Political violence and civil unrest are a growing concern for businesses.

Traditional insurance coverages exclude these risks or apply significant limitations, making it necessary to use specialised policies with clear and detailed wordings.

The unpredictability of real and potential threats.

Political violence risks are consistently identified in industry studies as one of the main sources of concern for companies. Although by definition difficult to predict, they represent concrete threats—especially in a rapidly changing geopolitical context marked by growing uncertainty and instability.

It is worth remembering that before the 11 September attack on the Twin Towers, terrorism risk was often considered marginal, not only by the economic landscape in general but also by the insurance industry itself.

The 2001 event revealed the scale of potential losses and triggered structural changes: separate pricing, targeted exclusions, specific endorsements, and above all, a complete reassessment of the insurance market’s capacity.

In the decades that followed, phenomena such as increasing inequality and a widespread sense of injustice fuelled protests that in some cases escalated into riots across different parts of the world—including geographies previously considered stable.

Today, we face new and unexpected scenarios that add to, rather than replace, the previous ones. In recent years, violent political actions orchestrated by States or carried out through State‑supported proxies have intensified, reinforcing the concept of “state sponsorship” and hybrid warfare.

Unidentified drones, GPS interference, parcel bombs, and complex targeted attacks on critical infrastructure often go unclaimed, suspended in a grey zone of plausible deniability. Initially limited to the Baltic republics and Scandinavian countries, these hybrid operations are now increasingly affecting other European states, including Western Europe.

The objective is clear: to destabilise and increase insecurity wherever possible.

Are our companies truly protected in this shifting environment? The Italian insurance landscape.

In Italy, there is no terrorism pool nor a structured State involvement. Many property policies include exclusions or sub-limits for terrorism risks.

Similar restrictions often apply to civil unrest (SRCC), while war and civil war risks are—except in rare cases—generally excluded.

For this reason, traditional insurance coverages may not be sufficient. It is therefore necessary to rely on specialised policies with clear and specific wordings: the absence of precise definitions increases the risk of disputes over the activation or attribution of coverage and can lead, at best, to delays in claim payments.

Political Violence: comprehensive protection.

Bridging this insurance gap is essential not only for large multinational corporations but also for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) operating internationally. Protection is possible through specialised and adequate coverages included in a comprehensive Political Violence policy, which may include:

• direct damages
• indirect damages, including Delay in Start Up (DSU) for construction risks (CAR/EAR)
• contingent business interruption (denial of access, loss of attraction, customers/suppliers)

Insurable risks include, beyond terrorism and sabotage, civil unrest (SRCC: strikes, riots, civil commotion) and political violence events: malicious acts with political/religious/ideological motivations, insurrection, rebellion, revolution, coup d’état, mutiny, war, civil war. Coverages can be offered on a stand‑alone basis (e.g., terrorism and sabotage, SRCC) or integrated and adjusted alongside other risks.

It is also possible to extend protection to liability arising from terrorist acts, as well as to event cancellation or postponement resulting from a terrorist act or threat.

Conclusions

Risks linked to sabotage, terrorism, and political violence are real, evolving, and potentially systemic. Although unpredictable in timing and form, it is possible to estimate their probability and impact for each scenario and implement appropriate mitigation measures. Among these, insurance remains an essential tool to transfer risk to third parties and reduce corporate vulnerability to major events.