To Martyr or Not to Martyr: Jihad is the Question, What Policy is the Answer?

Abstract

The question of what policies may deter risk-taking actors who willingly commit suicide is not only theoretically challenging, but also of major importance to policymakers. Traditional deterrence theory, which is largely state-oriented, but has also delved into the realm of ordinary criminality, has not been adequately prepared to deal with individual or non-state actors who seem “irrational” because of their high propensity for risk taking and cost bearing. The present article seeks to adapt the notions of deterrence and risk taking developed in the context of interstate relations to such actors, especially terrorist groups whose members engage in martyr-style operations. First, a brief, non-technical review of the essentials of the rational choice approach to deterrence is provided. Second, the article indicates how this approach can be adapted to the deterrence of terrorist actions, especially the crucial role of risk and its correlate, uncertainty, on decision making. Finally, by way of examples, it suggests how these theoretical findings can contribute to a better understanding of the deterrence of terrorists’ actions. Perhaps the most important conclusion reached is that no policy is best, although some policies appear to be more efficacious than others. Although this is not an unexpected conclusion, the present analysis puts it on a firmer theoretical foundation and reinforces the argument that the focus of debate, discussion, and policy should be on the prospects for containing or reducing terrorist actions via passive defenses and the denial to terrorists of access to potential targets.