Q&A: A Complex Topic

April 9, 2004

Todd Sandler, professor of international relations and economics in the USC College of Letters, Arts and Sciences, has studied terrorism for decades. On April 16 and 17, he will co-helm a USC conference that will bring together leading economists, policy analysts and political scientists from universities here and abroad.

The group will discuss how resources can be allocated to deter terrorism, what motivates terrorists and what nation-states can do to stop, or at least reduce, such violence. Their findings will be published later this year in a special edition of the journal Conflict Resolution.

The conference is sponsored by the USC College's Center for International Studies. CIS director Peter Rosendorff co-heads the event with Sandler.

Writer Katilin Solimine recently talked with Sandler, holder of the Robert R. and Katheryn A. Dockson Chair in Economics and International Relations, who reflects on democracy, the 9/11 hearings and the direction of terrorism.

Q: What are your thoughts on the recent terrorist bombings in Spain?

A: The Spanish government appeared inept when they tried to place blame on the ETA and, as a result, was thrown out of power a few days later. That's the dilemma: If governments appear inept, they are removed from office. Terrorists may lose constituencies, but no one removes them from office. The trouble with terrorism is that it's very asymmetrical.

Q: What role does the war in Iraq play on the war on terrorism?

A: None. There was no evidence whatsoever that terrorists were operating out of Iraq or supported by the Iraqi government.

Q: What are terrorism's roots in the modern era?

A: Until about 1979, the main causes were anti-capitalist and separatist movements. Now terrorism has been adopted by individuals who want fundamentalist states. Why are we so aware of it now? Mainly because of the media, which is a part of globalization I guess. Many people trace modern-day transnational terrorism to the 1968 hijacking of an El-Al flight. The event got global coverage and was the first time the Israelis had to recognize the Palestinians.

Q: Why do you think the number of religiously-affiliated terrorist groups has increased so drastically since 1980?

A: It started in 1979 with the Islamic revolution in Iran, and now fundamentalist groups want to export the Islamic revolution worldwide. They see terrorism as a means of destabilizing governments. It poses many different challenges because fundamentalists are more willing to use suicide missions. They go for greater carnage and see anybody not on their side as a legitimate target.

Q: Tell me about your book coming out in June.

A: It is called Global Collective Action and looks at the challenges we're facing, not only in security, but also in health, redistribution and resources — all the major challenges and what can be done about them.

Q: What else is on your mind lately?

A: The likelihood of suicide attacks in our malls or public places. I can't imagine why what occurs in Israel wouldn't be imported into the U.S. Even one incident that killed just one person would cause headlines much greater than the headlines about Madrid, simply because it happened here and in a public place.

Q: What is needed for nations to form a global network against terrorism?

A: Nations need to see that there is a sufficient benefit to go beyond the high cost they put on losing autonomy. Attacks like 9/11 and Madrid certainly push nations to consider cooperation. The problem is that a forgetting always occurs. If there was a greater threat in terms of loss of life or hard evidence of weapons of mass destruction, then there would be a lot more cooperation. The downside of added cooperation is that there has to be a much more horrible threat, and a sustained one, or the cooperation diminishes.

Q: What is the relationship between globalization and terrorism?

A: It's very difficult to establish. Terrorism doesn't track any measure of globalization.

The only relationship is between democracy and terrorism. Countries with high democratic values are typically where terrorism is staged because there is freedom of association and greater chances to cross borders. Also, the democracy's media will cover terrorist acts, and terrorists are looking for that publicity. The policy prescription then would be to do away with democracy, and I don't think anyone wants to do that.

Q: Are more scholars studying terrorism since 9/11?

A: Yes, and subscriptions to the two main field journals have gone way up.

Q: Do you think anything will come out of the 9/11 hearings?

A: Nothing that will keep another 9/11 from occurring. If anything positive happens, it should be the realization that any guilt should be shared by both administrations, the one going out and the one coming in. I think that would be therapeutic for the country.

Q: Where do you think terrorism is heading?

A: I think it will continue about the pace it is. With the exception of 2001, where about 3,200 people lost their lives, terrorism kills approximately 320 people each year. About 42,000 people died on U.S. highways last year alone. We're spending as much as $160 billion on terrorism, but we're not spending nearly that much to make our highways any safer.

Q: What's the draw then?

A: People react in a very fearful way to catastrophic low probability events. It's human nature. We don't think twice about getting on the 110, which is a very dangerous road, but we think about a terrorist event occurring when we're on an airplane. The possibility of that happening is truly miniscule. The likelihood of being in an accident on the 110 is not so miniscule. But this is the asymmetry that plays into a terrorist's hands. If it wasn't a tactic that was low cost and caused a lot of fear, they wouldn't use it.