This Article Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 0022343309339249v1 46/6/739    most recent References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Gaibulloev, K. Articles by Sandler, T. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Hostage Taking: Determinants of Terrorist Logistical and Negotiation Success

Department of Economics, University of Texas at Dallas

Todd Sandler

Department of Economics, University of Texas at Dallas, tsandler{at}utdallas.edu

This article investigates the determinants of logistical and negotiation success from the terrorists’ viewpoint in hostage-taking missions. Logistical success indicates that the terrorists apparently completed the mission as planned, while negotiation success means that the terrorists received some of their initial demands. In the empirical analysis, the article utilizes a new dataset on hostage incidents from 1978 through 2005 for the logit regressions. Empirical results broadly support the authors’ theoretical predictions. Logistical success depends positively on terrorist resources and target vulnerability, while negotiation success increases with the relative disagreement values and relative bargaining strengths of the terrorists. More specifically, terrorist success at the execution stage depends positively on kidnappings and large hostage grabs and varies negatively with attack force diversity and terrorist casualties. Negotiation success depends on bargaining variables (i.e. the number of hostages, casualties, incident duration, and other proxies). The article shows that the factors that determine terrorist negotiation success differ between kidnappings and non-kidnappings (i.e. skyjackings, the takeover of buildings, and the hijacking of non-aerial means of transport), owing to location and other considerations (e.g. types of demands). In particular, making multiple demands bolsters negotiated success in non-kidnappings, while demanding money fosters negotiated success in kidnappings. Lengthier incidents have a positive influence on the likelihood of terrorists gaining concessions in kidnappings and non-kidnappings.

This version was published on November 1, 2009

Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 46, No. 6, 739-756 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/0022343309339249


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?