Have Suicide Attacks Helped or Hindered Terrorist Groups’ Goals?
Terrorism that uses suicide as a means of attacking individuals and places is on the rise across the globe with the reasons for the increase in such instances having no clear explanations. However, existing reports that are based on psychological dynamics have gotten contradicted by the widening gap of socioeconomic backgrounds of terrorists who commit such suicide attacks. According to Pape (2003), it is evident that the aim of suicide bombings is to make countries that are liberal and modern in nature to give into demands of terrorist groups existing within their respective borders. Additionally, it is common belief that terrorists have realized the relative immense financial gains associated with suicide attacks, therefore leading to a rise in the instances of such attacks. Because terrorist groups are considered both innovative and ground-breaking in their tact and conduct, suicide bombings are considered as one of the innovations that the terrorists employ in a majority of missions.
As explained by Gill et al. (2013), there are studies on choice types that are rational that seek to provide the explanations as to why extremist organizations engage in acts of violence. Furthermore, various analyses give an emphasis on the strategic utility of suicide bombing for terrorism because of the strategy’s ability to achieve power balance in a war that is not symmetrical. Additionally, terrorist groups find suicide bombing as an easy avenue that produces the collapse of systems which is one of the critical objectives of organizations that engage in the spread of terror.
Also, an emphasis is placed on the relationship between bombing that uses the suicide approach, the completion in local politics of a nation, and the search for support by the larger public. To this extent, suicide attacks can be viewed as a critical tool used by terror groups to communicate messages that reach a big number of individuals especially the political divide in the shortest time possible. Corte & Giménez-Salinas (2009) added that terror organizations different goals when they employ this mode of attack. Such strategic goals include the expulsion of occupying military forces that are foreign, the achievement of independence that is national, as well as the destabilization of a countries political wellbeing. Nevertheless, suicide attacks have gotten beneficial to terrorists. Such is because the organizations can intensify violent conflicts that are already in progress as well as the interruption of the process of seeking solutions to enhance peace for political, ethnic, of religious conflicts.
The high lethality level of suicide bombing also proves an important factor of consideration, importance, and benefit to the terror organizations. Such lethality is evident in a significant number of casualties, the generation of anxiety and a sense of helplessness, fear, as well as social destabilization produced as opposed to the results of any other regular method of violence (Pape, 2003). Evidently, this approach is also helpful to the terrorists because it facilitates the access to areas commonly perceived as well protected for example the [political leaders of a nation and various public buildings. Studies also reveal that terror organizations are increasingly resolving to suicide attacks because of the guaranteed level of precision presented by the attacks. Corte & Giménez-Salinas (2009) explained that such precision results from the reduced need for the reliance on devices that are remote controlled, the suicide bomber’s ability to decide the exact time as well as the location of the attack, and capacity to deal with changes that are unforeseen.
As stated by Hepworth (2013), studies on the behaviors of terrorists also reveal that suicide bombing is a critical approach to the organizations because it reduces the risks for the entire group of terrorists as well as simplifying the carrying out of the attacks. On the other hand, this method of attack can be considered as a hindrance to the organizations because of possible unintended and indirect consequences. The impediments may arise from an unwillingness to participate in the attacks and the amount of time taken to recruit as well as train a suicide attacker. Additionally, the amount of social capital available to the bomber for the mission to get successful is a determinant of success, and most of the time the bombers are foreign to their areas of operation (Mcbride & Richardson, 2012). It is clear that the use of suicide bombing has helped terrorist groups to achieve their terror agenda in most parts of the world. Factors such as the high number of casualties, ease of access protection, precision, and simplicity in execution as well as risk reduction can be achieved through suicide bombing to help terrorists achieve their goals.
How has the Advent of Suicide Attacks Changed Counter Terrorist Strategies?
Evidently, strategies implemented for the mitigation of terror attacks are subject to change in line with the size of the threat presented by such attacks. International terrorism remains persistent and adaptive even though measures are put in place for the disruption, dismantlement, and defeat of terror organizations across the world. Concurrently, according to Rineheart (2010) counterterrorism activities have witnessed massive changes of the last forty years according to the metamorphosis of methods that the terrorist organizations adopt to reign terror. Nevertheless, the security council of the United Nations actively participates in counter-terrorism activities via resolutions and subsidiary bodies aimed at assisting member nations in efforts to deal with the vice.
Over history, the most used methods by terrorists to harm individuals were hostage taking and the hijacking of planes, vehicles, and trains for the achievement of their goals. With time, such terror tactics proved not to bring forth the desired returns leading to the invention of more lethal methods such as suicide attacks. With the advent of suicide bombings, there has been a new advancement in military technology to help counter new terrorism strategies. Such new developments on the military front include the use of drones to monitor terrorist activities. Additionally, there has been the use of counter tactics by governments affected by suicide bombings around the world to fight the menace. Such counter-terror measures include the use of non-lethal preventive techniques that include arrests that are intelligence driven to target terror suspects.
Additionally, governments have taken steps that are lethal offensive to include killings that target those suspected of planning such attacks. Also, Kaplan, Mintz, & Mishal (2006) explained that targeted killing initiatives as a counter-terror approach are critical because they help with the prevention of suicide attacks by lowering the number of the individuals in charge the planning and execution of activities of terror. Furthermore, governments achieve arrests that are intelligence driven through the use of checkpoints at strategic places to screen individuals for the potential to commit suicide attacks. There has also been the increase in intelligence levels among security agencies as well as the citizens of the governments that suffer unprecedented levels of suicide bombings.
The role of information is to make sure that individuals are aware of packages that are suspicious, people as well as behaviors that could harm innocent lives, and the processes involved in the reporting of criminal elements. In addition to the aspect of human intelligence, sophisticated machinery has gotten developed for the detection of explosive devices before they detonate. Also, according to Gill et al. (2013), governments have also invested in the security of commercial aviation which is a new phenomenon from what was the case in the past. To this effect, governments have invested in the safety of their respective national carriers as and airports because larger aircraft are an attractive target for terrorists who carry out suicide attacks.
Further, suicide bombers have made it necessary for the development of policies and laws against terrorism by nations. Such pieces of legislation apply to both foreign and local organizations in line with the world commitment to restore long-term relief from terrorism. Additionally, such pieces of legislation are designed to make it easier for law enforcement agencies to carry out actions that are effective on those who take part in terrorism (Rineheart (2010).
Emphasis is put on human factors for the identification of potential sources of the threat because with the advancement in technology, explosives have become more sophisticated and may get difficult to isolate from luggage. Corte & Giménez-Salinas (2009) stated that the radicalization of suicide bombers is a psychological factor that has to be dealt with to reduce or halt instances of attacks that are suicide based. To this effect, governments have adopted strategies that involve the strengthening of psychological coping skills for the ordinary citizens. Such efforts are deliberate so that it is possible to counter the effects of terrorism that are demoralizing to disable the terrorists from personalizing their threats to render individuals vulnerable (Corte & Giménez-Salinas, 2009). Psychological well-being of the citizens is essential to combat the organizations’ aim of instilling fear in a nation's citizens to make it easy for the commission of terror acts.
In conclusion, the advent of suicide bombing has changed strategies employed for counterterrorism. The new strategies focus on applying human intelligence, the collection of information, the use of technology, and educational campaigns to boost the psychological resistance of the civilian population against the effects of terrorism.
References
Corte, L. & Giménez-Salinas, A. (2009). Suicide Terrorism as a Tool of Insurgency Campaigns: Functions, Risk Factors, and Countermeasures. Terrorism Research Initiative, 3(1), 1.
Gill, P., Horgan, J., Hunter, S., & Cushenbery, L. (2013). Malevolent Creativity in Terrorist Organizations. Journal of Creative Behavior, 47(2), 125-151.
Hepworth, D. (2013). Analysis of Al-Qaeda Terrorist Attacks to Investigate Rational Action. Perspectives on Terrorism, 7(2), 1.
Kaplan, E., Mintz, A., & Mishal, S. (2006). Tactical Prevention of Suicide Bombings in Israel. Interfaces, 36(6), 553-561. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/inte.1060.0242
Mcbride, M. & Richardson, G. (2012). Stopping Suicide Attacks: Optimal Strategies and Unintended Consequences. Defense and Peace Economics, 23(5), 413-419.
Pape, R. (2003). The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism. American Political Science Review, 97(3), 343-362.
Rineheart, J. (2010). Counterterrorism and Counterinsurgency. Perspectives on Terrorism, 4(5), 1.
