Australians stand together against the jihadist threat

ISLAMIST extremist terrorism demands multifaceted response.

ONE of the reasons the Islamist extremist terrorism threat concerns so many of us is that it can make us feel powerless. Especially in a peaceful country like Australia, we can rationalise how any number of threats pose a greater day-to-day threat; from traffic accidents to heart disease. Statistics about the number of deaths from these and other common risks, at home and abroad, will dwarf the 122 of our fellow citizens killed in terrorist attacks over the past 15 years (88 of them in the first Bali bombing). Yet it is the very randomness of the jihadist threat that unsettles us, along with the malevolent intent that targets us as enemies or legitimate targets no matter how blameless we consider ourselves. Another week of horror around the globe has amplified our fears: hundreds massacred in Nigeria; atrocious executions publicised by Islamic State in Iraq and Syria; terror suspects shot dead by police in Belgium; and more threats from Australian jihadists to unleash bloodshed here. We are told — and we tell ourselves — to go about our business as usual. We should remain alert but not alarmed.

Responses to the Islamist extremist threat are many and varied, they are multifaceted and interrelated. We look to government to undertake much of the more complex and hard-edge work. For instance, it is for sovereign powers to crush Islamic State and deny them the practical and symbolic benefit of holding a substantial tract of land with significant populations and resources, functioning as a caliphate of sorts. It is also for governments to strike the right balance between surveillance and privacy, between security and liberty. Clearly, whatever we might make of the various balances being struck — this newspaper has endorsed the Abbott government’s moves to extend powers and funding for security agencies, which were also given bipartisan support by Labor — there can be no doubt that we have seen failings. The gunmen in the Sydney siege and Paris atrocities had come to the attention of law enforcement agencies and courts before they carried out their defining crimes. We need to learn the lessons and close the gaps to provide the best protection possible from an ideology that can produce dangerous monsters within our midst. So government action must continue, we must scrutinise it and politicians must be accountable for their decisions.

Yet governments must also lead the way in some of what we might call the soft power challenges of this threat. The state has a role in encouraging the engagement and assimilation of Muslim immigrant communities in Western countries, ensuring education programs underscore our liberal values, guarding against proselytisation by extremist elements and, importantly, fostering tolerance across the broader community to minimise the social division terrorists might like to foment.

Yet it is when we consider these issues that we must also look within. Our sense of helplessness and vulnerability can be counterproductive. Rather, we need to accept that as individuals our response to this threat matters. The sum total of our individual reactions belongs to our community and to our nation. We ought to consider that if we are stoic and tolerant, this will be the soft power our nation projects. Just as the people of Paris took to the streets to publicly proclaim their defiance, so we must consider the messages we send. The more we hear from our Muslim communities speaking out against extremism, the better. The more engagement we have from the broader community with our various Muslim communities, the better. And, of course, we all need to be alert to events and individuals who might cause us concern so that we might inform authorities.

On Monday, human rights lawyer and political activist Julian Burnside told ABC radio from Paris that France was “coming together rather than splitting apart” in the wake of the terrorist atrocities. “The response here is utterly unlike anything you would expect in Australia,” he said. This was a sneering and completely incorrect slight against his fellow citizens. In the wake of the Martin Place siege this country showed community concern, political bipartisanship, public stoicism and, above all, overt tolerance. This augurs well for our ongoing battle against a violent — but ultimately doomed — extremist ideology.