THE attack in London on June 3rd, which left seven people dead and 48 injured, was the third deadly terrorist incident in Britain in less than three months. At about 10pm a van was driven at speed into pedestrians on London Bridge, before three men got out and began stabbing people around Borough Market, just south of the Thames. The men, who one witness said had shouted “This is for Allah,” were shot dead by police.
Although the three suspects wore what looked like suicide-bombers’ vests, they turned out to be fake. Knives and a large van were the only murder weapons involved. Police believe that no other attackers were involved.
The crude attack bears some similarities to the assault on March 22nd in which Khalid Masood, a 52-year-old British convert to Islam, mowed down pedestrians on Westminster Bridge, killing four, before getting out to stab a policeman to death. In that attack the target was the Houses of Parliament. This time it appears that the terrorists honed in on people drinking in bars.
The simplicity of the latest assault is in contrast to the attack on May 22nd at the Manchester Arena, in which a relatively sophisticated bomb was used to kill 22 people and injure more than 100. The perpetrator of that attack, Salman Abedi, a 22-year-old British Muslim, may have undergone training in Libya. Britain’s run of attacks demonstrates the dual nature of the terrorist threat. On the one hand are complex plots such as the Manchester attack, which have the potential to kill many but whose multiple strands give the security services a better chance of disrupting them. On the other are low-tech attacks like the latest one, which tend to have fewer casualties (in large part because of Britain’s strict gun laws) but are harder to anticipate and prevent.
The arrest of 12 men in the Barking area of east London in the aftermath of the attack does not at this point suggest that there was “network” behind the perpetrators, as police believe there was behind Abedi. It is almost certain that the identity of the three men is known, although not yet whether, as is likely, they had appeared previously on the “radar screen” of the security services. One of them is believed to have been a married man and a father of two children. The arrests are likely to be part of a normal information-gathering operation involving raids of the perpetrators’ homes and interviews under caution of anyone who might have been close to them. The fact that the terrorist-threat level, which was briefly raised to “critical” after the Manchester attack, has remained at “severe”, the next rung down, indicates that investigators are not looking for accomplices who may be planning a follow-up attack.
What is worrying the security services most is the possibility that low-tech simple attacks of the kind that have now struck London twice in just over two months may be attracting imitators. This was one of the suggestions made by the prime minister, Theresa May, in her response to the horror of Saturday night. “Terrorism,” she said, “breeds terrorism”. She also went on to say that there was too much tolerance of Islamist extremism. In particular, she demanded that more pressure be put on internet firms such as Google and Facebook to be made accountable for material they publish that may aid terrorism.
Quite what she has in mind is not clear. Mrs May used the odd expression that “enough is enough” as if any level of political violence were acceptable. It seems probable that after the general election on Thursday, a major review of counter-terrorism policies will be an urgent priority. Among the measures likely to be recommended are: longer prison sentences for terrorist offences; the issuing of many more “Tpims” (terrorism prevention and investigation measures) to tag and curfew some suspects; more use of powers to confiscate passports; a beefing up the “Prevent” anti-radicalisation strategy; and even more resources for the security service (MI5) and counter-terrorism police. Editor's note: This piece is being updated as new information becomes available.
No comments:
Post a Comment