Terrorism is usually understood as the use or threat of violence to further a political cause.

There is no universally agreed definition of terrorism making it a difficult object to quantify.

For clarity, the Data Quality & Definitions section below carefully outlines the definition used in
constructing the dataset presented here and compares it with the legal definition in the UK.
While acts of terrorism across the globe have increased markedly in recent decades, in most
parts of the world it continues to be a relatively rare event and is instead focused in particular
countries or regions of instability.

Terrorism is not a 21st century phenomenon and has its roots in early resistance and political
movements. The Sicarii were an early Jewish terrorist organisation founded in the first
century AD with the goal of overthrowing the Romans in the Middle East. Judas of Galilee,
leader of the Zealots and a key influence on the Sicarii, believed that the Jews should be ruled
by God alone and that armed resistance was necessary.

Unlike the Zealots, the Sicarii targeted other Jews they believed to be collaborators or traitors
to the cause. The tactics employed by the Sicarii were detailed by the historian Josephus
around 50AD: “they would mingle with the crowd, carrying short daggers concealed under
their clothing, with which they stabbed their enemies. Then when they fell, the murderers
would join in the cries of indignation and, through this plausible behavior, avoided
discovery.”1

There are many other key examples of terrorism throughout history before the modern
terrorism of the 20th century. Guy Fawkes’ failed attempt at reinstating a Catholic monarch is
an example of an early terrorist plot motivated by religion. Meanwhile, The Reign of Terror
during the French Revolution is an example of state terrorism.

The use of terrorism to further a political cause has accelerated in recent years. Modern
terrorism largely came into being after the Second World War with the rise of nationalist
movements in the old empires of the European powers. These early anti-colonial
movements recognised the ability of terrorism to both generate publicity for the cause and
influence global policy. Bruce Hoffman, director of the Centre of Security Studies at
Georgetown University writes that, “The ability of these groups to mobilize sympathy and
support outside the narrow confines of their actual “theaters of operation” thus taught a
powerful lesson to similarly aggrieved peoples elsewhere, who now saw in terrorism an
effective means of transforming hitherto local conflicts into international issues.”2 This
development paved the way for international terrorism in the 1960s.

Terrorism after 9/11

The attacks of 11 September 2001, known as 9/11, marked a turning point in world history
and the beginning of the ‘War on Terror’. The attacks are estimated to have killed 3000
people making it the deadliest terrorist incident in human history. The subsequent War on
Terror led to the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003. The following table
summarises the concentration of terrorist attacks pre- and post-9/11. It reveals that terrorism
pre-9/11 was concentrated in Latin America and Asia, but shifted to the Middle East post-
9/11–Peru, Chile and El Salvador completely disappear from the top 10. More than a quarter
of all terrorist attacks between 9/11 and 2008 took place in Iraq. Terrorism post-9/11 has
been concentrated in predominantly muslim countries as a result of radical Islamic
ideologies and sectarian violence.
War on terror

One major consequence of the rise of international terrorism, particularly Islamic extremist
groups, has been the global War on Terror. The War on Terror, which began in 2001, has so
far seen the full-scale invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as other operations in Yemen,
Pakistan and Syria.

An important question is whether the global campaign against terrorism, known as the War
on Terror, has made us any safer. Many commentators argue that the War on Terror has had
the perverse effect of making us less safe, with some going as far as claiming the War on
Terror is the leading cause of terrorism. Richard Clarke, a counter-terrorism expert that
worked in the US National Security Council between 1992–2003, was highly critical of the
Bush administration’s counter-terrorism strategy and the decision to invade Iraq.7 Clarke
writes: “Far from addressing the popular appeal of the enemy that attacked us, Bush handed
that enemy precisely what it wanted and needed, proof that America was at war with Islam,
that we were the new Crusaders come to occupy Muslim land.”

Saudi

The US military sent forces to Saudi Arabia in 1990 after Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. After
the US-led coalition won the 1991 Gulf War, it led to bases elsewhere but several thousand
service members, mostly associated with Operation Southern Watch, remained. Many Muslims
were upset at the U.S. presence, as it violated a Muslim tradition of excluding non-Muslim from
permanent residence in the Arabian peninsula. It is believed this is one of, if not the main reason
Osama bin Laden called for jihad against the United States.[6] There were no attacks against
American forces and Westerners in the country until after 1995.
After the September 11, 2001 attacks, there was continued world pressure for the Saudi
government to crack down on the imams preaching anti-American rhetoric in Saudi mosques.
These calls grew as it turned out that 15 of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. Saudi
officials pledged to make efforts to crack down on these imams

Understanding Saudi Arabia’s relationship with terrorists, however, is far more difficult than
assessing Iran’s backing of terrorism, which is open, extensive, and state-sponsored. Much of
Saudi support is done by non-state actors. Yet being “non-state” does not absolve the Saudi
government of responsibility. These non-state actors enjoy a range of relationships to the
Saudi regime. Some receive or did receive official patronage. Others, particularly those tied
to leading clerics in the Kingdom, are embraced indirectly by the regime’s self-proclaimed
role as Defender of the Faithful. And still others are truly private, acting independently of the
government

and in times in opposition to it.

In addition, the Saudi royal family itself occupies an unusual role. In one sense, the royal
family—with its tens of thousands of princes—is not the government. However, the family’s
and the government’s finances are interwoven, and if a prince supports a group it has an
unofficial imprimatur of approval. King Salman himself, for example, helped raise money for
the mujahedin in Afghanistan and the Balkans. 

AFGHANISTAN
Modern Afghanistan is seen as a place of terrorism and fear, but it hasn't always been that way. Afghanistan had
always been a good trade location. Due to its popular trade background, Afghanistan attracted many invaders
throughout its history and it has been fought over and ruled by many people. Afghanistan has been a place of
constant war since the 1980's. Terrorism started when The Taliban came into power. The Taliban are a political
terrorist group which conquered Afghanistan and its people. In 1996 when The Taliban first roseinto power, they
took a series of rights away from Afghans and they started attacking and victimizing them. They forced all
Afghans to convert to Islam and when the Afghans tried to fight back and sieze the help of other countries, The
Taliban started attacking other countries as well. The Taliban started making planned attacks on states all over
the world including 9-11. Afghanistan has always been a place fought over, but terrorism first started when The
Talban came into power

However, Afghanistan remains in a highly precarious condition. After more than a decade of

U.S. and international efforts to stabilize Afghanistan and build up the country’s governance
structures, the U.N. special envoy in Afghanistan Nicholas Haysom stated in March 2016
when briefing the U.N. Security Council that if Afghanistan merely survived 2016 the United
Nations mission in the country would consider it a success.[1] Afghanistan did survive 2016
without much of the country falling into the hands of the Taliban, or the government
collapsing with a protracted political crisis

Digital terrorism

Online sites are used by terrorists as forums for the discussion on the state of global
terrorism, propagation of anti-state sentiments and related issues. Social media has certainly
increased the appeal of terrorism and its following. Presently, terrorist groups operating
around the world use online social media and network sites such as Youtube and Facebook to
post detailed reports of their activities, photographs, videos, policy statements, future plans
and responses to criticisms of their organizations.

Terrorist organizations are using web forums, websites and social media networks for their
routine conversations, exchange of tactics, socialisation, propaganda and recruitment.

The monitoring and analysis of terrorism based media has shed insight into the
organizational structure of terrorist groups and their affiliates, ideology, goals and
future plans in the agenda for global terrorism, and continued monitoring will shed
further light. The study of terrorist media gives a glimpse into how these groups
function, which are otherwise shrouded in mystery. The understanding gained
has contributed to the development of strategies and counter narrative to overcome
this challenge. The continued utilization of these sites will facilitate intelligence
collection in terror and criminal investigations and counter-terrorism operations in the
future. Thus, state authorities, while blocking sites which incite violence directly,
should not ignore the monitoring of these forums and chat rooms for respect of civil
liberties, for it is in the pursuit to protect civilian life that online monitoring
is conducted.

Since the partition of the Indian subcontinent into India and Pakistan in 1947, the Kashmir
dispute has been an intractable one between them. They fought three wars over it in1948,
1965, and 1999, but have not been able to resolve it. The partition left the fate of over 550
princely states undecided. They were required to accede to either of the two states on the
basis of the geographical location and wishes of their people.

 
The state of Jammu and Kashmir should have acceded to Pakistan because of its Muslim
majority population and geographical location, but this was not happened when Mahraja
Hari  Singh seek military assistance from India to resist the Pakistani tribal’s attacks and
ultimately signed the ‘Instrument of Accession’ with India. Eventually Indian forces
intervened and captured the state of Jammu and Kashmir. From that day Kashmir dispute has
been the core issue between both Pakistan and India, which also had kept the security of
entire South Asia at stake because of their extensive nuclear capability.

So, the Kashmir issue has been a major bone of contention from the day of independence,
resulted in three wars, numerous conflicts between India and Pakistan and severely rigid
diplomacy. The United Nations Security Council had tried to resolve the dispute by declaring
that the accession of Jammu and Kashmir to India or Pakistan should be decided through the
democratic method by holding a free and fair plebiscite but India had rejected any mediation
which opposed its claim regarding Kashmir.

Kashmir’s strategic importance lies in the fact that its borders meet with China and
Afghanistan and also is close to Russia. Almost all the rivers which flow through Pakistan,
originate from Kashmir, that’s why both the countries ignore stepping back claiming of this
territory.

The failure of diplomacy to resolve the Kashmir issue attracted international and regional
attention to it. After the wars of 1948, 1962 and 1965, determined efforts were made to
resolve this issue. In 1948, the United Nations became deeply involved but India didn’t show
flexibility. After the India-China border War of 1962, there were intense but fruitless
American and British efforts to bridge a gap between India and Pakistan. The end of 1965
war saw Soviet Union as a regional peacemaker. The Soviets did manage to promote a peace
treaty at Tashkent, but this could not establish peace in the region and soon Indian
involvement in East Pakistan led to her separation in 1970-71.

The most consistent feature of great power influence on the Kashmir problem has been its
ineffectiveness. Besides Cold war rivalries, both United States and the Soviet Union have
played significant, often parallel and cooperative roles in the subcontinent. Both Washington
and Moscow made several inconclusive efforts to mediate the dispute or bring about its
peaceful resolution, but were distrustful of anything more. It took the 1990 crisis with its
nuclear dimension, to bring the United States back to the region.

Soviet Union, United states and China have different policies towards the Kashmir dispute
according to their own interests. In the beginning all of them showed neutrality but with the
changing world’s politics and dimensions, they formulate their concerns regarding Kashmir.
China‘s Kashmir policy has passed through different stages. In first phase, from 1949 to
1960s, China avoided siding with either India or Pakistan; instead it favored a resolution of
the issue through peaceful settlements and also opposed the role of UN and United States to
mediate Kashmir issue.

The second phase started from early 1960s and lasted till 1970. Sino-Indian border war of
1962 started hostility between India and China resulted close relations with Pakistan. China
stood by Pakistan on Kashmir issue with firm support for the right of self determination. But
in 1970s, China adopted neutral policy on Kashmir issue as its relations were normal with
India; this was reflected during Kargil conflict and Indo-Pak military possible conflict in
2001-2.

The normal relations between India and Pakistan on Kashmir would bring benefits to the
United States. Indo-Pak tensions are especially dangerous because they bring two nuclear
states on the brink of war. They divert Pakistan from fighting terrorists and militants on their
own soils. India and Pakistan need to engage in combined bilateral talks on all important
issues. Continuing tensions over Kashmir will weaken any initiative to bring stability to
South Asia as well as bring about the risk of a nuclear war. It will be quite right by assuming
that Kashmir is the root cause of much of the militancy in South Asia.

It is necessary for international community to realize that peace and stability in South Asia
can only be guaranteed if all outstanding disputes between Pakistan and India, including the
Kashmir dispute should be resolved because Pakistan has become a frontline state against the
Global War of terrorism.The best solution of the Kashmir dispute could be the right of self
determination which should be given to Kashmiris in order to give them the right to decide to
whom they want to accede.

How is terrorism caused

Religion
Perhaps the most commonly held belief today is that terrorism is caused by religion. Though it is not the main
cause for terrorism, religion does play a significant role in driving some forms of it. As Hoffman points out in
Inside Terrorism, from the Thugs of ancient India that killed to terrorize in the name of the god Kali to the Jewish
Zealots who cut the throats of Romans in public to combat their occupation of Israel, religion (in conjunction with
political/ethno-nationalist drivers) has long been a factor of terrorism.

Today religion as a part of terrorism has been mainly attributed to Islamic fundamentalism (though other
examples, such as the AumShinrikyo cult that carried out the 1995 sarin gas attacks in Tokyo, also exist). As
Sageman describes: “The global Salafi jihad is a world wide religious revivalist movement with the goal of
reestablishing past Muslim glory in a great Islamist state stretching from Morocco to the Philippines, eliminating
present national boundaries.”

As a driver of terrorism, the true danger that religious doctrine poses is its encouragement of attacks that are
more violent in nature than other types of terrorism. By being promised rewards in the afterlife, terrorists are more
likely to carry out suicide bombings and other such “all in” tactics that are harder to defend against.

Socio-Economic Status
Terrorists may also be driven by a sense of relative depravation and lack of upward mobility within society.
Globalization and the modern media have given the ‘have nots’ an acute awareness of their situation compared
to the ‘haves’. As Omer Taspinar states in Fighting Radicalism, Not “Terrorism,” “Globalization creates an acute
awareness about opportunities available elsewhere. This leads to frustration, victimization, and humiliation
among growing cohorts of urbanized, undereducated, and unemployed Muslim youth who are able to make
comparisons across countries.” Seeing the economic differences between themselves and the Western world
can infuriate some in underdeveloped countries, increasing tension and hostilities. This allows terrorist
organizations to gain attention and entry to societies that have felt wronged by these perceived social injustices.

Unfortunately the only real way to mitigate this is through economic development of the community, country, and
region, but that takes time. For the foreseeable future there will always be those that are disgruntled by the
comparison of living standards of the wealthy around the world versus their own, opening the doors to frustration
and anger.  Thus, this driver is remarkably hard to combat as globalization allows for more mechanisms of
comparison between varying global socio-economic levels.

Political Grievances
A lack of political inclusiveness in states or grievances against a certain political order may cause individuals to
join or create terrorist groups. Left and right wing terrorists often seek to a political system. As well, many in
nations with authoritarian regimes lack avenues for dissent.  Frustrated expressions of political will can turn to
violence as an alternative to exclusive political systems. While somewhat similar to ethno-nationalist/separatist
causes, these political grievances are not born from the desire to create a new state but to change the order
within the current one.

In his piece, Taspinar describes this as a political dimension to relative depravation. In this light he sees political
Islam as a reaction to such oppressive governments and its Western supporters. With the knowledge that other
people around the world live in representative governments, the anger only grows among those who live without
such political representation, leading disillusioned individuals into the arms of terrorism.

The implication here is that Western governments, in their support of repressive authoritarian regimes for their
own national interest, have essentially made themselves targets of terrorism of an angered populace within these
regimes, acting out violently as the only alternative to political expression.

Effects of terrorism

Acts of terrorism can have a profound influence on both the lives of the victims and the
region’s economy. Social effects of terrorism can include injury, death, and psychological
trauma, while local and national markets can experience a downturn in both the short term
and the long term.

Governments and international groups have historically had trouble agreeing on how to
define terrorism. While many of the hallmarks of terrorism, such as violence, the intent to
spread fear, and targeting of civilian populations, are agreed upon, attempts to create a widely
accepted definition of terrorism have proven to be challenging.

The FBI defines terrorism as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or
property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment
thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.” This differs slightly from the
definition used by the United Nations, "an anxiety-inspiring method of repeated violent
action, employed by (semi-) clandestine individual, group or state actors, for idiosyncratic,
criminal or political reasons, whereby - in contrast to assassination - the direct targets of
violence are not the main targets."
Both definitions, despite their differences, acknowledge that terrorism uses violence as a
means to cause fear, that acts of terrorism can be directed at civilian populations, and that the
goals of terrorist groups can be varied and unclear.

For those who live in countries affected by terrorism, everyday life is colored by the
uncertainty that comes with not being able to know if you are safe. Living in an area that is
threatened by terrorist attacks can cause individuals’ idea of what level of personal safety is
normal or acceptable to be altered. They may develop psychological coping mechanisms to
deal with living with heightened risks of harm. Some individuals cope by learning to only pay
attention to the things that they can control in their daily lives, as a way of relieving the
anxiety that stems from trying to anticipate an unexpected terrorist attack.

In the aftermath of a terrorist attack survivors often suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder,
anxiety, and major depression. Additionally, survivors of terrorist attacks are more vulnerable
to substance abuse issues and psychosomatic symptoms after an attack.

Children are especially vulnerable to the negative psychological effects of living under threat
of a terrorist attack. Children who have survived a terrorist attack, have family members who
have experienced an attack, or who have simply seen footage of a terrorist attack on
television may be more likely than adults to suffer from PTSD, anxiety, or depression as a
result.

The economy of an area affected by a terrorist attack suffers an immediate impact due to loss
of property and funds used to repair building and infrastructure damage. It also suffers long
term effects as financial markets slowly recover from the shock of the attack.

The largest effect on the economy, however, is a rise in spending on security and defense,
and the impact on supply chains of enhanced security at land, sea, and air border crossings.
Spending on defense and national security tends to increase by a large amount in the months
following a terrorist attack, as a nation takes steps to make its borders more secure. This
increased border and checkpoint security can make it significantly more expensive to move
products and goods into and out of the country. While these economic effects can be
significant, their overall impact tends to stabilize over time as a country regains its footing in
the years after an attack.

Future of terrorism

As a conflict method that has survived and evolved through several millennia to flourish in
the modern information age, terrorism continues to adapt to meet the challenges of
emerging forms of conflict, and exploit developments in technology and society. Terrorism
has demonstrated increasing abilities to adapt to counter-terrorism measures and political
failure. Terrorists are developing new capabilities of attack and improving the efficiency of
existing methods. Additionally, terrorist groups have shown significant progress in escaping
from a subordinate role in nation-state conflicts, and becoming prominent as international
influences in their own right. They are becoming more integrated with other sub-state
entities, such as criminal organizations and legitimately chartered corporations, and are
gradually assuming a measure of control and identity with national governments.

Adaptive Capabilities of Terror Groups

Terrorists have shown the ability to adapt to the techniques and methods of counter-terror
agencies and intelligence organizations over the long term. The decentralization of the
network form of organization is an example of this. Adopted to reduce the disruption caused
by the loss of key links in a chain of command, a network organization also complicates the
tasks of security forces, and reduces predictability of operations.

Terrorists have also been quick to use new technologies, and adapt existing ones to their
uses. The debate over privacy of computer data was largely spurred by the specter of
terrorists planning and communicating with encrypted data beyond law enforcement's ability
to intercept or decode this data. To exchange information, terrorists have exploited
disposable cellular phones, over the counter long-distance calling cards, Internet cafes, and
other means of anonymous communications. Embedding information in digital pictures and
graphics is another innovation employed to enable the clandestine global communication
that modern terrorists require.

Terrorists have also demonstrated significant resiliency after disruption by counter-terrorist

action. Some groups have redefined themselves after being defeated or being forced into
dormancy. The Shining Path of Peru (SenderoLuminosa) lost its leadership cadre and
founding leader to counter-terrorism efforts by the Peruvian government in 1993. The
immediate result was severe degradation in the operational capabilities of the group.
However, the Shining Path has returned to rural operations and organization in order to
reconstitute itself. Although not the threat that it was, the group remains in being, and could
exploit further unrest or governmental weakness in Peru to continue its renewal.

In Italy, the Red Brigades (Brigate Rossi) gradually lapsed into inactivity due to
governmental action and a changing political situation. However, a decade after the
supposed demise of the Red Brigades, a new group called the Anti-Capitalist Nuclei
emerged exhibiting a continuity of symbols, styles of communiqu�s, and potentially some
personnel from the original Red Brigade organization. This ability to perpetuate ideology and
symbology during a significant period of dormancy, and re-emerge under favorable
conditions demonstrates the durability of terrorism as a threat to modern societies.

Increasing Capabilities of Terrorists

Terrorists are improving their sophistication and abilities in virtually all aspects of their
operations and support. The aggressive use of modern technology for information
management, communication and intelligence has increased the efficiency of these
activities. Weapons technology has become more increasingly available, and the purchasing
power of terrorist organizations is on the rise. The ready availability of both technology and
trained personnel to operate it for any client with sufficient cash allows the well-funded
terrorist to equal or exceed the sophistication of governmental counter-measures.

Likewise, due to the increase in information outlets, and competition with increasing
numbers of other messages, terrorism now requires a greatly increased amount of violence or
novelty to attract the attention it requires. The tendency of major media to compete for
ratings and the subsequent revenue realized from increases in their audience size and share
produces pressures on terrorists to increase the impact and violence of their actions to take
advantage of this sensationalism.

Today, most experts believe that certain parts of the Middle East, Pakistan and Afghanistan
are turning out to be the main power centers for terrorism. Decades of lawlessness and
corruption have seen Islamic terrorist groups fill the power vaccum in this region and
continue to turn out an alarming number of religiously motivated terrorists.