A Reuters/Ipsos poll ahead of the 25th anniversary of September 11 found that 33 percent of Americans now see domestic terrorism as the most significant threat to their safety, compared to 20 percent who point to foreign terrorism. That shift matters for anyone hiring or advising in the national security sector.
The survey also asked respondents to weigh foreign versus homegrown extremist ideologies. Sixty-one percent chose domestic threats. That’s a meaningful reversal from the post-9/11 consensus that shaped two decades of policy, budgets, and cleared talent pipelines.
I’ve watched this change play out in search work over the past few years. Clients who once focused exclusively on counterterrorism abroad are now standing up domestic threat programs. They’re mapping the market for candidates with experience in homegrown violent extremism, insider threat, and behavioral analysis—skill sets that didn’t command the same premium five years ago. The talent exists, but it’s often in academic or state and local roles, not the traditional cleared defense and intelligence track.
The challenge isn’t just finding people with the right background. It’s finding leaders who can navigate the political sensitivity of domestic work without losing operational credibility. That’s a narrow lane. A strong track record in foreign CT doesn’t always translate; the legal frameworks, the stakeholder landscape, and the risk calculus are different. Fit matters more than usual.
This also complicates retention. Cleared professionals who built careers around external threats are being asked to pivot inward, and not all of them want to. Some see it as mission drift. Others worry about the optics or the career risk of working domestic issues in a polarized environment. That creates openings for passive candidates who’ve been doing this work quietly and are ready to step up.
The poll reflects what I’m hearing in confidential conversations: the threat picture has changed, and organizations are still catching up. Budget follows perception, and perception is shifting. If you’re leading a team or planning a hire in this space, it’s worth asking whether your talent strategy reflects the threat environment your stakeholders actually care about—or the one you built for twenty-five years ago.