The September 11 attacks on the US capital of Washington DC and New York City by an Islamic terrorist group, combated with the 15th April ’13 Boston bombings raised eyebrows by external investors as to whether the USA is a safe investment destination. In the wake of the global economic crisis, many countries are striving to build strong democracies and put up strong economies.
This has not gone without a fight from those who would wish to maintain the status quo. The result is a scenario of political unrest in the form of political violence that not only daunts the country’s image but also pose serious implications to the business society.
Politically inclined chaos and acts of terrorism is a big turn-off for business investors. This paper seeks to establish the countries that are least affected by political violence and terrorism and determine the most suitable investment destinations worldwide.
Countries with minimal political violence and terror activities
The USA is the world’s largest and stable economy with large industries supported by a large workforce and consumer base. The country has a stable and mature political structure and chances for political violence are negligible. 2013 political violence and terrorism analysis assigns it a political risk rating of zero.
The country is however a target for terrorist groups especially the sworn Islamist militants. 13 terrorism plots are confirmed since the September 11 attacks.
Located in the Caribbean region, it has the lowest political violence risk in the region. It has a political risk rating of 1, due to some legal and regulatory management issues and political interference. Occurrence of insurrection and coup d’état is unlikely. Terrorism and sabotage risks are low although protests are looming as the country prepares for offshore oil exploration.
It is Latin America’s leading performer in the most critical areas. Political risk is low with a rating of 2 due to a weak regulatory system and business environment, this is however controllable. Sometime it experiences short-lived protest although there is no significant risk of terrorism in Uruguay. Terrorism risk rating is 1. (AON, 2013)
2013 political risk analysis gives Australia a risk rating of zero. This shows that it is stable politically, with minimal chances for political violence although some civil protests occurred earlier. Cases of terrorism and sabotage are insignificant just as in previous years.
Has a political risk rating of 3, this is a moderate score indicating some acts of political violence and risks. The country enjoys a low threat to terrorism with a terror rating of 2.
Has a rating of 1 for both political violence and terrorism risk. The country is therefore free of political violence and terrorism attacks
2013 risk analysis shows no noticeable changes from the previous years. The country enjoys political stability and minimal terrorism threats (AON, 2013).
Denmark is stable politically and political violence is unlikely. This is according to AON’s 2013 political risk analysis. It experiences terrorism attacks from Islamist militia; it was twice attacked in 2010.
Based on the detailed analysis of the above countries, this paper strongly recommends future firm investment in;
This country is a political violence and terrorism free zone; there is no real chance for destruction of firm properties. The country has a rich economy due to close vicinity of S. Africa; a steady economy.
Just like Botswana, it is not affected by terrorism and political violence. Australia is among the world’s pillar-economies with a large labor force and market base. The country has a policy that supports external business investment.
According to AON’s 2013 survey report, most if not all countries are prone to political violence and terrorism. This paper based on this survey finds Botswana and Australia the least affected therefore the most suitable for investment.
AON. (2013, April 22). Crisis Management Web Analytics. Retrieved from AON plc: https://www.aon.com/home/index.html