In a disturbing trend, recent attacks involving individuals with military backgrounds underscore a troubling rise in ideologically motivated violence, particularly those incidents that aim for mass harm. This observation was highlighted by two significant events that occurred simultaneously on New Year’s Day—one in New Orleans and the other in Las Vegas—both involving men with military ties.
Shamsud-Din Jabbar, an Army veteran, was shot dead by police following a violent spree in a pickup truck that tragically resulted in the deaths of 14 people and injuries to many others. The incident is currently under investigation as a potential terrorist act allegedly motivated by the ideologies espoused by the Islamic State group.
In another shocking incident, Matthew Livelsberger, an active-duty Army Special Forces member, committed suicide in a Tesla Cybertruck loaded with firework mortars and fuel canisters just before the vehicle detonated near the Trump International Hotel, injuring seven individuals in the process. Authorities revealed that Livelsberger had written about his intent for the explosion to serve as a “wake-up call,” expressing his belief that the nation was “terminally ill and headed toward collapse.”
While individuals with military experience who turn to radical ideologies represent only a tiny fraction of the vast numbers who serve in the armed forces, investigations have indicated that the radicalization of veterans and active-duty service members is increasing. Research published recently found that hundreds of people with military connections have been arrested for extremist-related crimes since 2017, with extremist plots related to these individuals leading to nearly 100 casualties.
However, significant challenges persist within the Pentagon’s approach to tackling extremism among personnel. Investigators noted a lack of a comprehensive tracking system across the military and pointed out flaws in a key report that was based on outdated data, misleading assessments, and overlooked evidence.
Recent data from the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START) indicates that service members and veterans have become radicalized at a more rapid pace compared to the general population. While only less than 1% of adults in the U.S. are active-duty military, they comprised 3.2% of extremist cases identified by researchers between 2017 and 2022.
Even though the total number of military personnel involved in violent extremist activities remains small, their involvement typically increases the severity and impact of violent acts, according to analyses from various sources. From 2017 to 2023, more than 480 individuals with military experience faced allegations of ideologically based extremist offenses; notably, over 230 of those arrested were tied to the January 6, 2021, Capitol insurrection—representing 18% of the total arrests made in connection with that event. Most of the military-affiliated extremists were found to have constructed plans inflicting harm for various social, political, and religious motivations.
Data indicated that plots initiated by those with military backgrounds were much more likely to employ advanced weaponry or involve tactical training compared to those perpetrated by individuals without military ties. This tendency persisted regardless of whether the plots were executed.
The New Orleans event stands apart due to its connection with the jihadist beliefs of the Islamic State, as previous research showed that only about 9% of extremists with military backgrounds adhered to jihadist ideologies. In contrast, over 80% were found to align with far-right, anti-government, or white supremacist beliefs, with the remaining individuals distributed among other motivations.
There have been notable instances of violence committed by those linked to jihadist ideology and possessing military backgrounds, including a mass shooting in Fort Lauderdale by a National Guard veteran in 2017 and the Fort Hood shooting by an Army psychiatrist in 2009, both of which resulted in significant casualties.
In light of the events of January 6, officials have warned that domestic violent extremism represents a critical and persistent threat to national security. The Pentagon has publicly committed to understanding the root causes of such radicalization to address and report it effectively.
Kristofer Goldsmith, an Army veteran who leads the Task Force Butler Institute—focused on countering extremism amongst veterans—asserted that the issue transcends ideological boundaries. He noted that political opposition has hindered the Biden administration’s attempts to mitigate this extremism.
Both Jabbar and Livelsberger had served at one of the largest military installations, now known as Fort Liberty, although they did not serve concurrently. Goldsmith expressed concerns that the new administration may focus disproportionately on the New Orleans incident in relation to ISIS and overlook the more substantial threat posed by far-right violence, particularly if Trump’s defense secretary nominee gets confirmed.
Concerns arise that this distorted focus on specific types of threats could divert attention and resources from addressing the broader issue of extremism rooted in domestic ideologies. Overall, the future actions and priorities of the Pentagon and the government as a whole regarding this pressing issue remain to be seen.
