Analysis of the Hybrid Terrorist Organizations Hezbollah and Hamas

Inhaltsangabe oder Einleitung

In the mid-twentieth century, new types of warfare have emerged that are fought asymmetrically between a state and one or more nonstate actors (Ganor, 2015; Hoffman, 2007). The struggle now takes place not only on traditional military battlefields and is characterized by need to now also win a psychological war and a war for public opinion in and through the media has given rise to a new type of non-state actor: the Hybrid Terrorist Organization (Ganor, 2015; Hoffman, 2007). According to professor Boaz Ganor, a Hybrid Terrorist Organization is one that stands on two or, in many cases, three legs: The first one is that of the classic terrorist organization, that is a military or paramilitary organization that engages in terrorist acts. The second one extends the Da`wa system, which means the support of social welfare by offering consistently, over time and free of charge (or heavily subsidized) social services to its potential supporters. This provision of essential services leads to the seeding of the hearts of the public, an expansion of supporters and the generation of sympathy for terrorism. The third one involves the establishment of a political organization, which may merely represent its ideology, or it may compete in free and democratic campaigns and elections. The Hybrid Terrorist Organization uses democratic electoral processes to establish and strengthen its political power. This pillar is closely related to that of the Da`wa. People who have received financial support and welfare services from the terrorist organization are most likely to vote for representatives of the organization with which they have long been identified (Ganor, 2015). The three pillars complement each other and are smit interdependent. In the following, I will show how exactly the individual pillars interlock in practice, using the examples of the Hybrid Terrorist Organizations Hezbollah and Hamas.