An individual terrorist has been described throughout history in many different ways, such as anarchist, a lone-wolf terrorist, and a revolutionary terrorist among others. Although the specific context of these different labels tend to vary but there are many similarities between them. Perhaps the most notable example of an individual terrorist in history would be the U.S. army veteran, Timothy McVeigh, who killed 168 people and injured another 500 after detonating a bomb in Oklahoma City ("Profile: Timothy mcveigh," 2001). Although this strategy of terrorism is quite old, we still need to pay attention to it. In 2010, CIA-director Leon Panetta emphasized the danger of individual terrorism declaring that “it’s the lone wolf strategy that I think we have to pay attention to as the main threat to this country” (Spaaij, 2011, p.2). The main purpose of this paper is to synthesize the three typologies of individual terrorism, based upon the Pandora-model.
In the Pandora-model data collected from previous scenarios is used to create new ones, a specific pattern is followed by these scenarios, and they have several basic elements. Based upon the Pandora-model the three typologies of individual terrorism are the protagonist, the antagonist, and the crucial factors (Bressers, 2012). The protagonist-typology presents us with a profile for individual terrorists, which is independent of time, telling us who the individual terrorists are, their background, their demographic characteristics, their motivation, and more. The antagonist-typology tells us about the targets chosen by individual terrorists and their symbolic value. Finally, the crucial factors-typology highlights the factors of importance that stand out, and tells us about the modus operandi of individual terrorists. The mentioned details that fall under each of these three typologies can be deciphered by analyzing data of individual terrorists over the years.
Analysis of the ‘Protagonist’
The demographic characteristics of individual terrorists are the first things that need to be discovered under this typology based upon incidents of individual terrorism from 1880 till now. It can be concluded that most individual terrorists, the protagonists, are male since “and since “most terrorists have been young, some very young” (Laqeur, 1999, p.80), it can also be concluded that they are mostly under 50 years old. Similarly, looking at the number of individual terrorism attacks over the years, it can be concluded that individual terrorists initially preferred to claim their acts. However, more recently individual terrorists now claim their acts through general statements, such as through the internet or telephone. Although individual terrorists have been linked to third parties, such as the Ku Klux Klan ("Ku klux klan"), but have never been a part of terrorist organizations. They would not be individual terrorists if they were. It has also been noted that most acts of individual terrorism occurred in the United States and Western Europe.
When it comes to the backgrounds of individual terrorists, there are several common factors such as: a large number of individual terrorists had been communists (Woods) (but there were non-communists as well), many of them had some sort of mental illness, many of them were immigrants, high school dropouts, and many of them had at some point joined the army. Knowing the motivation of individual terrorists is the trickiest part. Prior to the 20th century, anarchist, racism and white supremacist tendencies governed the motivations of individual terrorists, but more recently, their motivations are either unknown or too vague. In incidents of individual terrorism such as the assassinations of Martin Luther King and J. F. Kennedy, conspiracy theories have also been developed regarding the motivations of the individual terrorist responsible.
Analysis of the ‘Antagonist’
One particular factor that has always been common in all incidents of individual terrorism over the years is that individual terrorists always targeted only people rather objects, unlike terrorists groups such as the al-Qaeda that targeted the World Trade Center buildings. Perhaps the only incident where a building was targeted by an individual terrorist was the 2010 Austin suicide attack ("Andrew joseph stack's," 2010), in which a light aircraft was crashed into the Echelon Building in Texas by Joseph Andrew Stack. Another thing that has been similar between the victims of individual terrorism, the antagonists, that individual terrorists chose from 1880 until 2011 chose specific persons as their targets. Over the years, individual terrorists have particularly emphasized on high value targets from within the government, from presidents and prime ministers to other prominent politicians. Moreover, individual terrorists select their targets based on some symbolic value. The targets always have some symbolic value, whether they are Asians, from the foreign community, gay, or Jewish, etc.
Analysis of the ‘Crucial Factors’
The first crucial factor that needs to be analyzed under this typology is the area in which individual carried out their acts of terrorism. A majority of the individual terrorists over the years seem to have had a preference for urban environments and public places. However, what has not been common between is that individual terrorists have chosen some of the most random places to commit their acts of terrorism, from private houses, public events, restaurants to work addresses, etc. Another crucial factor that individual terrorist had in common was that most of them were not very intelligent. This can be concluded from the facts that many of them carried out their attacks in places with security present and more than often, their weapons of choice were blades, daggers, or knives. One final crucial factor that has been common among individual terrorists is that a major of them were arrested and served time in jail, while a small number of them received the death sentence, such as Khaliq Hazara and Prince Faisal.
The goal of this paper was to analyze individual terrorists based on the three mentioned typologies, and by comparing numerous incidents of individual terrorism ever since 1881, the above conclusions were reached. The ultimate conclusion is that we still cannot reach a distinct profile for individual terrorists, which is independent of time. Although individual terrorists have some characteristics in common, but over time, there has been a wide range of individual terrorist profiles. However, one thing that is for certain is that better counterterrorism strategies are needed, especially for individual terrorism; keeping in mind the gruesome 2011 Norway attacks (Beaumont, 2011).
References
Andrew joseph stack's suicide attack: Austin plane attack victims saved by iraq war vet. (2010, Apr 21). Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/19/andrew-joseph-stacks-suic_n_469811.html
Beaumont, P. (2011, Jul 23). Norway attacks: at least 92 killed in oslo and utøya island. Retrieved from http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/23/norway-attacks
Bressers, S. (2012). Pandora ii, improvements to a scenario model for investigation of terrorist behavior. Retrieved from http://ilk.uvt.nl/downloads/pub/papers/hait/bressers2012.pdf
Ku klux klan. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAkkk.htm
Laqueur, W. (1999). The new terrorism: Fanaticism and the arms of mass destruction. (1st ed.). Oxford University Press.
Profile: Timothy mcveigh. (2001, May 11). Retrieved from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1321244.stm
Spaaij, R. (2011). Understanding lone wolf terrorism: Global patterns, motivations and prevention (springerbriefs in criminology). Springer.
Woods, A. (Artist) (n.d.). Audio file: Individual terrorism and communism [Web]. Retrieved from Audio File: Individual Terrorism and Communism
