Collective versus unilateral responses to terrorism

Public Choice (2005) 124: 7593DOI: 10.1007/s11127-005-4747-y C Springer 2005Collective versus unilateral responses to terrorismTODD SANDLERSchool of International Relations, University of Southern California, Von Kleinsmid Center 330, Los

Angeles, CA 90089-0043, USA (E-mail: [email protected])Accepted March 2005Abstract. Global terrorism presents collective action issues for targeted nations. Proactive

measures (e.g., preemptive strikes) against terrorists create external benefits for all at-risk

nations. In contrast, defensive actions deflect attacks to softer targets, thereby giving rise to

external benefits to protected foreign residents and external costs to venues abroad. Coordinated

antiterrorism measures are particularly difficult to achieve when many nations must participate

and nonparticipants can undo the efforts of others. Thus, freezing terrorists assets or abiding

by a no-negotiation pledge pose difficult collective action problems. These same concerns do

not plague decisive action against domestic terrorism.1. IntroductionTerrorism is the premeditated use or threat of use of violence by individuals

or subnational groups to obtain a political or social objective through intimidation of a large audience beyond that of the immediate victims. Terrorists try

to circumvent the normal political process through violence perpetrated on

a public who may then pressure the government to concede to the terrorists

demands. On 11 September 2001 (henceforth, 9/11), the four hijacked planes

graphically illustrated the havoc and destruction that terrorists can wreak on

society. If a targeted government views its future (discounted) costs from a

sustained terrorist campaign as greater than that of conceding to terrorists

demands (including reputation costs), then a government may grant concessions (Lapan & Sandler, 1993). In the absence of caving in, governments must

institute antiterrorist measures.The modern era of transnational terrorism began in 1968 with terrorists

traveling between countries and maintaining a presence in multiple countries

to achieve their greatest impact. A watershed transnational terrorist event was

the 22 July 1968 hijacking of an El A1 Boeing 707 en route from Rome to

Tel Aviv with 10 crew members and 38 passengers, including three hijackers identified with the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP)

(Mickolus, 1980, pp. 9394). This event is noteworthy for a number of reasons.

First, there was clear evidence of state-sponsorship after the plane landed in

Algiers, because Algeria took advantage of the situation and held some of the

hostages until 1 September 1968 when a...