INTRODUCTION
Nearly two decades after the 9/11 attacks, terrorism and targeted violence
continue to pose a
grave threat to the Homeland in ways that hav
e discer
nibly
evolved. Terrorism is likely a familiar term to most readers.
1
The term targeted
violence may be less familiar. For purposes of this Strategy, targeted violence
refers to any incident of violence that implicates homeland security and/or U.S.
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) activities, and in which a known or
knowable attacker selects a particular target prior to the violent attack.
2
Unlike
terrorism, targeted violence includes attacks otherwise lacking a clearly discern-
ible political, ideological, or religious motivation, but that are of such severity and
magnitude as to suggest an intent to inict a degree of mass injury, destruction,
or death commensurate with known terrorist tactics. In the Homeland, targeted
violence has a signicant impact on the safety and security of our communi
-
ties, schools, places of worship, and other public gatherings. The threats of
terrorism and targeted violence increasingly intersect with one another, and
there is likewise some alignment in the tools that can be used to coun
ter them. Thus, rather than dealing with
addresses the problems, and the tools terrorism and targeted violence as distinct phenomena, this Strategy
3
“The threats of
terrorism and
targeted violence
increasingly intersect
with one another, and
there is likewise some
alignment in the tools
that can be used to
counter them.
”
that can be wielded to address them, together.
Foreign terrorist organizations (FTOs) continue to plot against the United States, and the Department executes
o
n a daily basis its mission of preventing another attack from abroad.
4
Unfortunately, the severity and number
of domestic threats have also grown. Homegrown violent extremists (HVEs) are inuenced by the ideologies
and messages of FTOs.
5
There has been a concerning rise in attacks by individuals motivated by a variety of
domestic terrorist ideologies,
6
such as racially- and ethnically-motivated violent extremism, including white
supremacist violent extremism, anti-government and anti-authority violent extremism, and other ideological
1
The Department of Homeland Security denes terrorism as any activity involving a criminally unlawful act that is dangerous to
human life or potentially destructive of critical infrastructure or key resources, and that appears intended to intimidate or coerce a
civilian population, to inuence government policy by intimidation or coercion, or to aect the conduct of a government by mass
destruction, assassination, or kidnapping.
2
The concept of targeted violence was coined and rst dened in Robert A. Fein, Bryan Vossekuil & Gwen A. Holden, “Threat
Assessment: An Approach to Prevent Targeted Violence,” Research in Action (National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of
Justice), July 1995. All major subsequent works that have explored targeted violence—including studies published by the U.S.
Secret Service and U.S. Department of Education, among others—have either utilized or based their understanding of the concept
on this denition. This Strategy does so as well. Given the growing importance of the concept of targeted violence, a more precise
denition is needed, as one of the priority actions outlined in Goal 1.1 makes clear.
3
This Strategic Framework recognizes that the Federal Government has a role in addressing terrorism and targeted violence when
the severity and magnitude of an attack would overwhelm the capacity of State and local government prevention, protection, and
response eorts. The Federal Government primarily does this through informing, training, and equipping our SLTT partners. The
capabilities or capacity developed from Federal investments also benet other aspects of SLTT partners’ missions. For example,
enhanced analysis and information-sharing capabilities may be invested in by the Federal Government to ensure we have an eec-
tive two-way information sharing capability between SLTT and the Federal Government to share terrorism threat information, but
the capability may also be leveraged by the SLTT partner to address local criminal challenges.
4
This Strategic Framework denes a foreign terrorist organization in the same manner as does 8 U.S.C. § 1189, as a foreign organi-
zation that engages in terrorist activity or terrorism, or retains the capability and intent to engage in terrorist activity and terrorism,
which threatens the security of United States nationals or the national security of the United States. The Strategy denes it as such
regardless of whether the group has been placed on the U.S. Department of State’s Foreign Terrorist Organization List.
5
DHS denes a homegrown violent extremist as a person of any citizenship who has lived and/or operated primarily in the United
States or its territories who advocates, is engaged in, or is preparing to engage in ideologically-motivated terrorist activities (including
providing support to terrorism) in furtherance of political or social objectives promoted by a FTO, but is acting independently of a
FTO’s direction.
6
The Department denes domestic terrorism as an act of unlawful violence, or a threat of force or violence, that is dangerous to
human life or potentially destructive of critical infrastructure or key resources, and is intended to eect societal, political, or other
change, committed by a group or person based and operating entirely within the United States or its territories. Unlike HVEs,
domestic terrorists are not inspired by a foreign terrorist group. It should be noted that many groups and individuals dened as
“domestic terrorists” are becoming increasingly transnational in outlook and activities. The current label we employ to describe
them, which comes from the Federal Government’s lexicon, should not obscure this reality.
4