The current pandemic has caused widespread death and overwhelmed hospitals, leading to the transformation of wards into triage centers. People now prepare for trips to the grocery store as if they were entering a battlefield, wearing masks and gloves. This situation is reminiscent of Europe's past experiences with terrorism, but the invisible and pervasive nature of the virus creates a new type of fear. Unlike acts of terrorism, the virus is a natural threat with no clear end in sight. A significantly different reaction has been required in response to the new coronavirus compared to terrorism. While people may flee in fear from a terrorist attack, they often come together in solidarity and defiance afterwards. However, once the lockdown due to the coronavirus is lifted, people are expected to emerge cautiously, like moles from their burrows. Peter R Neumann, a professor of security studies, notes that despite the higher likelihood of dying in a car accident or from a bathtub fall compared to terrorism, people tend to fear terrorism more due to the lack of control they have over it. Terrorism is not only about killing people, but also about manipulating our thoughts and interests. The coronavirus is particularly terrifying because it cannot be controlled or fought with traditional methods like surveillance or persuasion. Unlike human or ideological enemies, the virus is something unknown and unpredictable, causing fear for good reason. Despite man-made threats typically being more feared, the natural disaster of the coronavirus is proving to be more deadly and destructive. Julianne Smith, a former security adviser to former Vice President Joe Biden and now at the German Marshall Fund, pointed out that terrorism and the pandemic have a wide-reaching impact on society beyond just the immediate threats they pose. Both create a sense of helplessness as individuals cannot predict when or where they will strike, leading to fear in everyday activities like being in crowds or attending events. Joshua A Geltzer, former senior director for counterterrorism on the National Security Council and now a law professor at Georgetown, noted that the randomness of terrorism and the virus adds to the fear they instill in people. The ability of the virus to make people consider that they could be affected like others does not require the same response as a terrorist attack, according to Geltzer. While a bombing at a public event like the Boston Marathon may prompt individuals to question attending similar events in the future, the virus demands a more collective approach. Instead of focusing solely on personal safety, individuals must consider the well-being of others by preventing the spread of the virus and avoiding overwhelming the healthcare system. This situation calls for a different type of unity and solidarity compared to the response to terrorist attacks in the past, where leaders encouraged citizens to continue with their daily lives and show resilience and defiance in the face of fear. In light of the virus outbreak, many societies were unprepared, and now resilience means staying at home instead of traveling. Governments are struggling to shift from urging calm during times of terrorism to instilling fear to promote collective action. Unlike with terrorism, the current crisis requires people to remain stationary rather than mobilize. Geltzer noted that staying at home or mandating production of protective gear may not be as appealing as traditional security responses like helicopters and shootouts. "We are not accustomed to cheering 'USA! USA!' for home schooling. It will also be challenging for governments to adapt their security systems to address threats that are not deterred by increased military spending and surveillance. Historically, analysts focusing on non-traditional threats such as health and climate were viewed as less important. However, this perception has shifted significantly. Departments dedicated to health security and virologists employed by the CIA will become more common, altering our understanding of security. Future threats may include concerns about economic downturns, mounting debt, and social unrest." There is concern about the impact of the current low oil prices on Arab and Persian Gulf countries, particularly in relation to paying salaries for civil servants and the military, as well as managing subsidies on bread. The Islamic State group has even advised its followers to avoid areas affected by epidemics. Hegghammer, who experienced the terrorist attacks in Norway in 2011, notes the country's response of unity and cooperation during that time, as well as during the current pandemic. The concept of "dugnad," referring to communal work, is being emphasized once again as individuals come together to help one another, regardless of political differences. The connection between the virus and past attacks in Norway is being openly discussed in the country. The government's lack of preparedness in dealing with a major threat is being criticized in a critical manner. In Norway, there will likely be a commission of inquiry after the recent events, just like there was in the United States after Sept 11. However, unlike homogeneous Norway, the divided United States is experiencing a slowly unfolding crisis that affects different parts of society at different speeds. This lack of unity is exacerbated by political polarization and partisan battles over science and facts. The impact of the virus on the country is compared to the plague in Athens during the Peloponnesian War, leading to indifference towards religion and law and the rise of more reckless politicians. She stated that the White House's delayed response ultimately undermines the current political leadership and societal practices. If the political repercussions are significant, it could result in the decline of the imperial presidency and a resurgence of federal and congressional activism as intended by the Founding Fathers. Despite the political divisions caused by the virus, it serves as a reminder that free societies rely on civic responsibility norms.