The 2011 civil war in Syria attracted thousands of fighters from at least seventy countries to join the Islamic State. Al-Shabaab carried out large-scale attacks on civilian targets in Uganda and Kenya as retribution for the deployment of peacekeeping forces in Somalia. In this report, Martha Crenshaw considers the extent to which civil war and foreign military intervention function as a rationale for transnational terrorism, and how understanding the connections between terrorism, civil war, and weak governance can help the United States and its allies mount an appropriate response.

Two men walk through a heavily damaged neighborhood in Raqqa, Syria, on April 4, 2019, more than a year after the city’s liberation from the Islamic State. (Ivor Prickett/New York Times)
Two men walk through a heavily damaged neighborhood in Raqqa, Syria, on April 4, 2019, more than a year after the city’s liberation from the Islamic State. (Ivor Prickett/New York Times)

Summary

Transnational terrorism poses a threat to all countries but is of immediate concern to the U.S. government. After key losses of territory by insurgents and the subsequent withdrawal of U.S. troops, forces of the self-styled Islamic State have regrouped in Iraq and are developing safe havens in war-torn Syria, accompanied by the stepped-up use of social media for recruiting and propaganda purposes.

The response of the United States and its key security partners should be coordinated not only across governments but across the agencies of a specific state. The U.S. response, for example, should entail policy coordination of defense agencies, humanitarian aid provision, the development of effective communications strategies, a well-thought-out plan for the use of force, if needed, and advance planning of postconflict stabilization strategies.

Mounting an appropriate response requires first understanding the complex interlinkages among civil war, transnational terrorism, and weak governance. Conflicts in Mali, Chechnya, Syria, and other fragile states disrupted by civil war and facing actions from global terrorist networks suggest the different ways in which these factors may interact and the different paths to a solution, including bi- or trilateral negotiations that include extremist groups at the negotiations table. However, governments supporting weak states need not wait for critical events entailing loss of life to occur before offering multidimensional assistance.

Recognizing the conditions under which extremist threats emerge allows governments to take defensive and mitigating measures before a crisis takes shape. Patience and adopting a long view of regional developments greatly aid in assessing and responding to global jihadist threats; governments should not overpromise results or exaggerate threats.

About the Report

Drawing on an extensive review of the recent literature, this report considers the extent to which civil war and military interventions by foreign powers function as drivers of and rationales for transnational terrorism. The research was supported by the Policy, Learning, and Strategy Center at the United States Institute of Peace.

About the Author

Martha Crenshaw is senior fellow emerita at the Center for International Security and Cooperation, Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, Stanford University, and professor emerita of government at Wesleyan University in Connecticut. Explaining Terrorism, a collection of her essays on the causes, processes, and consequences of terrorism, was published in 2011. She is the author (with Gary LaFree) of Countering Terrorism (2017).


Related Publications

At Pacific Islands Forum, Tensions Flare Over Taiwan, Geopolitics and Climate

At Pacific Islands Forum, Tensions Flare Over Taiwan, Geopolitics and Climate

Thursday, September 5, 2024

Last week, the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) met in Nukuʻalofa, Tonga, to discuss the challenges affecting the region. The PIF is an intergovernmental organization with the purpose of enhancing cooperation among the countries and territories of Oceania, including Australia, New Zealand, 14 independent Pacific Island countries, and France’s territories of New Caledonia and French Polynesia. China and the United States interact with the PIF as dialogue partners and the Pacific Islands have emerged in recent years as another arena of great power competition.

Type: Question and Answer

EnvironmentGlobal Policy

Sullivan’s Beijing Mission: Managing Competition Amid Simmering Tensions

Sullivan’s Beijing Mission: Managing Competition Amid Simmering Tensions

Wednesday, September 4, 2024

President Joe Biden’s top national security aide, Jake Sullivan, met with Chinese leader Xi Jinping last week, along with other top Chinese officials, as Washington and Beijing look to address bilateral tensions. Relations hit one of their lowest points in years in August 2022 after then U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi visited Taiwan and China responded by cutting off bilateral communications on areas ranging from military matters to climate cooperation. But both sides have attempted to pull back from the brink with a series of high-level meetings in the last two years, including between Biden and Xi in November 2023.

Type: Question and Answer

Global PolicyMediation, Negotiation & Dialogue

Modi Walks a Diplomatic Tightrope in Ukraine

Modi Walks a Diplomatic Tightrope in Ukraine

Thursday, August 29, 2024

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi visited Kyiv on Friday, marking the first time an Indian leader has gone to Ukraine since its 1991 independence. Ukrainian officials said the visit demonstrated diplomatic backing for the war-torn nation, as it looks to build support among non-Western nations ahead of any potential negotiations on a settlement to the conflict. Although India has long-standing close ties with Russia, it has sought to portray a neutral stance on the conflict. As part of Modi’s bid to boost India’s international clout, he wants to demonstrate that Delhi can play a constructive, “friendly” role in resolving the war.

Type: Question and Answer

Global Policy

How Fumio Kishida Shaped Japan’s Foreign Policy

How Fumio Kishida Shaped Japan’s Foreign Policy

Thursday, August 22, 2024

Earlier this month, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida made the surprise announcement that he would not seek another term. Although he was prime minister for less than four years, Kishida’s foreign policy legacy spans strategic and tactical advances in Japan’s defense and diplomatic posture. His approach represented both a continuation of and divergence from the legacy of his former boss, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, under whom Kishida acted as Japan’s longest-serving foreign minister. Although Kishida’s successes on foreign affairs were overshadowed by domestic political scandals involving his Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), as well as lack-luster economic growth, he oversaw increases in Japan’s reputation and popularity in the region and globally, as well as the institutionalization of related partnership gains.

Type: Analysis

Global Policy

View All Publications