Abrahm's Strategic Model Analysis

492 Words2 Pages
Abrahm describes his strategic model as stating that it “posits that terrorists are rational actors who attack civilians for political ends”. But Abrahm also provides seven puzzles, three of which are coercive ineffectiveness, terrorism as the first resort, and anonymous attacks.
Abrahm believed that in the strategic model, people joined terrorism because they believe what the group is fighting for and that they achieve their desired goals, yet with coercive ineffectiveness, there would need to be “rational people” were the ones to be in charge of and members of a terrorist group. Yet Abrahm believes that in the actual practice of terrorism, an organized manner of achieving political goals does not truly exist. Abrahm’s second puzzle focuses on terrorism as the first resort. His strategic model makes the assumption that terrorist groups only take terroristic actions after realizing that they do not have other choices. Yet, many terrorist experts believe that to be untrue seeing as a large amount of terrorist believe that terrorism achieves a goal that would not have otherwise been achieved through peaceful actions. A third puzzle of Abrahm’s is the anonymous attacks, in which his model states that the
…show more content…
He believes that terrorists are set up by stable, consistent preference, that terrorist evaluate expected payoffs based upon obvious options and that terrorism is viewed as superior when they have done the two previous items put together. The way that his strategic model compares to our own belief of strategic choice is that whereas Abrahm’s has a set standard for what makes a terrorist group prominent, we believe a strategic choice to be one that allows for change and understanding of what works and what doesn’t. It allows for the interaction of different aspects to come together and demonstrate strengths and weakness that could be fixed and allow for groups to grow in
Open Document