Terrorism and Counter Terrorism

Are Terrorists Rational? The tactics and strategies of terrorism

Dr. Michelle CowleyApplied Social Sciences

University of Southampton

Overview of the theme ‘Terrorism and Counter terrorism’

Lecture 4: Are Terrorists Rational? The tactics and strategies of terrorism

Lecture 5: Terrorism and Peace: Northern Ireland (A case study)

Lecture 6: Counter terrorism: Can the psycho-social sciences help us to tackle terrorism?

Seminar 2

Defining terrorism after September 11th

“‘Terrorism’ is a fiercely political word’ (Silke, 2003, p.xv)

‘the systematic employment of violence and intimidation to coerce a government or community into acceding to specific political demands’

(The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, 1993; cited in Rathbone, & Rowley, 2002, p.9)

‘terrorism is a technique for inducing fear by intimidation’

(Koslow, 1998, p.18)

Difficulties in developing theoretical frameworks of terrorism…

No consensus about what the definition of terrorism should be…

Difficult to ensure high quality research: sometimes dangerous to collect data (only a handful

of active researchers at any one time) Reliability of data; fragmentary and episodic data

(e.g., Schmid & Jongman, 1988) Quantity does not reflect quantity of research since

Sept 11th (Alexander, 2002) However, psychologists have made progress in

understanding how people respond to terrorism

Starting point: What motivates terrorists?

The Terrorist Personality as Abnormal Psychopathy (e.g., Horgan, 2003) The frustration-aggression hypothesis’ (e.g., Friedland, 1992) Narcissism (e.g., Pearlstein, 1991)

The Terrorist Personality as Normal (Remember the political definitions): The ‘rationale’ of terrorism: goals of terrorism Social marginalisation (e.g., Crenshaw, 1992) The Psychology of Vengeance (e.g., Silke, 2003) Status seeking Opportunity (including press-ganging)

Psychology and terrorism

‘it is difficult to understand terrorism without psychological theory, because explaining terrorism must being with analysing the intentions of the terrorist actor …’

(Crenshaw, 1990; p.247)

The intent on ‘vengeance’ as a rational explanation of terrorism (Silke, 2003)

‘the infliction of harm in return for perceived injury or insult…’ (Cota-McKinley et al., 2001)

Largely ignored by psychologists in light of the pursuit of personality constructs to understand why people become terrorists

The desire for revenge has been indicated as one of the most common motivators for joining a terrorist organisation (e.g., Schmid & Jongman, 1988)

The human sense of justice is strong, revenge and retribution are often justified in a darker sense of ‘fair play’ (e.g., Aronson, 1999)

The Psychology of Vengeance (Cota-McKinley, Woody & Bell, 2001)

(1)The willingness to sacrifice and suffer in order to carry out an act of revenge

(2) The willingness to compromise one’s own integrity, social standing, and personal safety

The evidence from psychological studies: Alpha male primate studies (Tudge, 2002) Prisoner’s dilemma study and ‘cheaters’ (Tudge, 2002) Gilligan’s (2000) interviews of personal accounts of why a serious

violent act was carried out Humiliation Disrespect Ridicule

Eamon Collins’ account of vengeance and his decision to become a paramilitary (1997)

The goals of vengeance: What does the terrorist intend to achieve?

To aright a perceived injustice To restore self worth To deter future injustice and unjust persecution

(e.g., Kim and Smith, 1993)

But not everyone is equally likely to carry out an act of vengeance (Cota-McKinley et al, 2001): Men Young men (15-25yrs) Religious belief Paul Morrisey (2000) ‘ wishing it on them…’ [N.B. Evaluate in

light of free-will vs determinism key debate]

The goals of terrorism: Tactics and strategies

‘terrorist groups [often] pursue ‘rational’ goals that would be subverted or nullified by unpredictable behaviour…(Rathbone & Rowley, 2002, p.12)

Well planned, organised and implemented attacks, cost-affect analysis (Koslow, 1998)

Provocation, coercion, intimidation (Koslow, 1998)

For example, to aright or deter social marginalisation (e.g. Israel)

Evaluation 1: Psychological abnormality and terrorism

Psychologically unstable individuals do not achieve significant leadership roles in terrorist organisations (Rathbone & Rowley, 2002)

Famous scientists and statesmen have many similar psychological characteristics: Dedication to a cause greater than oneself (e.g.,

Gandi etc.) Willingness to suffer and sacrifice personal comfort

for a favoured outcome (e.g., final year dissertation etc.)

Emotional detachment from the task at hand (e.g., surgeons etc.)…

Evaluation 1 continued…Status seeking

Regarded as courageous, honourable and important…respect from peers (e.g., PLO; Post & Denny, 2002)

Protection from other members (e.g., UDA; Smith, 1996)

Financial advantages Even ‘romantic’ advantages (e.g., Collins, 1997)

Remember that the ‘terrorist’ label tends not to be used by the marginalised ‘in-group’, for example, ‘freedom fighters’, ‘rebels’, ‘the resistence’ etc…

Evaluation 2: Key debate The Situation vs Personality/Disposition

Opportunity, press-ganging and conscription: Legal political front organisations such as Hamas and

the IRA; Testament to the cause etc. 1980s IRA turned away potential recruits UDA and the competition with State security forces

(Bruce, 1992) Goals of terrorism and goals of vengeance are

psychologically akin, for example, to aright perceived injustices…

Evaluation 3: Overcoming vengeance; Free-will vs Determinism

Remember Morrissey vs. CollinsSuicide bombers

Brain washed; seeking religious martyrdom…

But, Leyla Kaplan and the PKK (the previous woman Turkan- Adiyaman who refused to carry out the attack was executed in front of Leyla... (Ergil, 2001)

Suggested further readings

Alexander, Y. (2002). September 11: US reactions and Responses. Paper presented at the ESRC Conference fo the St Andrews/Southampton Research Project on the Domestic Management of Terrorist Attacks, 19-20 September 2002, Southampton, UK.

Cota-McKinley, A., Woody, W., & Bell, P. (2001). Vengeance: effects of gender, age, and religious background. Aggressive Behaviour, 27, 343-50.

Gilligan, J. (2000). Violence: Reflections on Our Deadliest Epidemic. London: Jessica Kingsley.

Silke, A. (1998). Chesire-Cat Logic: the recurring theme of terrorist abnormality in psychological research. Psychology, Crime, and Law, 4(1), 51-69.

Tudge, C. (2002). Natural born killers. New Scientist, 174(2342), 36-39.