Suchergebnisse

A forum contribution notes that the current literature on terrorism involving weapons of mass destruction (WMD) has reached a point where the same ideas are being recycled over and over again while original insights into WMD terrorism are becoming very rare. Although the fortunate absence of any actual WMD attacks by terrorists has kept research within the realm of the speculative, three suggestions are offered for broadening the research agenda. First, there is a need to operationalize WMD terrorism research by informing threat assessments. This can be accomplished by developing standardized methodologies for in-depth qualitative studies of extremist groups &/or synthesizing quantitative & qualitative studies in order to produce useful analytical tools. Second, there is a need for second-order analysis focused on such questions as when terrorists might be capable of using WMD to cause mass casualties & by what mechanisms such an attack might occur. The third area that needs exploration is the potential for & consequences of collaboration between terrorist groups. J. Lindroth

AbstractMass-casualty terrorism and terrorism involving unconventional weapons have received extensive academic and policy attention, yet few academics have considered the broader question of whether such behaviours could pose a plausible risk to humanity's survival or continued flourishing. Despite several terrorist and other violent non-state actors having evinced an interest in causing existential harm to humanity, their ambition has historically vastly outweighed their capability. Nonetheless, three pathways to existential harm exist: existential attack, existential spoilers and systemic harm. Each pathway varies in its risk dynamics considerably. Although an existential attack is plausible, it would require extraordinary levels of terrorist capability. Conversely, modest terrorist capabilities might be sufficient to spoil risk mitigation measures or cause systemic harm, but such actions would only result in existential harm under highly contingent circumstances. Overall, we conclude that the likelihood of terrorism causing existential harm is extremely low, at least in the near to medium term, but it is theoretically possible for terrorists to intentionally destroy humanity.