The recent shooting of Charlie Kirk is a chilling reminder: Terrorism and violent extremism remain a clear and present danger to our national security. Yet just as threats grow more sophisticated and diffuse, the Trump administration is quietly dismantling some of our most effective tools to prevent attacks before they happen.
Programs like the Department of Homeland Security’s Targeted Violence and Terrorism Prevention initiative and the State Department’s Office of Countering Violent Extremism have been gutted or eliminated. Long-serving experts have been fired, reassigned or resigned — taking with them decades of hard-won knowledge about what works in preventing terrorism.
The result: a less secure America.
The Center for Strategic and International Studies reported that attacks and plots against government targets driven by partisan beliefs nearly tripled from 2016 to 2024 compared to the previous 25 years combined.
Meanwhile, the global landscape of terrorism has shifted. While the U.S. successfully degraded core al-Qaeda and ISIS leadership, splinter groups have adapted, grown and forged new networks — targeting U.S. interests abroad and inspiring “homegrown” terrorists here at home.
FBI and Homeland Security assessments have concluded that the greatest terrorist threat to the homeland increasingly comes from lone actors radicalized online.
Motivations vary from anti-authority extremism to racial, ethnic or religious hatred, but the pattern is clear: Plotters exploit social polarization and digital pipelines to inspire violence. These actors often operate outside formal networks, making them harder to detect and disrupt through traditional intelligence methods.
Traditional counterterrorism and law enforcement remain essential, but most experts agree that reactive “whack-a-mole” strategies alone won’t stem radicalized violence. Prevention — both primary (education, youth support and awareness) and secondary (intervention with at-risk individuals) — is our best long-term defense.
The Targeted Violence and Terrorism Prevention initiative, launched during the first Trump administration, funded local efforts to disrupt radicalization before violence occurred.
These grants supported law enforcement, schools and nonprofits in identifying risks and connecting vulnerable individuals to resources. One of the initiative’s authors received such a grant to develop training materials for behavioral health professionals, until it was abruptly pulled.
The project aimed to equip clinicians with tools to recognize and respond to signs of radicalization, bridging a critical gap between public health and public safety. These efforts were not abstract. They were community-based, evidence-informed and designed to prevent violence before it erupted.
They also reflected a growing consensus: that terrorism prevention must be multidisciplinary, involving educators, mental health professionals, faith leaders and civic organizations, not just federal agents and intelligence analysts.
Violent extremism is obviously not a domestic problem solely; it is a global phenomenon. The recent elimination of the Office of Countering Violent Extremism at State undermines vital international partnerships.
As former Jefferson Science Fellows and consultants to the Office of Countering Violent Extremism, we worked on repatriation and rehabilitation of ISIS-affiliated women and children in Northeast Syria — an effort designed to prevent “ISIS 2.0.” With the office’s closure, years of expertise and momentum have been lost.
These camps, where thousands remain detained, are breeding grounds for future radicalization. Children grow up without formal education, exposed to violence, malnutrition and underground economies. Women face coercion and exploitation.
The Office of Countering Violent Extremism facilitated the repatriation and reintegration of thousands of individuals, helping countries develop humane, secure and effective responses. That work has now stalled, and the consequences will reverberate far beyond Syria’s borders.
To stay ahead of evolving threats, the U.S. must:
USAID’s role in countering violent extremism has been especially critical in fragile states, where poor governance and economic despair create fertile ground for radicalization.
Its programs have supported youth engagement, conflict resolution and civil society development — tools that reduce the appeal of extremist ideologies. The loss of these initiatives will likely blow back on U.S. national security, as instability abroad often fuels threats at home.
Complacency is not an option. Weakening prevention programs sends the wrong signal to adversaries and leaves our communities more vulnerable.
The threats we face, from ISIS plots abroad to domestic lone-actor attacks, are not going away. If we want to protect our families, neighbors, students and institutions, we must invest in the full spectrum of counterterrorism.
Royce Hutson is an associate professor of Social Work at Boise State University. Brian Gran is a professor in the Department of Sociology at Case Western Reserve University. Both served in the Department of State’s Bureau of Counterterrorism Office of Countering Violent Extremism.