The Lone Wolf Terrorist: Past Lessons, Future Outlook, and Response Strategies
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE INTER-UNIVERSITY CENTER FOR TERRORISM STUDIES The Lone Wolf Terrorist: Past Lessons, Future Outlook, and Response Strategies Table of Contents Professor Yonah Alexander ............................................................................................. 1 Marion (Spike) Bowman ................................................................................................... 9 Professor Amit Kumar .................................................................................................... 11 Kyle B. Olson ...................................................................................................................... 15 Captain Dave Martin ........................................................................................................ 18 Professor Carol Flynn ...................................................................................................... 22 Lisa Curtis ............................................................................................................................ 25 Dr. Nimrod Raphaeli ........................................................................................................ 29 Professor Dean Alexander ............................................................................................. 32 Disclaimer The authors, editors, and research staff cannot be held responsible for errors or any consequences arising from the use of information contained in this publication. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the institutions associated with this report. Copyright © 2017 by the Inter-University Center for Terrorism Studies directed by Professor Yonah Alexander. All rights reserved. No part of this report may be reproduced, stored, or distributed without the prior written consent of the copyright holder. Please contact the Inter-University Center for Terrorism Studies at the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies, 901 North Stuart Street, Suite 200, Arlington, VA 22203 Tel. 703-562-4513, 703-525-0770 ext. 237 Fax 703-525-0299 [email protected] www.potomacinstitute.org www.terrorismelectronicjournal.org www.iucts.org Cover Design By Alex Taliesen The Lone Wolf Terrorist 1 Introduction “The Lone Wolf Terrorist: Some Perspectives” Professor Yonah Alexander Director, Inter-University Center for Terrorism Studies From the dawn of history humanity has continuously faced two critical security challenges. The first is “natural” or “Mother Nature’s” disasters. It includes a wide range of disruptions and destruction of human lives and property. Hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, tsunamis, monsoons, droughts, floods, heat waves, wildfires, and varieties of pandemics arising from biological pathogens cause some of the most frequent catastrophic costs to individuals, communities, and civilizations. The second permanent and equally significant security concern consists of “man-made” threats such as technological and economic calamities, ideological and political radicalization and extremism, terrorism, insurgencies, and wars. The purpose of this report is to focus only on some of the specifically “lone wolf” challenges among the larger man-made security threats to the safety, welfare, and rights of ordinary people; the stability of the state system; the impact on national, regional, and global economic development; the expansion of democratic societies; and the prevention of the destruction of civilization by biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons. Thus, this academic effort is by its very nature narrow in scope and reflects selected assessments of terrorist threats undertaken by individuals independent of direct sponsorship by groups and nation-states. First, consider the conceptual fog surrounding the classification of “lone wolf” offenders. The list includes terms ranging from “crazies” and “criminals” to “crusaders” and “martyrs.” Other frequent identifications utilized invariably by both academic literature and the media include “anarchists,” “radicals,” “extremists,” “leaderless activists,” “hate militants,” “solo and autonomous terrorists,” “self-tested actors,” and “lone operatives.” In this connection, some related historical and contemporary lessons come to mind when assessing the “lone wolf” challenge. For instance, Homer’s Odyssey (XVI) in 1000 B.C. observed that “the blade itself incites to violence.” Also, General Matthew B. Ridgway in a Cleveland speech on November 10, 1953, asserted: “There is still one absolute weapon …that weapon is man himself.” And a famous Russian proverb reminds us that “even if the bear is gone, he left the place for the wolf.” Despite these insights, the international community still does not have a universally accepted definition as to who are “lone wolf” perpetrators. Yet, limited attempts have been made to provide some definitional suggestions. For example, a U.S. official provision on the “lone wolf” is included in relation to terrorist wiretapping issues. H. Rept. 112-79 – FISA Sunsets Reauthorization Act of 2011 explains that the provision “allows the government to track a foreign national who engages in acts to prepare for a terrorist attack against the U.S. but is not affiliated, or cannot immediately be shown to 2 The Lone Wolf Terrorist be affiliated, with a foreign terrorist organization. The lone wolf definition cannot be used to investigate U.S. persons, and only applies in cases of international terrorism.” To be sure, some other characterizations of the “lone wolf” are observable. These include individuals with little or no direct contact with “inspirational” extremist organizations; people who are poorly trained and less successful and who are often isolated within society; and those actors who give little advanced warning to pending attacks. However, characteristic differences also exist. For example, the age of the “lone wolf” perpetrator varies from young adults to seniors, and intelligence levels range from average to genius IQ. The process of radicalization of the “lone wolf” takes place through numerous ties with family, educational instruction, religious bodies, friends and neighbors, places of work, prisons, printed extremist literature, media influence, and Internet propaganda. It is noteworthy that modern society in general, and particularly the technological advantages of the Internet, have made the spreading and radicalization of the “lone wolf” participants easier and potentially more dangerous and deadly. Additionally, radical social networking from right-wing websites to jihadist forums serve as meeting places for like-minded individuals and thereby lead to incitement of violence in names of “higher principles,” from “just war” to even “peace with justice.” The existing literature, both published and unpublished, on the “lone wolf” distinguishes three different identifiable operations. First are individual attacks that aim only to harm a particular person rather than a larger target of a group of people. The second category consists of selected attacks targeting a specific group while excluding those who are not connected to or affiliated with the specific perceived “enemy.” The third type of operation is indiscriminate targeting which is designed to inflict massive damage and loss of life. Motivated by political, ideological, and cultural discontent and nourishment, the “lone wolf” resorts to a broad range of primitive to more sophisticated tactics in justification of secular, theological, or single-issue causes. Selected historical and contemporary cases include numerous assassinations by “lone wolf” perpetrators, including John Wilkes Booth (President Abraham Lincoln), Gaetano Bresci (King Umberto I of Italy), Leon Czolgosz (President William McKinley), Gavrilo Princip (Archduke Franz Ferdinand), Nathanuram Godsey (Mahatma Gandhi), Lee Harvey Oswald (President John F. Kennedy), Sirhan Sirhan (Senator Robert Kennedy), and Yigal Amir (Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin). Another list of infamous “lone wolf” actors consists of people who have inflicted mass disruptions and wide-spread terror and death. Mention should be made of the legacy of Theodore Kaczynski (the “Unabomber”), Major Nidal Malik Hasan (Fort Hood, Texas), and Anders Breivik (Norway). United States. Cong. Committee on the Judiciary. FISA Sunsets Reauthorization Act of 2011: Report Together with Dissenting Views (to Accompany H.R. 1800) (including Cost Estimate of the Congressional Budget Office). Cong. Rept. Washington, D.C.: U.S. G.P.O., 2011. The Lone Wolf Terrorist 3 Against the backdrop of the foregoing brief discussion, as well as the expanded rise in contemporary “lone wolf” attacks around the world, it behooves all concerned nations to undertake “best practices” strategies that necessarily must be based on three main levels. First is the local response. It includes elements such as vigilance (“if you see something, say something”), resilience, community awareness and education, local law enforcement training, community outreach for citizens (e.g., grassroots programs for those with perceived injustices), fostering programs for young adults (e.g., mentoring), community-oriented policing, and family-oriented Internet filtering and monitoring. The second level is that of national responses such as information sharing, local- national law enforcement synergy, safeguards against dangerous materials (e.g., licensing, red flags), public-private partnerships, successful immigration assimilation, representative and efficient government, protection of civil liberties, heightened monitoring/targeting/removal