Strategic Incapacitation and the Policing of Protest since 9/11
From Escalated Force to Negotiated Management
Characteristics of Strategic Incapacitation
Conclusion
Differences between Negotiated Management and Escalated Force
Negotiated Management
Escalated Force
From Negotiated Management to Strategic Incapacitation
1999 World Trade Organization Protest, Seattle
Police sought to maintain law and order through denying first amendment rights, frequently resorting to mass and unprovoked arrests, and the use of force
Encouraged active cooperation between police and protesters through the use of a standardized permitting system
Negotiated Management places high priority on the protection of First Amendment Rights and increased tolerance for community disruption by encouraging communication
"On-the-job troubles" such as deaths, injuries, and property damage gave rise to "in-the-job troubles" ; which encouraged police to search for an alternative approach
Reduced "on-the-job" and "in-the-job" troubles, as well as benefited newly professionalized social movement organizations
Disagreements were settled through negotiation and compromise
Police used as little force as necessary to protect people and property
"On-the-job" troubles included hundreds of arrests, millions of dollars in property damage, and disruption and failure of the WTO meetings
"In-the-job" troubles included resignation of the Seattle chief of police, a lost re-election campaign for the Mayor, city council report that criticized police and several lawsuits against the city
Failure of negotiated management is attributed to several organizational and tactical factors
The inability of Seattle Police to properly prepare for contingencies and allocate resources necessary to control unpredictable tactics employed by direct action protesters
Police could find no one with whom to negotiate from groups using leaderless, affinity group organizational structures
Police were also unable to infiltrate groups, due to close knit nature of groups and because of local laws adopted during negotiated management period that prohibited police surveillance of groups that had not yet committed a crime
Even though the protesters' goal was to "shut down" the WTO meeting was widely known, police only had limited ideas of how this would happen
Police could not predict the outcome of group decisions or disrupt communications between potentially unruly protest groups that utilized consensus and decentralized decision-making procedures.
New Penology Philosophy
Conceives crime as systemic, rather than individualized and stresses the need to identify potential victims and preemptively protect them
After 9/11, security and neutralization of threat became central focus of law enforcement
First Amendment Rights
During the escalated force period police tended to ignore First Amendment rights of all protestors.
During the negotiated management period, police stated that their highest priority was to respect the First Amendment even for those that expressed unpopular messages.
Now, when applying strategic incapacitation police openly declare that only protestors who agree in advance to engage in the permitting process and follow police-determined guidelines will be accorded protection of their rights to free speech and peaceful assembly
Tolerance for Community Disruption
When applying the escalated force strategy, police usually refused to allow disruption tolerating only occasionally the most police, orderly forms of public dissent.
The negotiated management strategy allowed for community disruption so long as it was prearranged through the permitting process.
With strategic incapacitation police now selectively determine in advance the locations, times and behaviors that will be tolerated.
Communication
Under the escalated force strategy police refused to formally communicate with protesters before or during demonstrations.
The negotiated management strategy used the event permitting process to adopt ope, two-way communication between police and protesters in order to mutually orchestrate events including the negotiation of unexpected details arising during events.
Use of Surveillance
Under escalated force police utilized surveillance, often by means of infiltration or informants, to gather intelligence that identified influential or radical individuals and groups and their organizational affiliations.
When using the negotiated management police relief much less on surveillance and instead used the event permitting system to gather information directly from protest organizations themselves
Surveillance is used extensively in current applications of strategic incapacitation with some similarity to escalated force.
The failures of negotiated management and the increased focus on security since 9/11 led US police agencies to adopt new protest management strategies
The analysis presented here examined three distinct strategies of protest policing - escalated force, negotiated management and strategic incapacitation - that have been employed during different time periods over the last 50 years