The Impact of Terrorism on Political Attitudes: A TwoEdged Sword

1
The Impact of Terrorism on Political Attitudes A
Two-Edged Sword

• Ami Pedahzur Daphna Canetti-Nisim

2
Goals of Terrorism

• 2 schools
• Terrorists wishes to terrorize the public and
  change its political attitudes
• Intimidation and induction of fear are not the
  ends of terrorist activity but rather means to
  effect political change
• Q Do they success in attaining their goals?

3
Research goals

• Looking at the relationships between
• Terrorism gtgt fear of terrorism
• Terrorism gtgt militant attitudes
• Terrorism Fear of terrorism gtgt militant
  attitudes

4
Public Opinion in Israel Terrorism and Peace
Making

• 1967-pre-Oslo Israelis demand strong measures
  against terrorists, and do not wish to seat to
  the negotiation table.
• The Oslo decade Al Aksa intifada a militant
  public willingness for peace talks.
• Al Aksa intifada going back to the pre-Oslo days
  a militant public who rejects any possible
  concessions

5
Terrorism Characteristics

• Violent acts or the threat to use violence
• Political context or goal
• Violence has a symbolic/deterrence dimension
  beyond the instrumental dimension

6
Some Implications of Terrorism

• Emotions of fear, anxiety, hysteria
• Uncertainty as a result of the irrational
  character of terrorism and the randomization of
  its victims
• Frustration and inability to function because of
  luck of clarity in regards to the goals of
  terrorism and available mechanisms of coping
• The individuals coping with continuous
  intensive terrorism usually leads to an ongoing
  mental pressure

7
Victims of Terrorism in Israel

• 1. Low socio-economic status
• The bold and the beautiful can better protect
  themselves
• Goals of terrorist attacks are public places
  (e.g. markets public transportation)
• 2. Younger people/teenagers
• They constitute a large percentage of those who
  use public transportation/coffee shops/dancing
  clubs
• 3. Those who live along the seam line
• They are an attractive target to terrorism
  perpetrators due to their geographic location

8
Fear

• It was originated in the 12th Century. It means
  sudden danger. It is a sudden, unpleasant, and
  strong emotion which is caused by expectance or
  awareness to danger
• Most researchers agree that it is a threatening
  and unpleasant emotion which appears as a
  reaction to danger
• Fear is not the enemy but the friend of humans
  it is the red light which helps in the process
  of survival
• It allows humans to react to dangers in their
  environment
• "Fear is an uneasiness of the mind, upon the
  thought of future danger likely to befall us."
  Locke.
• "Where no hope is left, is left no fear." Milton.

9
Terrorists and Fear of Terrorism

• Anxiety, hysteria, and fear are major tools of
  terrorists in their war on political goals
• The central assumption of the terrorists is that
  the creation of an anarchic atmosphere, anxiety,
  and uncertainty, would serve as a pressure
  instrument on policy makers to accept the demands
  of terrorists
• Terrorism within the Israeli-Palestinian context
  was mainly afflicted towards civilian population,
  and to a limited extent towards military and
  particular political targets

10
Fearful Individuals would Present

• A general impatience towards others, and the
  tendency to ignore basic civil rights
• A decrease in the efficiency of cognitive
  processes gtgtgt irrational thinking and reliance on
  stereotypes
• Greater willingness to take risks
• Aggressive and militant reactions

11
Framework of Analysis
Political attitudes
Terrorism intensity
Fear of Terrorism
12
Data Sources

• 2 databases
• 1. Terrorism database of the NSSC
• Review of the Haaretz 1948 - 2002.
• Data collection through questionnaires
• regarding each terrorist incident.
• A total of 2434 acts of terrorism
• 2. Semi-annual surveys of the NSSC
• More than 2000 respondents in each survey (5
  surveys so far)
• Regular attitudinal Qs - To what extent do you
  agree with
• A total of 10,000 respondents

13
Indices Intensity of Terrorism

• Monthly casualties (deaths injuries)
• 2. Monthly terrorist attacks (suicide
  non-suicide)

14
Indices Fear Questions

• 1. National Fear
• Fear of terrorism within Israel that would
  startle the political system
• Fear of terrorism as a strategic danger to Israel
• 2. Personal Fear
• Fear of terrorism that effects daily life in
  Israel
• Fear of terrorism that would injure me and my
  family

15
Indices Militancy

• WMD should be a major component in Israeli
  national security
• Every military action Israel initiates is
  justified
• All means are justified in Israels struggle
  against terrorism
• In case of a missile attack, Israel is obliged to
  react in full power

16

• Findings

17
Moving Sum (X, X-1, X-2) of Terrorisms
Casualties
18
Moving Sum (X, X-1, X-2) of Suicide Terrorist
Attacks
19
Fear of Terrorism (0-100 scale) (X-1)20
20
Militancy (0-100 scale) (X-1)20
21
Terrorism Intensity and Fear of Terrorism

22
Fear of Terrorism and Militancy

23
Militancy (X-1)20 among Fearful and Fearless
24
Differences in Militancy between Fearful and
Fearless

• The lines flow differently fearful and fearless
  present decrease in militancy from t1 to t2.
  Fearful present a major increase in t3 whereas
  fearless present an increase only in t4. From t3
  they present opposite trends fearful reduce
  militancy, whereas fearless increase militancy.
• In general fearful are militant in levels
  75.4-79.4 whereas fearless are militant in levels
  55.4-62.2
• Greatest differences were found in October 2001
  79.4-55.424
• T test showed that the differences in all points
  of time were significant

25
All Means Are Justified in the Struggle in
Terrorism Fearful Fearless
26
All Means are Justified in the Struggle against
Terrorism

• Fearful individuals wish to use more force in the
  struggle against terrorism
• Differences between the 2 groups were found to be
  significant in all 5 points
• The most significant difference was in October
  2001

27
Terrorism, Fear of Terrorism and Militancy

28
Summary Conclusions

• Is terrorism a two-edged sword?
• Terrorism has 2 major effects one emotional and
  one attitudinal
• Terrorism generates fear which leads to changes
  in political attitudes, however, the changes are
  not in the desired direction

29
Summary Conclusions

• We could see a general increase in levels of
  terrorism with a pick in April 2002
• Suicide attacks are the major cause of casualties
  both attacks casualties at their pick in
  April 2002
• The highest rate of national fear was in October
  2001, whereas the highest rate of personal fear
  was in April 2002
• Militancy is similar in its nature to national
  fear a decrease in April 2001 and a strong
  increase in October 2001

30
Summary Conclusions

• As opposed to some assumptions on curvilinear
  relationships, all correlations between terrorism
  variables and militancy are linear they co-vary
• Terrorism fear a relationship between suicide
  attacks and fear in general, and in particular
  personal fear
• Fear and militancy a relationship between
  national fear and militancy
• The fearful are more militant than the
  fearless, however, the differences are much
  more significant

31
Summary Conclusions

• As for the question of terrorism, fear of
  terrorism, and militancy
• Assuming terrorists wish to inflict fear in order
  to change political attitudes in a certain
  direction, do they manage to do so? No - during
  times of terrorism, the public intimidated
• A proposed model
• Suicide terrorism gtgt personal fear gtgt national
  fear gtgt militant attitudes