Abstract
<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title> <jats:p>Why do some insurgent groups target Americans? What are some of the consequences for insurgent groups that engage in anti-American violence? Do such insurgent groups continue to thrive, or does attacking Americans contribute to their decline and demise? Attacking and even killing Americans is a risky strategy for most insurgents, potentially risking retaliation from the world’s foremost military power. Yet, some groups deliberately pursue this course of action. We answer the above questions by examining how various incentives shape insurgent anti-American violence. To explore the puzzle, we develop a theoretical framework that accounts for strategic-level factors, but also organizational strategic decision-making processes and the organizational consequences of anti-American violence. We find that some factors, like ideology and the deployment of American military forces, encourage attacks on Americans targets, while others tend to restrain insurgents, such as the prevalence of American cultural artifacts. Targeting Americans also seems to yield important benefits: Insurgent groups that attack Americans can raise their profile among sympathizers and gain access to new resources. Significantly, they also tend to become more lethal and more likely to survive after attacking Americans. We use data on insurgent groups (the Big Allied and Dangerous 2.0-Insurgency dataset) to assess these factors quantitatively, and discuss four case studies to illustrate the underlying mechanisms, closely examining the causes and consequences of anti-American violence for the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), Al-Shabaab, and the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU).</jats:p>