In an era darkened by violence in Ukraine and the Middle East, scholars are working overtime to understand the mechanisms driving terrorist acts to help inform counterstrategies. Professor Joseph Young is one such SPA faculty member examining these issues, and he has multiple projects underway, including several publications, three grants, and a recent Fulbright Award.

Foreign Fighters

In “Foreign Fighter Mobilization: YPG Volunteers in Their Own Words,” in last month’s edition of Terrorism and Political Violence, Young teamed up with SPA Professor David Malet and PhD student, Joshua Farrell-Molloy (Malmo University). Farrell-Molloy is an Irish former soldier who traveled to Syria in 2015 to fight for the Kurdish YPG. Using Farrell-Molloy’s network and other sources, the trio interviewed 18 foreign fighters from Western countries who fought for the Kurds against the Islamic State in Syria. Some contacts had considered joining but decided not to, providing additional information about drivers.

“We thought, wow, this is an amazing opportunity,” recalled Young. “We don't have to speculate on why they joined, what they expected to find, why they were disgruntled, and why they came back. We can ask them. Foreign fighting like this isn’t illegal, so these people can talk to us without IRB issues or government reporting requirements, which makes the research easier.”

They found, rather than ideological or religious motivations, decisions sparked by 1) precipitating new information, such as viewing war crimes videos, and/or 2) preconditions that permitted them to leave their home countries, such as the end of a lease. With that said, a few interviewees indicated support for a general leftist ideology.

“To the extent that these fighters are similar to the jihadi fighters, which gives us insight into the whole process,” said Young. “I think the decision to go abroad and fight for a cause that isn't your own is somewhat universal and interesting.”

To illustrate, Young pointed to ISIS’ 2014 kidnapping and burning murder of a Jordanian pilot, filmed, and aired online. 

“More than a third of our interviewees noted that as the moment they knew that they were going to go fight against ISIS. They said, ‘Something has to be done, it’s not being done, and I'm the one that can do it.’” A lot of people saw ISIS as this horrible entity, as the Cold War generation viewed Russia, and the Kurds were one avenue for that help.”

Young was awarded a Fulbright Scholarship in the fall and traveled to Montreal’s McGill University to study foreign fighting among North Americans and work with students.

“I think a lot of Americans don't think about Canadians all the time, but Canadians very much are in tune with us on these issues,” he said. “Part of Fulbright’s goal is to raise awareness and create better connections between our countries. It really got me to think much more about Canadians and their thoughts on terrorism, instead of just being U.S.-centric.”

Terrorism in Democracies

In Spring 2022, Young was invited to speak at the French embassy on terrorism; his address formed the basis for his recent piece in a special issue of South Central Review, “Managing Terrorism in Democracies.” The article discusses the challenges associated with managing terrorist violence in democracies, its drivers and policy responses, and citizen concerns and attitudes, and argues that counterterrorism strategies should track carefully with the phenomenon’s specific cause. He also takes up the question of whether, as posited by John Mueller in his book Overblown, the international response to terrorism has been outsized.

“I'm not completely in that space,” said Young. “Erica Chenoweth at Harvard and I have collected data on [global] terrorism attacks and all kinds of regime change, to examine whether terrorism leads to the downfall of democracy. Our piece, still unpublished, did not find [these negative effects]; in fact, quite often, terrorist attacks strengthen aspects of democracy. The only time terrorist attacks harm democracy is when the regime destroys itself.”

The paper mentions Peru in the 1980s; the nation fought a Civil War with the terrorist organization the Shining Path. During the conflict, the president declared himself a dictator and overthrew the democratic regime himself. 

“The terrorist organization didn’t take over the country,” said Young. “The democratic leadership proclaimed, ‘we won’t be a democracy anymore.’ The point we make is that the only real threat from terrorism you get to a democratic system is from itself. . . If we took the example of 9/11, the worst terrorist attack in human history, U.S. democracy didn't fall. The outcomes (torture, extensions of presidential powers, and black sites in Eastern Europe) weren’t in accordance with our values and human rights but did not include the complete downfall of our democracy.”

Young also stressed the importance of national dialogues on the appropriate responses to terrorism when the threat is low.

“We should be having this conversation in public, with the president,” he said. “’We don't want to torture, or have black sites, or violate human rights. Those are core principles of our country.’ But we aren't, because they're not at the forefront of our minds. Then, after an attack like 9/11, or Paris, or Israel post-October 7, people want action, not a reminder to respect human rights. [That attitude, as in Palestine] comes with a lot of misery and death.”

Violence and Mental Health

In addition to two recent and several upcoming publications, Young has received three recent significant grants, two from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and one from the National Science Foundation (NSF). In the latter, Young is part of team examining how indirect exposure to violence affects people's job performance, mental health, and overall quality of life.

“We're looking specifically at counterterrorism professionals in DHS, ICE, and related agencies, via surveys and interviews, to see if their repeated exposures to violence are causing things like depression and anxiety,” he said. “There are big implications for, for example, police officers and counselors. How does that repeated exposure affect you? Does it lead to problems in your marriage? What sorts of coping skills do you have? ... You can start to lose your empathy because you're constantly exposed to these horrible things and develop what's called secondary traumatic stress.”

The team will be presenting this research to agency stakeholders in April, then work to translate their findings to help professionals on the ground. Possible mitigating activities, he suggests, may include alternating tasks, taking breaks with co-workers, and exercise.

“This is one of the more exciting projects I'm doing, because there are really practical and hopeful implications,” he said.