1. An Introduction to Terrorism
4/15/2018
An Introduction to Terrorism
Part I: Terrorist objectives, methods, and their psychological impact
To truly understand the terrorist it is necessary to understand the terrorist’s mindset—to understand their “terrorist” activities from their perspective. It is perhaps appropriate here to remind the viewers that this presentation and its author have a strongly pro-American, antiterrorist orientation. This orientation (and bias) was explicitly stated in the “Course Overview” presentation.
Full copyright information and fair-use policy are stated on the last slide of this presentation.
Copyright Michael A. Bozarth, Ph.D.

2. Defining “Terrorism”
There is not a one-size-fits-all definition that adequately describes all cases that might be considered terrorism
There are, however, some common features for most cases that can be readily identified by considering the “terrorist’s” motivation and its relationship to pathological behavior

3. Terrorist’s Objective
4/15/2018
Terrorist’s Objective
To affect political, social, economic, or religious change through the use of fear and intimidation
unable to accomplish objectives through democratic or other legitimate process
unable to directly confront their opposition militarily
The basic objective shared by those commonly labeled as “terrorists” helps to define what is usually meant by the term “terrorism.” The perspective of this author is to examine the terrorist’s motivation and their ultimate objective(s) for engaging in agonistic behavior. This is commonly labeled as “terrorism as a tool” models (see presentation on “The Genesis of Terrorism.”
This particular view provides what might be also termed a “reactionary model” of terrorism, whereby the terrorist turns to terrorist activity because it is the only means available to achieve their objective involving a justifiable and positive societal change from their perspective. In this sense, the terrorist might be considered by some to be a victim of circumstances. This is in contradistinction to the often held stereotypic view of terrorists as evil people desiring to inflict pain and suffering on others. To the contrary, terrorist in many cases seem to have much more altruistic motives.
Copyright Michael A. Bozarth, Ph.D.

4. An Alternative View of the Terrorist
In contradistinction to the often held stereotypic view of terrorists as evil people desiring to inflict pain and suffering on others
the terrorist might be considered by some to be a victim of circumstances
this “reactionary model” of terrorism suggests that the terrorist turns to terrorist activity because it is the only means available to achieve their objective involving a justifiable and positive societal change from their perspective
Terrorists in some cases may seem to have surprisingly “altruistic” motives

5. Difference Between Terror & Terrorism
4/15/2018
Difference Between Terror & Terrorism
Terror involves inflicting fear and anxiety on the victim(s)
Terror can be goal oriented or gratuitous
produce “positive” political, social, economic, or religious change
extortion for financial gain
pathological desire to inflict suffering
Appreciation of the difference between terrorism and other acts involving terror is essential for developing an understanding of terrorism.
Copyright Michael A. Bozarth, Ph.D.

6. Three Primary Motivational Dimensions to Consider
4/15/2018
Three Primary Motivational Dimensions to Consider
Terrorism
financial gain TERROR inflict suffering
“positive” societal change
Psychological Displacement Behavior
Conditioning factors
Psychological displacement behavior is a reactionary factor that occurs transitorily in response to certain external or perhaps even some internal stimuli. It is not considered here to be a type of “pathological terror” because it is commonly experienced in ‘normal’ individuals. Nonetheless, because the motivation is much different than goal-directed terrorism it merits consideration as an additional dimension overlapping with pathological terror.
Criminal Terror
Pathological Terror
Copyright Michael A. Bozarth, Ph.D.

7. Terrorism & Criminal Terror
4/15/2018
Terrorism & Criminal Terror
Terrorism is directed towards “positive” change for a larger group
seldom ‘self-serving’ often ‘sacrificing’
Criminal terror benefits the individual
extortion for financial or social gain
often involves frank or borderline psychopathology
Terrorist usually view themselves as the “good guys” and their opponents (often oppressors) as the “bad guys” (this notion is discussed further in the presentation). Those using criminal terror often (not but always) realize they are the “bad guys,” and cases involving pathological terror probably don’t care (i.e., distinguish “good” from “evil”).
Copyright Michael A. Bozarth, Ph.D.

8. Self-Perception of Individuals using Terror
Terrorist usually view themselves as the “good guys” and their opponents as the “bad guys”
Individuals employing criminal terror often (not but always) realize they are the “bad guys”
Individuals displaying pathological terror probably don’t care (i.e., distinguish “good” from “evil”)

9. Terrorism & Pathological Terror
4/15/2018
Terrorism & Pathological Terror
Terrorists seek change through the use of fear and intimidation
but this seldom involves mentally disturbed individuals
Some people use terror gratuitously
this usually involves mentally disturbed individuals
Copyright Michael A. Bozarth, Ph.D.

10. Pathological Terror as a Terrorist Tool
Some degree of pathological terror can be useful to terrorist organizations, but
Those motivated primarily by pathological terror are mentally unstable and not constrained by the terrorists’ agenda
Therefore they are usually a threat to the organization and excluded or only marginally involved (e.g., suicide bomber)

11. Other Potentially Important Variables
4/15/2018
Other Potentially Important Variables
Aggressive behavior can also be produced or amplified by other psychological processes
Frustration-aggression behavior
Classic displacement behavior
Conditioning hate and fear
Motivational variables give directionality to behavior
There are, of course, other ego-defense mechanisms and additional psychological processes that can contribute to the expression of terrorist behavior. For example, “acting out” aggression against the government or its institutions because of a latent hostility to authority figures based on the haltered of a parent or older sibling. Another processes that could be considered as an ego-defense mechanism according to psychoanalytic theory or as a simple conditioning process according to classical conditioning theory is “introjection,” whereby the individual acquires traits or attributes from those in their surroundings such as hatred of Jews because other Palestinians hate Jews. These processes are not directly related to the primary terrorist motives that involve an agenda more altruistic and one that is designed to ultimately affect what the terrorist deems as a positive societal or other change for ‘their’ oppressed group members.
Copyright Michael A. Bozarth, Ph.D.

12. Types of Terror Type Motivational Attributes 4/15/2018
The motivational attributes of the three primary types of terror can be used to define “terrorism” in a cross-cultural manner devoid of the political tones usually associated with the definition of this term (cf. USA FBI definition includes “an illegal act”). Note the apparent irony that terrorism may be considered a type of altruistic behavior because the action is usually directed towards accomplishing a ‘greater good’ for their specific (oppressed) group and because their actions are often self-sacrificing.
Copyright Michael A. Bozarth, Ph.D.

13. Terror & Psychopathology
4/15/2018
Terror & Psychopathology
Although most people might find it convenient to consider terrorists as mentally ill, terrorists seldom suffer from frank psychopathology. The degree of involvement of psychopathology typically displayed by terrorists can add an additional dimension for defining “terrorism.”
Copyright Michael A. Bozarth, Ph.D.

14. Relationship among Terrorism, Criminal Terror, & Psychopathology
4/15/2018
Relationship among Terrorism, Criminal Terror, & Psychopathology
Psychopathology
Criminal Terror
The Venn diagram is used to remind people that there is appreciable overlap in the types of terror, with terrorism typically involving some “criminal terror” and along with a low degree of “pathological terror.” No proportionality involving the degree of overlap of these three factors is implied.
Terrorism
Copyright Michael A. Bozarth, Ph.D.

15. Usual Criteria for Formal Definitions of “Terrorism”
4/15/2018
Usual Criteria for Formal Definitions of “Terrorism”
Several other terms are commonly found in government definitions of terrorism
Unlawful act
Violence or threat of violence
Acts against Noncombatants
But are these qualifiers useful or too restrictive?
Formal definitions and government definitions are nearly synonymous in the sense that it is government agencies that most often provide the formal definitions of terrorism. Alternatively, some academic definitions have also been presented but they often include the same criteria as the government definitions seemingly acquiescing to the government’s perspective as an authoritative body.
Copyright Michael A. Bozarth, Ph.D.

16. Terrorism as an “unlawful act”
Of course it’s unlawful from the perspective of the government ‘victims’ who make the laws
Silly legal jargon to insure criminal prosecution of terrorists?

17. Terrorism as a “violent act”
Does it really have to threaten physical violence?
What about forms of cyber-terrorism not involving physical harm (e.g., financial ruin)?
What about rape (cf. psychological vs. physical harm)?

18. Terrorism as an act against “noncombatants”
4/15/2018
Terrorism as an act against “noncombatants”
Perhaps it is important to exclude military personnel from definitions of terrorist attacks, but what about law enforcement officers?
What about military personnel not performing combat duties?
Military personnel not performing combat duties include various situations such as medical or infrastructure reconstruction staff and military personnel on leave. When they are targeted in their noncombatant roles, are they too victims of terrorist activity?
The problem with not including the restriction of targeting “noncombatants” is that the use of terror in military campaigns is part of conventional warfare (e.g., “shock and awe,” psyops). When does this become terrorism as opposed to just part of normal combat tactics? When formal hostilities cease? (Usually continued fighting after the cessation of former hostilities [i.e., “the war”] is considered an insurgency or resistance operations.) There is no clear answer to this question, so the restrictive qualifier as targeting “noncombatants” may be an essential component of any useful definition of terrorism.
Copyright Michael A. Bozarth, Ph.D.

19. 4/15/2018
Academic definitions should be transcultural and should contain criteria even the terrorist would agree with
“Yes, I’m a terrorist, but my cause is just.”
This type of definition defines the ‘territory’ in an impartial fashion
Defining the term “terrorism” impartially, devoid of biasing factors such as from the perspective of one of the parties involved (e.g., “an illegal act”), makes the term much more useful. State-sponsored terrorism remains terrorism, simply the use of terroristic tactics sanctioned by the government in power often against ones own people (e.g., the Nazi Gestapo).
The term “terrorist” sometimes even takes on a heroic meaning, with the person often stating that they are not happy with the way they’re forced to defend their people, but they truly believe they are fighting a necessary or even glorious ‘war’ against a stronger oppressor.
Copyright Michael A. Bozarth, Ph.D.

20. Terrorist’s ‘Weapons’
4/15/2018
Terrorist’s ‘Weapons’
Kidnapping & hostage taking
Assassination
Improvised Explosive Device (IED)
CBRN (cf. NBC)
chemical (e.g., sarin gas)
biological (e.g., anthrax)
radiological dispersal (e.g., dirty bomb)
nuclear (i.e., mass destruction)
New millennium—new methods
cyber-terrorism
other ‘non-violent’ threats?
“Attacks’ need not be violent to be terrifying. Consider the potential effects of cyber-terrorism targeting U.S. infrastructure or financial institutions. What about university student records associated with courses completed and financial obligations and loans?
Copyright Michael A. Bozarth, Ph.D.

21. Terrorist’s Method to Accomplish Goals
4/15/2018
Terrorist’s Method to Accomplish Goals
To instill “terror” in target audience to force capitulation
often by using the most terrifying means available, including
kidnapping, assassination, IEDs, CBRNs
by affecting many more people than directly affected by physical actions
media and government-response play a critical role in the impact of terrorism
* Some terrorist organizations are bound by their own code of ethical behavior. For example, the IRA never attacked children and seldom civilians not political targets. In contrast, other organizations such as the al-Qaeda often attack anyone associated with the West or their collaborators regardless of age or gender.
Copyright Michael A. Bozarth, Ph.D.

22. Terrorists’ Targets: Hard and Soft
Hard targets
high-ranking government officials
military bases
fortified police stations (e.g., Northern Ireland)
Soft targets
individual civilians
shopping areas
schools
cultural, sporting, & religious venues

23. Widening the “Target” to ‘Hit the Mark’
4/15/2018
Widening the “Target” to ‘Hit the Mark’
Level 1: Government Leaders
Level 2: Police & Military
Level 3: Government Workers
Level 4: Civilian Supporters
Level 5: All Civilians
The real target of terrorists’ activity is those empowered to make the change(s) demanded by the terrorists’ agenda—usually the government. However, in a democracy the outer ring (which is the easiest to attack) is usually empowered to yield to the terrorists’ demands.
Targets towards the center of the bulls eye tend to be “hard targets” and thus terrorists often increase their range of acceptable targets to reach those that can be directly targeted (e.g., “soft targets”) and whose influence directly or indirectly affects the policies and other behaviors of the government.
Terrorists increase their range of targets to achieve their goal. Most terrorist organizations include civilian targets, often preferred over hard targets.
Copyright Michael A. Bozarth, Ph.D.

24. 4/15/2018
Target Impact-Value
Most people probably believe that hard targets have a higher impact value than soft targets
This is generally true for conventional military campaigns, but this is not true for terrorist campaigns against democracies
Governments and their military forces often continue fighting even when their civilian populations have been demoralized (e.g., World War II Germany). In a democracy a government’s policy is determined ultimately by their electorate and therefore voting citizens can be targeted to affect change. This process is slower but usually more actionable (e.g., easier to ‘hit’ soft targets) than directly targeting the officials empowered to immediately capitulate to the terrorists’ demands.
Copyright Michael A. Bozarth, Ph.D.

25. Freedom’s Paradox: You can surrender it to terror!
Terrorist tactics probably work best against democracies, where targeting civilian populations has the greatest impact (i.e., civilians elect the government which sets the policy the terrorists wish to change)

26. Terror Value of Soft Targets
In addition to being easier to attack, soft targets actually have a higher terror value for the average citizen than do most hard targets (e.g., killing people “like me” makes the threat more personal and increases the individual terror value)

27. 9,000+ psychologically ‘injured’
Tokyo Subway Attack (Sarin gas attack by Aum Shinri-kyo cult, 20 March 1995)
12 Killed
5,700 physically injured
Photo from
Photo from
9,000+ psychologically ‘injured’
10,000’s terrorized

28. Beltway Snipers (Washington DC region, 02 - 24 October 2002)
10 Killed
3 physically injured
Photo from
Photo from Gwww.azette.net
100’s psychologically ‘injured’
100,000’s terrorized

29. Sequence of Beltway Sniper Attacks
The Beltway snipers were particularly effective in spreading terror and disrupting normal life because they killed at random and covered a wide area.
Originally though to be Muslim extremists, in the final analysis it was simply criminal terror masquerading as al-Qaeda type terrorists.

30. 10,000+ psychologically ‘injured’
911 Attack on America (World Trade Center & Pentagon, 11 September 2001)
3,025 Killed
1,000’s physically injured
10,000+ psychologically ‘injured’
A nation terrorized

31. When does attacking hard targets have a higher impact than attacking soft targets?
conventional military campaigns
totalitarian regimes

32. A Tyrant’s Hard Targets Are Most Vulnerable
“Soft targets” have little influence on totalitarian government leadership
“Hard targets” can erode totalitarian control (through attrition) or even instigate a coup de tat

33. Psychological Impact of Terrorism
Strong motivation to terminate terror
Evokes classic ego defense mechanisms and displacement
Often produces
frustration-aggression reaction
general increase in mental illness
Acute Stress Disorder (ASD)
Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)

34. Response to terror can aid the terrorist organization
4/15/2018
Response to terror can aid the terrorist organization
Magnitude of reaction seen as an indicator of the perceived threat
over-reacting can make the threat seem more serious than it actually is
over-reacting can strengthen the terrorists’ support base by alienating neutral parties and by encouraging supporters & independent attacks
Displacement aggression
seems to confirm the terrorists’ charge of an oppressor who is “not-like-us” and “not human”
causes victims of displaced aggression to identify with the terrorists seemingly fighting for them
A small threat with a big government, civilian, or mass media reaction makes the terror value of the threat much larger than it really is based on the actual incident.
Copyright Michael A. Bozarth, Ph.D.

35. Responses to Similar Events Vary Dramatically
Response to terrorism is determined by social cognition and other dynamics
Madrid train bombing (11 March 2004)
elect new government
withdraw troops from Iraq
9/11 attack on America
solidify government support
Bush doctrine: hunt & kill/preemptive war

36. Focus Question Set #2
What are the methods of terrorists? (e.g., targeting civilian populations)
Why do terrorists use the tactics of terrorism?