Does Terrorism Work?: A History

by Richard English

Terrorism is one of the most significant security threats that we face in the twenty-first century. Not surprisingly, there is now a plethora of books on the subject, offering definitions of what terrorism is and proffering advice on what causes it and how states should react to it.But one of the most important questions about terrorism has, until now, been left remarkably does it work? Richard English now brings thirty years of professional expertise studying terrorism to the task of answering this complex—and controversial - question.Focussing principally on four of the most significant terrorist organizations of the last fifty years (al-Qaida, the Provisional IRA, Hamas, and ETA), and using a wealth of interview material with former terrorists as well as those involved in counter-terrorism, he argues that we need a far more honest understanding of the degree to which terrorism actually works—as well as a more nuanced insight into the precise ways in which it does so.Only then can we begin to grapple more effectively with what has become one of the most challenging and eye-catching issues of our time.

Genres: History, Politics, Terrorism, Nonfiction

368 pages, Kindle Edition

First published July 1, 2016

About the author

Richard English is a historian from Northern Ireland. He was born in Belfast in 1963. His father, Donald English (1930–1998) was a prominent Methodist preacher. He studied as an undergraduate at Keble College, Oxford, and subsequently at Keele University, where he was awarded a PhD in History. He was first employed by the Politics Department at Queen's University Belfast in 1990 and became a professor in 1999. He is currently teaching at the University of St Andrews.

Reviews

[Raj · Rating 3 out of 5]

For what is a fairly short book (only about 260 pages, without endnotes etc), this took me a very long time to get through. I heard Prof English give a talk themed around this book at a literary festival and bought this book off the back of that. Unfortunately, I felt that the tone was very dry and difficult, especially in the introduction. English appears to be the sort of academic who's lost the full stop key on his keyboard (I'm sure I found sentences that went on for about 15 lines!) but has an overflowing thesaurus. Someone who doesn't like to use just one word when he can get away with ten.

In terms of the actual content, to answer the question "does terrorism work?", he lays out his framework in the introduction, where he introduces four different categories: strategic victories, partial strategic victories, tactical successes, and the inherent rewards of struggle. He also discusses the different categories of people we could be talking about when we ask for whom it works. From the introduction, we then go into four chapter-length case studies of different terrorisms before the conclusion.

Of the four case studies, the one most interesting to me was the IRA chapter, as this is something that I grew up with and the ceasefires and end of violence happened as I was coming of age. With this, as with the other case studies (al-Qaida, Hamas and ETA) he looks at the historical context and then tries to place this into his strategic framework as developed in the introduction. There was a lot of interest here, especially in the chapter about ETA. That's not something that I know much about, and it turns out that Spain is a much more complex country than I had realised.

The first part of the conclusion is spent doing thumbnail analyses over other terrorist organisations around the world, fitting them into his framework, but without the depth of the main case studies, and then he tries to come up with wider conclusions at the end. Unfortunately, a lot of this just comes down to "it's complicated", and I didn't need 260 pages to tell me that!

However, there is value in the framework and the historical contexts. Especially in the modern rolling news agenda where especially Islamic terrorism is met with such hysteria, it was nice to see a more considered, academic approach that sets it into historical context and reminds us that whatever the media and politicians say, this isn't unprecedented and there are ways to deal with it.

I liked that English was very clear from early on that although he was only considering non-state terrorism, he very much accepted that states can also indulge in terrorism, and that some of the responses to terrorist actions can be regarded as causing terror in their own right.

I would have liked to see chapters look at terrorism outside Europe and the Middle East, with more in-depth looks at terrorism in South America or South East Asia as I'd like to know if those differed in any great extent than the four case studies used. But within that context, I do think that the book is interesting and worth reading. I just wish someone would give the author a lesson in writing for people outside academia (or a better editor).

[Pinko Palest · Rating 1 out of 5]

so dry it parched my throat. This is more or less the establishment version, while its being mainly case studies is not very helpful about all the other cases which are not covered here

[Kalani · Rating 3 out of 5]

Dry asffffff had to read it for a history of terrorism work. Conclusion was: terrorism doesn’t work but it kinda do

[AC]

grad school readings be like:

[Pam Thomas · Rating 5 out of 5]

A question which has to be answered analytically and practically. Its all about politics and change and how much is achieved if anything. Fascinating insight into the processes that form patterns of terrorism and why some people endorse and practise it. Are they psychologically normal decision making processes by groups of humans who seem to think it s a way of achieving goals or the only way to reach a justified object.

[Pam Thomas · Rating 5 out of 5]

A questions which has to be answered analytically and practically. its all about political change and how much is achieved if anything. Fascinating insight into the processes that form patterns of terrorism and why some people endorse and practice it. Are they psychologically normal decision making processes by groups of humans who seem to think it is a way of achieving goals or the only way to reach a justified object.