Facebook Google Menu Linkedin lock Pinterest Search Twitter

Advertisement

Federal

Sep 4, 2014

The real threat of terrorism to Australians, by the numbers

Terrorism kills fewer Australians than even the most exotic causes of death, yet we're obsessed with it. The numbers show why we'd be better off focusing on less glamorous subjects.

User login status :

Share

How serious a threat is terrorism to Australians? We devote billions of taxpayer dollars to it, impose economic costs on ourselves and our industries and sacrifice some of our most basic freedoms for it. So it must be a huge threat to Australia, correct?

Since the 1978 Hilton Hotel bombing in Sydney, there have been 113 Australian victims of terrorism. That includes Australians killed overseas in terrorist attacks as well as non-Australians killed here, such as the Turkish consul-general murdered in Sydney in 1980.

For the purposes of comparison, we’re going to cheat a little and only look at more recent data on what kills Australians from the last 10 years, from 2003-12, using the Australian Bureau of Statistics’ Cause of Death data. But we figure that’s a reasonable comparison because the terrorism threat is perceived to have increased in the last decade-and-a-bit. And we’re focusing only on the causes of death, not on injury — not because being injured in a terrorist attack is trivial, but because the numbers are clearer that way, and people are also wounded and made ill by many of the other threats that we’re going to discuss here.

During the period 2003-12, there have been 2617 homicides in Australia, or around 23 times the number of all victims of terrorism since 1978. There have been over 8500 victims of car accidents (just car accidents, not pedestrian deaths or accidents involving other types of vehicles). There have been over 22,800 suicides in that time. So clearly terrorism isn’t comparable to common threats to the lives of Australians — even the extraordinarily rare fate of being murdered is vastly more common than terrorism.

So let’s scale it down to find some specific threats to life that are comparable to terrorism. For example, 230 people died falling off ladders from 2003-12; 190 Australians died from accidental gun discharges; 137 rural workers and farmers died falling off or rolling in tractors; 206 died from electrocution, which like tractor accidents is a tragically all-too-common form of workplace fatality. That’s starting to get close to terrorism, but you have to get very specific to find a cause of death that has claimed fewer lives than terrorism. Lightning, for instance, has killed 10 Australians in the period 2003-12. There were around 66 deaths of indigenous people in custody in that period. Whooping cough, mostly due to the murderous stupidity of anti-vaxers, has claimed 20 lives; chicken pox six (shingles has claimed 228 people; gastro and diarrhoea, 168). Social problems like the high rates of arrest and incarceration of indigenous people, and preventable diseases, get us closer to the sorts of numbers terrorism has claimed in the last 30-40 years.

Now that we have a sense of scale, let’s get some sense of what the numbers mean given the resources we throw at terrorism. In the period 2003-12, nearly 1700 indigenous people died of diabetes at a rate, on average, about seven times higher than non-indigenous Australians. If we’d invested a little of the money we spent going to war in Iraq or inflating the budget of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation on programs that lowered indigenous diabetes to just twice that of non-indigenous Australians, around 1200 lives would have been saved, or around 10 times the death toll of terrorism. Then again, there’s nothing sexy for the media in saving indigenous people from dying of diabetes.

In the same period, between 700 and 1000 women and children have been killed by their partners or parents in domestic homicides. We offer such a vague figure because we can only estimate it — getting specific numbers of domestic homicides is, for some reason (we could never guess why), impossible in official statistics compared to other forms of crime. Even assuming the lower figure, reducing the number of women and kids murdered in domestic violence by just 20% would save far more lives than have ever been lost to terrorism.

But, you might say, our intelligence and law enforcement agencies have surely stopped lots of terrorist attacks with all those extra powers and extra money? That’s debatable. Institutions like ASIO and the AFP already had extensive powers and lots of funding before 9/11 to deal with terrorism. What they got after that were additional powers and funding, including some powers never used. Whether these additional powers and funding made any difference in the performance of agencies isn’t clear. But ASIO insists that four “mass casualty attacks” have been stopped by the actions of security agencies since 9/11 in Australia.

“The point of all these numbers isn’t to cavalierly dismiss the threat of terrorism … But many, many other things that we can also prevent kill many more of us… “

Let’s go with that. What would those four attacks have done?

The problem is, history says terrorist attacks are, by and large, bad at killing people. The global terrorism database (which is downloadable) contains details of every terrorist attack since 1970, from Northern Ireland to South Sudan, from al-Qaeda to the ANC. It shows that around half of all terrorist attacks since 1970 haven’t inflicted any casualties. The average casualties of all terrorist attacks, including perpetrators, is 2.25. And that number hasn’t significantly escalated in the era of al-Qaeda — since 2000, the average death toll, including perpetrators, has been 2.27. So four terrorist assaults in Australia would not, on average, have reached double figures.

But let’s assume otherwise. The average death toll from attacks by al-Qaeda and its various offshoots is, according to the database, 7.5. But let’s strike out al-Qaeda in Iraq (AKA Islamic State, currently being touted as the enemy du jour) and al-Qaeda in Yemen, and al-Qaeda in the Land of the Islamic Maghreb, and stick with straight, vanilla al-Qaeda, which has carried out 9/11 and dozens of other attacks both in the West and (mainly) in the Middle East. The average toll from their attacks is 61, mainly because of 9/11. Let’s assume that, of the four mass casualty attacks that have been stopped, each would have cost 61 lives. This would place them in the top 0.2% of all terrorist attacks in the last forty-plus years, but let’s assume it anyway. Four attacks of that scale would bring the total Australian death toll from terrorism to just under 360.

That’s around 80 more than have died from exposure to cold in 2003-12, but well short of the 417 who have died falling out of beds (falls are a significant cause of death and injury for older Australians).

So, even with the most pessimistic  assumptions about possible casualties, history suggests terrorism would still rank below some of the more obscure causes of ordinary deaths of Australians — and way below the number of Australians whose lives we could save if we got serious about domestic violence or indigenous health.

What about the economic impact of terrorism? While 9/11 was a financially catastrophic attack, it remains, thankfully, unique. It was estimated to have directly caused between US$83 billion and US$123 billion in economic losses, or around 0.6%-0.9% of United States GDP that year, but it did accelerate an economic decline that was already in place under George W. Bush and is likely to lead, in the long run, to around $4 trillion in unnecessary spending from the Iraq debacle. The 2005 London bombings were estimated to cost the UK 2 billion pounds. Four similar large-scale terrorist attacks in Australia would cost us perhaps $3.6 billion each, but let’s round it up to $10 billion each for argument’s sake, for an economic impact of $40 billion in total. That would represent around 0.4% of total GDP over the last decade.

The point of all these numbers isn’t to cavalierly dismiss the threat of terrorism. It is a real threat, which has claimed the lives of over 100 Australians in recent decades. But many, many other things that we can also prevent kill many more of us, and particularly target people the media and politicians have less interest in, like indigenous people, the elderly or victims of domestic violence. If the focus of policymakers should be on the lives and wellbeing of Australians, terrorism should be far down the list of their priorities.

Yet, politicians only have to say the word “terrorism” for Australians, and especially the media, to abandon all reason and demand “whatever it takes” to “keep Australia secure”. The vague and trivial threat of being killed by an evil ideological force — unWestern, non-white, non-English speaking, unChristian — pushes our buttons in a way that far greater threats to our lives — “normal” homicide, domestic violence, preventable diseases and accidents — that kill many, many more Australians and cause persistent economic losses, do not.

Bernard Keane — Politics Editor

Bernard Keane

Politics Editor

Bernard Keane is Crikey’s political editor. Before that he was Crikey’s Canberra press gallery correspondent, covering politics, national security and economics.

Get a free trial to post comments
More from Bernard Keane

Advertisement

We recommend

From around the web

Powered by Taboola

26 comments

Leave a comment

26 thoughts on “The real threat of terrorism to Australians, by the numbers

  1. David Hand

    I searched in vain for a solid discussion in this article about managing risk. Bernard makes a limp wristed effort but without conviction, only going as far as the ASIO claim of 4 thwarted plots.

    Have you flown anywhere recently? You’ll notice that they scan your luggage for things you might use to destroy the plane. How many terrorist events have they prevented? According to the Keane theory of risk management, none, so we can all save a squillion and all that inconvenience by getting rid of all airport security.

    After all, the odd plane blowing up at some inconvenient location will still kill less people that diabetes in the Aboriginal community.

    That is your logic in this matter, isn’t it Bernard?

    I can’t help having the suspicion that this article is really a whack at the security apparatus that has grown so much in the past decade rather than a reasoned opinion about what we should invest in staying safe. This is aided by Bernard’s convenient choice of dates to coincide with the increase in fear of terrorism. So 911 and Bali are out. Not relevant.

    The real story here is that since 911 we are all afraid. We are afraid of extreme Islam trying to take over the world. You can share Milne’s fantasy that they’re really just ordinary people fighting for their homeland but to most of us, we get a quarterly reminder from some jihadist nutter that we are not safe.

    Discuss the way a state may take advantage of this fear to enhance its power over us but please don’t patronise me with the bleeding heart issues of the left du jour.

  2. GideonPolya

    Excellent articl by Bernard Keane.

    Since 1978 there have been 5 Australians killed by terrorism within Australia (the 3 killed in the Hilton Bombing that mat well have been an Australian Intelligence operation gone wrong, the Turkish Consul-General and a security guard killed by a Right to life fanatics. The average population of Australia in that period was 18.2 million.

    Accordingly the “empirical probability of Australian being killed by a terrorist within Australia in a given year” is 5 persons /(36 years x 18.2 million ) = 7.6 in 1 billion per year or roughly 1 in 100 million per year.

    By way of comparison, the probability of being killed by s shark in Australia is about 1 in 1 million per year i.e. it is 100 times more likely for an Australian to be killed by a shark than being killed by a terrorist within Australia in any year.

    The “terror hysteria” of the racist Zionists (RZs), the pro-war, pro-Zionist, US lackey Lib-Labs (Liberal-Laborals , Coalition and Labor Right) and politicized Australian public servants is simply egregious falsehood (an appropriate anagram for ISRAEL is e-LIARS).

    Conversely , about 66,000 Australians die preventably each year (0.8 million dying thus since the patently US-perpetrated 9-11 atrocity; see “Experts: US did 9-11”: https://sites.google.com/site/expertsusdid911/ ) and this carnage is linked to the long-term, accrual cost of the War on Terror to Australia of $125 billion (see Gideon Polya, “Endless War on Terror, Huge cost for Australia & America”, MWC News, 14 October 2012: http://mwcnews.net/focus/analysis/22149-endless-war-on-terror.html ) foisted on Australia by the “terror hysteria” and mendacity of the racist Zionists (RZs), the pro-war, pro-Zionist, US lackey Lib-Labs (Liberal-Laborals , Coalition and Labor Right) and politicized Australian public servants, who thus represent a HUGE threat to Australian lives.

    If you vote for the pro-war, pro-Zionist, US lackey Lib-Labs (Liberal-Laborals , Coalition and Labor Right) you are voting for state terrorists linked to the untimely deaths of 800,000 Australians this century. Decent Australians will vote 1 Green and put the Coalition last.

    Of course the lying, Neocon American and Zionist Imperialist (NAZI)-perverted Mainstream presstitutes will ignore and censor these realities. For details of media-derived censorship by the global Murdoch media empire, Australian Fairfax media, the Australian ABC, the UK BBC, and the Australian universities-backed web magazine The Conversation in Neocon American- and Zionist Imperialist-perverted and subverted Murdochracy, Lobbyocracy and Corporatocracy Australia and elsewhere in the West see “Boycott Murdoch media”: https://sites.google.com/site/boycottmurdochmedia/ ; “Censorship by the BBC”: https://sites.google.com/site/censorshipbythebbc/ ; “Censorship by The Conversation”: https://sites.google.com/site/mainstreammediacensorship/censorship-by ; “Mainstream media censorship”: https://sites.google.com/site/mainstreammediacensorship/home ; “Mainstream media lying”: https://sites.google.com/site/mainstreammedialying/ ; “Censorship by The Age”: https://sites.google.com/site/mainstreammediacensorship/censorship-by-the-age ; “Censorship by ABC Late Night Live”: https://sites.google.com/site/censorshipbyabclatenightlive/ , “Censorship by ABC Saturday Extra”: https://sites.google.com/site/censorshipbyabclatenightlive/censorship-by-abc-sat and “ABC fact-checking unit & incorrect reportage by the ABC (Australia’s BBC)”: https://sites.google.com/site/mainstreammediacensorship/abc-fact-checking-unit , “Censorship by The Guardian UK”: https://sites.google.com/site/mainstreammediacensorship/censorship-by-the-guardian-uk and “Censorship by The Guardian Australia”: https://sites.google.com/site/mainstreammediacensorship/home/censorship-by-the-guardian-a .

Leave a comment