Those involved in the counterterrorism enterprise are confronted with non-state actors who do not adhere to the traditional principles of statecraft and diplomacy under international law in dealing with conflict and waging war. They aim to expand their arsenal of weapons but are not organized like traditional military units with uniforms and defined geographic areas of occupation and operation. They use modern technology for global communication and work in secret cells that may plan and implement violent attacks autonomously throughout the world. They pose a major challenge for cumbersome, large-scale, traditional hierarchies that characterize the nation-state, especially armed forces, security, and police establishments that emphasize a complex layering of top-down command and control. Alternative means of addressing the threat of terrorism are required. This involves the creation of both formal and informal networks of counterterrorist cadres that can identify terrorists and detect their operations before attacks occur, engaging in preemptive acts or quickly responding to terrorist acts. The risk of developing such alternatives to traditional policing and military action is that legal and tactical parameters for intelligence-gathering, investigations, surveillance, apprehension, custody, and case processing are unclear. This challenge is compounded under the need to develop an international network of cooperation with the systems and legal frameworks of other countries. Effective oversight of the counterterrorist enterprise must be achieved under a unity of purpose and tactics that are acceptable under international human rights conventions. Tactics that are clearly acceptable include information exchange, education about the nature of terrorists as violent criminals, deterrence and target hardening, and the elimination of the root causes of their actions. 4 references