IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/econjl/v133y2023i650p787-811..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gone with the wind: The consequences of US drone strikes in pakistan

Author

Listed:
  • Rafat Mahmood
  • Michael Jetter

Abstract

Employing day-to-day wind conditions as an identification strategy, we explore the consequences of the 420 US drone strikes in Pakistan between 2006 and 2016. Results suggest that drone strikes encourage terrorism over the upcoming days and weeks, causing up to 19% of all terror attacks with more than 3,000 terror deaths in Pakistan during that period. Studying a leading Pakistani newspaper, we identify a polarised response to drone strikes as negative emotions and anger, but also positive emotions, in drone-related articles increase. Finally, anti-US protests and online searches exhibiting radical Islamist concepts increase as a consequence of drone strikes.

Suggested Citation

  • Rafat Mahmood & Michael Jetter, 2023. "Gone with the wind: The consequences of US drone strikes in pakistan," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 133(650), pages 787-811.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:econjl:v:133:y:2023:i:650:p:787-811.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/ej/ueac049
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Eugen Dimant & Tim Krieger & Daniel Meierrieks, 2024. "Paying Them to Hate US: The Effect of US Military Aid on Anti-American Terrorism, 1968–2018," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 134(663), pages 2772-2802.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:oup:econjl:v:133:y:2023:i:650:p:787-811.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/resssea.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.