IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ordeca/v17y2020i2p97-114.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparative Analysis of Terrorists’ Objectives Hierarchies

Author

Listed:
  • Johannes Ulrich Siebert

    (Department for Business and Management, Management Center Innsbruck, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria, Faculty of Law, Economics, and Management, University of Bayreuth, 95447 Bayreuth, Germany)

  • Detlof von Winterfeldt

    (Epstein Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Viterbi School of Engineering, Price School of Public Policy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California 90015)

Abstract

To develop effective counterterrorism strategies, it is important to understand the capabilities and objectives of terrorist groups. Much of the understanding of these groups comes from intelligence collection and analysis of their capabilities. In contrast, the objectives of terrorists are less well understood. In this article, we describe a decision analysis methodology to identify and structure the objectives of terrorists based on the statements and writings of their leaders. This methodology was applied in three case studies, resulting in the three objectives hierarchies of al-Qaeda, Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), and Hezbollah. In this article, we propose a method to compare the three objectives hierarchies, highlight their key differences, and draw conclusions about effective counterterrorism strategies. We find that all three terrorist groups have a wide range of objectives going far beyond the objective of killing and terrorizing people in the non-Muslim world. Among the shared objectives are destroying Israel and expelling Western powers from the Middle East. All three groups share the ambition to become a leader in the Islamic world. Key distinctions are the territorial ambitions of ISIL and Hezbollah versus the large-scale attack objectives of al-Qaeda. Objectives specific to ISIL are the establishment of a caliphate in Iraq and Syria and the re-creation of the power of Sunni Islam. Hezbollah has unique objectives related to the establishment of a Palestine State and to maintain the relationship with and support of Iran and Syria. Al-Qaeda’s objectives remain focused on large-scale attacks in the West. We also note a recent shift to provide support for small-scale attacks in the West by both al-Qaeda and ISIL. Our method can be used for comparing objectives hierarchies of different organizations as well as for comparing objectives hierarchies over time of one organization.

Suggested Citation

  • Johannes Ulrich Siebert & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 2020. "Comparative Analysis of Terrorists’ Objectives Hierarchies," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 17(2), pages 97-114, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ordeca:v:17:y:2020:i:2:p:97-114
    DOI: 10.1287/deca.2019.0400
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1287/deca.2019.0400
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/deca.2019.0400?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ralph L. Keeney, 1994. "Using Values in Operations Research," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 42(5), pages 793-813, October.
    2. Gregory L. Keeney & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 2010. "Identifying and Structuring the Objectives of Terrorists," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(12), pages 1803-1816, December.
    3. Johannes Siebert & Ralph L. Keeney, 2015. "Creating More and Better Alternatives for Decisions Using Objectives," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 63(5), pages 1144-1158, October.
    4. Gilberto Montibeller & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 2015. "Cognitive and Motivational Biases in Decision and Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(7), pages 1230-1251, July.
    5. Johannes Siebert & Detlof von Winterfeldt & Richard S. John, 2016. "Identifying and Structuring the Objectives of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and Its Followers," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 13(1), pages 26-50, March.
    6. Johannes Siebert, 2016. "Can Novices Create Alternatives of the Same Quality as Experts?," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 13(4), pages 278-291, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chaoqi, Fu & Pengtao, Zhang & Lin, Zhou & Yangjun, Gao & Na, Du, 2021. "Camouflage strategy of a Stackelberg game based on evolution rules," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 153(P2).
    2. Hunt, Kyle & Agarwal, Puneet & Zhuang, Jun, 2022. "On the adoption of new technology to enhance counterterrorism measures: An attacker–defender game with risk preferences," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 218(PB).
    3. Florian Methling & Steffen A. Borden & Deepak Veeraraghavan & Insa Sommer & Johannes Ulrich Siebert & Rüdiger von Nitzsch & Mark Seidler, 2022. "Supporting Innovation in Early-Stage Pharmaceutical Development Decisions," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 19(4), pages 337-353, December.
    4. Hunt, Kyle & Agarwal, Puneet & Zhuang, Jun, 2021. "Technology adoption for airport security: Modeling public disclosure and secrecy in an attacker-defender game," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 207(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Florian Methling & Steffen A. Borden & Deepak Veeraraghavan & Insa Sommer & Johannes Ulrich Siebert & Rüdiger von Nitzsch & Mark Seidler, 2022. "Supporting Innovation in Early-Stage Pharmaceutical Development Decisions," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 19(4), pages 337-353, December.
    2. Siebert, Johannes Ulrich & Kunz, Reinhard E. & Rolf, Philipp, 2021. "Effects of decision training on individuals’ decision-making proactivity," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 294(1), pages 264-282.
    3. Dimitrios Gouglas & Kendall Hoyt & Elizabeth Peacocke & Aristidis Kaloudis & Trygve Ottersen & John-Arne Røttingen, 2019. "Setting Strategic Objectives for the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations: An Exploratory Decision Analysis Process," Service Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(6), pages 430-446, November.
    4. Sumitra Sri Bhashyam & Gilberto Montibeller, 2016. "In the Opponent's Shoes: Increasing the Behavioral Validity of Attackers’ Judgments in Counterterrorism Models," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(4), pages 666-680, April.
    5. Franco, L. Alberto & Hämäläinen, Raimo P. & Rouwette, Etiënne A.J.A. & Leppänen, Ilkka, 2021. "Taking stock of behavioural OR: A review of behavioural studies with an intervention focus," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 293(2), pages 401-418.
    6. Timothy McDaniels, 2021. "Four Decades of Transformation in Decision Analytic Practice for Societal Risk Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 491-502, March.
    7. Shuang Liu & Kirsten Maclean & Cathy Robinson, 2019. "A cost-effective framework to prioritise stakeholder participation options," EURO Journal on Decision Processes, Springer;EURO - The Association of European Operational Research Societies, vol. 7(3), pages 221-241, November.
    8. McKenna, R. & Bertsch, V. & Mainzer, K. & Fichtner, W., 2018. "Combining local preferences with multi-criteria decision analysis and linear optimization to develop feasible energy concepts in small communities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 1092-1110.
    9. Doumpos, Michalis & Zopounidis, Constantin & Gounopoulos, Dimitrios & Platanakis, Emmanouil & Zhang, Wenke, 2023. "Operational research and artificial intelligence methods in banking," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 306(1), pages 1-16.
    10. Jaspersen, Johannes G., 2022. "Convex combinations in judgment aggregation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 299(2), pages 780-794.
    11. Wang, Qun & Jia, Guozhu & Song, Wenyan, 2022. "Identifying critical factors in systems with interrelated components: A method considering heterogeneous influence and strength attenuation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 303(1), pages 456-470.
    12. Jin Tian & Yundou Wang & Shutian Gao, 2022. "Analysis of Mining-Related Injuries in Chinese Coal Mines and Related Risk Factors: A Statistical Research Study Based on a Meta-Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-16, December.
    13. James Derbyshire, 2020. "Answers to questions on uncertainty in geography: Old lessons and new scenario tools," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 52(4), pages 710-727, June.
    14. Ormerod, Richard J. & Ulrich, Werner, 2013. "Operational research and ethics: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(2), pages 291-307.
    15. Donald L. Keefer & Craig W. Kirkwood & James L. Corner, 2004. "Perspective on Decision Analysis Applications, 1990–2001," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 1(1), pages 4-22, March.
    16. Faheem Aslam & Amir Rafique & Aneel Salman & Hyoung-Goo Kang & Wahbeeah Mohti, 2018. "The Impact Of Terrorism On Financial Markets: Evidence From Asia," The Singapore Economic Review (SER), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 63(05), pages 1183-1204, December.
    17. Gary J. Summers, 2021. "Friction and Decision Rules in Portfolio Decision Analysis," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 18(2), pages 101-120, June.
    18. Mónica D. Oliveira & Inês Mataloto & Panos Kanavos, 2019. "Multi-criteria decision analysis for health technology assessment: addressing methodological challenges to improve the state of the art," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(6), pages 891-918, August.
    19. Marttunen, Mika & Haara, Arto & Hjerppe, Turo & Kurttila, Mikko & Liesiö, Juuso & Mustajoki, Jyri & Saarikoski, Heli & Tolvanen, Anne, 2023. "Parallel and comparative use of three multicriteria decision support methods in an environmental portfolio problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 307(2), pages 842-859.
    20. Parreiras, R.O. & Kokshenev, I. & Carvalho, M.O.M. & Willer, A.C.M. & Dellezzopolles, C.F. & Nacif, D.B. & Santana, J.A., 2019. "A flexible multicriteria decision-making methodology to support the strategic management of Science, Technology and Innovation research funding programs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 272(2), pages 725-739.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ordeca:v:17:y:2020:i:2:p:97-114. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.