NCJ Number
86272
Date Published
1982
Length
333 pages
Annotation
This study of recent global terrorist actions shows that a flexible response based on minimum force is the best choice for governments faced with an immediate threat.
Abstract
Governments tend to respond more harshly when they perceive terrorists as having a high capacity for sophisticated operations, thus posing a greater threat to governmental authority. To respond effectively, nations must first analyze terrorist objectives and capabilities to determine if there is an actual threat to public order. Policy trade-offs are different in each terrorist conflict. If the responding government is interested in making the best 'deal' for itself and its constitutents, it should be aware of what it is giving away and what it is getting in return. A particular response may be cost-effective in one circumstance and not in another. Although a nation may want to announce a hard-line policy, its success in neutralizing terrorists will depend more on patience, negotiation, and delaying tactics than on violence. Selecting an optimal response involves tremendous uncertainty. By negotiating, uncertainty can be reduced through assessment during the negotiation process. The author uses case studies to illustrate these points, particularly West German and Israeli responses to hostage-taking incidents. Reference notes, an index, and a bibliography of more than 200 works are appended. Data on terrorist incidents are included.