Democracy’s Ambivalent Effect on Terrorism

Does democracy heighten or lessen the incidence of terrorism? This question has eluded a definitive answer for over three decades. Some terrorism researchers find that democracy has dampened terrorism; others that democracy has encouraged it; still others that there is a curvilinear or more nuanced relationship between the two. In this article, we contend that democracy has differential effects on terrorism, depending on the goals of particular terrorist groups. We claim that efforts to restrict democracy, by decreasing political rights and civil liberties, will effectively constrain terrorist activity from “strategic” groups but will have the opposite effect on “universalist” groups. The reason for this variance, we argue, involves the scope of ambition and underlying motivation distinguishing these very different types of terrorist movements. Because universalist groups have abstract ambitions and non-negotiable goals, they are unlikely to be deterred by crackdowns on democracy. Alternatively, because strategic groups do not see their missions as all-or-nothing campaigns of good versus evil and instead seek limited and concrete goals, anti-democratic measures are more likely to succeed against them. Our analysis of 200 countries from 1972 to 2016 finds strong support for this claim.