Recent from talks
Contribute something
Nothing was collected or created yet.
Religious terrorism
View on Wikipedia| Part of a series on |
| Terrorism |
|---|
Religious terrorism is a type of religious violence where terrorism is used as a strategy to achieve certain religious goals or which are influenced by religious beliefs and/or identity.[1]
In the modern age, after the decline of ideas such as the divine right of kings and with the rise of nationalism, terrorism has more often been based on anarchism, and revolutionary politics. Since 1980, however, there has been an increase in terrorist activity motivated by religion.[2]: 2 [3]: 185–99
Former United States Secretary of State Warren Christopher said that terrorist acts in the name of religion and ethnic identity have become "one of the most important security challenges we face in the wake of the Cold War."[4]: 6 However, political scientists Robert Pape and Terry Nardin,[5] social psychologist Brooke Rogers,[6] and sociologist and religious studies scholar Mark Juergensmeyer have all argued that religion should only be considered one incidental factor and that such terrorism is primarily geopolitical.
Definition
[edit]According to Juergensmeyer, religion and violence have had a symbiotic relationship since before the Crusades and even since before the Bible.[4] He defines religious terrorism as consisting of acts that terrify, the definition of which is provided by the witnesses – the ones terrified – and not by the party committing the act; accompanied by either a religious motivation, justification, organization, or world view.[4]: 4–10 Religion is sometimes used in combination with other factors, and sometimes as the primary motivation. Religious terrorism is intimately connected to current forces of geopolitics.
Bruce Hoffman has characterized modern religious terrorism as having three traits:
- The perpetrators must use religious scriptures to justify or explain their violent acts or to gain recruits.[7]
- Clerical figures must be involved in leadership roles.[3]: 90
- Perpetrators use apocalyptic images of destruction to justify the acts.[8]: 19–20
Religious terrorism can be seen as a type of right-wing terrorism in case of exclusionary behavior towards other religions.[9]
Martyrdom and suicide terrorism
[edit]Important symbolic acts such as the blood sacrifice link acts of violence to religion and terrorism.[10] Suicide terrorism, self-sacrifice, or martyrdom has throughout history been organized and perpetrated by groups with both political and religious motivations.[11] Suicide terrorism or martyrdom is efficient, inexpensive, easily organized, and extremely difficult to counter, delivering maximum damage for little cost. The shocking nature of a suicide attack also attracts public attention. Glorifying the culture of martyrdom benefits the terrorist organization and inspires more people to join the group.[12] According to one commentator, retaliation against suicide attacks increases the group's sense of victimization and commitment to adhere to doctrine and policy. This process serves to encourage martyrdom, and so suicide terrorism, self-sacrifice, or martyrdom represent "value for money".[13] Robert Pape, a political scientist who specializes in suicide terrorism, has made a case for secular motivations and reasons as being the foundations of most suicide attacks, which are often labelled as "religious".[14]
Financing
[edit]Terrorism activities worldwide are supported through not only the organized systems that teach holy war as the highest calling, but also through the legal, illegal, and often indirect methods financing these systems; these sometimes use organizations, including charities, as fronts to mobilize or channel sources and funds.[15] Charities can involve the provision of aid to those in need, and oblations or charitable offerings are fundamental to nearly all religious systems, with sacrifice as a furtherance of the custom.[16]
Criticism of the concept
[edit]Robert Pape compiled the first complete database of every documented suicide bombing from 1980 to 2003. He argues that the news reports about suicide attacks are profoundly misleading – "There is little connection between suicide terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism, or any one of the world's religions". After studying 315 suicide attacks carried out over the last two decades, he concludes that suicide bombers' actions stem from political conflict, not religion.[14]
Michael A. Sheehan stated in 2000, "A number of terrorist groups have portrayed their causes in religious and cultural terms. This is often a transparent tactic designed to conceal political goals, generate popular support and silence opposition."[17]
Terry Nardin wrote,
A basic problem is whether religious terrorism really differs, in its character and causes, from political terrorism... defenders of religious terrorism typically reason by applying commonly acknowledged moral principles... But the use (or misuse) of moral arguments does not in fact distinguish religious from nonreligious terrorists, for the latter also rely upon such arguments to justify their acts... political terrorism can also be symbolic... alienation and dispossession... are important in other kinds of violence as well. In short, one wonders whether the expression 'religious terrorism' is more than a journalistic convenience.[5]
Professor Mark Juergensmeyer wrote,
...religion is not innocent. But it does not ordinarily lead to violence. That happens only with the coalescence of a peculiar set of circumstances – political, social, and ideological – when religion becomes fused with violent expressions of social aspirations, personal pride, and movements for political change.[4]: 10
and
Whether or not one uses 'terrorist' to describe violent acts depends on whether one thinks that the acts are warranted. To a large extent the use of the term depends on one's world view: if the world is perceived as peaceful, violent acts appear to be terrorism. If the world is thought to be at war, violent acts may be regarded as legitimate. They may be seen as preemptive strikes, as defensive tactics in an ongoing battles, or as symbols indicating to the world that it is indeed in a state of grave and ultimate conflict.[4]: 9
David Kupelian wrote, "Genocidal madness can't be blamed on a particular philosophy or religion."[18]: 185
Riaz Hassan wrote, "It is politics more than religious fanaticism that has led terrorists to blow themselves up."[19]
On July 2, 2013, in Lahore, 50 Muslim scholars of the Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC) issued a collective fatwa against suicide bombings, the killing of innocent people, bomb attacks, and targeted killings declaring them as Haraam or forbidden.[20]
See also
[edit]References
[edit]- ^ Scheffler, Thomas (2007). "Terrorism". In von Stuckrad, Kocku (ed.). The Brill Dictionary of Religion. Leiden and Boston: Brill Publishers. doi:10.1163/1872-5287_bdr_COM_00449. ISBN 978-90-04-12433-2.
- ^ Hoffman, Bruce (Summer 1997). "The Confluence of International and Domestic Trends in Terrorism". Terrorism and Political Violence. 9 (2): 1–15. doi:10.1080/09546559708427399.
- ^ a b Hoffman, Bruce (1999). Inside Terrorism. Columbia University Press. ISBN 0-231-11469-9.
- ^ a b c d e Juergensmeyer, Mark (2004). Terror in the Mind of God: The Global Rise of Religious Violence. University of California Press. ISBN 0-520-24011-1.
- ^ a b Nardin, Terry (May 2001). "Review: Terror in the Mind of God". The Journal of Politics. 63 (2): 683–84. doi:10.1086/jop.63.2.2691794. JSTOR 2691794.
- ^ Rogers, M. Brooke; et al. (Jun 2007). "The Role of Religious Fundamentalism in Terrorist Violence: A Social Psychological Analysis". Int Rev Psychiatry. 19 (3): 253–62. doi:10.1080/09540260701349399. PMID 17566903. S2CID 22885752.
- ^ Interview with Bruce Hoffman; "A Conversation with Bruce Hoffman and Jeffrey Goldberg" pp. 29–35 in Religion, Culture, And International Conflict: A Conversation, edited by Michael Cromartie. Rowman & Littlefield, 2005 ISBN 0-7425-4473-7
- ^ Arquilla, John; Hoffman, Bruce; Jenkins, Brian Michae; Lesser, Ian O.; Ronfeldt, David; Zanini, Michele, eds. (1999). Countering the New Terrorism. Santa Monica, CA: RAND. ISBN 0-8330-2667-4.
- ^ Kamenowski, Maria; Manzoni, Patrik; Haymoz, Sandrine; Isenhardt, Anna; Jacot, Cédric; Baier, Dirk (2021-06-17). "Religion as an influencing factor of right-wing, left-wing and Islamist extremism. Findings of a Swiss youth study". PLOS ONE. 16 (6) e0252851. Bibcode:2021PLoSO..1652851K. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0252851. ISSN 1932-6203. PMC 8211158. PMID 34138885.
- ^ Dingley, James; Kirk-Smith, Michael (Spring 2002). "Symbolism and Sacrifice in Terrorism". Small Wars & Insurgencies. 13 (1): 102–28. doi:10.1080/714005406. S2CID 143826088.
- ^ Matovic, Violeta, Suicide Bombers: Who's Next, Belgrade, The National Counter Terrorism Committee, ISBN 978-8690830923
- ^ Vuong, Quan-Hoang; Nguyen, Minh-Hoang; Le, Tam-Tri (2021). A Mindsponge-Based Investigation into the Psycho-Religious Mechanism Behind Suicide Attacks. Walter de Gruyter GmbH. ISBN 978-83-66675-58-2.
- ^ Madsen, Julian (August 2004). "Suicide Terrorism: Rationalizing the Irrational" (PDF). Strategic Insights. 3 (8). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2009-05-11.
- ^ a b Pape, Robert A. (2005). Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism. New York City, NY: Random House. ISBN 1-4000-6317-5.
- ^ Raphaeli, Nimrod (October 2003). "Financing of Terrorism: Sources, Methods and Channels". Terrorism and Political Violence. 15 (4): 59–82. doi:10.1080/09546550390449881. S2CID 144519175.
- ^ Firth, Raymond (January–June 1963). "Offering and Sacrifice: Problems of Organization". Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute. 93 (1): 12–24. doi:10.2307/2844331. JSTOR 2844331.
- ^ Michael Sheehan Lecture: "A Foreign Policy Event Terrorism: The Current Threat" Archived 2007-11-02 at the Wayback Machine, The Brookings Institution, 10 February 2000
- ^ Kupelian, David (2010). How Evil Works: Understanding and Overcoming the Destructive Forces That Are Transforming America. New York City, NY: Simon & Schuster. p. 185. ISBN 978-1-4391-6819-6.
- ^ Hassan, Riaz (2010). Life As a Weapon: The Global Rise of Suicide Bombings. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 978-0-415-58885-0.
- ^ "Fatwa issued against suicide bombings, targeted killings and terrorism". Lahore. 2 July 2013.
External links
[edit]- Mark Juergensmeyer. From Bhindranwale to Bin Laden: The Rise of Religious Violence. Presentation at Arizona State University/National Bureau of Asian Research Conference, October 14–15, 2004 "Religion and Conflict in Asia: Disrupting Violence".
- Robert A. Pape. It's the Occupation Stupid. Foreign Policy magazine, October 18, 2010
- Booknotes interview with Jessica Stern on Terror in the Name of God: Why Religious Militants Kill. October 12, 2003
Religious terrorism
View on GrokipediaConceptual Foundations
Definition and Distinguishing Features
Religious terrorism encompasses acts of violence or threats of violence designed to intimidate or coerce civilian populations, governments, or international entities, where the perpetrators' primary motivation stems from a religious ideology that frames such acts as divinely ordained to advance spiritual, theocratic, or eschatological objectives.[2] This motivation often involves an absolute belief in an otherworldly power that sanctions the violence for the faith's glorification, promising perpetrators forgiveness, martyrdom rewards, or eternal salvation in the afterlife.[2] Unlike broader terrorism definitions centered on political ends, religious terrorism prioritizes theological purity, such as establishing a religiously governed state or precipitating apocalyptic events, over pragmatic negotiations.[13] Key distinguishing features include the unconstrained scope and indiscriminate nature of violence, where civilians are not spared because religious doctrine expands legitimate targets to encompass all non-believers or perceived enemies of the faith, contrasting with secular terrorism's more selective targeting of political symbols or personnel to rally support.[2] Perpetrators often operate as insular groups of "true believers" with narrow constituencies, deriving legitimacy from sacred texts or clerical authority rather than appealing to wide audiences for political leverage, which reduces incentives for restraint or compromise.[2] This theological absolutism fosters a symbolic worldview where violence purifies society or fulfills prophecy, leading to higher lethality in attacks; for instance, empirical analyses of post-1990s incidents show religious groups causing disproportionately more fatalities per operation due to these ideological drivers.[14] Further, religious terrorism emphasizes self-sacrifice and martyrdom as virtuous ends in themselves, enabling tactics like suicide bombings that secular groups historically employed less frequently before the 1980s rise of such religiously motivated campaigns.[15] Goals remain non-negotiable, rooted in divine will rather than mutable political demands, rendering deterrence challenging as perpetrators view death in action as transcendent victory.[13] These traits, evident in groups invoking scriptural mandates for holy war, underscore causal links between doctrinal absolutism and operational ferocity, independent of socioeconomic factors alone.[16]Theological Justifications and Motivations
Theological justifications for religious terrorism center on interpretations of sacred doctrines that frame violence as a divine imperative, often portraying it as a sacramental act to defend the faith, purify society, or hasten eschatological fulfillment. Perpetrators invoke scriptural mandates for holy war, martyrdom, or retribution against perceived apostates and infidels, viewing such actions as morally transcendent and rewarded in the afterlife.[17][3] This religious framing elevates terrorism beyond political grievance, embedding it in a cosmic struggle between good and evil, where human agency aligns with God's will.[3] Unlike secular variants, religiously motivated terrorism imposes few moral or strategic limits, as adversaries are dehumanized through theological lenses—depicted as subhuman or damned—permitting indiscriminate attacks on civilians to maximize divine approval or terror.[17] Martyrdom doctrines promise spiritual elevation, such as paradise or reincarnation benefits, incentivizing self-sacrifice in operations like suicide bombings, which have accounted for a significant share of fatalities in post-1980 religious attacks.[3] Extremists often employ selective exegesis, prioritizing militant passages while ignoring contextual or pacifist countertexts, to legitimize perpetual conflict aimed at theocratic dominance.[3] In Islamist contexts, jihad serves as the core justification, reinterpreted by Salafi-jihadist ideologues as an individual duty for offensive warfare to impose sharia and eradicate non-believers, drawing on Quranic verses like 9:5 ("kill the polytheists wherever you find them") and hadith assurances of sensual rewards for martyrs.[18] Groups such as al-Qaeda and ISIS diverge from classical Islamic just war rules— which prohibit targeting noncombatants and emphasize defensive jihad—by endorsing suicide tactics and total enmity, framing global caliphate restoration as apocalyptic necessity.[18][3] Christian extremists invoke Old Testament holy war precedents, such as Phinehas's zealot killing in Numbers 25:6-13, and Revelation's end-times battles against satanic forces, to rationalize violence against moral threats like abortion or secularism.[19] Networks like the Army of God, responsible for U.S. clinic bombings from the 1990s onward, portray such acts as biblically mandated defense of the unborn, equating opponents with ancient Canaanites warranting eradication.[3] Dominionist strains, including Christian Identity adherents, blend racial theology with calls for theocratic overthrow, seeing violence as purifying America for Christ's return.[19][3] Jewish religious terrorism draws on Torah commands for land conquest and annihilation of enemies, such as Deuteronomy 25:17-19's directive to blot out Amalek, applied by groups like the 1980s Gush Emunim Underground to justify bombings of Palestinian targets and plots against the Temple Mount mosques as steps toward messianic redemption.[20][3] Kach followers, led by Meir Kahane until his 1990 assassination, theologized Arab expulsion as fulfilling biblical covenants, with attacks peaking in the 1980s amid settlement expansions.[20] Sikh militants in the Khalistan campaign, active from the 1980s through the 1990s, motivated bombings and assassinations—including Indira Gandhi's 1984 killing—as defenses of religious purity against Hindu dominance, invoking Guru Granth Sahib tenets of martyrdom (shaheedi) and sovereign khalsa rule, though intertwined with ethnic separatism.[21][3] Historical Hindu Thugs strangled over a million victims from the 13th to 19th centuries in ritual offerings to Kali, believing such "thuggee" ensured cosmic balance and personal salvation through divine favor.[3] Across faiths, these motivations persist in fringe sects, amplified by charismatic leaders who blend theology with grievances, yielding attacks that comprised 38 of 50 religious incidents tracked in Canada from 1990-2014.[22]Differentiation from Secular or Political Terrorism
Religious terrorism is distinguished from secular or political terrorism primarily by the centrality of theological motivations, wherein perpetrators invoke divine commands or eschatological imperatives to legitimize violence, viewing it as a sacred duty rather than a pragmatic tool for earthly political gain. In contrast, secular terrorism, often rooted in ideological frameworks such as nationalism, Marxism, or anarchism, seeks to coerce political change through calculated acts aimed at influencing governments or societies toward specific temporal objectives, without appealing to supernatural justification.[17] This differentiation is evident in the absolutist worldview of religious terrorists, who frame conflicts in binary terms of divine good versus satanic evil, precluding compromise or negotiation, whereas secular groups historically engage in bargaining or propaganda to advance agendas like decolonization or class revolution.[23] A core operational divergence lies in the treatment of targets and the scale of violence: religious terrorists often endorse indiscriminate attacks on civilians as legitimate, rationalizing mass casualties as punishment for collective apostasy or as hastening apocalyptic purification, unburdened by secular norms distinguishing combatants from non-combatants. Empirical analyses of terrorist incidents reveal that religiously motivated attacks since the 1990s have been markedly more lethal per operation than their secular counterparts, with perpetrators embracing martyrdom doctrines that glorify self-sacrifice for otherworldly rewards, thereby amplifying willingness to execute high-casualty operations without regard for survivability or publicity.[24] Secular terrorists, by comparison, typically prioritize symbolic strikes to generate media attention and public sympathy for their cause, avoiding gratuitous bloodshed that might alienate potential supporters or provoke backlash, as seen in groups like the Irish Republican Army or Weather Underground, which calibrated violence to political leverage rather than transcendental ends.[17] Furthermore, the recruitment and ideological resilience differ markedly; religious terrorism draws on sacred texts and clerical authority to sustain commitment across generations, rendering adherents less susceptible to disillusionment from tactical failures, unlike secular movements prone to fragmentation upon unmet political demands or leadership decapitation. Studies indicate that while secular terrorism peaked in lethality during the 1970s-1980s with leftist and nationalist variants averaging fewer fatalities per incident, the post-1979 surge in religious terrorism—particularly Islamist strains—correlates with elevated per-attack death tolls, attributed to the absence of utilitarian constraints and the promise of paradise incentivizing suicidal tactics.[2] This pattern underscores causal realism in assessing threats: religious variants' fusion of faith and force engenders a more intractable form of violence, as theological certainty overrides empirical setbacks that might deter ideologically driven secular actors.[3]Historical Evolution
Pre-Modern and Early Instances
One of the earliest documented instances of religious terrorism occurred in the 1st century CE among the Sicarii, a radical Jewish Zealot faction opposing Roman rule in Judea. Motivated by a fervent commitment to Jewish religious law and opposition to perceived idolatry and collaboration, the Sicarii concealed short daggers known as sicae under their cloaks and conducted public assassinations of Roman officials, soldiers, and Hellenized Jewish elites during festivals and crowded gatherings.[25] [26] These acts aimed to instill widespread terror (terror), disrupt collaboration with the occupiers, and symbolically enforce religious purity, as described by the historian Flavius Josephus, who noted their targeting of high-profile figures like the high priest Jonathan to demonstrate regime vulnerability.[25] The Sicarii's tactics, including kidnappings and murders to coerce compliance, contributed to the escalation of the First Jewish-Roman War (66–73 CE), culminating in the siege of Masada.[27] In the medieval Islamic world, the Nizari Ismaili sect, known as the Hashashin or Order of Assassins, exemplified religious terrorism from approximately 1090 to 1275 CE. Founded by Hasan-i Sabbah in the fortress of Alamut in Persia, the group targeted Sunni Muslim leaders, Seljuk viziers, Abbasid caliphs, and Crusader figures deemed threats to their Twelver Shia-derived Ismaili doctrine, which emphasized esoteric interpretation and resistance to orthodox authority.[28] [29] Assassins employed fidayin (devoted agents) who infiltrated enemy courts disguised as servants or soldiers, executing targets with daggers in public settings to maximize psychological impact and deter further aggression against Nizari communities. Notable victims included Nizam al-Mulk in 1092 CE and Conrad of Montferrat in 1192 CE; these operations, often suicidal, were justified theologically as martyrdom advancing divine order.[28] [30] The Assassins' network of impregnable mountain fortresses enabled sustained campaigns, influencing regional politics until their destruction by Mongol forces under Hulagu Khan in 1256 CE.[29] In South Asia, the Thuggee cult, active from at least the 13th century through the early 19th century, practiced religiously motivated strangulation and robbery of travelers as ritual offerings to the Hindu goddess Kali, whom adherents believed demanded human blood to maintain cosmic balance and protect against calamity. Operating in secretive, hereditary bands across northern and central India, Thugs selected victims during journeys, using scarves (ruhmal) for ritual killing followed by burial and division of spoils, with an estimated 500 to 2,000 annual murders by the 1830s based on British judicial records and confessions.[31] Theological rationales portrayed these acts as sacred duties inherited from ancestral pacts with Kali, blending predation with piety; while colonial accounts sometimes exaggerated the cult's cohesion, archaeological evidence of mass graves and over 4,000 convictions under the Thuggee Suppression Acts of 1836–1837 confirm the scale of organized, faith-driven violence.[32] These pre-modern cases illustrate recurring patterns of small, ideologically driven groups leveraging targeted, symbolic violence to coerce conformity, protect perceived religious imperatives, and propagate fear disproportionate to their numbers.19th- and 20th-Century Developments
In the 19th century, religious terrorism persisted in isolated cases amid the rise of secular nationalist and anarchist violence, often blending theological imperatives with local grievances. The Thuggee cult in India, devotees of the goddess Kali who ritually strangled travelers as offerings, claimed an estimated 2 million victims over centuries before British suppression campaigns executed or imprisoned over 4,000 members between 1831 and 1837.[2] In the United States, the Mountain Meadows Massacre on September 11, 1857, saw approximately 120 emigrants from Arkansas killed by Mormon militiamen and Paiute allies in southern Utah Territory, driven by religious paranoia during the Utah War and doctrines such as blood atonement, which posited that certain sins required death for redemption.[33] Similarly, abolitionist John Brown's Pottawatomie massacre on May 24–25, 1856, involved the hacking to death of five pro-slavery settlers in Kansas Territory, framed by Brown as divine retribution against slavery, invoking Old Testament precedents for holy war.[34] His subsequent raid on Harpers Ferry arsenal on October 16–18, 1859, aimed to arm a slave uprising under providential mandate, resulting in his execution but influencing the sectional crisis leading to the Civil War.[35] The Ku Klux Klan, founded in Pulaski, Tennessee, on December 24, 1865, by Confederate veterans, exemplifies early post-Civil War religious-infused terrorism, employing cross burnings, night rides, and lynchings—over 3,000 documented between 1882 and 1968—to enforce white Protestant supremacy through biblical rationales like the Curse of Ham. Federal Enforcement Acts of 1870–1871 dismantled the first Klan iteration, prosecuting hundreds and reducing its activity by 1872.[36] A second wave revived in 1915 at Stone Mountain, Georgia, expanding to millions of members by the mid-1920s, targeting Catholics, Jews, and immigrants alongside African Americans with bombings and intimidation, such as the 1927 Michigan lynching spree that killed at least 25. This iteration declined amid scandals and the Great Depression, though remnants persisted into the 1940s.[37] In the early-to-mid-20th century, religious motivations appeared in ethno-nationalist contexts but remained secondary to political aims. Jewish paramilitary groups in Mandatory Palestine, including Irgun Zvai Leumi (founded 1931) and Lohamei Herut Israel (Lehi, 1940), conducted bombings and assassinations against British forces and Arabs, such as Irgun's King David Hotel attack on July 22, 1946, killing 91, and Lehi's murder of UN mediator Folke Bernadotte on September 17, 1948.[38] While primarily Zionist nationalist, Lehi's ideology incorporated messianic elements envisioning a biblically restored Jewish kingdom.[36] The assassination of Indian independence leader Mahatma Gandhi on January 30, 1948, by Nathuram Godse, a Hindu Mahasabha activist, stemmed from perceptions of Gandhi's concessions to Muslims during partition, rooted in revivalist Hindu nationalism viewing such policies as dharmic betrayal.[39] Overall, by 1968, no major international terrorist organizations were predominantly religious, reflecting dominance of secular ideologies like Marxism-Leninism in groups from the Irish Republican Army to the Algerian FLN.[15] This era marked a trough for religiously justified violence, supplanted by state-centric and ideological conflicts, though latent theological strains foreshadowed later resurgences.[15]Post-1979 Global Surge and Recent Trends (1980s-2025)
The 1979 Iranian Revolution initiated a marked escalation in religious terrorism, primarily Islamist in nature, by establishing a theocratic regime that exported revolutionary ideology and supported proxy militant groups through funding, training, and safe havens.[40] This shift coincided with the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan that same year, which drew international mujahideen fighters—backed by Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and the United States—creating transnational networks that evolved into enduring jihadist organizations like Al-Qaeda.[41] Between 1979 and April 2024, Islamist terrorist attacks numbered 66,872 globally, resulting in at least 249,941 deaths, dwarfing prior eras of predominantly secular or nationalist terrorism.[42] In the 1980s and 1990s, manifestations included Hezbollah's 1983 bombings of U.S. and French barracks in Beirut, killing 299, and the 1993 World Trade Center bombing by Al-Qaeda affiliates, which claimed six lives but signaled ambitions for spectacular attacks.[40] The September 11, 2001, attacks by Al-Qaeda killed 2,977 in the United States, propelling religious terrorism into a central geopolitical concern and inspiring a wave of affiliated operations worldwide.[41] Non-Islamist instances, such as the Sikh Khalistan militants' 1985 downing of Air India Flight 182 (329 deaths) and Aum Shinrikyo's 1995 sarin gas attack in Tokyo (13 deaths), occurred but lacked the scale, persistence, or ideological export of Islamist variants.[2] The 2010s saw a peak with the Islamic State's (ISIS) self-proclaimed caliphate in Iraq and Syria from 2014 to 2019, orchestrating or inspiring over 3,000 attacks and causing tens of thousands of deaths, including beheadings publicized for propaganda.[42] ISIS and affiliates accounted for 69,641 fatalities, second only to the Taliban (71,965), highlighting religious terrorism's lethality through tactics like suicide bombings and mass executions.[42] Data from terrorism incident records indicate religious motivations, especially Islamist, became predominant, with attacks more frequent and deadlier than secular counterparts due to absolutist ideologies permitting indiscriminate violence against civilians as divinely sanctioned.[14] From 2020 to 2025, overall terrorism fatalities declined post-ISIS territorial defeat, yet intensified in pockets: the Global Terrorism Index reported an 11% rise in deaths in 2024, driven by the Taliban's resurgence in Afghanistan, ISIS affiliates in the Sahel and Afghanistan, and Hamas's October 7, 2023, assault on Israel killing 1,200.[43] Outside Afghanistan, deaths increased 4%, with ISIS remaining the deadliest group via decentralized affiliates and lone-actor plots enabled by online propaganda.[12] Trends show a shift toward low-tech, high-impact attacks in unstable regions, persistent financing via illicit economies, and adaptation to counterterrorism pressures, sustaining religious terrorism's global footprint despite reduced caliphate ambitions.[44] Non-Islamist religious violence, such as sporadic Christian extremist actions or Hindu nationalist incidents in India, remained marginal in global impact compared to Islamist dominance.[2]
