The Terrorism and Oil Industry Relationship Dissertation

Abstract

Scholarly and professional literature demonstrates that oil and energy play central roles in worldwide political stability. Geopolitical instability was found to have a significant impact on the volatility of oil prices. Since terrorism is a source of political instability in the world, there is expected to be a positive correlation between oil prices and terrorist attacks. Research demonstrates that there may be other types of correlations between terrorism and oil apart from terrorist acts affecting oil prices.

The purpose of this research was to examine the relationship between oil and terrorism in a broad sense. In order to achieve the purpose, a narrative literature review was used as the primary research method. Four databases, including Science Direct, Research Gate, Google Scholar, and Portsmouth University library, were searched to find relevant research on the subject. A total of 34 papers were included in the literature review to arrive at a conclusion.

The results of the analysis revealed that there were three types of correlations between oil and terrorism. First, terrorism was found to have a short-term positive effect on oil prices, which is negated long-term. Second, emerging evidence was found that supports the rhetoric that oil money may finance terrorism. Finally, the oil industry was found to be a relatively frequent target of terrorist attacks. The results of the review were discussed against the strain theory, social movement theory, and game theory.

Introduction

Background

Scholarly and professional literature demonstrates that oil and energy play central roles in worldwide political stability, as they can be a reason for interstate and even civil wars (Lee, 2018; Mayik & Ochi, 2020; Piazza, 2016). Recent changes in geopolitics also demonstrated how oil and gas could be used to promote the interests of different countries. On February 24, 2022, Russia invaded Ukraine with the official goal to demilitarise and de-Nazify Ukraine, as President Putin declared that Russia could not develop safely without ensuring the neutral status of Ukraine (Kirby, 2022). Oil and gas were the central mechanisms of both Russia and European countries in the political sphere. The allies threatened Russia to ban oil originating in the country as a way to punish Russia for its invasion of Ukraine (Thomas & Race, 2022). As a response, Russia threatened to close its main gas pipeline to Europe, which would lead to catastrophic consequences (Thomas & Race, 2022). Europe receives more than 30% of its oil and 40% of its natural gas from Russia, and it was impossible to find a reliable replacement (Thomas & Race, 2022). Thus, it may be concluded that oil plays a significant role in the geopolitical arena, as it can be a source of economic pressure.

There is another way oil is correlated with international conflicts and conflicts and wars between citizens of one country. Geopolitical instability was found to have a significant impact on the volatility of oil prices (Ivanovski & Hailemariam, 2022). In other words, oil and gas prices grow unpredictably in times of international conflicts. After the start of the conflict in Ukraine, Russia doubled its revenues from fossil fuel sales, in comparison with a similar period in 2021, due to the rise in prices of oil and gas (Harvey, 2022). This may demonstrate that starting conflicts may be beneficial for oil-rich countries, as instability in the geopolitical environment can lead to significant increases in profits for oil companies around the world.

Terrorism is also a source of instability in the geopolitical arena, which implies that it can be correlated with oil markets. After the terrorist attack on September 11, 2001, the world’s oil prices spiked upwards significantly for one weak despite the global decrease in demand for fossil fuels before the events (Richman et al., 2005). The attack caused extreme volatility in stock markets, currency rates, and energy prices, which was a result of geopolitical instability (Dadwal, 2001). Thus, it may be assumed that since oil companies and oil-rich countries receive significant benefits from large-scale terrorist attacks in the form of increased revenues from high fossil fuel prices, they can be interested in promoting such attacks. In other words, there may be two types of correlations between oil markets and terrorism. On the one hand, terrorism increases the volatility of oil prices, which causes increased revenues for oil companies. On the other hand, oil companies and oil-rich countries may be financing terrorist attacks to increase their revenues.

Research demonstrates that there may be other types of correlations between terrorism and oil apart from the two mentioned above. Lee (2018) states that there may be three different mechanisms that connect the oil industry and terrorism. First, as it was mentioned previously, oil-producing countries may sponsor terrorism for different economic and political reasons. Second, oil-rich countries are frequent terrorism targets, as the terrorist attacks often happen at oil facilities. Additionally, the strategic importance of oil-rich countries to powerful countries, such as the US, also serves as the reason for attacks on oil-rich countries. Third, the oil may motivate local conflicts among the citizens due to resentment toward the government, which causes domestic terrorism. Le Billon and El Khatib (2004) stated that terrorism was also used by the US to acquire easy access to Iraqi oil through intervention. Thus, it may be concluded that the relationship between oil and terrorism is well-established.

Oil Industry as the Context of the Study

This literature-based research focuses on the inter-relationship between the oil industry and terrorism. The oil and gas industry experienced a significant decline in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic (Deloitte, 2021). The primary reason for the matter was the decline in mobility around the globe due to COVID-19 restrictions (Deloitte, 2021). In April 2020, the prices dropped to negative amounts, which created significant tension is among the major players in the industry (Deloitte, 2021). However, the oil prices rebounded to the pre-COVID levels by 2021 (Megatrends, 2022). In 2022, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine boosted prices above $100 per barrel, which was the highest price since 2014 (Harvey, 2022; Megatrends, 2022). Thus, oil prices support the development of the industry (see Figure 1 below for changes in oil prices).

According to the recent forecasts, the oil industry is expected a transformation in 2022. The increase in oil prices will allow the companies in the industry to decrease their debt to ensure long-term financial sustainability (Deloitte, 2021). The demand is expected to grow significantly, especially for non-Russian oil, since the US is pushing for a ban on Russian oil (Thomas & Race, 2022). However, high prices are expected to boost the transition from fossil fuel to alternative sources of fuel, such as wind and sunlight (Deloitte, 2021). As a result, in the near future, the industry is expected to experience a shift in business models to adapt to the era of decarbonisation (Deloitte, 2021). Thus, even though the demand for oil and growing oil prices are expected to help the industry develop short-term, rapid growth of oil prices and push for environmental sustainability are expected to affect the industry negatively long-term.

Rationale

Literature on the relationship between oil and terrorism is abundant. The scholarly literature focuses on different aspects of the correlation, which were briefly mentioned in the previous section. Bassil et al. (2018) focused on the relationship between the oil market and terrorists’ attacks on OPEC countries. The results demonstrated that terrorist attacks on the countries positively affect the oil prices and negatively affect its volatility. Orbaneja et al. (2018) focused on exploring the relationship between different aspects of terrorist attacks, such as the number of fatalities and proximity to oil facilities on oil prices based in Middle Eastern countries. The results revealed that the closer the terrorist attacks were to the oil facilities and the more fatalities were associated with the attacks, the high the revenues were from crude oil sales. Other studies focused on the oil reserves being of high interest to terrorists. In particular, Lee (2018) provided significant empirical evidence using secondary data that countries with large oil reserves are more likely to be targeted by terrorists.

However, while the research on the topic of the correlation between oil and terrorism is plentiful, there is a lack of literature reviews that unite all the knowledge in one work. In other words, the search of the literature revealed no systematic or narrative literature reviews that summarised all the knowledge concerning the relationship between the two phenomena in a comprehensive form. Without such literature reviews, it appears challenging to reveal literature gaps and discover relevant directions for future research.

Aims and Objectives

This research aims to describe the current state of knowledge concerning the relationship between terrorism and oil in the world. In particular, the purpose of this thesis is to provide a list of recommendations for future research concerning the relationship between oil industry terrorism. These recommendations were expected to be based on the analysis of gaps in the current body of knowledge. In order to achieve the purpose, the following objectives were identified:

1. Conduct a literature search in major online libraries concerning the topic of the relationship between the oil industry and terrorism;
2. Conduct thematic analysis of literature to organise the findings of recent research based on the areas of research;
3. Discuss the results of literature analysis based on the terrorism theory;
4. Provide recommendations for future research based on the results of the discussion.

Overview of Dissertation

This dissertation is divided into five chapters based on the purpose and context of each chapter. This chapter provided a description of the background along with the rationale of the dissertation. Additionally, the chapter focused on the aims and objectives of the paper.

Chapter 2 of this thesis focuses on the description of methods. The selected method for this research was a narrative literature review with elements of thematic analysis. Chapter 2 justifies the methods and describes the literature search strategy.

Chapter 3 provides an in-depth analysis overview of the literature on the topic of the correlation between terrorism and the oil industry. First, the chapter provides a brief overview of the concept of terrorism to establish the basic assumptions for further analysis by discussing the definition of terrorism and introducing the triangle of terrorism as the central conceptual framework for understanding the mechanism and reasoning of terrorism. After that, the chapter overviews literature concerning the correlation between oil prices and terrorism by establishing the effect of terrorist attacks on oil markets and oil prices. Further, the chapter provides a brief overview of current evidence concerning the oil-rich countries funding terrorism. Even though the research on the subject is scarce, there is indirect evidence that hint at the connection. Finally, the chapter discusses evidence concerning the oil industry being the target of terrorist attacks.

Chapter 4 provides a discussion of the research results by analysing the themes against the theory of terrorism. This chapter also includes a list of recommendations for future research in the area of correlation between oil industry and terrorism. Additionally, the chapter acknowledges the limitations of the study to warn the reader about the possible biases associated with the assumptions.

The final chapter provides a brief summary of the results and discusses the implications of this literature-based research.

Research Methodology

Research Questions

This research aims at provided recommendations for future research concerning the questions of the correlation between the oil industry and terrorism. The problem the present paper aims to solve is the lack of systematic knowledge concerning the inter-relationships between the oil industry and terrorism. Thus, it may be stated as:

RQ: What are the relationships between oil and industry and terrorism based on the review of scholarly literature?

The preliminary literature review demonstrated that there might be three types of relationships, including the effect of terrorism on oil prices, oil financing terrorism, and oil being the target of terrorism. Additionally, it was found beneficial to provide an in-depth explanation of the concept of terrorism and different terrorism theories that can help to explain these relationships. Thus, the primary research question may be divided into four sub-questions listed below:

1. What is terrorism, and what terrorism theories help to explain the phenomenon?
2. How does terrorism affect oil prices?
3. What is the state of evidence concerning oil money financing terrorism?
4. How likely oil facilities are to be targeted by terrorist attacks?

Research Methodology and Justification

Since this research aims at summarising the current knowledge concerning the relationships between the oil industry and terrorism, the most appropriate method is a literature review. At first, it was considered to utilise secondary data to test the relationship between the volume of oil production and the number of terrorist attacks using secondary data. Such an analysis would have revealed if there was a significant correlation between the concepts. However, such an analysis would not have answered the research question entirely, as the preliminary literature review revealed that the relationships between the two concepts are multifaced. Moreover, a similar study was conducted by Lee (2018), which revealed a significant positive correlation between oil production and the number of terrorist attacks using a complicated statistical model. Therefore, it was decided in favour of a narrative literature review as the primary method for answering the research question.

There are two types of literature review, including systematic literature reviews (SLRs) and narrative literature reviews (NLRs). SLRs are usually used to answer a very narrow research question based on the results of empirical studies (Green, 2006). SLRs utilise a very strict protocol for literature selection, as all the included studies should use similar methods and have a similar research question (Green, 2006). When conducting an SLR, researchers usually follow seven steps, including posing a research question, locating studies, critical evaluation of studies, data collection, data analysis, interpretations of findings, and refinement and updating the review (Rother, 2007). Since the protocol of SLRs is strict, it requires significant experience of the researcher to ensure the reliability of findings and viability of methods (Green, 2006).

NLRs are used when a broad overview of the selected topic is needed. The approach does not have a strict protocol for selecting the studies and their no rigorous requirements for the narration and paper organisation. According to Rother (2007), “narrative literature review articles have an important role in continuing education because they provide readers with up-to-date knowledge about a specific topic or theme” (p. v). NLRs usually use a qualitative approach to data analysis, and they do not allow to reproduce the results of the studies due to the lack of a systematic approach to methods (Green, 2006).

NLR was selected as the primary method for the following reasons. First, it suits the purpose of the study, which is to provide a broad overview of the current body of knowledge concerning the relationship between terrorism and the oil industry. Second, even though the literature on the topic is abundant, the located articles utilised a wide variety of methods and touched upon various aspects of inter-relationship between the concepts. Finally, the skills of the researcher limited the ability to conduct the systematic literature review, as the researcher did not have enough experience to ensure the validity of methods and the reliability of findings.

Procedures

Scholarly databases were searched to find relevant articles that answer the research question. The researcher utilised four databases, including Science Direct, Research Gate, Google Scholar, and Portsmouth University library. The following keywords were used to search for relevant studies: ‘terrorism and oil’, ‘oil industry and terrorism’, ‘fossil fuel and terrorism’, ‘relationship oil and terrorism’. In addition, it was found beneficial to search for articles concerning the theory of terrorism. For this purpose, the same libraries were searched using the keywords of ‘terrorism’, ‘terrorism definition’, ‘terrorism theory’. The located studies went through three levels of the selection process. First, the titles of the studies were read to ensure their relevance to the research question. Second, the abstracts of the papers were read to understand if they would be helpful for achieving the purpose of the study. Finally, the remaining articles were read entirely to gain an in-depth understanding of the findings. In addition to

All the articles were sorted according to the major themes discussed in them. In order to indicate the themes of the studies, all the abstracts of the selected articles were printed out and sorted into several stacks according to their central themes. Some of the studies were used for two or more stacks, as they discussed more than one topic. After the topics were identified, tables of all the studies on the topic were created to summarise the research questions and findings of these studies. Finally, narratives were written to provide an in-depth description of the findings of research for each identified theme.

Results

Introduction

This chapter provides an in-depth narrative overview of the relationship between terrorism and the oil industry. The subheadings of the chapter corresponding to the central themes located in the literature. Each subsection is ended with a table that overviews all the literature mentioned in it. First, the definition and theory of terrorism were discussed to allow the researcher to explain the results of the findings. Second, the correlation between oil prices and acts of terrorism was discussed. Third, evidence concerning oil-rich countries funding terrorism is introduced. Fourth, the chapter discusses of oil industry being the victim of terrorist attacks. The chapter is ended with a brief summary of the results.

The purpose of this section was to describe the results of the analysis in the most unbiased matter to allow the readers to draw their own conclusions. In general, the function of the results section is to present the key results in the most objective manner (Saunders et al., 2019). Therefore, no analysis was included in the description of the results.

Terrorism: Definition and Theory

Terrorism is a term familiar to almost any adult around the globe. However, researchers and policymakers disagree about the definition of the term. Title 22 of the United States Code, Section 2656f(d) defines terrorism as “politically motivated violence perpetrated against non-combatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience” (Ruby, 2002, p. 10). As a result of the analysis of this definition, Ruby (2002) describes three basic characteristics of terrorism. First, terrorism is to be politically motivated, which implies that the aim of terrorism is to motivate a change in government policy (Ruby, 2002). Second, the target of terrorism should be non-combatants, which are people that are not currently engaged in military battles (Ruby, 2002). This category includes military people that attacked during the piece time (Ruby, 2002). Finally, the terrorist attacks are to be conducted by subnational groups, which implies that if nation-states initiate violence against non-combatants, it is not considered terrorism (Ruby, 2002). Thus, the US government provides a clear definition that helps to distinguish between terrorism and non-terrorism.

Taylor (1988) defined three additional criteria that help to distinguish between terrorism and non-terrorism. First, Taylor (1988) mentioned that terrorism should be illegal to be seen as terrorism. This implies that, depending on the legal framework, the same act may be seen as terrorism and non-terrorism by different nations. Second, the public may consider an act to be terrorism based on a moral perspective (Taylor, 1988). The public sees an act as terrorism only if it is immoral according to their viewpoint (Taylor, 1988). Finally, the third perspective on terrorism is behavioural, which distinguishes between terrorism and non-terrorism regardless of morality and legality of actions.

Schmid (2020) conducted a thorough overview of the concept of terrorism and its forms. The review revealed over 260 different definitions, which all differed in some matters. However, Schmid (2020) stated that all of these definitions describe the three central characteristics that describe terrorism, which was present in the definition of the US government and discussed by Ruby (2002). Schmid (2020) distinguishes between ten types of terrorism, including single-issue, lone wolf/actor, vigilante terrorism, separatist, left-wing, right-wing, religious, cyber, chemical/biological, and regime terrorisms. Schmid (2020) states that terrorism is based upon the presumption of the effectiveness of a special form or tactic of fear-generating political violence and the practice of calculated direct violent action against non-combatants to have a significant indirect psychological effect on the target audience (Schmid, 2020). In order to explain this phenomenon, Schmid (2020) introduces the ‘triangle of terrorism’, which explains the motivation of terrorist attacks (see Figure 2 below). According to this triangle, the target audience feels fear due to mass media and social media’s coverage of the terrorist attacks on the direct victims.

The studies about terrorism are characterised by a lack of generalisable theory that can explain all acts of terrorism. Beck (2008) stated that terrorism can be partially explained by the social movement theory. Beck (2008) demonstrates that terrorism requires the concentration of a large number of resources, which requires collective identity. However, social movement theory explains terrorism as a form of contentious politics that involves organised collective action. Beck (2008) does not apply the theory to lone wolf/actor terrorism that does not require collective identity and large resource concentration.

Goodwin (2006) describes the theory of categorical terrorism touching upon the revolutionaries attempting to overthrow the government. According to this theory, revolutionaries are likely to attack the categories of non-combatants that are likely to influence the current policy of the government. At the same time, revolutionaries are unlikely to attack non-combatants that are seen as possible allies of the terrorists (Goodwin, 2006). Such a phenomenon can be explained by the fact that categorical terrorism is motivated by political reasons.

After conducting a through literature review, Agnew (2010) stated that strain theory is the most common framework that explains terrorism. According to the theory, grievance is the major source of terrorism and without grievance, there would be no terrorism (Silver et al., 2019). The central strains that contribute to the emergence of terrorism include material deprivation, globalisation, resentment to the domination of powerful countries, territorial or ethnic disputes, discrimination, denial of human rights, displacement, military occupation, and challenges to group identity (Agnew, 2010). According to the theory, in many cases, terrorism remains as the only coping option (Agnew, 2010). Silver et al. (2019) confirm that the strain theory is helpful for explaining lone wolf terrorism, unlike the social group theory. A recent study by Skoczylis and Andrews (2022) also confirms the relevance of the strain theory and control theory for the explanations of different violent acts, including terrorism.

Sandler (2003) stated that game theory can contribute to understanding the reasons of terrorism as well as predict the target of terrorist attacks. Sandler (2003) describes several reasons why game theory can be applicable. First, game theory captures the communication between the terrorist group and the government, which explains the motivations behind the attacks. Second, game theory provides an explanation of inter-relationship between the members of a terrorist group. Third, game theory explains why the government and the terrorists issue threats and promise to gain an advantage. Fourth, the actions of the government and the terrorists abide to the rationality assumption of the game theory. Finally, the ideas of uncertainty and learning of game theory apply to terrorism. Thus, even though there are some limitations to the applicability of the game theory to terrorism, Sandler (2003) confirmed that game theory is relevant for explaining terrorism.

Table 1 below provides a summary of all the articles utilised in this subsection.

Table 1. Articles concerning the definition and theory of terrorism

Relationship between Terrorism and Oil Prices

The relationship between terrorism and oil prices is a matter of increase interest among scholars and traders around the globe (Bassil et al., 2018; Blomberg et al., 2009; Orbaneja et al., 2018; Monge & Cristóbal, 2021). However, scholars have not reached a consensus concerning the effect of terrorist attacks on the oil prices. Dadwal (2001) stated that after the terrorist attacks of 9/11, oil prices reacted with a significant increase in prices and volatility short-term due to an increase in demand. However, after several weeks, the prices and the volatility of returned to the pre-9/11 levels (Dadwal, 2001). While such anecdotal evidence can be helpful for getting an idea of the possible effects of terrorist attacks on oil prices, they are insufficient to be considered reliable empirical evidence. Thus, a review of empirical studies using rigorous quantitative methods was conducted to summarise the current state of knowledge on the matter.

Most of researchers agreed that terrorism has a significant positive impact on oil prices. Orbaneja et al. (2018) conducted a quantitative research using secondary data to assess the effect of terrorist attacks on oil prices. The researchers utilised a multiple regression model that quantified the effect of several characteristics on oil prices. The analysis of coefficients revealed that terrorist attacks’ proximity to oil facilities and the number of fatalities had a significant effect on oil prices. Thus, the study confirmed a positive correlation between oil prices and terrorist attacks and shed some light on the mechanisms that affect oil prices.

Kollias et al. (2013) assessed the impact of wars and terrorist attacks on the major market indices and oil prices. The results revealed that wars had strong impacts on market indices and oil prices. At the same time, terrorist attacks had a significant effect on oil prices and some market indices. Chen et al. (2008) also confirmed a positive effect of terrorism on oil prices by creating a model that predicted economic downturns using oil prices as an independent variable and terrorist attacks as an instrumental variable.

Bassil et al. (2018) utilised a more complicated model to describe the relationship between terrorism and oil prices. The results of the analysis demonstrated that terrorist attack inside OPEC countries have a significant positive effect on returns from crude oil and negative impact on its volatility. Phan et al. (2021) confirmed that the relationship between oil prices and terrorist attacks is the strongest when these attacks are originated in the oil-producing countries. In other words, Phan et al (2021) revealed that the location of terrorist act is a crucial factor affecting the relationship between terrorism and oil prices.

Kilian (2009) claimed that the relationship between the relationship between oil prices and terrorist attacks was indirect. The study demonstrated that major terrorist attacks affect the demand for oil short-term. The reason for that is increased uncertainty around the oil prices and supply, which urges the participants of trade to purchase oil at the current price. According to the laws of supply and demand, the increase in demand affects the equilibrium, which is reached by increasing the price of the product.

While most studies favour a positive correlation between terrorist attacks and oil prices, some researchers provide evidence that terrorist attacks do not have a significant impact on oil prices. A recent research by Monge and Cristóbal (2021) state that terrorist attacks have a very limited effect on oil prices and do not affect the general trend. The researchers created a rigorous time series model with high predictivity, which demonstrated that, after a short shock, oil prices return to the pattern before the attack. Thus, even though the short-term effect of terrorist attacks on oil prices may be significant, the long-term effect of such attacks is insignificant.

Blomberg et al. (2009) evaluated the effect of different types of conflicts, including on oil prices. The analysis demonstrated that OPEC regulations minimised the effect of conflicts on price volatility. However, in rare cases, conflicts can increase the price of oi by up 10 percentage points.

In summary, all research discussed in this subsection agrees that there is a positive correlation between terrorist attacks and oil prices short-term (Bassil et al., 2018; Blomberg et al., 2009; Chen et al., 2008; Dadwal, 2001; Kilian, 2009; Kollias et al., 2013; Monge & Cristóbal, 2021; Orbaneja et al., 2018; Phan et al., 2018). Such a relationship can be either direct (Bassil et al., 2018; Orbaneja et al., 2018; Phan et al., 2018) or indirect (Chen et al., 2008; Kilian, 2009). However, there is significant evidence that after a short period of shock, oil prices return to their trends before the terrorist attack (Blomberg et al., 2009; Dadwal, 2001; Monge & Cristóbal, 2021). Table 2 below provides a summary of all the studies utilised as references in this subsection.

Table 2. Articles concerning the relationship between terrorism and oil prices

Oil-Rich Countries Financing Terrorism

Even though the rhetoric concerning oil-rich countries financing, the evidence on the matter is scarce. However, there is some preliminary evidence, which confirms that oil money is involved in financing terrorism (Lee, 2018). Terrorism is financed through various channels, including personal businesses, private donations, illegal activities, and state sponsorship (Freeman, 2011; Jacobson, 2010; Raphaeli, 2010). Historically, state sponsorship was the central source of funding of terrorist groups during various wars, which implies that state sponsorship of terrorists’ activity is a well-known fact (Freeman, 2011). Today, Iran and Syria are known to be central sponsors of terrorist organisations, such as Hezbollah (Freeman, 2011). Lee (2018) stated that since oil production generates extensive revenues, there is a strong possibility that oil money can be spent on financing terrorism.

Raphaeli (2010) stated that in order to prevent terrorism, the countries should unite to cut off their money supply by several nations acting together to investigate all the possible transactions that may be associated with terrorism. Ross (2012) states that the problem with oil money is that it is easily concealed. Concealed money can be used by nation-states to fund terrorism, as it cannot be tracked by other countries (Lee, 2018). Le Billon and El Khatib (2004) stated that there was strong suspicion that Al Qaeda was financed primarily by the government of Saudi Arabia using the concealed money from oil revenues. However, no direct evidence to confirm that such financing exists.

Another possible way oil-rich countries fund terrorism is indirectly. Freeman (2011) stated that illegal activities, such as looting, kidnapping, smuggling, and robbing, are a significant source of financing for terrorists. Thus, terrorist can profit from looting oil from the pipes and selling it on the black market (Ross, 2004). As a result, the governments of oil-rich countries finance terrorist organisations unknowingly by letting terrorists steal oil. It is also a possibility that the governments allow such an activity intentionally by failing to respond to such dangers (Lee, 2018).

It was also mentioned earlier that oil-rich countries have certain motivation to fund terrorism. First, the countries can benefit from the changes in oil prices to increase the revenues (Lee, 2018). Second, governments may want to sabotage other oil-rich countries to damage their geopolitical interests (Adams, 2003; Luft & Korin, 2004). Thus, since oil-rich countries have both motivation and resources to fund terrorism, there is a strong possibility that they may engage in such activity. Moreover, historical evidence shows that governments funding terrorist organisations is a confirmed fact.

While the evidence provided above provides a strong suspicion that oil-rich countries are more likely to finance terrorism than others, this discussion is only indirect. The only study that provided empirical evidence of oil-rich countries being more likely to finance terrorism was study by Lee (2018). The study assumed that if Western money spent on purchasing oil from Middle Eastern countries is true, the oil-producing countries are more likely to fund terrorism. In order to test the hypothesis, Lee (2018) created a complicated statistical model and included a variable called terrorism sponsor in the equation. It was a dummy variable that demonstrated if the country was one of the eight states recognised as terrorism sponsors by the US Department of State. These countries included Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Libya, North Korea, South Yemen, Sudan, and Syria. The results of research revealed that oil-rich countries are more likely to be sponsors of terrorism.

In summary, the evidence on oil rich countries being the sponsors of terrorism is scarce. Research demonstrates that oil-rich countries have the opportunity to donate money to terrorist organisations as the revenues from oil are abundant and they can be easily concealed (Freeman, 2011; Jacobson, 2010; Le Billon and El Khatib, 2004; Raphaeli, 2010; Ross, 2012). The funding of terrorist organisations can be both direct and indirect (Ross, 2004). Moreover, oil-rich countries have the motivation to fund terrorism (Adams, 2003; Luft & Korin, 2004). The only study that provided significant evidence that oil-rich countries are likely to fund terrorism was provided by Lee (2018). However, the evidence is preliminary and should be treated with caution. Table 3 below provides a description of all the studies utilised in this section.

Table 3. Articles concerning oil-rich countries funding terrorism

Oil as the Target of Terrorist Attacks

The literature concerning terrorist attacks targeting the oil industry is scarce and controversial. Toft et al. (2010) stated that the number of attacks on oil infrastructure are scarce for a wide variety of reasons. The authors indicate that the primary reason for the small number of attacks on oil infrastructure is the lack of incentives (Toft et al., 2010). Apart from the absence of material incentives, Toft et al. (2010) mention a lack of ideological reasons to attack oil infrastructure. Doukas et al. (2011) stated that terrorist attacks on oil facilities could be a significant factor contributing to energy insecurity in Europe. However, at the time of the assessment, terrorism was not an imminent threat due to a small number of attacks on oil facilities. Doukas et al. (2011) recommended that the oil infrastructure is protected against terrorist attacks in the future to mitigate the risk to Europe’s energy security.

Lee (2022) also stated that the attacks on the oil industry were not very frequent. However, oil facilities and infrastructure were identified as the most frequent non-human target of terrorist attacks. Lee (2022) argues that some terrorist groups may have significant incentives to attack oil facilities and infrastructure. Lee (2022) outlines three basic characteristics of oil facilities that contribute to the chance of being targeted by terrorists. These factors include low mobility and high concentration, increased economic value to the government, and remoteness. Low mobility and remoteness add to the vulnerability of oil infrastructure objects, while high concentration increases the damage from each attack. High strategic and economic value are also crucial for target selection, as it increases grievances and fear of hostile enemy companies.

Luft and Korin (2004) stated that, in the 21^st century, the problem of piracy is a significant danger for all the business activities that involve transportation using sea transport. Modern pirates are well-armed and equipped and attack sea facilities as well as ships to finance illegal activities. Terrorists attack ships transferring oil and offshore properties of oil companies to fund their activities. Kashubsky (2011) also mentioned that terrorist attacks on the oil industry are frequent. However, an in-depth analysis of a series of terrorist attacks demonstrated that onshore objects are attacked more frequently than offshore facilities. The primary reason for that is that onshore facilities are easier targets, as they require less equipment to attack. However, both onshore and offshore facilities are equally vulnerable to attacks.

Cook (2008) conducted an in-depth analysis of terrorist attacks on the infrastructure of oil companies. The research revealed that the number of terrorist attacks increased significantly between 2004 and 2007. Al Qaida increased the number of autonomous cells that aim at attacking oil infrastructure due to the new ideology. Oil companies in all major countries have been threatened to be attacked by at least one terrorist organisation. However, Cook (2008) found no correlation between being threatened by terrorists and being attacked. The researcher also stated that oil facilities are usually attacked by terrorist organisations that fail to achieve other political or military goals.

Tichý and Eichler (2018) shed light on ideological reasons for the attacks on oil facilities. Al Qaida and the Islamic State (IS) adopted an ideology that sees the United States as the central ideological enemy of Islam. The terrorist organisations see the dependence of the US on oil from the Middle East. Therefore, both Al Qaida and IS see attacks on the oil industry in the Middles East to sabotage the economic stability of the US. Billon and El Khatib (2004) stated that the core of this ideology lies in the imperial motives of the US that used terrorism as a reason to invade oil-rich countries and overtake their oil production.

Lee (2018) conducted an empirical study and created a complicated statistical model using secondary data. The results of the empirical analysis revealed that oil-rich countries are more likely to be attacked by terrorists. Lee (2018) explained that such a tendency could be explained by the vulnerability of oil facilities due to their location. The facilities of oil companies are usually situated far from cities, which makes them difficult to secure. Moreover, oil facilities are of financial interest to terrorists, as loot from these attacks can be used to fund further operations. Later, Lee (2022) stated that terrorists often kidnap important persons associated with the oil industry to receive the ransom. Most governments have policies of not paying ransom to terrorists in any case. However, private companies do not have such policies, which makes them more likely to pay a ransom. Terrorists use the money from kidnapping to finance their activities.

Ghatak and Karakaya (2021) explained that terrorists are more likely to target oil-rich countries because sabotaging and looting strategic resources can help in confrontation with the enemy governments. Ghatak and Karakaya (2021) stated that terrorists that attack only non-combatants almost always fail to achieve their political objectives. Terrorist organisations are successful only when they move from pure terrorist acts to open confrontation against governments. Attacking oil facilities does much damage to the enemy governments. Thus, the availability of oil often triggers the transition from terrorism to rebellion.

In summary, the literature concerning oil-rich countries being the targets of terrorism is comparatively scarce. Additionally, the research findings are inconsistent, which creates significant uncertainty. On the one hand, some research states that terrorist attacks on oil facilities are frequent (Kashubsky, 2011; Cook, 2008). Moreover, it was revealed that oil-rich countries are more likely to be the target of terrorists (Ghatak & Karakaya, 2021; Lee, 2018). On the other hand, research states that the attacks on oil facilities are less frequent than on other civilian objects (Doukas et al., 2011; Toft et al., 2010). As a consensus, Lee (2022) stated that even though the number of terrorist attacks on oil facilities is scarce, such facilities are attacked the most frequently among non-human objects. Researchers also differ about the reasons for terrorist attacks on the oil industry. Different studies name various possible incentives for attacking oil facilities, such as ideology, the possibility to finance operations, increased damage to the government, and convenience for the attacks (Cook, 2008; Ghatak & Karakaya, 2021; Lee, 2018; Lee, 2022; Tichý and Eichler; 2018). However, some research findings suggest that terrorists do not have any incentives to attack oil facilities. Table 4 below summarises the research findings of articles utilised in this subsection.

Table 4. Articles concerning oil as the target of terrorist attacks

Chapter Summary

This chapter provides a summary of findings from the literature review concerning the inter-relations between oil and terrorism. The chapter started with a definition of terrorism and a review of theories that could explain terrorism as a phenomenon. The review revealed that acts of terrorism are violent actions against non-combatants performed by non-state actors with an intention to put significant political pressure (Ruby, 2002; Schmid, 2020). There are numerous theories that can explain terrorism, including strain theory, game theory, and social movement theory (Agnew, 2010; Beck, 2008; Sandler, 2003). Additionally, the triangle of terrorism was introduced.

After establishing a clear, thorough description of the concept of terrorism, the chapter provided an analysis of three basic types of interaction between oil industry. First, the analysis revealed that terrorism affected oil prices both directly and indirectly short term. However, long term, the effect of terrorist attacks on oil prices appeared insignificant. Second, the evidence concerning oil money financing terrorism was inspected. The literature review revealed that even though oil-rich countries have both the possibility and motivation to finance terrorism (Freeman, 2011; Jacobson, 2010; Le Billon and El Khatib, 2004; Raphaeli, 2010; Ross, 2012), the evidence of the correlation between oil-associated wealth and the probability of financing terrorism was only preliminary (Lee, 2018). Finally, the review assessed if oil facilities are more likely to be attacked by terrorists. The review of literature provided controversial results concerning the frequency of attacks and the reasons for the attacks.

Discussion

Introduction

This chapter provides an in-depth analysis of the research results using the theoretical frameworks discussed in Section 3.2. The primary purpose of this chapter is to interpret the results of the literature review using the strain theory, game theory, and social movement theory. This section is subdivided into three central subsections based on the research questions mentioned in Chapter 2. First, the discussion focuses on the inter-relations between terrorism and oil prices in the world. Second, the chapter explains the possibility of oil money financing terrorism. Third, the chapter discusses the findings concerning oil facilities being the target of terrorist attacks. The chapter is concluded with a short summary of the incentives drawn from the analysis of literature in the form of research gaps.

Terrorism and Oil Prices

The results of the literature review demonstrated that the researchers do not agree on the nature of the relationships between oil prices and terrorist attacks. Some researchers insist that there is a significant correlation between oil prices and major terrorist attacks (Bassil et al., 2018; Blomberg et al., 2009; Chen et al., 2008; Dadwal, 2001; Kilian, 2009; Kollias et al., 2013; Monge & Cristóbal, 2021; Orbaneja et al., 2018; Phan et al., 2018), while others claim that no such correlation exists (Blomberg et al., 2009; Monge & Cristóbal, 2021). However, a consensus can be reached by careful examination of periods analysed by researchers. The inconsistency lies in the fact that studies, which demonstrated that there was a significant relationship between terrorist attacks and oil prices, discussed only immediate effects of terrorist attacks. Thus, these studies evaluated only the short-term effect of terrorist attacks. Research that focused on prolonged periods also acknowledged that short-term effects of terrorist attacks existed. However, no such correlation was found long-term.

Such behaviour of oil prices can be explained by the law of supply and demand. After a terrorist attack, especially when speaking of terrorist attacks on oil-producing countries, the prices of oil and other energy resources increase due to an increase in demand. Consumers anticipate significant volatility in oil supply and prices due to the possibility of damaging oil infrastructure. Consumers want to protect themselves from supply disruptions and money losses and by extra oil for the future. However, the disruptions are prevented or quickly mitigated by the actions of OPEC based on their policies and regulations. Since consumers purchased oil in advance, the demand for the energy source decreases after a short shock and returns to the trends before the attack. Thus, there is no contradiction between research findings, as it can be said that terrorist attacks both have and do not have a significant effect on oil prices, depending on the period of discussion.

There is also a seeming contradiction in the research results concerning the nature of the correlation between oil prices and terrorist attacks. Some researchers stated that there was a direct correlation between oil prices and terrorist attacks, while others stated that the relationship was indirect (Bassil et al., 2018; Chen et al., 2008; Kilian, 2009). However, a careful analysis demonstrates that no contradiction exists. The explanation lies in the fact the studies that insisted on direct correlation did not include any mediators or moderators in their statistical models.

In summary, the analysis revealed that there are no significant contradictions in the current body of knowledge. Terrorist attacks appear to have a significant positive effect on oil prices short-term. However, long-term, the effect is insignificant due to a gradual decrease in demand and regulations of OPEC. However, there is a significant uncertainty concerning the dispute if the relationship between terrorist attacks and oil prices was direct or indirect due to the lack of studies on the matter.

Oil Financing Terrorism

The results of the literature review demonstrated that there was little direct evidence that oil money financed terrorism (Lee, 2018). However, there is a large amount of indirect evidence that hint on the fact that oil money can fund terrorist attacks (Freeman, 2011; Jacobson, 2010; Le Billon and El Khatib, 2004; Lee, 2018; Raphaeli, 2010; Ross, 2012). It should be mentioned that the majority of research on the matter was qualitative, which implies that the results were open to interpretation, as the methods were not rigorous. The central problem with conducting quantitative research is the inability to confirm the fact that the oil money actually financed terrorism. Therefore, the creation of a statistical model appears impossible due to the inability to measure the outcome variable. However, Lee (2018) managed to find a way to measure the outcome variable by using the least of countries that are officially considered sponsors of terrorism.

The assumption that oil money finances terrorism is consistent with several theories described in Section 3.2 of this paper. On the one hand, strain theory explains such an interaction. Oil-rich countries have enough money to finance terrorist acts. Moreover, the literature review demonstrated that such money could be easily concealed, which makes it easy to transfer them to terrorist organisations. Strain theory explains that oil-rich countries may be discontent with the domination of the US and other Western countries in the global arena. However, since these countries do not have the mechanisms to oppose oppression, they utilise terrorism as a coping method to promote their political ideas. On the other hand, game theory explains the relationship between the attacker and the sponsor. According to the theory, the attackers will promote the political interest of oil-rich countries if they receive monetary incentives from the governments of these countries and vice versa. However, even though theories and indirect evidence support the idea that oil money is likely to fund terrorism, there is only preliminary evidence that oil-rich countries are more likely to fund terrorism than others.

Terrorists Targeting Oil

The results concerning the attacks of terrorists on oil facilities were controversial. While some research stated that the attacks on oil facilities were scarce, other studies insisted that attacks on oil infrastructure were frequent (Kashubsky, 2011; Cook, 2008; Toft et al., 2010). However, the controversy was resolved by a qualitative study conducted by Lee (2022). The researcher stated that even though terrorist attacks on oil facilities were scarce, they were relatively frequent in comparison with attacks on other non-human targets. According to the triangle of terrorism mentioned by Schmid (2020), the purpose of terrorist attacks is to cause fear in the target audience indirectly. According to the concept of the triangle of terrorism, terrorist organisations usually aim to attack objects that may cause the most fear in the target population. Oil facilities are usually remote, and attacking them deals damage to oil companies rather than governments. Therefore, attacking oil facilities is unlikely to cause fear among civilians or governments. Such an explanation is consistent with the findings of Cook (2008), who stated that terrorists attack the oil industry only if they fail to achieve other political or military goals.

It appears that oil facilities are attacked more frequently than other non-human objects, mostly for financial reasons. First, research demonstrates that attacking oil facilities can be a source of funding, whether it is connected with looting or kidnapping (Lee, 2018; Ghatak & Karakaya, 2021). Second, the lack of resources to attack hard targets, such as government or military objects, induces terrorists to attack soft targets, such as oil facilities. Finally, attacking oil facilities deprives the government of income.

Social movement theory explains why Al Qaida and IS included attacks on oil facilities in the Middle East as part of their ideologies, even though such attacks do not directly harm the primary enemy of these organisations, the United States and other Western countries. Terrorist organisations may need to finance their operations, and attacking oil facilities appears to be an easy way to make money. However, if such attacks are explained by the ideology, it makes the attackers feel part of a social movement and explains their actions with a greater cause.

Summary and Gap in Knowledge

This section focused on explaining the results of the literature review using the theoretical frameworks described in Section 3.2. The analysis revealed that terrorist attacks on oil facilities affect crude oil prices for a short period due to a temporary increase in demand. However, after a short shock, crude oil prices return to trends before the attack. It was also concluded that the assumption that oil money fund terrorism is in line with the strain theory. Yet, only preliminary evidence on the fact that oil-rich countries are more likely to fund terrorism is present. Finally, it was established that terrorists target oil mostly for financial reasons and use ideology to explain their actions to feel part of a social movement.

Several knowledge gaps were identified in the literature that should be addressed.

1. No quantitative research is available that tests the relationship between oil prices and terrorist attacks using mediation or moderation models.
2. Little quantitative research is available that can confirm the fact that oil money is likely to fund terrorism.
3. Quantitative research that could confirm that oil development is associated with an increased possibility of countries becoming the targets of terrorist attacks is scarce.

Conclusion

Essential Conclusions

This study aimed to identify the nature of the relationship between the oil industry and terrorism. The analysis of available literature revealed three central correlations between terrorism and the oil industry. First, a correlation was found between crude oil prices and terrorism. The research demonstrated that terrorist acts, especially if they target oil-rich countries, have a short-term positive effect on oil prices. However, the effect is negated long-term due to the laws of supply and demand. Second, emerging evidence concerning oil money financing terrorism was revealed. Even though most evidence was indirect, one study that revealed a positive correlation between revenues from oil sales and the possibility of a country funding terrorism was found. Third, it was established that terrorists are more likely to attack oil facilities in comparison with other non-human targets. The central reasons for that were found to be economical, as attacks on onshore oil facilities do not require large financial investments and have the potential to fund future activities of terrorist organisations. In summary, the relationship between oil and terrorism is complicated and well-established by previous research.

Research Limitations

While the results of this research were achieved using justified methodology that should be acknowledged. Acknowledgement of these limitations is expected to provide the reader with an idea concerning the possible flaws in the research design that may have affected the reliability of the results.

First, this research is limited by the characteristics of the sample of studies that were included in the review. A total of three types of correlations between oil and terrorism were found. While the literature on the correlation between oil prices and terrorism was abundant, studies discussing other types of correlations were scarce. Thus, conclusions were drawn from a limited number of studies. Moreover, research that discussed the themes of oil financing, terrorism and terrorism targeting was mostly qualitative in nature, which limits its reliability.

Second, the knowledge received as a result of this literature review may be overly generalised. Schmid (2020) distinguished between ten types of terrorism that all have their unique characteristics. The studies overviewed for this dissertation were on the general topic of terrorism and ignored the differences in types of terrorism. The controversy in findings may have been due to the fact of failure to acknowledge the different types of terrorists. However, it should be mentioned that most of the papers discussed international organised terrorism.

Third, the researcher may have failed to include all the studies relevant to the topic. The search strategy focused on four online databases, including Science Direct, Research Gate, Google Scholar, and Portsmouth University library. There may be other relevant studies that could have been found in different libraries or using different keywords.

Finally, the study results are limited by the skills of the researcher. Even though the researcher has relevant qualifications to conduct such research, the experience was limited. Thus, some essential aspects of the correlation between terrorism and oil may have been ignored unknowingly.

Recommendations for Future Research

Future research should focus on closing the literature gaps revealed by this literature review and address the limitations of this study. The list of recommendations for future research is provided below:

• Test for mediators and moderators in the relationship between oil prices and terrorist attacks. The results revealed that quantitative research focused on the direct relationships between oil prices and terrorist acts. However, the analysis revealed that there might be significant mediators and moderators in the relationship. Therefore, it is recommended that future research focuses on testing such relationships.
• Conduct more quantitative research on oil money funding terrorism. The research on the relationship is limited due to the inability to measure variables. Future research should aim at solving this issue.
• Focus on increasing the amount of evidence concerning oil-rich countries being frequent targets of attacks. The number of studies that quantified the relationship between oil revenues earned and the number of terrorist attacks is limited. Thus, additional evidence is required.
• Examine the relationship between different types of terrorism and oil. Such an endeavour can help to gain more specific knowledge about the relationship between terrorism and oil.

References

Adams, N. (2003). Terrorism and Oil. PennWell Books.

Agnew, R. (2010). A general strain theory of terrorism. Theoretical Criminology, 14(2), 131-153.

Bassil, C., Hamadi, H., & Bteich, M. (2018). Terrorism in OPEC countries and oil prices. International Journal of Emerging Markets, 13(6), 1732-1750.

Beck, C. J. (2008). The contribution of social movement theory to understanding terrorism. Sociology Compass, 2(5), 1565-1581.

Blomberg, B., Hess, G., & Jackson, J. H. (2009). Terrorism and the returns to oil.Economics & Politics, 21(3), 409-432.

Cook, D. (2008). Oil and Terrorism.

Chen, N., Graham, L., & Oswald, A. J. (2008). Oil Prices, Profits, and Recessions: An Inquiry Using Terrorism as an Instrumental Variable. CEPR Discussion Paper No. DP6937.

Dadwal, S. R. (2001). The Global oil market after 9/11: On the brink of a crisis?Strategic Analysis, 25(9), 1059-1070.

Deloitte. (2021). 2022 oil and gas industry outlook.

Doukas, H., Flamos, A., & Psarras, J. (2011). Risks on the security of oil and gas supply. Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning, and Policy, 6(4), 417-425.

Freeman, M. (2011). The sources of terrorist financing: Theory and typology.Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 34(6), 461-475.

Ghatak, S., & Karakaya, S. (2021). Terrorists as rebels: Territorial goals, oil resources, and civil war onset in terrorist campaigns. Foreign Policy Analysis, 17(1), oraa012.

Green, B. N., Johnson, C. D., & Adams, A. (2006). Writing narrative literature reviews for peer-reviewed journals: Secrets of the trade.Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 5(3), 101–117.

Goodwin, J. (2006). A theory of categorical terrorism. Social Forces, 84(4), 2027-2046.

Harvey, F. (2022). Russia doubles fossil fuel revenues since the invasion of Ukraine began. The Guardian.

Ivanovski, K., & Hailemariam, A. (2022). Time-varying geopolitical risk and oil prices. International Review of Economics & Finance, 77, 206-221.

Jacobson, M. (2010). Terrorist financing and the Internet. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 33(4), 353-363.

Kirby, P. (2022). Why has Russia invaded Ukraine and what does Putin want?BBC News.

Kilian, L. (2009). Not all oil price shocks are alike: Disentangling demand and supply shocks in the crude oil market.American Economic Review, 99(3), 1053-69.

Kollias, C., Kyrtsou, C., & Papadamou, S. (2013). The effects of terrorism and war on the oil price–stock index relationship.Energy Economics, 40, 743-752.

Kashubsky, M. (2011). A Chronology of Attacks on and Unlawful Interferences with, Offshore Oil and Gas Installations, 1975 – 2010. Perspectives on Terrorism, 5(5/6), 139–167.

Lee, C. Y. (2018). Oil and terrorism: Uncovering the mechanisms. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 62(5), 903-928.

Lee, C. Y. (2022). Why do terrorists target the energy industry? A review of kidnapping, violence and attacks against energy infrastructure.Energy Research & Social Science, 87, 102459.

Le Billon, P., & El Khatib, F. (2004). From free oil to ‘freedom oil’: Terrorism, war and US geopolitics in the Persian Gulf.Geopolitics, 9(1), 109-137.

Luft, G., & Korin, A. (2004). Terrorism Goes to Sea. Foreign Affairs, 83(6), 61–71.

Macrotrends. (2022).Crude Oil Prices – 70 Year Historical Chart.

Mayik, B. M., & Ochi, E. B. (2020). The Issue of Oil and Disputed Areas in the Conflicts between Sudan and South Sudan. Journal of Global Peace and Conflict, 8(2), 12-18.

Monge, M., & Cristóbal, E. (2021). Terrorism and the behavior of oil production and prices in OPEC. Resources Policy, 74, 102321.

Orbaneja, J. R. V., Iyer, S. R., & Simkins, B. J. (2018). Terrorism and oil markets: A cross-sectional evaluation.Finance Research Letters, 24, 42-48.

Phan, D. H. B., Narayan, P. K., & Gong, Q. (2021). Terrorist attacks and oil prices: Hypothesis and empirical evidence.International Review of Financial Analysis, 74, 101669.

Piazza, J. A. (2016). Oil and terrorism: An investigation of mediators. Public Choice, 169(3), 251-268.

Sandler, T. (2003). Terrorism & game theory. Simulation & Gaming, 34(3), 319-337.

Schmid, A. (2020). Handbook of Terrorism Prevention and Preparedness. ICCT Press. Web.

Skoczylis, J., & Andrews, S. (2022). Strain theory, resilience, and far-right extremism: the impact of gender, life experiences and the internet.Critical Studies on Terrorism, 15(1), 143-168.

Silver, J., Horgan, J., & Gill, P. (2019). Shared struggles? Cumulative strain theory and public mass murderers from 1990 to 2014. Homicide Studies, 23(1), 64-84.

Saunders, M. N. K., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2019). Research methods for business students. Pearson.

Raphaeli, N. (2003). Financing of terrorism: sources, methods, and channels. Terrorism and Political Violence, 15(4), 59-82.

Richman, V., Santos, M. R., & Barkoulas, J. T. (2005). Short-and long-term effects of the 9/11 event: the international evidence. International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Finance, 8(07), 947-958.

Rother, E. T. (2007). Systematic literature review X narrative review.Acta Paulista de Enfermagem, 20(2), v-vi.

Ross, M. L. (2004). What do we know about natural resources and civil war?Journal of peace research, 41(3), 337-356.

Ross, M. L. (2012). The Oil Curse: How Petroleum Wealth Shapes the Development of Nations. Princeton University Press.

Ruby, C. L. (2002). The definition of terrorism. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy (ASAP), 2(1), 9–14.

Taylor, M. (1988). The terrorist. Brassey’s Defence.

Toft, P., Duero, A., & Bieliauskas, A. (2010). Terrorist targeting and energy security. Energy Policy, 38(8), 4411-4421.

Thomas, D. & Race, M. (2022). War in Ukraine: Russia says it may cut gas supplies if oil ban goes ahead. BBC News.

Tichý, L., & Eichler, J. (2018). Terrorist attacks on the energy sector: The case of Al Qaeda and the Islamic state.Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 41(6), 450-473.