BACKGROUND REPORT

Global Terrorism Overview: Terrorism in 2019

• Increasing terrorist violence in Afghanistan sustained amid peace talks
• Islamic State’s decline in Iraq and expanding global impact
• Deadly increases in racially and ethnically motivated terrorism

OVERVIEW

In 2019, there were nearly 8,500 terrorist attacks around the world, which killed more than 20,300 people, including 5,460
perpetrators and 14,840 victims. The patterns described here provide a general overview. We encourage readers to explore the
Global Terrorism DatabaseTM and consider contextual information for a comprehensive assessment.1
▪ 2019 was the fifth consecutive year of declining global terrorism since terrorist violence peaked in 2014 at nearly
17,000 attacks and more than 44,000 total deaths. The total number of terrorist attacks worldwide decreased 50%
between 2014 and 2019, and the total number of deaths decreased 54%. Regional trends varied substantially.
▪ While the Taliban engaged in peace talks with the United States, Afghanistan experienced 21% of all terrorist attacks
worldwide in 2019, and 41% of all people killed in terrorist attacks (including assailants) in 2019 were killed in
Afghanistan.2
- The number of terrorist attacks in Afghanistan increased 2% between 2018 and 2019.
- The total number of deaths due to terrorism in Afghanistan decreased 16%; however, this change was largely a
result of the 32% decline in the number of assailants killed during attacks, which is typically especially high in
Afghanistan (38% of all deaths in 2019). The number of victims killed in terrorist attacks in Afghanistan
declined 2% and the number of victims killed in attacks carried out by the Taliban increased 9% between 2018
and 2019, essentially sustaining the escalation that has taken place in Afghanistan in recent years.

1 Please see the Methodological Note at the end of this report for important information about the potential impact of changes
in access to translated source materials.
2 Maizland, L. (2020, March 2). U.S.-Taliban Peace Deal: What to Know. Council on Foreign Relations. Retrieved from

https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/us-taliban-peace-deal-agreement-afghanistan-war
START Background Report © University of Maryland, July 2020 1
 TERRORIST ATTACKS AND TOTAL DEATHS WORLDWIDE, BY MONTH, 2012 – 2019
7000

6000

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

Attacks Total Deaths

Source: Global Terrorism Database
▪ Global statistical trends continued to be heavily impacted by patterns of terrorism in Iraq, which suffered more terrorist
attacks than any other country each year from 2013 to 2017. The number of terrorist attacks in Iraq decreased 53%
between 2018 and 2019 and the number of people killed in terrorist attacks decreased 44%. However, monthly trends
in Iraq in 2019 indicate that terrorist violence persists, and the rate of decline may be slowing.
▪ In particular, from the declaration of the caliphate in June 2014 to the liberation of Mosul in July 2017, Islamic State
carried out more than 100 terrorist attacks in Iraq and killed more than 500 victims each month, on average. The
group’s violence in Iraq subsequently decreased dramatically and continued to decline throughout 2019, but remained
deadly. More than 350 Islamic State attacks in Iraq killed more than 500 victims and 70 perpetrators in 2019, and
Islamic State caused hundreds of additional casualties in Syria and other locations.3
▪ While Islamic State violence declined in Iraq, the group’s influence continued to expand geographically. Attacks carried
out by Islamic State “core” operatives, affiliated organizations, or unaffiliated individuals who indicated allegiance to
the group took place in 31 countries in 2019, compared to 35 in 2018. However, three new countries—Mozambique,
the Netherlands, and Sri Lanka—experienced Islamic State-related attacks in 2019, bringing the total number of
countries that have ever experienced Islamic State-related terrorist attacks to 57.
▪ Several important trends emerged in African countries in 2019, including in Nigeria, where terrorist violence overall
decreased due to a reduction in attacks by Fulani extremists, but terrorist violence carried out by Boko Haram
increased. Boko Haram also increased terrorist activity in Cameroon, Chad, and Niger. In addition, Mali saw a 16%
decrease in attacks in 2019, but a 41% increase in total deaths due to multiple (6) mass casualty terrorist attacks in
which more than 30 people were killed, compared to zero such attacks in previous years.
▪ The number of terrorist attacks in Western Europe declined 6% from 2018 (203 attacks) to 2019 (191 attacks),
continuing a pattern of decline since 2015. The number of casualties of terrorist attacks in Western Europe, which has
also declined dramatically since 2015 and 2016, remained stable in 2019 with 18 victims killed and approximately
100 victims injured.
▪ Mass casualty terrorist attacks remained relatively rare in Western Europe in 2019. Out of 191 terrorist attacks, there
were nine attacks in which at least four people were injured or killed.4
- These mass casualty attacks took place in France (3), the United Kingdom (2), Finland (1), Germany (1), Italy
(1), and the Netherlands (1).
- Five of the mass casualty attacks in Western Europe involved knives or bladed weapons, two involved firearms
(although they were not discharged in one attack), two involved vehicles as contact weapons, one involved

3 Consistent with START’s practice of including in the GTD only those attacks that have been reported by at least one high-
validity source, these statistics represent those incidents that were reported by independent news outlets. These data provide
conservative estimates of terrorism in locations where unbiased media coverage is limited, such as Syria and Yemen.
4 Note that two of the nine mass casualty attacks in Western Europe were marked as “doubt terrorism proper” in the GTD,

meaning there is conflicting information about whether the definitional criteria were satisfied.
START Background Report © University of Maryland, July 2020 2
 explosives, one involved incendiary weapons, and one was an unarmed assault in which four people were
injured.
▪ In 2019, there were 64 terrorist attacks, killing 51 people in the United States. Terrorism in the United States continued
to be characterized by diverse, sometimes complex, and often ambiguous ideological influences, typically without clear
ties to formal, named organizations.
- Perpetrators of the 10 lethal terrorist attacks in the United States in 2019 included white
supremacists/nationalists, anti-Semitic extremists linked to the Black Hebrew Israelite movement, an al-Qaida
in the Arabian Peninsula operative, and a conspiracy theory extremist.5
- However, the vast majority of terrorist attacks in the United States in 2019 were non-lethal (84%, excluding
perpetrator deaths), and these attacks were also motivated by diverse ideological influences, including anti-
fascist, anti-government, anti-LGBT, anti-Muslim, anti-Semitic, anti-white, left-wing, pro-choice, and white
supremacist/nationalist extremism.
▪ Between 2015 and 2019, 286 people were killed in terrorist attacks in the United States (excluding assailants). Nearly
all of the victims (95%) were killed in attacks involving firearms. Firearms were used in 27% of terrorist attacks in the
United States during this time period.
▪ Exceptionally deadly attacks targeting Hispanic Americans in the United States and Muslims in New Zealand in 2019
marked a sharp increase in the lethality of “racially and ethnically motivated terrorist attacks” (REMT), many of which
were motivated by white supremacy, xenophobia, and anti-immigrant beliefs. At least 86 people were killed in such
attacks in Australasia, North America, and Western Europe in 2019, compared to 52 in 2018.
▪ The deadliest terrorist attacks in 2019 took place on Easter Sunday in Sri Lanka. More than 250 people were killed and
at least 500 others were injured when eight assailants carried out suicide bombings at seven different crowded
locations, including hotels and churches. A pipe bomb was defused at an eighth location. Sri Lankan authorities
indicated that National Thowheeth Jama'ath and Jammiyathul Millathu Ibrahim operatives were responsible for the
attacks. However, Islamic State reportedly posted a video purportedly showing the assailants pledge allegiance to the
group, and reports indicate that one or more of the assailants trained with Islamic State.6

KEY REGIONAL DEVELOPMENTS

Terrorist violence remained heavily concentrated in certain locations and coincided with other types of political violence. More
than half of all attacks took place in five countries: Afghanistan (21%), Yemen (9%), Iraq (8%), India (7%), and Nigeria (6%). As in
2018, half of all deaths due to terrorist attacks in 2019 took place in two countries: Afghanistan (41%), and Nigeria (8%).

TERRORIST ATTACKS AND TOTAL DEATHS, COUNTRIES WITH MORE THAN 150 ATTACKS, 2019
Total % of % Change Total % of % Change
Country Attacks Total from 2018 Killed* Total from 2018
Afghanistan 1804 21% 2% 8249 41% -16%
Yemen 771 9% 55% 1219 6% 8%
Iraq 642 8% -53% 798 4% -44%
India 623 7% -30% 311 2% -25%
Nigeria 507 6% -22% 1718 8% -33%
Philippines 464 5% -23% 396 2% -10%
Pakistan 362 4% -25% 416 2% -40%
Somalia 360 4% -32% 860 4% -25%
Syria 292 3% 25% 1102 5% -29%
Democratic Republic of the Congo 250 3% 53% 642 3% -35%
Colombia 228 3% 11% 134 1% 2%
Nepal 200 2% 102% 7 0% --
Burkina Faso 159 2% 127% 797 4% 587%
Worldwide Total 8473 100% -14% 20309 100% -13%
*Includes perpetrator deaths
Source: Global Terrorism Database

5 Note that three of the ten lethal attacks in the United States were marked as “doubt terrorism proper” in the GTD, meaning
there is conflicting information about whether the definitional criteria were satisfied.
6 Mandhana, N., Taylor, R., and Shah, S. (2019, April 29). Sri Lanka Bomber Trained in Syria with Islamic State. Wall Street

Journal. Retrieved from https://www.wsj.com/articles/sri-lanka-attacks-show-isiss-reach-even-after-defeat-11556561912

START Background Report © University of Maryland, July 2020 3
 ▪ Several locations experienced especially large decreases in terrorist violence between 2018 and 2019. These include:
- Libya, where the number of terrorist attacks continued to decline dramatically from a peak of 729 in 2014 when
multiple Islamic State affiliates emerged to 70 in 2019. Likewise, the total number of deaths that resulted from
terrorist attacks declined from 694 to 90 during the same time period.
- Iraq, which previously experienced thousands of terrorist attacks annually. In 2019, the number of attacks further
declined by 53% to 642 and the total number of deaths by 44% to 798. Although Iraq remains among the countries
most heavily impacted by terrorism, the threat has evolved since the fall of the Islamic State caliphate.
- Pakistan, where the number of terrorist attacks peaked at more than 2,200 in 2013 (2,800 people were killed that
year), continued to see dramatic reductions in terrorist violence. There were 362 attacks in Pakistan in 2019, a
25% reduction from 2018, and 416 people (including 38 assailants) were killed in 2019, 40% fewer than in 2018.
▪ Several locations experienced especially large increases in terrorist violence between 2018 and 2019. These include:
- Yemen, where terrorist violence in the context of a devastating war increased 55% with respect to the number of
attacks (771 in 2019) and 54% with respect to victim deaths (903 in 2019). Despite the drastic increase in victim
deaths, total deaths increased by 9% in Yemen as a result of the number of perpetrator deaths in Yemen declining
41% between 2018 and 2019.
- Nepal experienced 200 attacks in 2019; however, nearly all of them (98%) were non-lethal and not intended to
cause physical injuries. This 102% increase in attacks was largely the result of a campaign targeting
communications infrastructure by the Communist Party of Nepal - Maoist (CPN-Maoist-Chand), who set fire to
dozens of telecommunication towers, primarily in February, July, and August.
- Burkina Faso, where terrorist violence has been steadily increasing since 2015, saw a 127% increase in the
number of terrorist attacks in 2019 and a 587% increase in the total number of deaths in 2019. This sharp
increase in lethality was largely due to an increase in the number of attacks in which 10 or more people were killed,
from two in 2018 to 25 in 2019. At least nine of these exceptionally lethal attacks were carried out by Jamaat
Nusrat al-Islam wal Muslimin (JNIM) or Islamic State in the Greater Sahara (ISGS).
- Cameroon, where violence erupted after Anglophone separatists declared independence in 2017. 7 Although the
number of attacks in Cameroon (which had more than doubled in 2018) decreased by 38% in 2019, the number of
victims killed in terrorist attacks increased 28% between 2018 and 2019, from 167 deaths to 214.

PERPETRATORS

Information on the perpetrator of the attack was reported for 66% of all attacks worldwide in 2019. In 59 attacks, the individual
perpetrator or perpetrators were identified, but they were not known to be affiliated with a particular group or organization. This
represents a decline in the number of attacks carried out by unaffiliated individuals, which peaked at 102 in 2017. The lethality
of attacks carried out by unaffiliated individuals also decreased, from more than 200 victims killed in 2016 to 98 in 2019.
PERPETRATOR GROUPS RESPONSIBLE FOR MORE THAN 100 TERRORIST ATTACKS, 2019
Total Change Total Change
Perpetrator Group Attacks from 2018 Killed* from 2018
Taliban 1375 9% 7531 -11%
Houthi extremists (Ansar Allah) 579 55% 983 11%
Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) 461 -37% 1252 -44%
Boko Haram 348 43% 1954 47%
Al-Shabaab 330 -33% 864 -25%
Maoists/Communist Party of India - Maoist (CPI-Maoist) 238 -11% 146 -23%
New People's Army (NPA) 192 -32% 155 -18%
Communist Party of Nepal - Maoist (CPN-Maoist-Chand) 134 148% 7 --
Fulani extremists 118 -61% 426 -64%
*Includes perpetrator deaths
Source: Global Terrorism Database

7Inside Cameroon’s 100-year old Anglophone conflict. (2019, October 1). Agence France Presse. Retrieved from
https://www.africanews.com/2019/10/01/inside-cameroon-s-100-year-old-anglophone-conflict/
START Background Report © University of Maryland, July 2020 4
▪ In 2019, 265 groups and organizations carried out terrorist attacks worldwide. This number has been steadily declining in
recent years since it peaked at 377 groups and organizations identified as perpetrators of terrorist attacks in 2016. The
perpetrator groups responsible for the most attacks in 2019 are shown in the table above.
▪ The Taliban in Afghanistan was responsible for more terrorist attacks in 2019 than any other group by a wide margin, and
those attacks resulted in more deaths than the next ten deadliest perpetrator groups combined. Between 2018 and 2019,
the number of terrorist attacks carried out by the Taliban increased 9% and the total number of deaths decreased 11%.
However, it is important to note that attacks carried out by the Taliban often involve many perpetrator deaths. In 2019 the
number of perpetrator deaths in Taliban attacks decreased 31% and the number of victim deaths increased 9%.
▪ Aside from the Taliban, several of the perpetrator groups that increased terrorist violence in 2019 included Houthi
extremists in Yemen (55% increase in attacks; 11% increase in total deaths; 54% increase in victim deaths), Boko Haram
(43% increase in attacks; 47% increase in total deaths; 37% increase in victim deaths); and the Communist Party of Nepal
– Maoist – Chand (148% increase in total attacks; seven people were killed in 2019 including one perpetrator, up from zero
in 2018).
▪ Islamic State and certain affiliated groups were among those whose terrorist violence continued to decrease in 2019.
These include Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (attacks decreased 37% and deaths decreased 44%) and Islamic State-
Khorasan Province (attacks decreased 52% and deaths decreased 68%). However, this network of organizations remained
very deadly and their attacks resulted in thousands of casualties in locations around the world. Attacks by Islamic State
operatives in Iraq and Syria killed more than 1,000 victims in 2019. The group also claimed responsibility for deadly attacks
in Lebanon, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan, and Tunisia.
▪ Boko Haram increased terrorist violence in 2019, not only in Nigeria, but also in neighboring countries Cameroon, Chad,
and Niger. Specifically, attacks attributed to Boko Haram resulted in 241 total deaths in Cameroon (up from 76 in 2018),
189 in Chad (up from 106 in 2018), and 315 in Niger (up from 50 in 2018). In addition, Boko Haram (Barnawi faction,
Islamic State West Africa Province) claimed responsibility for an attack in Burkina Faso in 2019, in which assailants killed
24 soldiers.
▪ In 2019 there was a sharp increase in the lethality of terrorist attacks that were racially or ethnically motivated (REMT). This
increase was largely a result of exceptionally deadly attacks targeting Hispanic Americans in the United States and Muslims
in New Zealand. The table below illustrates recent patterns in REMT attacks, many of which were motivated by white
supremacy, xenophobia, and anti-immigrant beliefs, and which took place in 23 different countries between 2015 and
2019.

TRENDS OVER TIME IN RACIALLY AND ETHNICALLY MOTIVATED ATTACKS, 2015 -- 2019
Total Total Perpetrators Total Perpetrators
Year Attacks Killed Killed Injured Injured
2015 34 26 2 22 0
2016 42 18 2 64 1
2017 84 16 1 51 1
2018 33 54 2 79 4
2019 54 89 3 146 2
Total 247 203 10 362 8
Source: Global Terrorism Database

▪ In recent years, perpetrators of terrorism in the United States have been very loosely organized, rarely affiliated with a
formal organization, and motivated by a diverse array of ideologies. These ideologies often overlap, to the point that it can
be difficult to classify the identity of the perpetrator or perpetrators in a straightforward way. The table below lists the
identity of perpetrator “groups” that were active in the United States between 2015 and 2019. Note that many of these
attributions are generic identifiers, not meant to exhaustively capture all ideological characteristics of the assailant(s), but
typically based on the ideological influences most relevant to the specific attack in question.

START Background Report © University of Maryland, July 2020 5

 PERPETRATOR GROUPS RESPONSIBLE FOR TERRORIST ATTACKS IN THE UNITED STATES, 2015 -- 2019

Perpetrators
Perpetrator Group Name Total Attacks Total Killed Killed
Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) 1 4 1
Anarchists 1 0 0
Animal Liberation Front (ALF) 1 0 0
Anti-Abortion extremists 7 3 0
Anti-Arab extremists 1 0 0
Anti-Fascist extremists 1 1 1
Anti-Government extremists 7 64 3
Anti-Immigrant extremists 1 0 0
Anti-LGBT extremists 6 0 0
Anti-Muslim extremists 32 5 0
Anti-Police extremists 7 11 3
Anti-Republican extremists 2 1 1
Anti-Semitic extremists 16 17 2
Anti-Sikh extremists 1 0 0
Anti-Trump extremists 4 0 0
Anti-White extremists 12 10 1
Black Hebrew Israelites 3 0 0
Citizens for Constitutional Freedom 1 0 0
Conspiracy theory extremists 3 1 0
Court Reform extremists 1 0 0
Environmentalists 3 0 0
Incel extremists 2 13 2
Jihadi-inspired extremists 23 86 8
Ku Klux Klan 3 0 0
Left-wing extremists 1 0 0
Male supremacists 3 0 0
Muslim extremists 4 7 2
Neo-Nazi extremists 4 12 1
Pro-choice extremists 2 0 0
Pro-LGBT Rights extremists 1 0 0
Pro-Trump extremists 16 0 0
Right-wing extremists 2 0 0
Shield Wall Network (SWN) 1 0 0
Sovereign Citizen 1 0 0
United Constitutional Patriots 1 0 0
Unknown 99 17 3
White Rabbit Three Percent Illinois Patriot Freedom
2 0 0
Fighters Militia
White supremacists/nationalists 34 64 2
Total 310 316 30
Source: Global Terrorism Database

▪ When considering perpetrator group patterns, it is important to note how groups and organizations evolve over time, often
breaking into factions and splinters, sharing members, changing names and aliases, locations and personnel, and forming
mergers, alliances, and “franchises.” As a result, groups are a problematic unit of analysis that can lead to shortsighted
inferences. Combining perpetrator organizations, groups, and individuals with shared goals into “movements” helps capture

START Background Report © University of Maryland, July 2020 6

 broader, long-term patterns of perpetrator activity. For example, GTD researchers organized the perpetrators associated
with the Islamic State movement and al Qaida movement for the purpose of comparison. 8
- The graph below indicates the number of countries each year that experienced a terrorist attack carried out by a
group or individual affiliated with the broader al Qaida movement (in gray) or Islamic State movement (in red), as
well as the cumulative number of countries each movement has impacted. The fact that Islamic State evolved from
al Qaida in Iraq partly explains their more rapid expansion, but we also note that the number of countries impacted
by Islamic State-related terrorism continued to expand beyond the dissolution of the caliphate.
- As violence perpetrated by Islamic State operatives decreased in Iraq, the broader movement continued to expand
geographically. Attacks carried out by Islamic State predecessors, “core” operatives, affiliated organizations, or
unaffiliated individuals who indicated allegiance to Islamic State took place in 31 countries in 2019, bringing the
total number of countries that have ever experienced Islamic State-related terrorist attacks to 57.
GEOGRAPHIC REACH OF AL QAIDA- AND ISLAMIC STATE-RELATED TERRORISM, 1981 – 2019
(INCLUDES PREDECESSORS, “CORE,” AFFILIATED GROUPS, AND INSPIRED INDIVIDUALS)
60

50 Al Qaida Annual Number of Countries

Al Qaida Cumulative Number of Countries

Number of Countries

40

30

20

10

60

50 Islamic State Annual Number of Countries

Islamic State Cumulative Number of Countries

Number of Countries

40

30

20

10

Source: Global Terrroism Database Year

8Miller, E. (2016, August). Patterns of Islamic State-Related Terrorism. START Background Report. Retrieved from
https://www.start.umd.edu/pubs/START_IslamicStateTerrorismPatterns_BackgroundReport_Aug2016.pdf
START Background Report © University of Maryland, July 2020 7
ADDENDUM: METHODOLOGICAL NOTE REGARDING NON-ENGLISH SOURCES

Understanding the importance of including multi-lingual sources in the data collection process, the GTD team typically
supplements the English-language content in the LexisNexis Metabase news feed with content from Open Source Enterprise
(OSE). Although the GTD research team does include analysts with non-English language skills, at this time the team does not
have resources to translate content at scale or conduct artificial intelligence processing on non-English language source
documents. OSE—a U.S. government media aggregation and translation service originally established in 1941—was formerly
known as Open Source Center, World News Connection, and the Foreign Broadcast Information Service. This product has been
used in the GTD data collection effort for decades and, although it is impossible to know what percentage of GTD records would
not exist without OSE sources, approximately 15-25% of all records in the GTD leverage information from OSE or its
predecessors in some way. Despite the fact that the translated content on the OSE platform was “open source” content curated
from publicly available news feeds around the world, access to OSE was not available to the general public. The GTD team
accessed the OSE platform at no cost by virtue of sponsored research agreements with U.S. government agencies.

On June 3, 2019 the GTD team learned that the OSE platform would be decommissioned on June 28. The GTD team later
learned that the open source media translation effort and the content itself were apparently not decommissioned, but that the
platform (now known as Open Source Data Layer and Services (OSDLS)) would no longer be available to those who are not U.S.
government employees with Joint Worldwide Intelligence Communications System (JWICS) credentials. According to an OSE
customer service representative, the reason for this shift, which was clearly detrimental to open source research efforts, was to
improve the security of access to the platform as it was moved to cloud servers.

GTD staff worked with U.S. government and private sector partners to attempt to understand the implications of this decision for
the research team’s access to the critical translated content needed to promote comprehensiveness and consistency in the
GTD collection process. Ultimately, efforts to make decisionmakers aware of the impact of this change and/or identify a
pathway to accessing the content on OSDLS were not successful in reversing or mitigating the policy change.

Concurrently, the team began exploring contingency plans, the most promising of which by far was purchasing subscription
access to BBC Monitoring. BBC Monitoring is a media aggregation and translation platform with which the GTD team has long
been familiar. In fact, for many decades, BBC Monitoring worked in close partnership with OSE, and the GTD research team has
had access to the BBC Monitoring content that was included in the OSE platform and LexisNexis Academic. Although BBC
Monitoring is the only resource remotely comparable to OSE, little information is available about the scope of unique or
overlapping translated content across the two platforms. In December 2019 the GTD team gained subscription access to the
BBC Monitoring platform and began to incorporate this content into the data collection workflow.

The team has since completed the backlog of triaging for the 2019 BBC Monitoring source documents and reviewed the data
with the aim of providing an assessment of the likely impact that the loss of OSE and replacement with BBC Monitoring had on
the resulting data. The initial data on the total count of source documents provided by BBC Monitoring by month in 2019,
compared to the same month in 2018, are instructive.

KEY METRICS FROM SUPPLEMENTAL MEDIA AGGREGATION/TRANSLATION PLATFORM

2018 2019
(Open Source Enterprise) (BBC Monitoring)
Filtered Source Articles
67,916 8,129
(keyword filters, excluding duplicates)
Potentially Relevant Articles
37,002 4,330
(machine learning model results)

The table above indicates that the total amount of content accessed through the BBC Monitoring subscription in 2019 was
much smaller than the total amount of content accessed through the OSE platform in 2018. This difference is evident for the
source articles that match the GTD’s initial keyword filters, and for the source articles that are classified as potentially relevant
by the machine learning model (candidates for triaging). Although the decrease in supplemental content is stark, this
information is not sufficient to illustrate the degree and nature of its impact. Which source documents were ultimately used to
support GTD records? Which source documents from OSE were still accessible in either BBC Monitoring or LexisNexis
Metabase? How do these deficits differ by language or location? How frequently might particular events still be recorded in the
database even if certain sources or source articles were lost? Ultimately, although BBC Monitoring presents the best opportunity
to supplement source documents following the loss of OSE content, concerns about the consistency and comprehensiveness of
data without OSE content remain.

Likewise, the table below shows the number of cases either added to the GTD or updated with new information based on the
triaging of the BBC Monitoring content. Although OSE was decommissioned in early July, the GTD research team triaged BBC

START Background Report © University of Maryland, July 2020 8

Monitoring source articles for the entirety of 2019. Although the greatest impact of the supplemental BBC Monitoring content
occurred in July through December 2019 (after OSE was decommissioned), a few records were added or updated in the GTD for
the January – June time period as well.

CONTRIBUTION OF BBC MONITORING CONTENT TO GTD RECORDS, BY MONTH, 2019

Records Newly Created Based on BBCM Records Newly Created or Updated Based on
Source Documents BBCM Source Documents
January 8 13
February 5 9
March 11 19
April 3 15
May 16 23
June 17 27
July 79 147
August 100 189
September 120 194
October 101 147
November 61 109
December 109 169

We have completed an initial review of the 2019 data with the intention of identifying any specific locations that may be
particularly impacted by this change in access to translations of non-English source documents. Although there do not appear to
be any countries where data trends clearly coincide with the shift from OSE content to BBCM content, that does not rule out the
possibility that this change suppressed otherwise increasing trends or exacerbated already decreasing trends in certain
locations. In general, we urge analysts to interpret trends over time with caution due to ongoing fluctuations in the availability of
source documents. Based on our familiarity with the source documents formerly provided by OSE, the research team urges
analysts to pay particular attention to the potential impacts on trends in Somalia and Yemen. Additional analysis of regional
trends, trends in types of attacks, or trends in supporting sources may provide greater insight.

START Background Report © University of Maryland, July 2020 9

ADDENDUM: STATISTICAL ANNEX DATA

Readers familiar with the U.S. State Department’s Country Reports on Terrorism may recall that START provided the “Statistical
Annex” for that report each year from 2012 through 2017. For consistency with the definition of terrorism established in the
U.S. Code, we used a restricted application of the GTD’s inclusion criteria for the analysis in the Statistical Annex.
Despite a productive partnership with our colleagues at the Bureau of Counterterrorism and Countering Violent Extremism, in
2018 the State Department did not award START a contract to continue providing data and analysis for the Statistical Annex.
We recognize that any data or analysis the Statistical Annex includes for 2018 and 2019 is not consistent or comparable with
previous years’ data and analysis produced by START. To support analytical continuity, we have re-produced several key tables
using the restricted Statistical Annex version of the GTD. Specifically, the following tables exclude any attacks that do not meet
all three GTD inclusion criteria, and any attacks that were classified as “doubt terrorism proper” by GTD analysts.
Table 1: Terrorist attacks and casualties worldwide by month, 2019
Kidnapped/
Month Total Attacks* Total Deaths* Total Injured* Hostages
January 540 1284 1388 486
February 568 1108 917 700
March 636 1123 1269 503
April 582 1268 1625 489
May 740 1366 1238 358
June 599 1386 1047 387
July 625 1444 1938 225
August 497 1020 1181 281
September 542 1104 1266 207
October 509 983 912 458
November 393 716 814 164
December 491 1020 947 406
Total 6722 13822 14542 4664
*Includes perpetrators
Source: Global Terrorism Database (Statistical Annex Dataset)

Table 2: Ten countries with the most terrorist attacks, 2019

Deaths per Injured per Kidnapped/
Total Attacks Total Deaths* Attack* Total Injured* Attack Hostages
Country 2019 2018 2019 2018 2019 2018 2019 2018 2019 2018 2019 2018
Afghanistan 1422 1443 5725 7379 4.14 5.47 6221 6514 4.63 5.12 592 1362
Yemen 561 336 555 425 1.29 1.57 762 421 1.87 1.70 539 423
India 558 750 277 352 0.50 0.48 439 541 0.81 0.75 178 247
Iraq 495 1131 564 1054 1.18 0.97 1029 1727 2.18 1.62 74 203
Nigeria 411 565 1245 2043 3.47 3.96 419 772 1.44 2.02 390 445
Philippines 348 424 284 297 0.85 0.71 393 343 1.19 0.83 76 55
Pakistan 279 369 300 543 1.10 1.50 654 1132 2.39 3.16 43 23
Somalia 239 286 569 646 2.67 2.55 765 638 3.81 2.63 457 238
Democratic
Republic of 213 135 559 410 3.70 3.60 103 145 0.80 1.49 542 379
the Congo
Syria 211 155 517 918 2.57 7.17 979 887 5.13 7.58 126 866
Worldwide 6722 7752 13822 16359 2.21 2.26 14542 16141 2.43 2.36 4664 6527
*Includes perpetrators
Source: Global Terrorism Database (Statistical Annex Dataset)
START Background Report © University of Maryland, July 2020 10
 Table 3: Five perpetrator groups with the most attacks worldwide, 2019
Kidnapped/
Total Attacks Total Deaths* Total Injured* Hostages
Perpetrator Group 2019 2018 2019 2018 2019 2018 2019 2018
Taliban 1034 987 5094 6214 4984 4064 550 1285

Houthi extremists (Ansar Allah) 446 277 436 258 609 260 394 410

Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL)** 343 560 954 1601 1319 1423 41 970

Boko Haram 245 171 1069 732 378 589 304 376
Maoists/Communist Party of India - Maoist
226 247 136 175 87 154 94 135
(CPI-Maoist)
* Includes perpetrators
** Excludes attacks attributed to branches of ISIS or ISIS-inspired individuals
Source: Global Terrorism Database (Statistical Annex Dataset)

Table 4: Targets of terrorist attacks worldwide, 2018-2019

Number of Targets
Target Type 2019 2018
Private Citizens & Property 2987 3259
Police 1359 1624
Government (General) 875 988
Business 486 611
Military 400 391
Religious Figures/Institutions 203 257
Educational Institution 164 189
Terrorists/Non-State Militia 279 186
Transportation 140 143
Utilities 72 140
Journalists & Media 121 110
Government (Diplomatic) 71 92
Violent Political Party 59 86
NGO 51 47
Telecommunication 81 40
Airports & Aircraft 31 21
Maritime 18 21
Food or Water Supply 11 14
Other 14 14
Tourists 12 13
Abortion Related 0 1
Unknown 345 545
Total 7779 8792
Source: Global Terrorism Database (Statistical Annex Dataset)

START Background Report © University of Maryland, July 2020 11

The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the author and
should not be interpreted as representing the official views or policies of the United
States Government or any other funding agency.

Erin Miller is the primary author of this report. Please direct questions to
[email protected].

The data presented here are drawn from START’s Global Terrorism Database (GTD) and reports from news media. The GTD
contains information on more than 190,000 terrorist attacks that occurred around the world since 1970. For more
information about the GTD, visit www.start.umd.edu/gtd.

The National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START) is a university-based research,
education and training center comprised of an international network of scholars committed to the scientific study of terrorism,
responses to terrorism and related phenomena. Led by the University of Maryland, START is a Department of Homeland
Security Emeritus Center of Excellence that is supported by multiple federal agencies and departments. START uses state-of-
the-art theories, methods and data from the social and behavioral sciences to improve understanding of the origins, dynamics
and effects of terrorism; the effectiveness and impacts of counterterrorism and CVE; and other matters of global and national
security. For more information, visit www.start.umd.edu or contact START at [email protected].

START Background Report © University of Maryland, July 2020 12