Verbal attacks on terrorist groups increase violence against civilians

Area of Science:

• Political Science
• International Relations
• Conflict Studies

Background:

• Transnational extremist groups cause significant civilian casualties globally.
• Governments often employ verbal coercion against these groups.
• The effectiveness of verbal coercion on terrorist behavior remains under-examined.

Purpose of the Study:

• To investigate the impact of government verbal conflict on the behavior of extremist groups, specifically the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).
• To determine if verbal coercion deters or escalates terrorist attacks.
• To explore the underlying reasons for the observed effects on extremist group behavior.

Main Methods:

• Bayesian structural vector autoregression models were used to analyze daily event data.
• Data covered interactions between ISIS and foreign governments from 2014-2020.
• Empirical analyses were supplemented with evidence from ISIS's publications and public statements.

Main Results:

• Verbal conflict initiated by governments did not deter ISIS; instead, it increased the frequency of ISIS's attacks on civilians.
• This escalation is linked to a perceived credibility deficit, where extremists respond to verbal challenges with violence to signal resolve.
• Similar patterns were observed in analyses extended to Al-Qaeda in Iraq and Boko Haram.

Conclusions:

• Government verbal coercion strategies against extremist groups are counterproductive.
• Extremist groups may escalate violence in response to verbal challenges to enhance their reputation and perceived capabilities.
• The findings suggest a need to re-evaluate counter-terrorism communication strategies to avoid unintended escalation and mitigate humanitarian consequences.