To conclude our three-part analysis of the homeland security landscape, Homeland Security Today now presents the final portion of our 2026 Threat Forecast. Our Editorial Board, columnists, and community of subject-matter experts bring decades of practical experience defending and protecting America, and their insights reflect both enduring concerns and emerging challenges in their assessments of the threats facing our nation.
This year’s forecasts are delivered amidst significant transition: changes in leadership with Department of Homeland Security agencies, evolving federal priorities, and a threat landscape that continues to grow in complexity. Our experts examine familiar adversaries alongside newer risks, from the persistent threat of terrorism to the rapid advancement of technologies that both enable and challenge our security efforts.
Several themes emerge across these assessments: the enduring and evolving nature of terrorist threats, both foreign and domestic; the accelerating role of artificial intelligence, unmanned systems, and other emerging technologies in the hands of both defenders and adversaries; and the multidimensional challenges that cut across traditional categories, from infrastructure vulnerabilities to gaps in strategic foresight.
As addressed in Parts I and II, this year’s forecasts address three interconnected areas of concern.
- Part I, Terrorism – examining threats from ISIS and its affiliates, lone actors and small cells, soft-target vulnerabilities, and the convergence of extremist movements
- Part II, Emerging Technology – addressing necessary policy frameworks for advanced air mobility, cybersecurity, and AI; unmanned aerial systems in law enforcement; identity and credential security; and the exploitation of AI by criminal organizations
- Systemic Risks – exploring infrastructure security, lifeline resilience, facilities protection, foresight gaps, and the intersection of major events with evolving threat streams
Some assessments appear here as excerpts; full versions are available via the links provided. We encourage you to read the comprehensive analyses our contributors have shared, and to share these articles alongside your own perspectives with us via LinkedIn (tag @GTSC’s Homeland Security Today). The homeland security mission depends on practitioners in the field, and we want to ensure this conversation reflects the full scope of our community’s knowledge and concerns.
Whether confronting a resurgent adversary or anticipating the next disruptive technology, these assessments offer a clear-eyed look at the challenges ahead and a foundation for the strategies we’ll need to meet them.
Part III, Systemic Risks
Assessing the Homeland Risk Landscape in a Fractured Era
Kenneth Bible, former Chief Information Security Officer, DHS; Editorial Board Member, Homeland Security Today
Once again, the new year begins with a couple of challenging events that, regardless of political persuasion, color an assessment of the greatest threats to our Homeland in 2026.
First, the American action to conduct a raid on the country of Venezuela to remove Nicolas Maduro from the presidency based on U.S. court indictments stunned many. The breathtaking scope of actions taken, and follow-on demands for the new President to cut ties with powerful nation-state allies triggered concerns across a number of sectors. Subsequently, a series of shootings of civilians associated with ICE and CBP agents in Minneapolis and Portland further exacerbated the high level of political polarization associated with the current Administration’s immigration policies.
Based on this polarization, self-radicalization and violent domestic extremism remain near the top of my risk assessment. While such extremism may be motivated by both far-right and far-left extremist groups, the growing concern is the lone actor motivated by political beliefs and influenced by false narratives. We can expect increasing efforts by foreign actors to exacerbate such false narratives, societal divisions, and undermine trust in federal institutions.
One mechanism of action of increasing concern is the continued proliferation of drone technology – the weaponization of which has become frighteningly more accessible to the lay person. Given the devastating effectiveness of such technology in the war between Russia and Ukraine, combined with the continued lack of effective regulations, and lagging definition of legal authorities on countering the threat, urgent action is needed.
Cybersecurity threats continue to weigh on both the public and private sectors in the United States. Nation-State actors such as China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran may increase cyber operations, particularly to disrupt critical infrastructure and undermine public confidence, as retaliation for the reported U.S. employment of cyber effects on Venezuelan power distribution during the operations earlier in the month. While visibility to these threats has increased, the lack of specific intelligence may blunt an effective response. And while Congress is more engaged in the topic – most notably due to the telcom impacts of Salt Typhoon – specific actions will likely take time, or only be mandated in light of a catastrophic incident.
As noted last year, an adversary able to impact critical infrastructure such as power and water systems could challenge the response capabilities of the largely commercial entities operating such infrastructure. And while some laudable voluntary efforts have emerged to mitigate the most egregious risks (namely the DEF CON Franklin Project), the role of the government at all levels to mitigate such risks remains undefined.
Threats in Homeland Security Facilities
Rebecca Carr, Partner, Defense & Security, Guidehouse; subject matter expert in government real estate and facilities program management
Homeland security facilities serve as the backbone of national safety, housing sensitive operations and resources essential to keeping our country safe. Yet these facilities face a growing array of threats—from physical attacks and insider risks to cyber intrusions targeting operational systems. As adversaries become more sophisticated, safeguarding these sites requires a comprehensive approach integrated into the full lifecycle of facilities operations—from pre-design through construction into daily operation.
When selecting a location for a facility, thorough vetting of landlords and neighboring entities is critical to mitigating risks posed by unsafe actors. Property owners and adjacent businesses can compromise security through affiliations with criminal networks, extremist groups, or foreign adversaries. Conducting background checks, reviewing ownership structures, and assessing historical activities in the area help identify potential vulnerabilities before a lease or purchase is finalized. Once a location is chosen, agencies should continue to monitor landlords and neighboring entities and evaluate changing risk profiles to mitigate the risk from insider threats, surveillance, or coercion, reinforcing the integrity of operations and safeguarding personnel.
The construction phase of a facility presents unique risks that can be addressed through rigorous vulnerability testing. Temporary access by contractors, third-party vendors, and labor crews can create additional opportunities for insider threats, unauthorized surveillance, or the introduction of compromised materials and systems. Security teams should implement layered controls, including background checks for all personnel, monitoring of supply chains, and inspection of critical infrastructure components, such as IT cabling and HVAC systems. Regular security audits and penetration testing during construction help identify weaknesses before they become permanent, ensuring that the facility meets national security standards from the ground up.
Determining the outward-facing presence of a facility is a critical balance between operational transparency and security imperatives. A highly visible presence can serve as a deterrent and reinforce public confidence, but it also risks making the site a target for surveillance or attack. Conversely, a low-profile or discreet footprint reduces exposure but may complicate community engagement and emergency coordination. Decision makers should weigh mission requirements, threat assessments, and local context when choosing signage, branding, and architectural design. Incorporating security-by-design principles—such as controlled access points and unobtrusive barriers—ensures that visibility does not compromise operational integrity.
As facility threats continue to evolve in 2026—driven by emerging technologies, cyber-physical risks, and global insecurity—maintaining a national security-driven strategy throughout the entire facility lifecycle ensures stronger protection and allows staff to stay focused on their core mission. As threats continue to evolve, a disciplined approach at every stage—from planning and construction to operations—provides the foundation for long-term security, resilience, and mission success.
The Risk of Governing Without Foresight
Robin Champ, Vice President, Strategic Foresight at LBL Strategies; 2024 Homeland Security Today Trailblazer; former Chief, Enterprise Strategy Division, U.S. Secret Service; former Chief Strategist, Defense Threat Reduction Agency
One of the most consequential homeland security risks in 2026 is the inconsistent integration of anticipatory thinking across government amid increasingly complex and interconnected threats.
While many agencies and leaders are actively working to get ahead of emerging risks, foresight capabilities are not yet consistently embedded across planning, budgeting, and policy processes. As a result, advanced technologies, cyber tools, autonomous systems, biological risks, and emerging weapons – alongside climate stressors, information manipulation, infrastructure fragility, workforce strain, and declining public trust – too often collide faster than institutions can adapt.
Many of the threats shaping 2026 will not emerge suddenly. They will build gradually through interaction and accumulation—misinformation amplified by automation, climate impacts cascading into supply chains and migration pressures, and geopolitical instability reverberating through domestic preparedness and governance. These dynamics echo a familiar warning. The 9/11 Commission concluded that September 11th reflected not only intelligence gaps, but “a failure of imagination.” That insight remains deeply relevant in today’s complex threat environment.
Strategic foresight and emerging trend analysis, as well as scenario-based planning, helps leaders move beyond the constraints of the present. Scenario work is not about prediction; it is about disciplined imagination, grounded in evidence, to explore multiple plausible futures and uncover creative solutions. By systematically asking “what if?” across credible futures, leaders can surface blind spots, anticipate second- and third-order effects, and design strategies that remain viable as conditions change.
Recent speculative fiction produced by the Federal Foresight Advocacy Alliance offers one illustration of what becomes possible when foresight is treated as a core governance capability rather than an occasional exercise.
As homeland security leaders look toward 2026 and beyond, the central challenge is not identifying a single dominant threat but ensuring that foresight is applied consistently and at scale. Embedding anticipatory thinking into planning, budgeting, and policy processes – and potentially institutionalizing it through a dedicated federal Office of Strategic Foresight – offers a path toward more adaptive, resilient, and trusted governance, In an era of accelerating complexity, the ability to imagine, prepare for, and shape multiple futures may be one of our most critical security capabilities.
A Complex Year Ahead
Bob Kolasky, Senior Vice President for Critical Infrastructure, Exiger; Editorial Board Member, Homeland Security Today; former Assistant Director, Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency
The threat environment in 2026 necessitates a period of heightened awareness for homeland security professionals. The combination of threats facing communities is as high and complex as I can recall. As the United States engages the world militarily in the Middle East, Europe, South America, and Africa, it raises the specter of blowback from groups and individuals inclined to employ terrorist tactics aligned with adversarial ideologies. This risk is amplified by public events intended to honor America and its role in the world, including the celebration of America250 and the FIFA World Cup 2026. As a result, soft-target and crowded-places security must be a priority for communities.
2026 is also an election year, and the history of the last decade demonstrates that threat actors—both foreign and domestic—are inclined to use cyber and physical threats, as well as active disinformation campaigns, to attempt to influence election outcomes. With trust in government continuing to falter, these tactics will almost certainly be employed again, challenging the ability of election officials to secure election systems amid resource constraints and a conflicted communications environment. It is essential that state and local election officials have the ability to disseminate accurate information and establish trust in the integrity of election systems and infrastructure.
This threat environment, in which more actors have the intent to cause harm to the United States, is further amplified by emerging technologies such as unmanned aerial vehicles, additive manufacturing, and artificial intelligence, which are lowering barriers to entry for developing sophisticated capabilities. At a practical level, this means the homeland security enterprise is engaged in a technological contest with an amorphous set of adversaries and must be as adept at adopting new technologies for security and resilience as adversaries are at weaponizing them.
The net result of the 2026 risk environment is that communities, private industry, and the federal government cannot afford further backsliding in homeland security capabilities. Resources must be allocated for ample security; information-sharing organizations and relationships must maintain the processes and trust necessary to function; risk communication practices must prioritize breaking through a conflicted information environment; and security professionals must prepare for the unexpected. Homeland security is a national strategic imperative and must be treated as such.
Self-Reliance: What America Has Lost and Why It Matters More Than Ever
Mitchell Simmons, Associate Dean for the Master of Science & Technology Intelligence degree at the National Intelligence University; Contributing Editor, Homeland Security Today; Lieutenant Colonel, United States Air Force (retired)
[Excerpt]
“Solar storms, physical attack, and cyber-attack have already caused blackouts … For these high-consequence threats … the electric grid and interdependent infrastructures are vulnerable.”
— Resilient Societies Risk Assessment Report
Americans living at the start of the 20th century possessed far greater self-reliance than those born at the start of the 21st century. In the year 1900, nearly two-thirds of the estimated 76M+ U.S. population lived in rural areas, most on farms. Daily life required hard physical labor and practical skills that were essential to survival: growing and preserving food, repairing tools, managing livestock, and improvising solutions with limited resources. Self-reliance was not a virtue; it was a necessity. Larger families were needed, and they lived together or near one another, which reinforced these skills. Practical knowledge, a strong work ethic, and survival practices were passed directly from one generation to the next. Communities were tight-knit, interdependent, and resilient because they had to be.
Over the next century, however, America underwent a profound transformation. In the year 2000, nearly 80 percent of the estimated 280M+ U.S. population lived in urban or suburban environments. Society shifted away from agrarian self-sufficiency toward an economy dominated by information, services, and consumer convenience. As infrastructure expanded and became more technologically interdependent, practical survival skills steadily eroded. Nowhere is this decline more evident than in our dependence on critical infrastructure sectors such as food and agriculture, transportation systems, energy (electricity in particular), communications, and water and wastewater systems. These five highly interdependent sectors will be discussed briefly to illustrate how unprepared Americans are in the isolation of an electrical grid down scenario.
Food and Agriculture
In 1900, most households possessed the skills and tools to feed themselves. Growing food and its preservation—canning, smoking, drying, salting—was routine. When families lacked something, they bartered goods or labor within their community. Food production was local, personal, and resilient. Over the 20th century, mechanization and industrial farming dramatically increased food output while requiring fewer farmers. This efficiency gave rise to today’s centralized food and agriculture regions and farms, which are extraordinarily productive. Most Americans don’t even have a garden and even fewer would know how to butcher animals for meat. Americans today fail to even appreciate the logistics to stock grocery stores and even fewer realize that their modern grocery stores typically hold only a few days’ worth of food. In a prolonged electrical grid down scenario—where refrigeration, transportation, and logistics fail—food hoarding, looting, food scarcity would occur quickly, catching most Americans unprepared.
Transportation
In 1900, transportation was limited. Most people traveled locally by foot, horse, and wagon, often on unimproved roads that became muddy and nearly impassable at certain times of the year. Longer distance travel was confined to rail, ship, or river boat within the U.S. This reduced mobility in rural areas fostered local cohesion where people lived closer to their work, families, and sources of sustenance. Today, American life depends on a vast and complex transportation network. Cars, airplanes, high-speed rail, subways, and trucks enable unprecedented mobility and convenience. Supply chains span continents, delivering goods directly to our doors in astonishing speed. Yet this efficiency and convenience come at a cost: Americans are now physically and psychologically disconnected from the systems that sustain them, most don’t know their neighbors or care too, and family members live further apart, often states away. When transportation networks fail, daily life quickly grinds to a halt, and the goods and services that we depend on or travel to become out of reach.
Energy (Electricity)
In 1900, electricity was largely confined to urban centers. Rural Americans relied on candles, kerosene lanterns, and open-hearth fires well into the 1930s for lighting and heat. Early electrical systems operated at varying voltages and frequencies due to the proximity of generation and consumption. As communities grew and these isolated generation and consumption grids came together forcing a 60 Hz frequency standard of electrical generation which enabled interconnectedness forming our modern electrical grid. Today, electricity underpins all 16 U.S. critical infrastructure sectors. Without it, large farm production degrades; frozen and refrigerated food spoils; communications and logistical scheduling systems fail; water and wastewater systems stop flowing; fuel production and pumping ceases; shipping and transportation falter; emergency response and critical medical care is hampered; and the economy declines as greater chaos ensues. Americans are spoiled by a high functioning modern society and are profoundly unprepared today for life without electricity, even temporarily. Of all infrastructure sectors, electricity is the central hub upon which all other critical infrastructure sectors depend and when it fails, everything else soon follows.
Communications
At the turn of the 20th century, long-distance communication was slow and deliberate. Telegraphs, early telephones, and postal mail were the primary means of long-distance communication. A long-distance phone call just 50 years ago was a family event with a preliminary letter mailed earlier to coordinate both parties of the time and day, and the call often occurred later at night to reduce costs. Over time, communication technologies evolved mainly due to deregulation in the early 1980s, which drove competitiveness and innovation. Our communication systems evolved from telegraph wires to telephone wires of solid copper, to twisted multipair lines, to fiber optic lines, to microwave, to wireless, and even satellites. Today, instant global communication is ubiquitous, and this communication infrastructure is vital to our financial systems. In many homes, cellular phones have replaced landline phones, and constant local, regional, and global connectivity is assumed and expected no matter the time of day or night. Few Americans consider how dependent these systems are on electricity, or how quickly society would become isolated and impotent without them in an electrical grid-down environment, where few know their neighbors or have skills or resources to immediately start coping with the new normal.
To read the remainder of Simmons’ forecast, including how the lack of preparedness for loss of critical infrastructure will impede our resilience, click here.
The author is responsible for the content of this article. The views expressed do not reflect the official policy or position of the National Intelligence University, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the U.S. Intelligence Community, or the U.S. Government.