Search
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Mini-Conference
Browse By Division
Browse By Session or Event Type
Browse Sessions by Fields of Interest
Browse Papers by Fields of Interest
Search Tips
Virtual Exhibit Hall
Change Preferences / Time Zone
Sign In
X (Twitter)
Existing literature on leadership decapitation focuses almost exclusively on assessing its effects on the targeted organizations' survival, structure, or tactics. While the efficacy of leadership decapitation is much debated, a critical aspect that remains unexplored is whether the tactic contributes to "winning the hearts and minds" of civilian populations¬ – a vital contributor to the success of most counterterrorism and stability operations. Although responsible state actors often publicize targeted killings of militant leaders as significant ‘wins’, this study explores how targeted killings affect civilians' perceptions of government efficacy versus insurgent strength. We argue that the effect on civilian perceptions is likely to be shaped by the identity of the primary targeting force associated with such efforts. Decapitation efforts, which involve local security actors, are more likely to improve perceptions of government efficacy compared to efforts that are driven by external actors. We test our argument using original data on multitier leadership losses of Islamic State Khorasan leaders (ISK) in Afghanistan between 2015-2018, which we combine with the latest Afghanistan Nationwide Quarterly Assessment Research (ANQAR) survey data. Our findings indicate that leadership losses due to efforts that involved local Afghan forces tended to improve perceptions of the Afghan government's performance. Conversely though, targeted killings of ISK's topmost leaders through U.S. air strikes failed to shift attitudes towards the local government, and instead increased support for the Afghan Taliban. Our study highlights the importance of cooperative counterterrorism efforts that involve local government actors in shifting civilians' perceptions of local governance.