The Decision to Begin Talks with Terrorists

Lessons for Policymakers

Bibliographic Data

ID12407166
AuthorsDaniel Byman (Georgetown University, corresponding author)
Year2006
Volume29
Issue5
Pages403-414
Publication date2006-07-22
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueStudies in Conflict and Terrorism (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1057-610X • E-ISSN: 1521-0731
PublisherTaylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/10576100600703996
OpenAlexW2043372924
LanguageEN
Citations received7
References cited8

Governments have many means to begin a dialogue with terrorist groups. The offer of talks may lead terrorists’ constituents to reduce their support for violence, and moderates within a group itself may also turn away from violence. Despite these potential benefits, even the consideration of entering discussions carries many risks. Talks with U.S. officials do indeed reward the use of terrorism, tangibly demonstrating that groups can kill innocents and yet become legitimate interlocutors—a reward that is costly both in terms of reducing the prevalence of this tactic worldwide and because it inevitably angers local allies fighting the groups. Moreover, talks often fail in a variety of ways, giving the terrorists a breathing space to rearm and organize and leaving the government looking foolish. Because talks often fail, policymakers should carefully explore whether the conditions are right for any hope of success before they begin a dialogue

Computer security · Criminology · Government (linguistics · Political science · Public relations · Terrorism · Variety (cybernetics · Computer Science · Crime, Illicit Activities, and Governance · Law · Political Conflict and Governance · Psychology · Social Psychology · Terrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub