The Anti-Defamation League has a new report that suggests far-right violent extremism is now a greater threat to the U.S. than Islamic extremism. That is manifestly untrue. The vast majority of U.S. violent extremist plots are Islamist extremist. Intelligence and law enforcement activities are rightly prioritized on that threat.
The ADL knows this to be true. Buried in the middle of its report, the ADL notes, “The fact that only one person was killed by a domestic Islamist extremist in the U.S. in 2018 should not be taken as an indication that the threat posed by this form of extremism has diminished.” But the ADL also suggests that resources should be allocated away from that threat and toward far-right extremist threats. At the start to the report’s policy recommendations, it claims, “For too long, policymakers have focused disproportionate attention on the threat of Islamist extremism — to the detriment of readiness to address many other security issues.”
My critical disagreement is the ADL’s claim of “disproportionate attention” on Islamic extremism. There is nothing disproportionate about it. The evidence is clear that Islamic-rooted terrorist threats are the most numerous and deadly. In significant part, this is because Islamic terrorists are motivated by a desire to carry out maximal slaughter via means of explosives or other high-lethality devices. Were the FBI and its intelligence community partners not so adept at identifying and countering plotters, we would lose hundreds of lives to Islamic terrorism every single year.
Herein lies the particular problem with Islamic State extremism: It offers an expansive recruiting appeal not only to Salafi-fanatics, but also losers such as Orlando nightclub attacker Omar Mateen and other mentally ill individuals with an Islamic affiliation. In large part, this is why the FBI has around 1,000 open investigations into suspected ISIS-related terrorist activity. A significant number of those investigative targets are converts to Islam or Muslims with a very tenuous understanding of Islamic theology.
In contrast, far-right attacks tend to be conducted by individuals with a penchant for far-right views but no obvious or visible indications of attack planning. That makes it a lot harder to detect these plotters, which is why they succeed more often.
Where does this leave us?
Well, with three questions to answer. First, should we be astute to far-right terrorism? Yes. Second, is the far-right threat growing? Yes. Third, is far-right terrorism more of a challenge to the U.S. than Islamic terrorism? Certainly not.
