Terror in Auckland

Saturday 4th September, 2021

A Sri Lankan terrorist with ISIS links was shot dead by the New Zealand police, yesterday, while he was carrying out a knife attack on civilians in an Auckland supermarket. Some of his victims are reported to be seriously injured. The assailant had been under police surveillance for some time, we are told. There could be others of the dead terrorist’s ilk, and it is hoped that the New Zealand police and public will remain Argus-eyed.

The manner in which the New Zealand law enforcement officers handled the terrorist concerned bears similarities, mutatis mutandis, to the way the Sri Lankan police acted in respect of the terrorists who carried out the Easter Sunday bombings. Both police forces failed to pre-empt the terror attacks despite having reliable information about the suspects’ terrorist connections and criminal intent.

The Sri Lankan terrorist in New Zealand could have resorted to far worse forms of terror, killing many people in spite of being under surveillance. What would have been the situation if he had grabbed a policeman’s weapon or commandeered a heavy vehicle, say a fuel tanker? Anything can become a weapon in the hands of terrorists bent on destroying lives.

New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Arden rightly declared that the terrorist attack had been carried out by an individual, not a faith. Terrorists and other such violent elements who are a threat to society take advantage of weak laws in a country to propagate their anti-social ideologies and expand their networks. Covid-19 patients are traced and isolated––in most cases, against their will––to ensure the safety of others. So, why shouldn’t terror suspects be caught and detained to protect society? Special laws have been introduced to tackle the fast-spreading pandemic, and the task of eliminating the scourge of terror also requires extraordinary laws. This does not mean the states should have the freedom to arrest and detain citizens arbitrarily as terror suspects, but those against whom there is irrefutable evidence, like the knife attacker in Auckland, must be arrested immediately. If New Zealand had done so instead of just shadowing the terrorist, the Auckland incident could have been averted.

Meanwhile, the UK has extended the ban on the LTTE. But this proscription does not serve any purpose because the LTTE enjoys unbridled freedom to operate on British soil; its activists conduct demonstrations, displaying the flag of the banned outfit, and the British police look on. By allowing Adele Balasingham, who brainwashed the LTTE’s child combatants, especially girls, and turned them into killing machines and human bombs, to lead a comfortable life in London, the UK has made a mockery of its commitment to protecting human rights and its efforts to have Sri Lanka’s accountability issues probed. There is incontrovertible evidence to prove the woman’s involvement in terrorism, and shouldn’t the British government have her arrested and tried for her crimes and, thereby prove that it is not partial to the LTTE and its human rights concerns are genuine?

Time was when powerful nations laboured under the delusion that they could harbour others’ terrorists safely. In fact, some of them have even used terrorism to destabilise their rival states. But they themselves have become victims of terror as can be seen from the experience of the UK, the US, etc. Even the countries with no known history of harbouring terrorists, have come to be affected by terror. Unfortunate incidents that peace-loving New Zealand has witnessed during the last couple of years in Christchurch and Auckland demonstrate that terrorism, like the Delta variant of coronavirus, has not spared any part of the globe, and no country is safe until every country is safe. This is why the world must unite in fighting terrorism in all its forms a manifestations wherever it raises its head, and learn from those who have defeated the evil instead of trying to confer pariah status on them.