An exploration of the motivating factors for terrorism

1. What Motivates Terrorism?
Jeremiah Granden: INTA 6103

2. Primary Texts
• Andrew H. Kydd and Barbara F. Walter, “The Strategies
of Terrorism,”
• Robert A. Pape, “The Strategic Logic of Suicide
Terrorism,”
• Jerrold M. Post, Leaders and Their Followers in a
Dangerous World,
• ***Walter Enders and Xuejuan Su, “Rational terrorists
and Optimal Network Structure

3. “The Strategies of Terrorism”
• Costly Signaling
– Terror used to demonstrate commitment and capacity to
inflict harm
• Five Key Strategies
– Attrition
– Intimidation
– Provocation
– Spoiling
– Outbidding
• Terrorism is a rational strategy
• Example – Shining Path
• Counterexample – Aum Shinryko

4. “The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism”
• Suicide terror designed to coerce democracies to
make concessions on matters of self-determination
• Other principle points
– Facet of greater strategic campaign
– On the rise over last twenty years
– Best suited for mid-level goals
– Best defended against by domestic defense tactics
• Suicide terrorism is a rational strategy
• Example – Tamil Tigers
• Counterexample – 2002 Helsinki Mall Bombing?

5. Why terrorism cannot be rational
• Per structural arguments terrorism is a rational strategy
• Power of terrorism stems from outbidding rationality
– Skewing rational valuation by killing and dying makes terrorism
frightening and inspiring
• Optimal network structure requires that individual
terrorists and terror cells embody both the rational
strategist (RS) and the irrational actor (IA)
– Gunman licking blood off the floor (IA) also bears responsibility
for the greater strategic goal (RS)
– Constant interplay of rational and irrational muddle personal and
group conceptions
– Pathologies presumed throughout the system
• Critical Case - Black September

6. Why terrorism cannot be rational
Rational Terror network “Real” Terror network
RS IA
RS RS IA
RS IA
IA
RS IA

7. Leaders and Their Followers in a Dangerous
World
• “Us versus them” mentality is a common feature of
most terror groups. This attracts people who
– see the world in black and white terms
– want a scapegoat
– want to belong
– are action oriented and not prone to reflection
• This “terrorist identity” can be found in all
groups, regardless of affiliation or goals
• Terrorism is a way of coping with psychological
turmoil
• Example: Continuity Irish Republican Army?
• Counterexample: Kurdistan Workers’ Party?

8. The dilemma that positing a terrorist identity
creates
• Terrorists because they belong to terror groups
or belong to terror groups because they are
terrorists?
– Terror group as siren drawing psychologically
wounded people in to do its bidding
– Terror group as empty space where terrorists inscribe
their pathologies
• Critical Case: 2005 London Attacks
– Were attackers Jihadi fighters or disaffected
immigrants?
– Different policy recommendations for each

9. Questions
• Which of these arguments, if either, do you find
satisfying?
• Are terrorists rational actors?
• How can you use policy to limit or remove the
motivation to commit terrorist acts?