - Walter S. Carpenter, Jr Professor of International Studies, Cornell University

'[Foley] explains away dense and deadening legislation with a light touch, illuminating areas of contention with reference to popular cases. This makes an otherwise scholarly study readily accessible to a general audience.'

Source: The Spectator Online

‘Countering Terrorism [in Britain and France] is the product of extraordinarily high-quality scholarship. Outstanding interview material - though often unidentified, for ethical reasons - is blended with a tight theoretical frame to produce an account that is persuasive and powerful.’

Stuart Croft Source: European Political Science