Terrorism in Civil Wars

Most scholarship on terrorism finds that terrorism is not particularly effective. Engaging in acts of terrorism usually means that the group responsible doesn't have long to exist. In general, groups like the Tamil Tigers and  Al-Qaida are the exception not the rule.

Jakana Thomas posted an article on the Monkey Cage based on her research into terrorism in civil wars which suggests that terrorist attacks may encourage the government to make more concessions when negotiating with rebels. She notes that this result largely depends on the context, i.e., that there is a civil war going on and that the government is negotiating with the rebels (something that is not universally the case).  As she puts it:

When both terrorism and counterterrorism inflict massive costs on civilians, the population is left with a choice of two bad options. Given that preexisting grievances are likely to have facilitated rebels’ mobilization efforts in the first place, governments are doubly likely to lose in such a contest. For these reasons, governments should be expected to pursue negotiated settlements to stop the pain caused by terrorism and to strike deals while their bargaining positions still permit favorable deals. New research by Reed Wood and Jacob Kathman similarly demonstrate that victimizing civilians may help groups achieve desirable outcomes in civil wars.

While a possible interpretation of these findings would suggest that terrorism helps groups “win” in war, it is important to note that the effects of terrorism are largely contingent upon a government’s response to it. If governments avoid feeding into terrorists’ strategies and instead engage in sound counterterrorism practices, they may be able to stymie the growth of terrorists (or at least not aid it). By offering protection and resisting the urge to use violence against civilians when responding to terrorists, governments should be able to undermine terrorists’ ability to undermine them.

Another way governments might deal with the problem is by finding effective ways of ending civil wars once they start. If governments resolve their conflicts, terrorists lose their power to hurt as war provides the context in which terrorism can work. As much as terrorism is a problem, a government refusing to seek peaceful settlements is also a problem. By dealing with the latter, governments can also address the former and resist “rewarding bad behavior.” Providing concessions to civilians or even more moderate armed groups in society, for example, may do enough to limit some of the aforementioned effects of terrorists’ strategies.