Understanding Terrorism after the Paris Attacks Islamic State

Understanding Terrorism after the Paris Attacks: Islamic State and Beyond Dr. Lee Jarvis Politics, Philosophy, Language and Communication Studies University of East Anglia November 2015

What happened in Paris? • 13 November 2015 • Bombings and shootings, three groups of attackers • Stade de France – first explosion • Bataclan Concert Hall – deadliest attack • Shootings at bars and restaurants • 130 people killed, hundreds more injured • Many were young, French people • > 20 foreigners, including from the UK, Algeria, Germany. • Nine attackers now dead • One - Salah Abdeslam - remains on the run • ‘Islamic State’ claim responsibility: • ‘Let France – and those who walk in its path – know that they will remain on the top of the list of targets of the Islamic State…This attack is the first of the storm and a warning to those who wish to learn’

What is the Islamic State? • Emerged out of al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) • Founded by Abu Masab al-Zarqawi after the 2003 US-led invasion • Notorious for its brutality • Split from Al Qaeda in 2013 • Now a separate entity run by Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi • Focus: capturing land in Syria and Iraq • Re-establishing a ‘caliphate’ • Foreign fighters and hostage beheading videos • Funding via wealthy supporters, criminality, and oil sales • Little overseas focus until recently • ‘Islamic State’ name is controversial: • Some prefer ‘ISIS’, ‘ISIL’ or ‘Daesh’

Three Questions • Were the attacks in Paris an act of terrorism? • If so, what makes them ‘terrorist’? • Why did the attacks take place? • What were their causes and contexts? • What should be done in response to the attacks? • How effective are the current responses likely to be?

Question 1 Were the attacks in Paris ‘terrorist’?

What is Terrorism? • Schmid (2011): • >250 academic, governmental and inter-governmental definitions. • Some common features, but no consensus: • • Violence Communication Political motivation Non-state perpetrator • Controversial • Different types of definition: • Government definitions are often vague • Academic definitions are often complex and long

Selected definitions of terrorism (from Shanahan 2010) • Terrorism simply means deliberately and violently targeting civilians for political purposes (Richardson 2006) • The deliberate creation and exploitation of fear through violence or the threat of violence in the pursuit of political change (Hoffman 2006) • Premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets … by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience (US Department of State, Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism 2003)

Schmid and Jongman (2011) • Drawing on 109 different definitions: • Terrorism is an anxiety-inspiring method of repeated violent action, employed by (semi-) clandestine individual, group or state actors, for idiosyncratic, criminal or political reasons, whereby – in contrast to assassination – the direct targets of violence are not the main targets. The immediate human targets are generally chosen randomly (targets of opportunity) or selectively (representative or symbolic targets) from a target population, and serve as message generators. Threatand violence-based communication processes between terrorists (organisation), (imperilled) victims, and main targets are used to manipulate the main target (audiences(s)), turning it into a target of terror, a target of demands, or a target of attention, depending on whether intimidation, coercion or propaganda is primarily sought.

Why define terrorism? • Three common reasons: • Academic rigour • Policy responses • Political critique • Why is defining terrorism so difficult? • A pejorative label: • “Terrorism is something the bad guys do” (Richardson 2006) • Overuse and ‘stretching’: • Cyberterrorism, narcoterrorism, agroterrorism, bioterrorism • The meaning of terrorism changes over time: • Origins in the French Revolution • Diversity of terrorisms: • “there is not one terrorism but a variety of terrorisms and what is true for one does not necessarily apply to others” (Laqueur 2003).

Were the Paris attacks ‘terrorist’? • Violent? • Certainly • Communication? • Perhaps to inspire fear in audiences? • To change French – or Western – foreign policy? • To encourage potential recruits? • Political? • Inspired by or directed at foreign policy? • Linked to ‘state building’ in the Middle East?

Question 2 What caused the Paris attacks?

Waves of Terrorism • David Rapoport (2003): • • 1880 s: Anarchist terrorism 1920 s: Anticolonial terrorism Late 1960 s: New left terrorism 1979: Religious terrorism. • Thoughts: • Criticised for simplicity • But, demonstrates: • Terrorism’s long history • Terrorism’s use for a variety of motives • Social contexts matter • Ideas and technologies

Causes are complicated • Contexts Macro • Poverty, religion, inequality, foreign policy • Often described as ‘root causes’ • Individual factors Micro • Personalities, psychology, experiences But: • There is no such thing as a ‘terrorist profile’ • Most ‘terrorists’ are relatively ‘ordinary’: • “most terrorists appear to be normal in a clinical sense” (Schmid 2014)

What caused the Paris attacks? • Macro-level: • Sustained violence in Syria and Iraq, and the rise of ISIS • • • Popular uprisings and power vacuums Rivalry between communities, and between militant groups ISIS weakened in recent years Response to French foreign policy Particular interpretations of Islam • Micro-level: • Individual alienation • But, beware notions of ‘radicalisation’ • Difficult to look inside the mind of a ‘terrorist’ • Intervening - meso-level - factors: • Failures of intelligence and border security • Group dynamics

Question 3 What should be done?

Types of counter-terrorism Description Understanding of terrorism Examples Use of force Military force to disrupt or prevent terrorism A form of warfare • Wars on terror • Assassinations Intelligence and policing Counter-terrorism via A crime security services • Intelligence gathering • Community policing Homeland security Improving resilience and protection from terrorism A manageable security threat • Counter-terrorism laws • Infrastructure protection Conciliation Non-violent efforts to Outcome of and dialogue address root causes grievances and conditions • Negotiations • Public diplomacy • Development initiatives

What is being done? • Condemnation and coalition building • UN Security Council Resolution • Member states to take ‘all necessary measures’ • European Union mutual defence clause • ‘Obligation of aid and assistance’ • Invoked by France for the first time • Air strikes on targets in Syria and Iraq • France, Russia, US and UK (In Iraq) • Police raids across France and Belgium • Hundreds of searches, deployment of thousands of police and soldiers • ‘State of emergency’ in France; ‘Lockdown in Brussels’ • Border control restrictions across Europe • New security measures at transport hubs

Will it work? • Limitations of military power • • Fixed targets are rare Risk of civilian casualties Increased resentment Makes diplomacy more difficult • Exceptional security measures • • Effectiveness is difficult to evaluate Risk creating a climate of fear May exaggerate the terrorist threat Often outlast their initial justification

Conclusion • Terrorism is a rare phenomenon, especially in the global North • 40, 000 people die each day from hunger alone • 32, 658 people killed by terrorism last year • 80% in 5 countries: Iraq, Nigeria, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Syria • ‘Outside of 2001, fewer people have died in America from international terrorism than have drowned in toilets’ (Mueller 2005) • Responses to terrorism often cause more harm than terrorism itself • Efforts to kill 41 men in drone strikes up to November 2014 led to the deaths of 1, 147 people • Hardening of attitudes toward the refugee crisis • Islamophobia in France, the UK and beyond • Counter-terrorism policy is often excessive and rushed

Thanks for listening! Dr. Lee Jarvis Politics, Philosophy, Language and Communication Studies University of East Anglia Web: leejarvis. com Email: l. jarvis@uea. ac. uk Twitter: @Lee. Jarvis. Pols