Targeting the Leader
Which tends to more likely lead to the end of a terrorist campaign: arresting the leader of the group or targeted killing of the leader?
Arresting the leader
Negotiations are more likely to succeed when terrorists want what types of concessions?
When a terrorist group has tangible demands over territory, autonomy etc.
In general, are terrorist campaigns more likely to succeed or fail?
Fail
Why might it be important to sparingly use the label "Al Qaeda" when discussing jihadist groups?
Al Qaeda wants to appear invincible and that it is everywhere. However, many groups that are part of the greater movement have no direct link to Al Qaeda. They may have been inspired by Al Qaeda but they operate independently.
Why is it important to study how terrorist campaigns end?
We can use this information to improve counterterrorism strategies.
What are some examples when the arrest of the leader helped lead to the end of a terrorist campaign?
Shining Path in Peru, Aum Shinrikyo in Japan and the Real Irish Republican Army (RIRA)
Who are "spoilers" in negotiations?
Hardline terrorists who don't want to compromise and may increase attacks to thwart negotiation efforts.
What are two ways to measure the "success" of terrorist campaigns?
length of the campaign's existence and achievement of the group's goals (strategic and political goals)
What are the three components to the Al Qaeda movement?
the core
the network
the periphery (usually have no direct link to core of Al Qaeda leadership)
What is the triad of strategic actors in terrorism from the book?
terrorists
government
audiences (both the constituency of the terrorist group and external audiences such as the constituency of the government)
Why is catching and arresting leaders usually more successful than assassinations?
humiliates the leader, prevents them from becoming a martyr, can interrogate the captured leader and gain intelligence
What percentage of terrorist groups chooses to enter negotiations?
only 18%
How much of the failure of terrorist campaigns is a direct result of counterterrorist strategies?
Not much. In many cases, terrorist campaigns primarily fail because they are self-defeating. The effects of the counterterrorist tactics are usually exaggerated.
What are the three LEAST likely endings to Al Qaeda?
decapitation
success
brute force
What are the four things that all terrorists have in common according to Kurth Cronin? (NOTE: As we have discussed, not everyone agrees with these categories. For example, some argue state actors can use terrorism).
1)political nature of their actions 2)non-state actors 3)symbolic use of force for an audience 4)deliberate killing of civilians
What has tended to happen after Israel assassinates leaders of Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad?
The terrorist groups tend to gain more recruits after the targeted killings
When there is a stalemate in conflicts between terrorist groups and the government, the two sides are more likely to negotiate. What is a stalemate?
When both sides see violence as counterproductive from a political (as opposed to a military) standpoint
What are two famous "success" stories of terrorist campaigns?
Irgun helped to establish Jewish state of Israel
MK in South Africa helped end apartheid
(In both cases, the amount that the terrorist group was directly responsible for the success is questionable. Both groups existed as fringe extremists within a much broader and more peaceful movement.)
Does Kurth Cronin think negotiations are possible with Al Qaeda? Why or why not?
She thinks negotiations are possible with specific Al Qaeda affiliated groups (NOT the core leadership) that may have more nationalist and territorial goals.
What are the six independent variables in the book?
decapitation, negotiations, success, failure, crushing terrorism with force and reorientation
What are the legal, moral and practical considerations of assassinations?
legal: killing someone without a trial, also likely against Geneva Conventions since it is a "preemptive" act
moral: hypocrisy since governments are doing the same thing they criticize terrorist groups for doing
practical: both "audiences" might become upset with the government for conducting a targeted killing
Why are vague statements in agreements helpful, especially in the beginning stages of negotiations?
Both sides can avoid dealing directly with the most sensitive topics
Also helps each side save face with their constituents because they can interpret the agreement however is most politically useful to them
What is marginalization of terrorist groups and what are three ways this can happen?
marginalization= loss of popular support
Three ways can happen:
Ideology becomes irrelevant
Loss of contact with constituents
Backlash against the terrorist group
Why might implosion of Al Qaeda be a likely scenario?
The Al Qaeda movement is huge, decentralized and filled with actors with very different goals. We have already seen splinter groups and the loss of operational control by the core in some cases. ISIS splitting off from Al Qaeda is probably the most prominent example of this.
What type of qualitative case study method does Kurth Cronin use in her book?
Process tracing (see PowerPoint notes from week 13 for an explanation of what this means)