| The purpose of this study is to compare and contrast secular and religious groups in their rationale for using terrorism and determine if there is a difference. Much of the terrorism literature asserts that while secular terrorists may be rational in their use of terrorism, religious groups are irrational and motivated by fatalist, apocalyptic views of the world. By developing a structured case study and standardizing the questions and criteria applied to each group, it is possible to examine the selection of terrorism from the options and means available. A set of standardized questions and criteria were applied to six groups, three secular (Shining Path, Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam [LTTE], and Basque Country and Freedom [ETA]) and three religious (Al-Qaeda, Hizballah, and Aum Shinrikyo), who have employed terrorism in their attempts to fulfill political objectives. Modified expected utility theory was used to determine if the selection of terrorism by each group was rational based on their objectives, means, political capability, and government reaction.; The study found some commonalities between the religious and secular groups and several factors which crossed religious and secular lines. Also, it was found that neither religious nor secular groups were totally rational or irrational in their selection of terrorism as a strategy. The determination of the rationality of each group was based on two criteria: (1) whether a gain was anticipated by using terrorism and (2) whether violence would result in a smaller loss than no action. Overall, the selection of terrorism as a strategy was determined to be rational for Shining Path, LTTE, ETA (during the Franco years), Al-Qaeda (pre-9/11), and Hizballah (during Israeli occupation). For Aum Shinrikyo, the selection of terrorism to achieve their political objectives was determined to be irrational as was the case for ETA (post-Franco), Al-Qaeda (following 9/11), and Hizballah (after Israeli withdrawal). Therefore, the study did not support the assertion that religious terrorists are motivated by different factors than secular terrorists or that they use different criteria in making rational decisions. This study may serve to debunk the myth that religious terrorists are fanatical, irrational zealots for their cause. |
