The Root Causes of Terrorism

“The policies in the USA, Britain, and other allies towards Iraq

and Israel have not only inflamed Islamic communities and

directly led to new terrorist attacks, but also undermined the

public moral critique of Islamist terrorism and, more deeply,

affirmed an image of the West as a jahidi civilization and a

threat to Islam.  We may complain that the moral and

strategic picture is far more complex than they portray it, but

this will be virtually impossible to convey given the binary

prism thorough which Western acts will be viewed.  And self-

regarding talk of the superior values of secularism,

representative democracy and free markets (especially when

they are accompanied by attacks on multiculturalism and

basic civil rights) will only make the situation worse.  Euben

perceptively points out that Qutb’s work demonstrates that

there is ‘a transcultural problematic of modernity’ which

needs careful analysis, but Fukuyama is a paradigm case of a

thinker who cannot accept that modernity might be

criticizable.  His own theory of the inexorable advance of

American modernity and its dissolution of local cultural

differences beneath a single capitalist horizon is exactly the

target of Qutb’s critique of the ‘Crusader spirit’ that ‘lives on in

the seemingly inexorable march of Western colonization and

the cultural hostility it embodies and expresses”.

      (Burke 2008, p. 46)

Introduction

The root causes of terrorism have largely been misunderstood.  A short history

of the discipline will reveal that this is partly a result of the politicized forces that

have dominated terrorism studies.  More recently, the contribution of theorists

from a range of disciplines including sociology, history, anthropology, social

psychology have built on overly simplistic psychological explanations of terrorist

behaviour.  This essay will attempt to situate many different types of terrorism,

religious and ethno-nationalist, in legitimate grievances individuals and groups

have with the State.

Psychology

Early social scientific explanations of the root causes of terrorism focused on

psychological explanations for terrorist behaviour, attempting to argue that

terrorists were personally predisposed to terrorism (Sageman 2014, p. 2). 

Attempts to assign psychological disorders, mental illness, pathology, deviance,

personality disorder were made using psychological theories (Erlenbusch 2014,

p. 473).  The scholarly literature has disregarded these explanations  (Sageman

2014, p. 2; Shughart II (2006, p.  11), although descriptions of terrorists as

irrational or psychologically disturbed individuals continue to dominate

mainstream media.  Moreover, terrorists continue to be conceptualized in

Western political discourses though this lens (Erienbusch 2014, p. 474).  

Similarly, explanations that attempted to determine the character traits of

terrorists have also been disregarded, finding that there are no common threads

of race, ethnicity, education, income, employment status that run through

individuals or groups involved in terrorist activities (Shugart II 2006, p. 11). 

More sophisticated psychological approaches have emerged.  For example,

rational choice perspective that treats terrorists as deliberate actors engaging in

reasoned behaviour (Crenshaw 2008, p. 7).  These actors are assumed to be

motivated primarily, but not solely, by self-interest.  Here, decisions to join a

group and participate hinge on the individual’s evaluation of the probable

benefits or costs to recruitment and/or participation.  Group based explanations

(Hoffman 2013, p. 231) use a combination of sociology and psychology, moving

away from psychopathological explanations focus on the social processes leading

to perpetuation of acts of terrorist violence (Hoffman 2013, p. 231). 

Other disciplines

More sophisticated explanations of the root causes of terrorism have emerged as

different disciplines have become interested in explaining terrorism.  This

includes; sociology, anthropology, political science, history, economics,

engineering, computer science (Sageman 2014, p. 5-7).  Social psychology and

social moment studies have provided great insight in analyzing the root causes of

terrorism.  These theories have been used to examine the social processes of

becoming a terrorist, including recruitment policies, social networks, trigger

events and peer dynamics (Hoffman 2013, p. 232).  A multi-disciplinary study of

the root causes of terrorism reveals the extent to which the causes of terrorism

have been understood through a politicized lens.  For example, security

organisations that seek to blame the enemy may spend very little time or energy

attempting to understand root causes and instead focus on counter terrorism

strategies that fail to take account of the genuine grievances a terrorist group

may have with the government.  This reveals that bias hides the root causes of

terrorism.  In the case of the United States of America and the ‘War on Terror’ an

examination of key strategic documents since 2001, reveal that the United States

response to terrorism is characterized by a lack of focus on the underlying

grievances Muslim or other populations may have with the West.

History

“The history of terrorism in the second half of the twentieth

century would have been quite different had Transjordan, as it

was intended to be, been made a Palestinian homeland; if

Kurdistan had not been mysteriously overlooked in the

Settlement of 1922; if a line had not been drawn around Iraq,

but that Mesopotamia had instead been divided along its tree

natural internal boundaries; and if Armenians, Tajiks, Uzbeks,

Pashtuns, Punjabis and many other ethnic populations had not

been marooned across the borders of two or more contrived

nation-states”(Shughart II 2006, p. 36).

Shughart II (2006, p.7) locates the root causes of terrorism in the artificial

creation of nation states.  Nationalism and ethnic separatism are prime motives

underlying terrorism that emerged in the wake of the Second World War

(Shughart II 2006, p. 17).  He argues that terrorism is a predictable response to

artificial nation states that we created by colonial powers without regard for

traditional ethnic homelands or customary patterns of trade (Shughart II 2006,

p. 8).  Shughart II also explains that the root causes of terrorism originated in the

genuine grievances of ethnic and religious groups, marginalized politically. 

Gershman (2002, p. 63) argues that the root causes lie in weak states, inadequate

cooperation between countries in region, social problems, including anemic

economies, unequal patterns of development and fragile democratic institutions. 

While economic inequality seems to be given by Left Wing groups and Marxist

theories that attempt to explain this type of terrorist behaviour, the inequalities

that pervade society influence all types of terrorism whether, religious, right and

left wing or ethno nationalist.

Globalisation

Newman (2006, p. 750) argues that poverty, demographic factors, social

inequality, exclusion, dispossession and political grievances enable conditions

for terrorism.  As an extension of this, he says that globalization, free markets

and spread of democracy resulted in economic instability and volatile social

situations (Newman 2006, p. 754).   Moreover, as Juergensmyer (2008, p. 9)

points out, the domination of Western cultural and economic control is

interpreted by many as neo-colonialism.

Hanlon (2008, p.116) argues that globalization is widening the gap between rich

and poor states.  He says that it further undermines the sovereignty, security and

legitimacy of those states on the fringes of the globalized world (Hanlon, p. 116). 

He makes the conclusion that armed states are uniquely positioned to exploit the

benefits of globalization in ways that weak states cannot (Hanlon 2008, p. 124). 

Similar to a number of other authors, Hanlon (2008, p. 122) argues that the

deeper causes of terrorism lie in fractured states were created during the

decolonization period after 1945.  Juergensmyer (2008, p. 32) explains that one

of the reasons why secular ideas and institutions are strongly rejected by some

religious leaders is that these ideas and institutions are perceived as responsible

for the moral decline within their own countries.

Gershman (2002, p. 63) builds on Hanlon (2008), to explain the broader

economic and political conditions that have facilitated the emergence of

extremist political Islam.  He uses Muslim regions in Thailand and the

Philippines as examples of areas that have the worst poverty, income inequality,

infant and maternal mortality rates and literacy levels (Gershman 2003, p. 68). 

Rather than attributing religion to the terrorist activities, the author explains

that particular groups of people have been marginalized, their marginalization

being along religious lines.  This makes it easy for disputes about inequality to be

misconceived as being purely about religion.

Alienation

A number of authors use alienation as an explanation of the conditions that lead

individuals and groups to joint terrorist groups, and participate in terrorist

activities.  Many authors see alienation as connected to globalization, an

inevitable result of the deep fundamental grievances suffered by a particular

population (Tan 2013, p. 15).   Under conditions of anxiety and societal strains

(Alienation and the quest for renewal, p. 115), the alienated individual is left

susceptible to appeals to religion, ethnicity and class (Tan 2013, p. 15).

Taking a sociological response, Hall (2007, p. 74) argues that it is Muslim

alienation, not radical Islam that is the root cause of Islamic terrorism (Hall

2007, p. 74).  “Alienation and victimization – whether real of perceived – among

a considerable proportion of the worldwide Muslim community needs to be

recognized and responded to positively.  If unaddressed or dealt with in token

ways, there is a risk that the world will slide back into international policies

based on spheres of influence; in effect, the ‘War on Terror’ will become the new

Cold War” (Hall 2007, p.75).  Hall (2007, p. 74) uses an explanation reserved for

ethno-nationalist terrorism, when he argues that Islamic violence is fueled by

feelings of collective victimization and social inequality, challenging popular

conceptions about the connections between Islam and terrorist violence.

Tan (2011) provides an example of the Malay Muslims in Southern Thailand.  He

argues that the Malay Muslims have become alienated over time.  He explains

that this has occurred because Malay Muslim populations never really accepted

state legitimacy (Tan 2011, p. 69).  Combined with this, there has been a

continued failure to make progress on resolving some of the fundamental

grievances of the Malay Muslims (Tan 2011 p. 78).  These grievances include

discrimination, mismanagement, corruption and insensitive policies made by the

central government (Tan 2011, p. 86).

Current Western responses to Terrorism

If the root causes of terrorism lie in genuine grievances particular populations

have with States, it becomes obvious that the war in Iraq, waged by the United

States of America and its allies, boosted propaganda and terrorist recruitment.

For example, while the West attempts to characterize terrorists in particular

ways, the Fatwa set out by Bin Laden and five other terrorist groups, for

example, outlines three justifications for attacking Americans and America.  The

Fatwa gave the following reasons and go some way to explaining anger directed

at the West: US troops in Saudi Arabia, US foreign policy to Iraq, and the US

support of the state of Israel.

In 2006, UK Prime Minster, Tony Blair said liberty and justice, “can only be won

by showing that our values are stronger, better and more just, more fair than the

alternative” (Blair in Hall, 2007, p. 73).  This quote is consistent with the popular

notions coming out the USA, Britain and Australia, which characterize the West’s

value system is superior to anything an imagined opposition can offer (Hall

2007, p. 73).

At the level of international cooperation, UN resolutions that are enforced

against one party and ignored by others, weapons proliferation treated that are

only applied to some and international laws that are enforced against some, but

ignored in the case of others, contribute to alienation that many groups, such as

fundamentalist Muslims feel towards the West (Hall 2007, p. 73).

The “West lacks collective moral and political authority to preach from any high

moral ground when it comes to a value judgment.  Incidents like Abu Graib, the

rendition of Guantanamo, the use of extraordinary rendition in the case of

prisoners and the use of cluster munitions in populated areas have not worn

coverts to the Western cause” (Hall 2007, p. 74).  Incidents like these exemplify

that the West is prone to hypocrisy, duplicity and unilateralism (Hall 2007, p. 74)

and suggest the way the behaviour of States can contribute to the emergence of

terrorism (Schmid 2005, p. 130).

Conclusion

To provide a more effective response to terrorism, it is important that the root

causes of terrorism are adequately examined.  This requires scholars to

understand that terrorism emerges, at least partly, through the failure of States

and scholars to take responsibility for the key role the West plays in creating and

perpetuating inequality and alienation, fundamental reasons for terrorism.  By

accepting the West’s role in manifesting hate directed at it, the West may begin

to implement policies that combat inequality both within and between countries.

References

Burke, Anthony 2008, The end of terrorism, Critical Studies on Terrorism, vol. 1,

      no. 1, pp. 37-49.

Crenshaw, Martha 2008, Current research on terrorism: The academic

      perspective,  Studies in Conflict and Terrorism, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 1-11.

Erienbusch, Verena 2014, How (not) to study terrorism, Critical Review of

      International Social and Political Philosophy, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 470-491.

Gershman, John 2002, ‘Is southeast Asia the second front, Foreign Affairs, vol. 81,

      no. 4, pp. 60-74.

Hall, Robert 2007, The sociology of terrorism, The RUSI Journal, vol. 152, no. 3,

      pp. 72-75.

Hanlon, Querine 2008, Globalization and the transformation of armed groups, US

      Naval College, Newport.

Hofmann, David 2012, The sociology of terrorism: People, places and processes,

      Behavioral Science of Terrorism and Political Aggression, vol. 5, no. 3,

      pp.231-233.

Juergensmeyer, Mark 2008, Global rebellion: Religious challenges to the secular

      state, from Christian militias to Al Qaeda, University of California Press,

      Berkeley & Los Angeles.

Newman, E 2006, ‘Exploring the “Root Causes” of terrorism, Studies in Conflict &

      Terrorism, vol. 29, pp. 749-772.

Sageman, Marc 2014, ‘The stagnation in terrorism research’, Terrorism and

      Political Violence, vol. 1, pp. 1-16.

Schmid, Alex 2012, ‘Root causes of terrorism: Some conceptual notes, a set of

      indicators, and a model’, Democracy and Security, vol. 1, pp. 127-136.

Shughart II, William 2006, An analytical history of terrorism, 1945-2000, Public

      Choice, vol. 128, pp. 7-39.

Tan, Andrew 2011, Security strategies in the Asia-Pacific, Palgrave Macmillan,

      New York.

Tan, Andrew 2013, Terrorism and insurgency in Southeast Asia, Rutledge, London.

Bibliography

Burke, Anthony 2008, The end of terrorism, Critical Studies on Terrorism, vol. 1,

      no. 1, pp. 37-49.

Chadler, Michael & Gunaratna, Rohan 2007, Countering terrorism, Reaktion

      Books, London.

Crenshaw, Martha 2008, Current research on terrorism: The academic

      perspective,  Studies in Conflict and Terrorism, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 1-11.

Erienbusch, Verena 2014, How (not) to study terrorism, Critical Review of

      International Social and Political Philosophy, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 470-491.

Franks, Jason 2009, ‘Rethinking the roots of terrorism: Beyond orthodox

      terrorism theory – a critical research agenda, Global Society, Vol. 23:2, pp.

      153-176.

Gershman, John 2002, ‘Is southeast Asia the second front, Foreign Affairs, vol. 81,

      no.4, pp. 60-74.

Hall, Robert 2007, The sociology of terrorism, The RUSI Journal, vol. 152, no. 3,

      pp. 72-75.

Hanlon, Querine 2008, Globalization and the transformation of armed groups, US

      Naval College, Newport.

Hoffman, Bruce 2006, Inside terrorism, Columbia University Press, New York.

Hofmann, David 2012, The sociology of terrorism: People, places and processes,

      Behavioral Science of Terrorism and Political Aggression, vol. 5, no. 3,

      pp.231-233.

Juergensmeyer, Mark 2008, Global rebellion: Religious challenges to the secular

      state, from Christian militias to Al Qaeda, University of California Press,

      Berkeley & Los Angeles.

Krieger, Tim & Melerricks, Daniel 2011 ‘What causes terrorism’, Public Choice,

      vol. 147, pp. 3-27.

Newman, E 2006, ‘Exploring the “Root Causes” of terrorism, Studies in Conflict &

      Terrorism, vol. 29, pp. 749-772.

Post, Jerrold 2010, “’When hatred is bred in the bone:” The social psychology of

      terrorism’, Annals Of The New York Academy of Sciences, 1208, pp. 15-23.

Rinehart, James 2006, Apocalyptic faith and political violence: Prophets of terror,

      Palgrave Macmillan, New York.

Sageman, Marc 2014, ‘The stagnation in terrorism research’, Terrorism and

      Political Violence, vol. 1, pp. 1-16.

Schmid, Alex 2012, ‘Root causes of terrorism: Some conceptual notes, a set of

      indicators, and a model’, Democracy and Security, vol. 1, pp. 127-136.

Shughart II, William 2006, An analytical history of terrorism, 1945-2000, Public

      Choice, vol. 128, pp. 7-39.

Tan, Andrew 2011, Security strategies in the Asia-Pacific, Palgrave Macmillan,

      New York.

Tan, Andrew 2013, Terrorism and insurgency in Southeast Asia, Rutledge, London.