The attack on Jewish people celebrating Hanukkah at the famous Bondi beach in Sydney, which claimed 16 lives and injured many, by a father and son duo reportedly owing allegiance to the Islamic State, has once again raised questions about how extremism of this kind is to be dealt with. There is the danger of stereotyping and, also, evading responsibility for government and societal failures. The Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has been quick to blame Australian PM Anthony Albanese for adopting a soft stance towards extreme ideologies owing to political correctness. There is no doubt that a proper in-depth examination of the factors involved is required to fashion an effective response to violence inspired by political and religious extremism.
The evasive politics can already be seen with identification of the perpetrators who lived in Australia from the 1990s as persons of South Asian origin. This is despite the fact that they were radicalised in Australia. Among the first facts that came to the fore was that the killers originated from Pakistan, but the ‘South Asian’ identification is similar to that adopted in the UK for the ‘grooming gang’ members. With this, public outrage is misdirected towards broader ethnicity than religious or national identity. As such, establishments can avoid the kind of action against specific groups that Netanyahu demanded some time before the attack took place.
The concern for the Muslim community can easily be shaped around the incident itself. While the killers were undoubtedly radicalised persons serving a purportedly ‘Islamic’ cause, the person who fought back and disarmed one of the attackers was also a Muslim. He, however, was defending Australia, as also his own and his family’s future in the country. This fact makes it easier to act against extremists without worrying about the possible impact on the larger community. This reality has to be the template by which distinctions can be made between ordinary people and the radicals of every kind. The manner in which ‘Khalistani’ extremists have been tolerated in countries like Australia for fear of seeming intolerant reveals the insecurities of most politicians. On the other hand, those who demand strong action do so out of dislike for all immigrants. Once policies are framed on the basis of intelligent analyses rather than political sensitivities, democracies will be able to handle the security issues in a more effective manner. Unfortunately, going by the early response of the Australian establishment, fudging the reality seems to be the objective.
