tip off

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.

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.

26
  • 1
    Liamj
    Posted Thursday, 4 September 2014 at 1:41 pm | Permalink

    Fighting’ terrorism isn’t about saving lives, its about justifying oil wars & propping up dictators. The govt can’t tell us this because it wont deliver cheaper oil for us, only maximising elite control & profiteering. Given declining conventional oil supply and climate chaos its just fighting over deckchairs on the titanic, but the volume of bullshitting is tiresome. Pity the fools who sign up to die for Exxon.

  • 2
    Phil Lynch
    Posted Thursday, 4 September 2014 at 1:42 pm | Permalink

    Good stuff Bernard but left me wondering what just a few sheckels thrown at suicide awareness programs might do to that 22,824 number?

  • 3
    klewso
    Posted Thursday, 4 September 2014 at 1:54 pm | Permalink

    How many could Ebola kill if it gets away - because of a lack of “defence funding”?

  • 4
    Roger Clifton
    Posted Thursday, 4 September 2014 at 2:00 pm | Permalink

    Thank you for that dose of cold, clear reasoning! Terrorism can only terrify us if we are willing to be terrified.

    To a certain extent it is we who write the scripts, and the performers volunteer for the part. For example, the “Airport” movies preceded and prescribed the plots of many real hijackings, of which the Twin Towers was a climactic act, seeming to confirm all that we had been afraid of all along. More fools are we!

    The panic in Tokyo about the broken power station in 2011 was based on popular fiction more than fact, yet placating it caused an evacuation with many more fatalities than radiation could ever have caused. You would’ve thought we had learned sense by now.

    Perhaps we just plain want to be afraid. We keep buying newspapers that feed on our fears. Perhaps the world is in pretty good shape if all we have to be afraid about is bearded young men volunteering to be terrorists.

  • 5
    Liz Connor
    Posted Thursday, 4 September 2014 at 2:40 pm | Permalink

    The fact that it ‘pushes our buttons’ is of course the reason why those in government blow it out of all proportion. Fear is the great unifier - it makes us all part of Team Australia.

  • 6
    Robert Brown
    Posted Thursday, 4 September 2014 at 4:56 pm | Permalink

    Excellent, insightful article, Bernard.

    But then terrorism wouldn’t be called terrorism if it didn’t elicit an irrational response.

    It’s got me wondering about the nett effect of the economic impact of terrorism versus spending on anti-terrorism. For example, if we directed that extra $600m increase that ASIO etc. just got on something that had a wider economic benefit (e.g. infrastructure) would we be better off overall in economic terms?

    Or what if we spent it on aid programs in third world countries, in an attempt to reduce global inequality? Or to improve education? Both of which might have a better chance at reducing the feed-in to terrorism groups than drone strikes and the like….

    Interesting stuff!

  • 7
    mikeb
    Posted Thursday, 4 September 2014 at 5:38 pm | Permalink

    Oh I dunno. Breaking my neck falling off a ladder just doesn’t seem as bad as getting my head sawn off on video for the enjoyment of psychopaths. Being blown up or cut to pieces isn’t as mundane as getting t-boned at a road junction or falling over drunk. Do you reckon if we ignored terrorists they would just go away? No I don’t think so either.

  • 8
    Robert Brown
    Posted Thursday, 4 September 2014 at 5:49 pm | Permalink

    I was also reminded of this article:

    http://blogs.crikey.com.au/theurbanist/2014/06/01/should-we-be-aiming-for-a-zero-road-toll/

  • 9
    GF50
    Posted Thursday, 4 September 2014 at 6:40 pm | Permalink

    Thanks Bernard, when you are on-song its better than the three tenors.
    I become very annoyed, I don’t require the LNP behaviour/thought modification propaganda machine coming at me! I won’t become uselessly paranoid and check under the bed for the goblins as I did as a child! No need as the ogres are in clear sight, destroying the social mores, of decency and humanity. Terrorists indeed!
    Australia’s LNP/Corporate Murdochracy Government are my concern, trying to scare the bejesus out of all of us, Stand up Australia and reject this attack on our “limited” Democracy. As proved by the NSW ICAC, and the Dingo PUPS our democracy is for sale to the highest bidders.
    I am also aware of the useless “lock yourself in” scare campaigns used against women, when all domestic violence occurs at home, and most women are murdered in their own home! and don’t forget the abuse physical and mental of children, no I don’t have the stats to hand, but that is factual.
    Anyway, the Howard era fridge magnet still carries protective powers against the terrorists.ROFL

  • 10
    Helen Razer
    Posted Thursday, 4 September 2014 at 6:59 pm | Permalink

    halliburton isn’t in the ladder business

  • 11
    Helen Razer
    Posted Thursday, 4 September 2014 at 7:00 pm | Permalink

    i don’t have the stats but i’m willing to bet hypothermia kills more people in oz than terrrrsm

  • 12
    Helen Razer
    Posted Thursday, 4 September 2014 at 7:20 pm | Permalink

    priapism has killed less people than terrorism, although that’s generally not fatal. lucky for our politicians….

  • 13
    Dennis Bauer
    Posted Thursday, 4 September 2014 at 8:02 pm | Permalink

    Has everyone forgotten that communist threat that was going to overrun us all, I believed in the domino theory when I was a teenager, hence volunteer for Viet Nam, and then the west takes all the jobs to the biggest Communist Country in the world, if there really is anything that points to intelligence on this planet, it’s not human that’s for sure, just a mob of mathematical primates that can’t realise that if we all shit in the creek were going to poison the water and die of thirst and make a lot of unfriendly bacteria very happy, we can’t even see what else uses the water, but if we perchance do, we ignore it.

  • 14
    nonchalance
    Posted Thursday, 4 September 2014 at 8:20 pm | Permalink

    But this sudden international obsession has shifted the budget embarrassment (viz electoral damage) off the front pages ….

  • 15
    telstra avenger
    Posted Thursday, 4 September 2014 at 8:25 pm | Permalink

    Bernard - should another Bali suddenly happen we will be calling for heads, so let’s give resources to the spooks to protect us. What amazes me is the posturing of the government over international events when most Americans and Europeans have any idea who, what or where Australia is. As a US diplomat commented recently “Australia needs to decide what it what to be when it grows up”. A mind and soul of its own maybe ….

  • 16
    Graham R
    Posted Thursday, 4 September 2014 at 10:27 pm | Permalink

    Stop talking sense, Mr Keane, it’s Unaustrayan.

  • 17
    CML
    Posted Friday, 5 September 2014 at 2:41 am | Permalink

    Great article Bernard!
    But the bogans will still think there is a terrorist cell down the street. They are starting to believe everything the rAbbott and his motley crew spin.
    Gawd, it is soooo boring. A comedic tragedy that is not funny any more!!

  • 18
    AR
    Posted Friday, 5 September 2014 at 6:25 am | Permalink

    Hey, didn’t you hear Obama & the UK’s Cameroon warning that the struggle against IS will go on for decades coz, like y’know, it threatens our very existence?
    All 30,000 of them, spread over an area the size of Britain consistingmostly of desert.
    Shome chicken, shome neck said a previous British PM when there really was a danger across the Channel where the foreigners are, or ‘were’ now that all 28 countries are so peachy keen happy together.
    Cameroon even managed to channel Chamberlain’s “a quarrel in a far away country between people of whom we know nothing” though I’d bet Lonbdon to a brick that he wasn’t even aware of it, his speech to the Commons being so otiose with PR cliches that it was barely even English.

  • 19
    Mali Edon
    Posted Friday, 5 September 2014 at 10:35 am | Permalink

    If we assume that politicians are not entirely stupid then they know all this.

    And are using the anti-terrorism actions as a cover for another agenda.

    In the US the government seems to wish to protect itself from the population.

  • 20
    Robert Brown
    Posted Friday, 5 September 2014 at 11:46 am | Permalink

    @Mali Edon…

    Possible “other agenda”?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military%E2%80%93industrial_complex

  • 21
    David Hand
    Posted Friday, 5 September 2014 at 1:29 pm | Permalink

    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.

  • 22
    The Pav
    Posted Friday, 5 September 2014 at 3:25 pm | Permalink

    Although shingles is more deadly than terrorism I am still more afraid of the Catholic church

  • 23
    GideonPolya
    Posted Friday, 5 September 2014 at 5:59 pm | Permalink

    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 .

  • 24
    philro
    Posted Saturday, 20 September 2014 at 3:15 pm | Permalink

    Though I generally agree with the article. I don’t think however that it properly addresses the issue of the emergence of a sudden threat such as with the recent emergence of ‘Islamic State’.

  • 25
    David Lee
    Posted Sunday, 21 September 2014 at 11:39 am | Permalink

    and all you have to do is keep ignoring the fact that psychopaths that have for 1400 years waged war on normal humans, killing in the process over 270 million people {more than any 2 other causes}, now may have access to w.m.d.’s
    Yeah, real bright… just ignore it and the threat will go away.

  • 26
    Roslyn Ross
    Posted Monday, 22 September 2014 at 10:53 pm | Permalink

    While journalism is about opinion and discussion, a basic rule of journalism is to remain as objective and as balanced as possible. Clearly a rule Crikey does not respect on some issues and this comment is disgraceful, as prejudiced, subjective, hyperbolic judgement:

    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).

    Having returned to Crikey after some time away I am both surprised and disappointed to find the site, supposedly one which thinks outside the box, so locked into a box on vaccination.

    Shame on you. It is immaturity and unprofessionalism to talk about ‘murderous stupidity.’ And to include this as some form of terrorism is just shameful. Tell that to the parents who have opted to limit or reject vaccination with a child dead or damaged because of it.

Womens Agenda

loading...

Smart Company

loading...

StartupSmart

loading...

Property Observer

loading...