Treatment of different non-state actors in detention: A legal, moral, and national security analysis

Authors

• Alison P. Raedel, James Madison UniversityFollow

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

Date of Graduation

5-14-2026

Semester of Graduation

Spring

Publish

yes

Degree Name

Bachelor of Arts (BA)

Department

Department of Political Science

First Advisor

Jonathan Keller

Second Advisor

Keith Grant

Third Advisor

Kenneth Rutherford

Abstract

This thesis analyzes state behavior regarding the treatment of non-state actors through three major frameworks: international law, ethical theory, and national security. Two cases are compared: the treatment of al-Qaeda detainees by the United States after the attacks of September 11th, 2001, and the treatment of the Angolan liberation movements by the Portuguese during the Angolan War of Independence. These cases were chosen to assess how the three frameworks apply across different non-state actors, which include terrorist organizations and liberation movements. International law provides a baseline for rights and protections, but it is often selectively interpreted. Just war theory gives ethical guidance and concepts such as supreme emergency provide potential clarity for extreme situations. The national security framework, grounded in realist theory, shows priority for state survival and strategic interests, regardless of the degree of threat. This analysis finds that legal and ethical frameworks offer important constraints on state behavior, but they are consistently overwhelmed by national interests in practice. Across both cases, state behavior shows a pattern in which security priorities reinterpret and override legal and ethical limitations, highlighting the difficulties of international enforcement capabilities.