SECURITYFebruary 19, 2025

Counterterrorism returns as a top U.S. priority

James Jay Carafano

Reading time: 7 min

President Trump’s counterterrorism strategy prioritizes direct action: capturing or eliminating perpetrators and seizing assets over trying to address root causes.

President Donald Trump began his second term with swift actions and orders, outlining his administration’s key priorities, many of which were were anticipated and much discussed during the campaign. One likely priority has received less attention, yet it will significantly shape the United States’ foreign policy and national security. Counterterrorism will likely be a persistent focus. Implementation, however, will differ from past U.S. efforts to combat global terrorism.

Spotty record 

Comparing emerging policies and programs with past American efforts clarifies the future form of U.S. counterterrorism initiatives. The country’s tactics and strategies are evolving to sidestep the shortcomings and pitfalls of earlier campaigns.

During the Cold War (1947-1991), the U.S. primarily viewed global terrorism through the prism of state sponsorship, an extension of Soviet efforts to weaken America and its allies by sponsoring terrorist organizations aiming to attack the developed world. Internally, the U.S. viewed domestic terrorism as the acts of small, disparate groups motivated by extremist fringe political agendas.

With the end of that period, the U.S. focus on counterterrorism operations declined, with far less attention to both foreign and domestic terrorism. During the Cold War, Congress routinely held hearings on the topic, but in the 1990s, congressional inquiries into terrorism threats became a rare event. Even as the U.S. intelligence community became more aware of al-Qaeda’s activities and intentions, counterterrorism remained far from a national priority.

After the September 11, 2001 attacks (9/11), the U.S. prioritized counterterrorism by implementing a Global War on Terrorism (GWOT). This included attacking terrorists and their networks, envisioning an ideological struggle against Islamist extremism to address its root causes, which were assumed to include poverty and ethnic conflict, while also discouraging violent fanaticism. From establishing the Department of Homeland Security and designating combating terrorism as the primary mission of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to enhancing border security and immigration enforcement, along with wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the war on terror became a central pillar of foreign and national security policy under President George W. Bush (2001-2009).

President Biden was widely criticized for reorienting many homeland security and foreign policy instruments toward political objectives, including climate change mitigation and achieving social equity.

After he took power in January 2009, President Barack Obama sought to downplay the central role of combating terrorism as a key instrument of national policy, even banning the use of the term GWOT. The emergence of the Islamic State (also known as ISIS) following the anticipated withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq generated renewed attention on the threat, a concern that significantly declined after President Trump oversaw the completion of defeating the ISIS “caliphate” in the Middle East during his first term (2017-2021).

During Joe Biden’s presidency (2021-2025), the U.S. emphasis on counterterrorism further declined, marked by his withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan and the adoption of border security and immigration practices considered unacceptable by both Democrats and Republicans after 9/11. President Biden was widely criticized for reorienting many homeland security and foreign policy instruments toward political objectives, including climate change mitigation and achieving social equity.

Following the U.S. Capitol riots on January 6, 2021, the Biden administration asserted that domestic right-wing radicals were the most significant terrorist threat in the U.S. – an assertion that has been widely discussed. 

The new emphasis on fighting terror

President Trump returns to office likely with a greater emphasis on counterterrorism as an instrument of policy. This shift is not a return to the policies of his previous administration but a response to significant geopolitical shifts.

Open border policies and lax immigration enforcement, particularly in the U.S., Canada and Europe, have created new opportunities for terrorist travel and action. The U.S., for example, has seen a record number of individuals on terrorist watchlists entering the country. The Biden administration’s policies, which reprioritized national security instruments away from post-9/11 counterterrorism practices, have arguably left the U.S. more vulnerable to terrorist attacks than it was before the 2001 attacks in New York and Washington. The country also faces increased aggression from criminal cartels and transnational gangs, primarily based in Mexico and Latin America, raising significant national security concerns.

Global intifada. Following the October 7, 2023, attacks in Israel, networks mobilized global protests against the state of Israel, Jews and many Western governments, triggering a resurgence of worldwide Islamist extremism and violent rhetoric not seen in decades. The revival of Islamist extremism, combined with operational bases for their actions in the Sahel and Afghanistan, raises concerns over renewed attacks organized or inspired by Islamist networks and ideology.

Read more from James Jay Carafano

• A possible Saudi Arabia-Israel-United States triangle
• The American factor in EU reform
• U.S. influence challenged in the Southern Cone

State-sponsorship. Not since the Cold War has state sponsorship of terrorism been such a major global threat. Adding to the longstanding list of state sponsors of terror, including Russia and Iran, China has more recently been considered U.S. adversaries by presidents of both parties. Despite attempts to improve relations, these adversaries consistently undermine U.S. power. 

The U.S. will not return to war on terror as its primary counterterrorism framework, a key lesson from past campaigns.

President Trump returns to the office as their power has diminished – Russia is bogged down in Ukraine, China’s economy has lost steam and Iran’s surrogates have become depleted in conflict with Israel. The three rivals may resort to state-sponsored terrorism to harass the U.S. and compensate for their weakened hard power.

Russia, for example, has been accused of engaging in attempted terrorist acts in Europe, including assassination, attacking infrastructure and bombings to undermine support for Ukraine. Recently, the prime minister of Poland implicated Russia in planning “acts of terror” against airlines globally.

For all these reasons, counterterrorism is likely to return as a national priority not only in the U.S, but in Europe as well.

Shift in tactics and strategy

The U.S. will not return to war on terror as its primary counterterrorism framework, a key lesson from past campaigns. Instead of broadly targeting extremism’s supposed root causes and entering into global conflicts, which President Trump sees as endless war, his administration will focus on destroying terrorist networks, mitigating risks and punishing state sponsors for providing material support or organizing terrorist acts – though not necessarily seeking regime change. The objective is to limit the capacity and capability of terrorist groups to harm the U.S., its friends and allies.

Contact us today for tailored geopolitical insights and industry-specific advisory services.

Sign up for our newsletter

Receive insights from our experts every week in your inbox.

Email*

Subscribe

Agreement GDPR

We may inform you about events and products by e-mail or other electronic means.

Information about what personal data we collect about you and how we process it (including information about how we personalize our website for you and deliver content tailored to you) can be found in our privacy policy.