English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 93889/124336 (76%)
Visitors : 28947317      Online Users : 510
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    政大機構典藏 > 國際事務學院 > 期刊論文 >  Item 140.119/129878
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/129878

    Title: Democracy, Civil Liberties, and Hostage-taking Terrorism
    Authors: 李佳怡
    Lee, Chia-yi
    Contributors: 國際事務學院
    Keywords: bargaining;civil liberties;democracy;hostage-taking;terrorism
    Date: 2013-03
    Issue Date: 2020-05-26 14:17:49 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: While hostage-taking has been a common form of terrorism for decades, which types of governments are more prone to it remains unclear. Does democracy motivate terrorists to engage in hostage-taking acts because of how easy negotiating with a democratic government is? Or does democracy impose ‘audience costs’ on the government leaders, driving them never to negotiate with hostage-taking terrorists following the long-held principle of no negotiation? This article argues that hostage-taking terrorists are more inclined to target democratic governments because of the greater value given to human life and personal freedom in democracies. Additionally the helplessness of held hostages is more freely exposed by the media in democracies, which leads to the audience focusing on the hostages themselves rather than on the interests of the nation. This in turns compels decisionmakers to concede, especially near election time. It is only when institutional constraints on the executives are high that democratic leaders refuse to make concessions. Using data on hostage events from 1978 to 2005, this article finds strong evidence that supports this theory, showing that democracy has competing effects on hostage-taking terrorism – civil liberties and press freedom are positively associated with hostage-taking incidents, whereas executive constraints have a negative association.
    Relation: Journal of Peace Research, Vol.50, No.2, pp.235-248
    Data Type: article
    DOI 連結: https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343312465424
    DOI: 10.1177/0022343312465424
    Appears in Collections:[國際事務學院] 期刊論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat

    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.

    社群 sharing

    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback