Allying to Kill: Terrorist Intergroup Cooperation and the Consequences for Lethality

Horowitz, Michael C.; Potter, Philip

doi:10.2139/ssrn.1787599

Cited by 36 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, regarding the role of democratization, this study uncovers no effect, in line with findings by Horowitz and Potter (2013) and Asal and Rethemeyer (2008a). However, a more precise outcome emerges from an analysis that features a non-monotonic relationship, acknowledging that very autocratic regimes can deter militant groups through suppression, while very strong democracies deter them by giving the aggrieved an alternative channel to express their views.…”

Section: Environmentsupporting

confidence: 76%

“…If these strong groups choose to act though, they likely are very effective. These contradicting theoretical predictions are reflected in empirical literature, such that group size and group allies appear to have positive impacts on fatalities, but state sponsorship is associated with fewer fatalities (Asal and Rethemeyer 2008a;Horowitz and Potter 2013).…”

Section: Capacitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This differentiation highlights that, for instance, the positive impact of group size on lethality documented by Asal and Rethemeyer (2008a) actually is a positive impact on activity; lethality is much less affected by group size. Finally, this article helps shed light on the complex relationship between the level of democratization and militant group activity (Horowitz and Potter 2013) by highlighting that groups from countries with intermediate levels of democratization are significantly more lethal than groups from either very autocratic or very democratic countries.…”

Section: Militant Groupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The activity and lethality of militant groups: Ideology, capacity, and environment

Mierau¹

2014

Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What determines the activity and lethality of militant groups? To answer this question, a two-step count method disentangles activity and lethality in terms of ideology, capacity, and environmental factors. A first step assesses the determinants of group activity, measured by the number of incidents in which a group was involved. The second step considers the number of fatalities, conditional on the number of incidents.Similar factors drive militant group activity and lethality, but some links are stronger than others. Specifically, ideological factors are particularly strong determinants of lethality; capacity and environmental factors matter more for activity.

show abstract

Section: Environmentsupporting

confidence: 76%

Section: Capacitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Militant Groupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The activity and lethality of militant groups: Ideology, capacity, and environment

Mierau¹

2014

Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One line of research on suicide bombing involves understanding its spread from the early 1980s, when the use of suicide bombing was limited to a few groups and instances (the best-known being Hezbollah in Lebanon), to the present, when dozens of groups use suicide bombing around the world. Expertise in suicide bombing could be spreading through both direct connections, where groups communicate with each other or even ally with each other (Asal & Rethemeyer 2008, Horowitz & Potter 2014, and indirect connections, where groups learn through observing the behavior of other groups. One infamous example of indirect diffusion is the suicide vest, an innovation by the Tamil Tigers whose description in the media facilitated its spread to terrorist groups around the world.…”

Section: How Do Societal Factors Influence the Adoption Of Suicide Bomentioning

confidence: 99%

The Rise and Spread of Suicide Bombing

Horowitz

2015

Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article reviews the existing literature, mostly from political science, on suicide bombing. A prominent weapon in the toolkit of violent nonstate actors for a generation, suicide bombing generates a significantly larger number of casualties per attack than other uses of force by terrorist groups, insurgents, and others. Scholars tend to agree that no single reason leads individuals to become suicide bombers. Moreover, groups use suicide bombing for strategic reasons-although whether suicide bombing campaigns make groups more likely to achieve their goals is unclear. Scholars continue to disagree about what drives groups to adopt or eschew suicide bombing, including the role of religion. Although groups that are more religious are significantly more likely to adopt suicide bombing, the underlying cause and its relationship to particular religious ideologies (such as Salafi Jihadi movements) versus the structure of religious groups remain matters of contention.

show abstract

“…Their existence contributes to increase opportunities for groups to improve their operational efficiency [15] and lethality [16] as well as it helps them to gain followers, provides a natural bridge for the diffusion of tactical knowledge [17] or brings new funding channels. Ultimately these alliances give them power and ability to act when its structure is limited or threatened.…”

Section: The Impact Of Terrorist Intergroup Cooperationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The future of counter-terrorism in Europe. The need to be lost in the correct direction

Navarro

Villaverde²

2014

Eur J Futures Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Terrorism is a clear context of rapid change, greater complexity and genuine uncertainties. A review of the events that have been going on in Europe shows a great evolution of the threat and the continuous emergence of new scenarios, like those represented by "lone actors" and "foreign fighters". The complexity of the situation is due to the variety of quantitative and qualitative factors involved. Uncertainty is a key characteristic of our societies, generating fears that must be managed by governments and security institutions. Before defining new policies it is needed an analysis of the current situation of the phenomenon and its possible evolution. Critical thinking, loads of imagination, creative foresight and horizon scanning methodologies would be the pillars of the research. Policies are usually led by events and by social perception of risk. We propose a holistic approach that integrates the lessons learned from the past with modern foresight methodologies, intelligence analysis, evidence-based policing, and decision-making models. It is possible to manage our uncertainties in the present, a time and a matter in which perhaps we feel lost, but we must be sure that we are walking in a correct direction.

show abstract

Allying to Kill: Terrorist Intergroup Cooperation and the Consequences for Lethality

Cited by 36 publications

References 50 publications

The activity and lethality of militant groups: Ideology, capacity, and environment

The activity and lethality of militant groups: Ideology, capacity, and environment

The Rise and Spread of Suicide Bombing

The future of counter-terrorism in Europe. The need to be lost in the correct direction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About