Artificial intelligence and the future of terrorism

(Image by Tung Lam from Pixabay)

By Daniel Byman and V.S. Subrahmanian • Jul 13, 2026

Popular discourse often frames AI as a revolutionary force that will transform warfare, governance, and society. When discussing terrorism in particular, public debates frequently assume that AI will enable terrorist organizations to conduct catastrophic attacks, create autonomous killing systems, or weaponize dangerous pathogens.¹ Although the historical relationship between terrorism and technology suggests that AI may empower individual terrorists, the reality will likely be more restrained than pessimists fear. Moreover, AI will also enable advances in counterterrorism, although these come with their own risks.

Terrorist groups have rarely been as technologically innovative as popular perception assumes. They are often conservative organizations operating under conditions of scarcity, uncertainty, and intense pressure. Failure can be fatal, both to individuals and to their organizations. Operational mistakes expose networks, destroy safe havens, alienate supporters, and invite state retaliation. As a result, terrorist groups typically favor methods that are reliable, inexpensive, and psychologically effective. Guns, improvised explosive devices (IEDs), suicide bombings, and vehicle attacks remain attractive precisely because they work.

At the same time, dismissing technological adaptation would be a mistake. Terrorist organizations have demonstrated an ability to absorb existing technologies and employ them creatively. The September 11 attacks combined two established methods—aircraft hijacking and suicide terrorism—in an unprecedented way. At the height of its power, the Islamic State used commercially available social media platforms more effectively than most governments at the time. Today, Hezbollah has integrated drones, precision-guided munitions, and information operations into broader political-military campaigns. Terrorists are not technological pioneers in the conventional sense, but they are often capable adopters.