Many of the world’s most infamous terrorist organizations demonstrate clear political aptitude, maintaining highly successful political parties while simultaneously carrying out terrorist attacks. Yet the relationship between terrorism and a group’s political fortune is unclear. Groups like Hamas and Hezbollah appear to have gained significant sup- port as a consequence of certain attacks, most notably those against US and Israeli targets. Other organizations fight for their political life after certain attacks. The Provisional Irish Republican Army (IRA) and its political wing, Sinn Fein, scrambled to restore its public image after bombs in Enniskillen, Northern Ireland, killed 11 Protestant civilians. In this article Dr. Heger examines the relationship between violence and political participation. Dr. Heger shows that rebel groups are less likely to attack civilians when they simultaneously participate in democratic elections. She argues that attacking civilians is not good for political business. Not only can it distinguish the group as a terrorist organization and alienate supporters as a result, but attacking civilians also imposes high costs on the group’s own civilian support base. For these reasons, civilians frequently withdraw political support for rebel groups after they target civilians, which can be profoundly harmful to rebels. Dr. Heger analyzes the violent and political behavior of non-state violent organizations from the Middle East and North Africa from 1980 to 2004. She also examines the IRA as a means of describing the causal mechanism advanced here.
This article examines the relationship between violence and political participation, and analyzes violent and political behavior of certain non-state organizations, in particular, the Provisional Irish Republican Army (IRA).
Among the findings:
Many terrorist organizations maintain highly successful political parties while carrying out terrorist attacks.
The relationship between terrorism and a group's political fortune has been unclear.
When rebel groups participate in democratic elections they are less likely to attack civilians.
Attacking civilians is not good for political business.
This article explains coup activity in democracies by adapting insights from the literature on commitment problems and framing coup around the threats leaders and potential coup plotters pose to each other.
One Earth FutureWritten byOne Earth Futureon November 2, 2015
Is a world without war possible in the 21st century?Trends in armed conflict and a developing body of social scientific research suggest that this idea is plausible.Based on a discussion of high-level experts held in 2014, this report reviews the
When rebels provide social services, do they have more leverage negotiating the terms of a peace deal? The literature suggests service-providing groups may, on average, have a wider base of support and a more centralized organizational structure.
Written byConor Seyle, Jens Vestergaard Madsenon August 27, 2015
As part of an ongoing lessons-learned project based on Oceans Beyond Piracy’s work with the Contact Group on Piracy off the Coast of Somalia, OEF Research is documenting the potential role of non-state actors in maritime security.