The characteristics of progressive terrorist organisations. New problems arise.

In recent years, the structure and strategy of terrorist organisations have evolved in ways that resemble elements of conventional and corporate systems. These groups no longer rely solely on ideology or territorial control. Instead, they adopt flexible networks, adapt to global economic and political changes, and often use sophisticated methods once associated with formal state or private entities.

One key characteristic of modern or progressive terrorist organisations is their adaptability. Groups such as ISIS have demonstrated an understanding of military tactics similar to those used by state forces or private military companies. They experiment with logistics, recruitment and intelligence gathering, mirroring the structure of professional armies. Their ability to shift strategies quickly allows them to survive under pressure, even when losing territorial ground.

A second development is the move toward economic influence. Some of these organisations seek access to trade routes, natural resources and financial networks. By embedding themselves within global or regional commerce, they attempt to sustain their operations beyond direct conflict. This marks a transition from purely militant action to a more complex form of control, one that touches economics, communication and population management.

The rise of such structures creates a paradox. On one hand, their integration into existing systems could reduce open violence by forcing engagement through indirect means. On the other, it risks deeper interference with economic stability and governance. No one can clearly predict whether this evolution will lead to peace or renewed intervention. The line between conflict and cooperation becomes increasingly blurred.

In my opinion, such matters should concern mainly the bureaucratic and administrative systems responsible for global security. Ordinary people, who focus on survival and stability, can only adapt and continue with their lives. These organisations, like unstable systems throughout history, are destined to collapse under their own contradictions. The question is not if they will fall apart, but how much damage their instability will cause before they do. So people should never be respected by their occupation but their character.