Terrorism: Motivation and Theory
e Journal of Public and
m : M otivatio n an d Theor y
Wayne Korbl 0
Unversity of West Georgia 0
waynekaye 0
@gmail.com 0
0 The Journal of Public and Professional Sociology by an authorized editor of
Recommended Citation
-
Terroris
M
Article 1
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/jpps
Terrorism: Motivation and Theor y
Cover Page Footnote
I would like to thank the reviewers for their constructive feedback and Neema Noori, Ph.D. for inspiring me to
pursue this research topic.
This refereed article is available in The Journal of Public and Professional Sociology: https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/jpps/
vol9/iss2/1
TERRORISM: MOTIVATION AND THEORY Wayne Korbl University of West Georgia
INTRODUCTION
The following paper attempts to determine motivations behind terrorism
from the perspectives of Rational Choice Theory and Social Solidarity Theory. It
explains difficulties in agreeing on a common definition of terrorism among
different scholars and reviews some of the possible demographic, psychological
and social dynamic causes of terrorism, ultimately concluding that understanding
motivation for terrorist acts cannot be determined uni-dimensionally and that
different levels of terrorist organizations are best understood using different
theories. Individual suicide bombers’ motivations can be best explained by Social
Solidarity Theory, while sponsoring organizations’ motives are best explained by
Rational Choice Theory.
According to Olivier
Roy (2006)
, the original al-Qaida members were of
predominantly Saudi Arabian and Egyptian origin. Thus, these countries are
significantly represented in the paper, to the extent that the example of
mechanical solidarity included below is based on Saudi Arabian history. The
paper examines suicide terrorism, although it also explores other forms of
terrorism. Although this paper examines a pre-Islamic State era of terrorism, some
journalists report that the boundaries of the IS “caliphate” are diminishing and
requiring it to u-turn into an insurgency and competitor to al-Qaida
(Marcus,
2017)
. Thus, these perspectives still contribute to the understanding of the
motivations for past and contemporary terrorism.
SUICIDE TERRORISM FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF RATIONAL CHOICE
THEORY
In reviewing the literature concerning terrorism and Rational Choice
Theory, one finds that rational choice is much more accepted in the political
science than sociological discipline, perhaps due in part to RCT’s origin in
economic theory. Early classical theorists outlined sociology by differentiating it
from economic theory. Currently, some theorists are still resistant to the
“colonization” of sociology by RCT
(which they call exchange theory [Scott,
2000])
, although this may be slowly changing
(Hedström & Stern, 2008)
.
Since an individual characterized by one person as a terrorist will be
characterized by another as a freedom fighter
(Bates, 2011; Qirko, 2009;
Shughart, 2011)
, martyr, revolutionary, insurgent, or common criminal
(Shughart,
2011)
, no definition is unanimously recognized
(Atran, 2003; Karoui, 2010; Post,
et al, 2009)
. However, definitions provided by many scholars
(Atran, 2003;
Karoui, 2010; Kydd & Walter, 2006; Pape, 2005; Post, et al, 2009)
closely echoed
the Office of the Coordinator, US Department of State definition of terrorism as
“premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant
targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence
an audience”
(Shughart, 2011, p.127)
. As seen below, the theories that these
theorists provide support this definition with the exception that most imply the
attempt to influence multiple audiences instead of just one audience.
In Rational Choice Theory, individuals are seen to be active, rational
agents that determine the best course of action given certain rewards and costs.
Many theorists believe that terrorism can be explained through the lens of RCT.
Shughart believes that terrorists calculate risks and make choices in order to gain
the greatest benefit for the least cost in “money, munitions and manpower” (2011,
p.127). They also shift tactics when states enact countermeasures against them.
Atran (2003)
states that the cost of outfitting a Palestinian suicide bomber is $150,
of which transportation to the site is the most expensive item. This cost gains the
sponsor organization increased public support and more prospective bombers.
Bryan Caplan (2006) counters this assertion, also citing Rational Choice. He
believes that the sponsoring organizations have a large motivation to overstate
their influence and willingness to utilize suicide terrorism. and questions why
there are not more bombings given the claims of plentiful recruits and money to
outfit them. Caplan cites the example of two terrorist organizations engaged in a
morbid rivalry in which they tried to outdo each other in the number and
destructiveness of (...truncated)