{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.024709302325581394, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.919597989949748, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Terror Organizations' Uses of Public Diplomacy: Limited versus Total Conflicts

ABSTRACT In the last few decades, terrorism has become a global threat and challenge, which many countries have had to face and fight. Conflicts involving terror organizations are, to a large extent, battles of ideas, and are not focused only on physical violence or military confrontation. This reality creates a need to better understand the tools through which terror organizations promote their messages, and to distinguish between different types of terror organizations. The current study examines different types of terror organizations' messages targeting foreign audiences. The analysis focuses on the organizations' usage of public diplomacy in promoting their messages and distinguishes between the different types of organizations (limited- versus total-conflict). Messages promoted by four terror organizations—Hamas and Hezbollah (limited-conflict organizations) and Al Qaeda and the Islamic State (total-conflict organizations)—are analyzed. The findings reveal that while limited-conflict organizations communicate with the international community, and use public diplomacy to try to change the international environment in which they operate, total-conflict organizations do not use public diplomacy; they talk about the international community rather than communicating with it.