Tony Abbott must continue to tread carefully in discussing Sydney terror

TONY Abbott was correct to call the Martin Place siege and shootings an act of terror.

Just as he was quick and correct to express outrage at the deaths of 28 Australians in the shooting down of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 over Ukraine, the Prime Minister was right in pinning the deaths of two innocent people in a coffee shop on terrorism.

Such a course, while correct, is not without danger and pitfalls for Abbott and the prosecution of the argument requires cautious and careful development.

While the siege was ongoing, Abbott said it was profoundly shocking that innocent people could be held “by an armed person claiming political motivation”.

On the morning after the siege ended he said: “Australians should be reassured by the way our law enforcement and security agencies responded to this brush with terrorism.”

Abbott was subsequently criticised for using the term “brush with terrorism” as part of the entrenched argument that Australia’s involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan has increased the risk of terror and also out of an eagerness to play down any jihadist ­influence.

Previously Abbott has been accused of exaggerating the threat of Islamic State to Australia and “dog whistling” on terror in an effort to secure the passage of enhanced security laws.

But it would be a mistake to back off the conclusion because of the well-intentioned descriptions of the attack being a criminal act only, the work of a madman with no direct connection to a terrorist group and not representative of the Islamic faith.

The point is that Man Haron Monis may not have been a certified terrorist or directly connected to Islamic State but he was the latest example of the jihadist group’s newest weapon: an unstable, violent, delusional Islamist who can be activated purely by publicity and propaganda.

Without any real effort and with no risk at all, Islamic State can get the full terror effect of killing innocent people going about their normal lives, bringing a city’s heart to a stop and creating an atmosphere of division aimed at driving more people to become isolated and violent.

Islamic State has demonstrated it is adept at using dangerous dupes to reinforce terror as a military tactic and political weapon.

The fact one in four Australians who have gone to Iraq and Syria to fight with Islamic State have died, along with numerous other foreign fighters, is proof that the group can formally or informally recruit the unstable and alienated and then ruthlessly use them to its own advantage. As Attorney-General George Brandis said last week: “They (Islamic State) are simply using them as frontline cannon fodder, suicide bombers and propaganda tools.”

There is no doubt these Australian citizens are unstable, hold perverted views of Islam and have violent or criminal histories, but it is equally clear they are performing acts of terrorism to Islamic State’s advantage.

There is also no doubt that Islamic State, like other jihadist terror groups, has been able to exploit the freedoms of our society and the resultant “weaknesses” of its legal and security systems.

It is a travesty that Monis was able to get a gun while on bail, charged with being an accessory to murder and for a series of sex offences, after being convicted for harassing the families of Australian soldiers killed in Afghanistan.

Abbott was forthright about this on ABC radio when he said: “The system did not adequately deal with this individual — there is no doubt about that.

“The tragedy of this atrocity is that two delightful Australians, two very decent people, are dead, others are injured, others are traumatised because of a madman who was roaming our streets.”

NSW Premier Mike Baird was immediately on to this and rushed to point to the fact his government was already tightening bail conditions in the face of growing public protests about the violent offenders being granted bail.

NSW police were advised, when seeking to prevent bail for Monis over his latest sexual offence charges, that it was pointless and Australian Federal Police are investigating how Monis was incorrectly listed as legally entitled to have a gun.

Nor was Monis, a self-styled sheik who supported Islamic State, on a so-called watch list despite a conviction for sending sick letters to the families of Australian troops and being charged as a sex offender and accessory to murder.

Abbott recognised the reality that the system had failed and that not everyone could be watched, with priority given to those considered likeliest to turn violent.

Realistically — and politically — Abbott had to address these systemic failures. But valid as the arguments are of an inability to deal with a series of lapses and weaknesses in the criminal justice system in dealing with a deranged and criminal individual, it was also necessary to Abbott to confront the influence of Islamist terrorists.

Abbott’s first explanation was clear and moderate: “What we do know is that the perpetrator was well known to state and commonwealth authorities. He had a long history of violent crime, infatuation with extremism and mental instability,” he said.

“We know that he sent offensive letters to the families of Australian soldiers killed in Afghanistan and was found guilty of offences related to this. We also know that he posted graphic extremist material online.

“As the siege unfolded, he sought to cloak his actions with the symbolism of the ISIL (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) death cult. Tragically, there are people in our community ready to engage in politically motivated violence.”

The political challenges for Abbott in this approach are twofold: he has to be careful not to make unsubstantiated claims about Monis’s motivation or connection with Islamic State, nor to focus unnecessarily on Islam.

On the first point, the public will not tolerate any misleading over terrorist threats and respon­sibility. After the 2004 train bombings in Madrid the Spanish government lost office largely because of misleading and confused claims about responsibility, not the bombings themselves.

Already standing accused of inflating the terrorist threat, Abbott cannot afford to be seen as misleading the public about the role of Islamic State in Monis’s motivation.

By the same token Abbott cannot ignore the commonsense reaction of the public that Monis’s previous actions were motivated by a distorted, and apparently self-made, view of Islam. To deny a connection is ludicrous.

Abbott has been careful to talk about Monis “cloaking” his actions with Islamic State and being politically motivated. He also pointed to Monis’s instability and his “infatuation” with extremism.

The quick and positive condemnation of Monis from Muslim leaders and their support for the NSW police and government actions have ensured the exhortations from leaders, including Bill Shorten, for calm and no backlash against the Australian Muslim community will succeed.

But any examination of the conditions that enabled Monis to carry out his plan must take in how Islamic State or other jihadi calls for action influenced his final behaviour and how such influences can be combated in the future. The lone, deranged and deluded, self-styled jihadi is Islamic State’s new weapon of terror.