“Globalization” does not involve the demise of nations. Rather it involves an expansion of economic, technological, political, social, and cultural interdependence and interaction that may strain as well as enhance the well-being and security of the residents of countries affected by globalization. The deployment of PMCs by countries to protect their interests in other countries reveals the extent to which globalization simultaneously transforms the exposure and vulnerability of conventional nation-states to politically motivated violence while limiting their capacity to respond to this vulnerability as nation-states. The growth of PMCs within a global market for counterterrorism and counterinsurgency services exemplifies the uneven and unequal outcomes of globalization processes. PMCs are an attractive alternative for nation-states because the private sector is able to respond more rapidly and creatively to unfolding situations than traditional state bureaucracies. Still, this approach to the provision of security in a climate of globalization leaves security under the management of individual nation-states. Under conditions of globalization, responses to terrorism ultimately require both international and intranational formulations in a coordinated manner. This requires the creation and effective action of agencies acting in concert on a series of political, economic, diplomatic, and military levels, with the shared objective of managing collectively experienced risk. The United Nations, NATO, and the European Union are presented as examples of such a paradigm. 29 references