“Crenshaw said researchers and policymakers should "ask why some groups cause large numbers of civilian casualties and others do not, rather than assuming that religious beliefs are the explanation for lethality."

“With options limited for fighting terrorists, negotiations may be the best remaining alternative.”

“There is no tide of “violent extremism” associated with Islam and carried by immigrants that is sweeping the country. The perpetrators of violence are not representative of any community.”

“The second point to stress is that the U.S. government cannot control the overall response to terrorism. There are limits to what even a superpower can do when terrorism is rooted outside the scope of its authority or when terrorism comes from disgruntled individuals already inside the country who act erratically.”

“The Matthew B. Ridgway Center hosted terrorism experts Marc Sageman, M.D., PhD and Martha Crenshaw, PhD, for a panel discussion moderated by Dr. Michael Kenney on April 24, 2017 to discuss the policies and actions the U.S. can take to combat terrorism.”

“In this session titled "ISIL, Iran, and the Taliban: Assessing the Threats to American Security" moderator Brad Kapnick, a Partner at Katten & Temple, LLP, and SIEPR Advisory Board member, asks some tough questions of Scott Sagan, The Caroline S.G. Munro Professor of Political Science; Karl Eikenberry, a Consulting Professor at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies; and Martha Crenshaw, a Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies.”

Martha Crenshaw discusses what causes terrorism. 

“Three founders of modern terrorism studies reflect on what the world has learned about political violence—and what remains unknown.”

“Stanford University’s Iranian Studies Director Abbas Milani talks about the renewed tensions between the U.S. and Iran.”

“Now that President Trump has made good on a major campaign promise – pulling the U.S. out of the JCPOA Iran nuclear deal – the debate has begun whether it was the right move. Abbas Milani, a Hoover research fellow and the Hamid and Christina Moghadam Director of Iranian Studies at Stanford University, offers his opinion and explains how the change affects both the politics of Iran and the Middle East region.”

“During his presidency, Trump’s strategy of “maximum pressure” and “restoring deterrence” have weakened America’s position on every count of its stated policy objectives in the region, while simultaneously, at least in the short run, strengthening the most conservative elements within the Iranian regime. Compared to three years ago: we have no nuclear agreement with Iran, let alone a more comprehensive one; we have enabled greater Iranian influence in the region, especially in Syria and Iraq, not less; and we have seen the Islamic Republic’s theocratic order become more repressive and entrenched, not more open or democratic.”

“Milani is no fan of maximum pressure. He says it undermines Iran’s democracy movement and strengthens Iran’s ties with Russia and China.”

“Democracy will come to Iran when the people of Iran have their reckoning with their ruthless and incompetent rulers. Tragically, the new Trump strategy delays that reckoning.”

“US President Donald Trump’s decision to pursue a more aggressive Iran policy underscores his administration’s misunderstanding of the Iranian regime. Shelving the 2015 nuclear deal would not only heighten regional tensions; it would also embolden the very hardliners that the US has been seeking to contain.”

“Unless both sides decide to de-escalate, the United States and Iran are moving toward a dangerous and destructive war that will further dim the waning prospects for a working agreement that will convince Iran it is not in its interest to try to develop a nuclear bomb and will also lessen tensions that have reached a fever pitch with the assassination of Soleimani.”

“So far, with the exception of President Trump’s announcement of his willingness to negotiate unconditionally with Iran, his administration often seems to be following a policy of not just maximum pressure but maximum humiliation. The policy is sure to fail. Maximum pressure applied unwisely can beget maximum disaster.”