ABSTRACT
This chapter provides a distinction between direct and indirect responsibility and argues that the international community has, in fact, moved toward a model of indirect responsibility. It presents a two-tiered model of strict liability vis-a-vis terrorism in order to address the new and polymorphic threats. Both before and after 9/11, several commentators highlighted the inadequacy of the current scheme of state responsibility in dealing with terrorism while also placing significant emphasis on the shortcomings of the Nicaragua and Tadic formulation of attribution. The events of 9/11 mark perhaps the most pivotal point in recent memory with regard to international law. The "harboring and supporting" principle has essentially taken over as the linchpin of modern state responsibility vis-a-vis terrorism. Based on the new paradigm, host states can be found responsible for wrongful acts, as would the babysitter who fails to prevent the children under his or her guard from burning down the neighbor's house.
