Suicide Terrorism: a Decision-Making Problem - Research Paper Example

Suicide Terrorism: a Decision-Making Problem Abstract: The wave of terrorism has reached its peak level in the 20th century. This has also been accompanied by a deadly combination of semi-intentional suicide in the event of terrorist attacks. The objective to spread terror is pursued on the constraint of the death of a terrorist. The emotions and sentiments also get drowned in this revolution for terrorism. In order to seek one’s independence, young generation is getting swayed over by the tides of violence and malice against the innocent citizens of the country. In this respect, the phenomenon has been guided by the decision-making approach theory. In this essay, it will be portrayed how a problem or a purpose faced by a terrorist takes him to a situation where a challenge to clothe in death is accepted by a rational terrorist. This, way of reaching one’s destination guided by the macroeconomic as well as microeconomic concepts of game theory will be the limelight of the essay. Last but not the least, a trade –off between the payoff to a terrorist and loss of this decision making problem will be analyzed with the help of several psychological tools. It will show the significance of adoring oneself with the jewel of death to shine as a martyr and set an example to the mass. Introduction: The phenomenon of suicide terrorist attacks is guided by the principles of psychology, economics and sociology. The area of decision making in this case is the problem faced by an individual on the verge to kill him and others for the religion or and social purpose. Why would a human being wrap explosives around their body walk in to a crowd and blow themselves up with the intent of killing others? Suicide terrorism implies, the act of an individual who is the attacker, gaining the potential to transform himself into martyr by taking the lives of several innocent citizens of the society and himself. This intentional way of committing suicide is becoming prominent in this modern world. It is a standard used for campaigning the future prospects of terrorism. One, idea that has to be kept in the minds of an attacker and the public is that the root of suicide terrorism is based on nationalist grounds rather than on religious differences. Examples of such communists and anti-imperialist’s groups are Red Army Faction (RAF) and the suicidal groups of Kamikaze. The motivators of the terrorists groups persuade the vulnerable sections of the society especially the young people, the woman forbidden by their husbands or widows whose husbands have been killed being wrongly accused as a terrorist. The unsuccessful and low-responsibility lives of the students force them to engage in bloodstained activities to gain a personal identity and victory. In this era of modernization, the consequences and the ideals behind the suicide terrorism is potentially getting more strong and turgid. Many conflicting views of the authors have portrayed the decision making problem in different dimensions among which, three of them will be under the spotlight in this essay.(Bongar, 2007,pp:107-111) The psychological aspect of suicide terrorism originates from the low esteem, lost identity and homeless nature of the individuals. This forces them to dive into the path of terrorism to empower themselves with dignity and mass appeal. It also originates from the terror-stricken family whose children are forcibly taken away by the terrorists groups. This is just a transition of terror from the family of the individual to the whole community. Even, some people get isolated from their homes and family, and in search of solace they pick guns and weapons. This becomes the last resort according to them. A solution to their mental depression and personal trauma culminates in attacking and terrifying the society with explosives and bombs. The pattern of timing, area, the target and the objectives are a part of rational and logical terrorist. So, even if the person might be unsatisfied in his/her personal life or depressed with his family ties, the planning of the event of suicidal attacks in the city is done strategically. To overcome the stress of being inferior in the society and establish one’s own image, the terrorist willingly devotes himself for the sake of martyrdom. A self-enforcing mechanism acts on the psychological set-up of a terrorist, which instills in him the zeal to end himself through suicide terrorism. The character traits among the suicide bombers are framed by their stability and the dearth of personal empathy (Bongar, 2007, pp. 107-111) The reason and the logic behind commitment of suicide and killing others can also be explained by microeconomic as well as macroeconomic theory. From the perspective of rational actor model, an uneducated and unskilled person will diverge himself into terrorist activities. This is so because, the opportunity costs for the terrorist from other alternative sources of income are minimal. Even, the rewards and fame accompanied by being a martyr is more as compared to the expected loss or in the probability of getting caught and imprisoned. The benefits accrued to the bombers are usually high social recognition but after his death. The rational theory is not only the aspect of an attacker but also the head of the organization. Suicide bombers are the priced assets for them, which bring material benefits, popularity and sentiments from the mass people. The attackers and the head of the terrorists groups govern the decision-making area. The game theoretic approach finds its application in human conflicts and other strategic interactions of market. It is appropriately used in the area of terrorism which includes the strategic interdependencies of the decision making problem. In this approach, the players are the terrorists and the government who are in pursuit to maximize their individual pay-offs subject to their opponents expected actions. The government makes it a point to gain the knowledge about the aims and motives of the terrorist group. It thus helps in understanding the strategies of the terrorists, the governmental policies and reaction of both the players. According to this, the pay-off of suicide terrorism has higher pay-off in the form of changed government agenda and border security policy. Due to the assumptions of rationality and intelligent behavior of the players, game theory has been successful in modeling out the decision-making problem in the suicidal terrorists’ attacks. (Benmelech, Berreb and Klor, February, 2010). From the macroeconomic point of view, it has been evident that economic conditions of a society are related to the rise of terrorism. If in an economy, the rate of cyclical as well as structural unemployment shows an upward trend the terror organizations also recruits more number of educated and skilled individuals under the name of suicide terrorists. The intergenerational investment in suicidal terror attacks brings a sustainable development in the future and probability of getting benefits of some social good also increases for the next generation. The decision of sacrificing for one’s nation and the people percolates in the form of improved economic well-being of the people at present and in future.( Azam, October 12, 2003,p.4) The phenomenon of suicide terrorism can be portrayed through the following models such that the decision-making problem of being a martyr imposes a significant value in the life of a terrorist and the society as well. Jean Paul’s Theory: The definition of suicide attacks implies the attack of mass innocent people and killing oneself in the pursuit of independency and reformation of governmental rules and regulations. It is done in order to spread terror and cause widespread damage given the constraint that there is a high probability in the death of the attacker. In this model developed by Jean Paul Azam, an inter-linkage between the present and the future generation is focused on within the framework of macroeconomic ideas and concepts. It says that through the nature of altruism, the present generation can bring benefits to the future generation by taking the decision to accept the act of martyrdom. A bomb-blast or any other means to terrify the world peace can trickle down as sweats of blessing over the future generation. As a target is chosen to attack, the success of the blast increases the frequency of the utility maximization for some social good or services in the near future. It has been shown in his paper, that empirically it has been proved that suicide bombers hailing from a renowned and wealthy family opt for being a terrorist. It might appear that the opportunity costs of the terrorist are more if he chose an alternative career. Although, the phenomenon of suicidal terrorists attacks raises the sensitivity to the standard of living, consumption level and the development of future generation. This, in turn, gives a better pay-off and offsets the income accruing from any other sources of income than suicide terrorism. It is a common belief that several factors like poor education, standard of living and the social background can be the ultimate cause for an individual to enter into the path of terrorism. In this paper, this has been proved wrong with respect to the actual scenario. In the terror attack of 9/11 in 2001 caused by the crashing of planes at the Twin Towers and Pentagon, it has been investigated that the attackers involved were basically students from USA. Thus, most of the terrorists in this era of globalization are coming from a strong family and an educational background. Usually, the young people who join the terrorist organizations such as Al-Qaeda or any other Islamic Jihad groups are above average educated and also hail from a wealthy family. Thus, the search of one’s identity and be recognized by the world through suicide terrorism is basically rejected after such findings. According to Jean Paul Azam, suicide terrorism germinates from the virtue of intergenerational investment. This relates to a sustainable development in the present as well as in the future generation. If an individual is ready to die, then it can be viewed as maximum saving for the future generation. This leads to an increasing level of consumption and income of the people. The act of martyrdom can shower blessing for the upcoming generation. In one respect, the terrorists are murderers but at the same time, there are also the godfathers of the future generation. The killing of innocent civilians along with himself at some point of time gives a more secured and balanced life to the following generations. The main assumption is this model is that, the resources required to target the civilians in a bomb-blast brings a long-term increase in the utility of any other public good. Thus, the phenomenon of suicide terrorism plays both a negative as well as positive role in the society. The public good can emerge in the form of independence or some liberty from the bondage of political bureaucrats. It can also be the effective control over the limited valuable resources, like the oil fields etc. This will bring an economic growth along with the development of resource property. In any event of suicide terrorism, the target groups are usually the foreign occupation army or some other higher authorities. The most depressing aspect of this event is that the target ones are hardly affected but the fragile and weaponless civilians are trapped with terror and death. Besides, targeting the common people, a striking feature is that terrorists are not at all affected by the fear of being killed or facing death. They can never be discouraged on the pretext that a particular terror attack might take away his life and bring a mournful atmosphere among his family and friends. The act of murdering is molded with a new objective to sacrifice and serve one’s religion and nation in the form of a martyr. The microeconomic aspect relating the poverty issues to the terrorism is depicted in his paper. It states that if the cost of suicide terrorism increases then the investment in bombing also falls. It will lead to an increase in the present consumption level rather than the future generation consumption level. The cost of investment incorporates two features, i.e. the cost of hosting such a terror-spreading event and the other is the opportunity cost of sacrificing one’s life for the sake of religion and nation. There is no empirical support to the latter cost. This is so because for an educated person, the opportunity cost is always more if he indulges in the act of suicidal terrorism. It is also believed that educated people are much concerned with the bio-economic equilibrium of the natural resources and also possess the knowledge of biodiversity. Education becomes the weapon to realize the sensitivity of the future generation due to reduced consumption in the present period of time. (Azam, October 12, 2003,pp: 4-15) In this model, the objective function proposed is segregated in terms of the bomber’s current consumption and the expected rise in consumption of his descendents in the future. This rise in consumption pertains to a public good like freedom or any valuable resources for the future generation. The rational choice behind suicide terrorism is the positive trade-off between the probability of the next generation getting benefited by the public good and the act of suicide terrorism. This decision-making problem depends on a set of explanatory variables like the invested resources in this act of martyrdom, which makes the level of consumption zero. The rational behavior of the terrorist leads him to his involvement in this task for the betterment of the ecosystem. It is just an extreme form of saving, such that the bomber gives up his current consumption for sake of enhancing the probability of future generation to enjoy the fruits of public good like independence. Bombing is thus a function of current wealth and the educational background. It increases with the amount of wealth one possesses due to the larger investment of the resources in this act. So, even empirically it has been evident that individuals coming from above-average income family background find martyrdom as their destination. Talking about the other explanatory variable, education, suicide attacks are positively related with the knowledge of altruism towards the next generation. So, it has been observed lately that people hailing from an above-average educational level are more willing to join the terrorist groups and sacrifice themselves in the name of nation. This strategy of high education and wealthy individual is the dominant strategy forming Nash equilibrium over the period of time. One drawback of the above analysis is that if by any means the benefit of the public good is made certain, then the area of decision-making problem in this respect has no significance and so suicide terrorism will have no impact on the social life of an individual. (Azam, October 12, 2003, pp.17-24) Wintrobe’s theory: According to this theory, the act of suicide terrorism is the extreme situation incorporating the rational choice theory of a human behavior. In order to obtain solidarity or belongingness, young individuals engage themselves in these terrorist groups and divert their beliefs in obtaining an identity. The model basically analyzes that the trade-off between the adopted beliefs by the group of an individual and the reception of the benefit of solidarity. Wintrobe depicts in his study the desire of an isolated individual towards belongingness from the cult or the group and its activities. The achievement of this solidarity is accomplished by the intensive involvement of the group activities. In this process, the individual’s own values and beliefs are given up in the name of the values of the group people. Under this theory, the terrorist or the bombers utility is the function of groups’ and the leaders’ values and his lack of identity. So, the marginal utility changes and is dependent on the behavior of the group. This gradually diminishes and wipes out the individual’s identity. The marginal value of solidarity does not exhibit diminishing returns due to inclusion of leaders’ values in the utility function of the terrorist. In this respect, there is nothing irrational or abnormal in the commitment of suicide terrorism. The rationality behavior solves out the problem with the help of solidarity multiplier effect of entering into the act of suicide terrorism. The solution of the above problem yields the equilibrium point, which is monomaniac or a corner solution by nature. Here, the bomber has maximized its utility, which is ultimately reflected as the leaders’ values only. The rational suicide is possible in this case. Seeking solidarity by suicide terrorism is a rational choice. The decision to sacrifice oneself is the way of internalizing the values and beliefs of the group by gaining a possession and identity in exchange. So, the corner solution states the extent of the rational behavior. At this point no irrationality or abnormality persists in the act of a suicide bomber. In summarizing, a suicide bomber can be rational in pursuit of solidarity and the transformation of autonomy to solidarity. This is because a young individual who is homeless and is isolated seeks identity and popular image in the group. Thus, it is also empirically observed that with technological discontinuity in the form of traditions and rituals results in the commitment of self-sacrifice for his religion. Solidarity like any capital, religious beliefs or computer software becomes more attractive with more usage. It contaminates the whole humanity towards suicide terrorism. The rationality framework within which the decision-making problem operates is a tool to get identified by committing suicide. This ensures freedom from the bondage of loneliness and melancholy. (Wintrobe, November 5, 2001) Contrast between Jean Paul theory and Wintrob’s ideals: The objective of the above two theories is to reach at a steady solution in the problem regarding the act of suicide terror attacks. Both the theories and approaches land in to a common destination that suicide bombers are rational by behavior and the action taken by them. Though, the path to achieve this is based on different concepts and underlying approaches. In Jean Paul’s theory, suicide terrorism does not reflect a mental imbalance or psychological disturbance. Social isolation, loss of identity and lack of wealth are not the determining factors of an individual to engage in the act of deadly terrorism. Rather, people hailing from an above-average educational background or above-average wealthy family participate more in the act of suicide terrorism. This is because, more investment of resources are required in suicidal terror attacks, which is only possible for individuals wealthier than others. The passion for this investment comes from the high knowledge of bio-diversity and negative effects of high consumption in the current period. Above-educated young people who have the spirit to perform altruism for the next generation only possess this. So, according to Jean Paul the explanatory variables for suicide bombers are high-education and high investment of their resources to commit suicide terrorism. (Azam, October 12, 2003, p. 24) In comparison to this, Wintrob states that suicide bombers act rationally in the name of the group people and the culture. Individuals, who have been isolated from their family and feel that they do not have any personal identity of their own, participate in terrorist activities. They consider the values and beliefs of the group and the leader by giving up one’s own values. It is the zeal to seek unity, solidarity and identity. According to this theory, the individual’s utility function depends upon the leaders’ values. In order to gain a popular image, the terrorist reaches a corner solution, which is the maximum utility, derived from suicide terrorism. This is described as the rational and logical aspect of any general human behavior. The transition from autonomy or solitary to belongingness is the rational choice of a terrorist by accepting death.(Wintrob, November 5, 2001) Silverman’s simulated terrorist decision-making approach: This is the ultimate goal of taking the decision to commit suicide in a terror attack by the attacker himself. It is based on simulation technique by taking in to account the real variable or conditions in the real world and then running the terrorist attack in a virtual simulated environment. A process has been postulated by Silverman to analyze the task of terrorist organization and identify the motives and actions of the terrorists by the Performance Moderator Function. (PMF). This forms the basis by a combination of game-theoretic approach and Markovian analysis to capture the suicidal terrorism and the ideology behind. It is the basic and significant approach to develop a useful tool to understand and analyze the rational mind set-up of the suicide bombers. The individual decision making approach is described by the process of Markov Decision process and also as repeated Bayesian games. According to the Markov decision, the terrorist strategy is segregated in a world of states such that the transition of one state to another is free from the past events but depends on the current state. The transitional probability denotes the movement of one state to another, which helps us to build the decision-making problem by a game theoretic representation of the players. Here the terrorists are the players. Silverman says that, suppose a terrorist organization exists that targets a specific number of people across the checkpoint. Now, assume that its decision to lead the organization towards the target can only be achieved via a bomb blast. It also knows that it must plan to escape through the checkpoint to carry out their plan. This course of actions planned by the terrorist group can be made into a model through an initial definition of states. It can be like succeeding and escaping to return back home, or getting identified at the checkpoint and then imprisoned or getting killed in a shootout. Then at the point, the terrorist can find either of the outcomes as follows, i.e. faced by a trained guard and getting killed or can find an untrained guard in an unsteady mode. In the second case, the terrorist can smell some positive utility in accomplishment of the plan by carrying out the plan unnoticed. It can also lead to shooting of the guard, running, continuing or sacrificing himself. A low utility outcome is obtained by engagement in shootout with the trained guard. At each state, the choice analysis will give the route of action adopted by the terrorist in a simulated environment. Then a utility is assigned to each course of action. This will be based on the consequences followed by the specific state. Along with it, a probability is attached based on the beliefs and values of the terrorist about achieving the outcome or the pay-off. A suicide bomber or any other terrorist maximizes the expected utility function derived by the sum of outcomes of utility multiplied by the probability. So, the decision behind the act of martyrdom is also achieved based on this simulated model approach. Here the attackers creates the environment in such a way that it is a mirror reflection of the real world that they will have to operate in. The suicidal terror attacks have to organize campaigns which will apt the current situation of the society consisting of the potential targets. Then, a target sector is chosen after which the planning is drawn. Then, the implementation of the plan is undertaken and if the attack demands that utility can be maximized by suicide terrorism, then the attack will result in killing of several civilians as well as the attacker himself. In this way, the terrorist organization can operate and behave in a realistic way. (Silverman, Weaver, Shin and Dubois, 2001). Discussion: The above models depicted the various ways to analyze the decision making approach in suicidal terror attacks. It has been achieved by the game-theoretic approach where the players or the terrorists rationally maximize the pay-offs given the expectations of the opponents or the potential targets. The rational behavior theory by Wintrob has illustrated that the act of suicidal terrorism is a rational choice on the side of the attacker. It is obtained as the corner solution by maximizing its utility function, which is dependent on the leaders’ values and the beliefs of the group. In search of identity and companionship, the values of the terrorist groups persuade a young individual and he substitutes his own beliefs with that of the leader and the group members. Eventually, at the equilibrium this persuasion reaches at the maximum point such that the attacker becomes the dancing puppet in the hands of the leader. This motivates him to commit suicide and kill millions of civilians in the name of fake virtues of religions. In contrast to this, Jean Paul formulated a intergenerational investment model in which the high-level education and the wealth of an individual determines the act of suicidal attacks. This is done with the objective to gift the future generation with a public good. It shows the philanthropic spirit of suicide bombers who sacrifice themselves for the betterment and maintenance of the ecological system. Above all, a simulated model to understand and study the planning and strategy of the terrorist organization is based on the Silverman’s modeling and simulating approach. This is based on the Markov chain analysis and repeated games theory. The model presents a picturesque to relate the simulated or virtually created targets and terrorist attacks to the suicidal terrorism and spread of terror among the citizens in the real world. The problem of decision-making solely lies upon why and in what circumstances a terrorist will be ready to die for his group and proclaim himself as a martyr of the community. This area is multi-dimensional in nature, because at one point it might appear that only poor or homeless people resort to these terrorist activities to find their identity and get a strong grip in the beliefs and the motives of the group. This in fact does not follow always. In the recent scenario, most educated people and young talented people hailing from a rich family also takes this problem and adopts several ideals to kill themselves. In spite of much acclaimed models by Wintrob and Jean Paul, both the theories face certain criticisms. Like, if there is a certainty that the future generation will be benefited by the consumption pf a public good, then the probability of suicidal terrorism will decrease, as the value of altruism will no longer hold. In Wintrob theory of rational actor model, a person in search of identity and solidarity will sometimes resort to martyrdom but not always. An equilibrium point or rather a corner solution is not preferred by any general individual as it will only give satisfaction derived from one particular good. Thus, valuing only what the leader says will not be preferred always. An equal advantage will be given to his views and the leaders’. In comparison to this, the Silverman’s model which is based on simulation can be proved to be inappropriate if the real world conditions changes or the variable explaining the targets and consequences also varies with time. (Benmelech, Berreb and Klor, February, 2010) Conclusion: This paper shows that the decision making approach to suicidal terror attacks is rational. This is achieved on the basis of utility maximization given the constraint of gain in solidarity and altruism. Killing one self for the sake of religion and people is not irrational in terms of the motives and intentions of the attacker. Though, the models provide a necessary way to find a way to this decision making problem, still conditions given by these models will not be sufficient to give a long-term solution. The definition of rationality is basically narrowed down as it attacks the mind of the terrorist with a uni-directional way of thinking. The sensibility and the judgment power of the suicide bombers get imprisoned under the seductive and persuading nature of the leaders. They become vulnerable in the name of religion and freedom. A suggestion to stop this growing problem of suicide terrorism is to prevent and protect the young individuals, educated or uneducated, homeless or wealthy, from being over swayed by the wrong motives of the terrorist groups. A simulated and modeled environment will be constructed to reflect freedom and justice, which will exist for every individual in the real world. The real and non-violent virtues of the religion and the community should be instilled in everyone’s souls in order to transform them from terrorist to patriotic heroes. References: 1) Silverman, B.G, Weaver, R, Shin, H and R. Dubois. (2001). Modeling and simulating Terrorist Decision-Making. Retrieved on June 28, 2010 from: http://scholar.google.ch/scholar?hl=de&as_sdt=2000&q=modelling+and+simulating+terrorist+decision+making 2) Wintrobe, R. (November5, 2001). Can suicide bombers be rational?. Retrieved on June 28. 2010 from: http://scholar.google.ch/scholar?hl=de&q=can+suicide+bombers+be+rational&lr=&as_ylo=&as_vis=0 3) Azam, J.P. (October 12, 2003). Suicide bombing as Inter-Generational Investment. Retrieved on June 28, 2010 from: http://neeo.univ-tlse1.fr/1629/1/suicide_bombing.pdf 4) Bongar, B.M. (2007). Psychology of terrorism. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 5) Benmelech, E, Berreb, C. and E. F. Klor. (February, 2010). Economic conditions & quality of suicide terrors. Retrieved on June 28, 2010 from: http://economics.huji.ac.il/facultye/klor/ECQST.pdf Read More