Suchergebnisse

What prompted states to participate in the War on Terror? Conventional wisdom concludes that the endeavor is an unpopular exercise in US imperialism, yet this argument is juxtaposed with the overwhelming amount of international support in its initial stages. Additionally, while there is a great depth and breadth of information on aggregate terrorist attacks and their theoretical motivation, there is relatively little with regards to counterterrorist behavior. This study represents the first of its kind to examine from a global perspective the counterterrorist behavior of states by linking it to the conflict theories of general and immediate deterrence. The results will show how democratic characteristics inhibit military commitment while alliance obligations act as an outside constraint that engenders preemptive behavior. However, once committed militarily, state capabilities are the main influence on the level of preemptive action applied. This analysis supports the utilization of traditional conflict theories when examining state counterterrorist behavior. ; Publisher PDF

What prompted states to participate in the War on Terror? Conventional wisdom concludes that the endeavor is an unpopular exercise in US imperialism, yet this argument is juxtaposed with the overwhelming amount of international support in its initial stages. Additionally, while there is a great depth and breadth of information on aggregate terrorist attacks and their theoretical motivation, there is relatively little with regards to counterterrorist behavior. This study represents the first of its kind to examine from a global perspective the counterterrorist behavior of states by linking it to the conflict theories of general and immediate deterrence. The results will show how democratic characteristics inhibit military commitment while alliance obligations act as an outside constraint that engenders preemptive behavior. However, once committed militarily, state capabilities are the main influence on the level of preemptive action applied. This analysis supports the utilization of traditional conflict theories when examining state counterterrorist behavior.

In this article, we examine how changes in the status of women affect the intensity of terrorism by using three novel approaches. First, we link terrorist ideology more directly to women's status using a well-tread topic in feminist literature that is rarely applied to political violence: misogyny. Second, we provide more explicit linkages to misogyny by disaggregating terrorist ideology into four typologies (ethnonationalist, religious, right-wing, and left-wing), arguing that the first three have strong themes of masculinity and patriarchy; ideologies when taken to their extremes distill into misogyny. Finally, previous efforts to study gender equality frequently suffer from imprecise theory and concept stretching. We sidestep this issue by instead focusing on women's status and employ a new series of measures that broaden our understanding of women's status from a rights-based approach to one that includes women's security, inclusion, and legal rights. We do this by disaggregating 634 terrorist organizations to determine whether the level of specific women's status indicators affects the frequency of violence from specific terrorist ideologies. We test this on a sample of 185 countries from 1970 to 2014 and find that increases in women's security provoke violence from ethnonationalist and religious groups while increases in women's legal rights incite violence from right-wing groups.

In this article, we examine how changes in the status of women affect the intensity of terrorism by using three novel approaches. First, we link terrorist ideology more directly to women's status using a well-tread topic in feminist literature that is rarely applied to political violence: misogyny. Second, we provide more explicit linkages to misogyny by disaggregating terrorist ideology into four typologies (ethnonationalist, religious, right-wing, and left-wing), arguing that the first three have strong themes of masculinity and patriarchy; ideologies when taken to their extremes distill into misogyny. Finally, previous efforts to study gender equality frequently suffer from imprecise theory and concept stretching. We sidestep this issue by instead focusing on women's status and employ a new series of measures that broaden our understanding of women's status from a rights-based approach to one that includes women's security, inclusion, and legal rights. We do this by disaggregating 634 terrorist organizations to determine whether the level of specific women's status indicators affects the frequency of violence from specific terrorist ideologies. We test this on a sample of 185 countries from 1970 to 2014 and find that increases in women's security provoke violence from ethnonationalist and religious groups while increases in women's legal rights incite violence from right-wing groups.

As the coronavirus reaches developing countries in Africa and Asia, the pandemic will have effects beyond public health and economic activity. As the disease wreaks its havoc in areas poorly equipped to handle its spread, terrorism likely will increase there as well. We are political scientists who study the developing world and political conflict. Our recently published research identifies a potential link between the pandemic and an uptick in violence. We find that food insecurity – the lack of both financial and physical access to nutritious food, which leads to malnutrition and undernourishment in a population – makes citizens angry at their governments. Citizens conclude that their political leaders are either unable or unwilling to ease their suffering. This anger gives terrorist groups opportunities to recruit new members by providing them a violent outlet for venting their frustrations. In many cases, terrorist organizations do what their governments can't or won't do: give people the food and money they badly need to survive.