The nature of international terrorism has fundamentally shifted in recent years. While everyone knows about the violent nature of acts of terror, the most concerning risk lies with the “silent nod”, whereby groups recruit members, establish cells, expand their footprint and grow their presence in a country of interest. Add to this individuals acting on own accord, inspired and directed by propaganda calls to action, and the probability of an attack is persistently increasing.
Most governments have legislation and counter-terror initiatives aimed at dealing with bombings, mass shootings, hostage taking etc, thus focusing on the violent nature and after-effects of acts of terror. The fact that the group responsible managed to operate silently in the country prior to the attack while recruiting, radicalising and training the individuals accountable, and that these operations went unchallenged, is often overlooked. In short, it is not unreasonable to state that the “silent nod”, given enough time, is just as dangerous as a commissioned act of terror.
Terrorism reality: Opportunity
While conventional thinking tends to focus on reasons why South Africa is not vulnerable to an act of terror, the fact that the Islamic State is already recruiting in the country cannot be ignored.
Despite popular opinion, South Africa is not subject to a special set of circumstances that forgo our viability as a target. The Islamic State is all about establishing presence and showing strength, meaning that a terror attack in South Africa would be just as effective as one in Europe.
This begs the question: just how much opportunity does the Islamic State have to carry out a terror attack in South Africa?
A “lock up and go” mentality when dealing with threats (such as protest action, riots, and potential acts of terror), in which perpetrators are apprehended and jailed and the matter considered “dealt with”, is set to fail as a counterterrorism response. Conversely, while the public tries to keep itself informed and aware, most people employ private security companies (few of which can claim adequate training regarding situations involving terrorism) to secure their safety. In some cases attention is given to the causal relationship between the origin of these threats and the threats themselves, but mostly things are expected to go back to normal once the instigating parties have been removed from the environment. With regards to potential acts of terror, a temporary response to threats is wholly inadequate.
As such, South Africa’s current counterterrorism strategy amounts to a culture of “government only response”, with the public needing to fend for themselves through private security companies with little to no training in counterterrorism initiatives. All in all, without the presence of mitigating factors, South Africa remains an easy target.
Mitigating an ever increasing concern
It is time to accept and respond to an undeniable reality: the Islamic State is already operating in South Africa in a non-violent capacity. So the longer the implementation of permanent mitigating factors is ignored, the more likely South Africa is to experience an act of terror in the near future.
The answer is to be found in two aspects, limiting the impact of the Islamic State current presence within a non-violent evolutionary reality coupled with a focused strategy in which misguided perceptions against Muslim and foreign communities as well as fear of an attack are challenged. A ring-fenced law and order mindset will not suffice.
So what can be done?
The need for law and order function remains; however, such an approach transcends conservative approaches of vetting and investigations of specific individuals. The non-violent side to terrorism demands new thinking and application, whereby government officials gain the required skills to monitor and trace social network interactions to and from local soil as well as the skill to assess and understand the use of propaganda as a communication tool and how it is taking effect in South Africa.
The bad news is that mitigating factors are currently haphazard, culminating in limiting impact, and therewith the probability of an attack remains of increased concern. The good news: the vulnerability of South Africa to an act of terror can be limited, merely by refocusing and rethinking mitigating factors. DM
Photo of Johannesburg by Arthur Spring via Flickr.
Watch Pauli van Wyk’s Cat Play The Piano Here!
No, not really. But now that we have your attention, we wanted to tell you a little bit about what happened at SARS.
Tom Moyane and his cronies bequeathed South Africa with a R48-billion tax shortfall, as of February 2018. It's the only thing that grew under Moyane's tenure... the year before, the hole had been R30.7-billion. And to fund those shortfalls, you know who has to cough up? You - the South African taxpayer.
It was the sterling work of a team of investigative journalists, Scorpio’s Pauli van Wyk and Marianne Thamm along with our great friends at amaBhungane, that caused the SARS capturers to be finally flushed out of the system. Moyane, Makwakwa… the lot of them... gone.
But our job is not yet done. We need more readers to become Maverick Insiders, the friends who will help ensure that many more investigations will come. Contributions go directly towards growing our editorial team and ensuring that Daily Maverick and Scorpio have a sustainable future. We can’t rely on advertising and don't want to restrict access to only those who can afford a paywall subscription. Membership is about more than just contributing financially – it is about how we Defend Truth, together.
So, if you feel so inclined, and would like a way to support the cause, please join our community of Maverick Insiders.... you could view it as the opposite of a sin tax. And if you are already Maverick Insider, tell your mother, call a friend, whisper to your loved one, shout at your boss, write to a stranger, announce it on your social network. The battle for the future of South Africa is on, and you can be part of it.
Popsicles were originally going to be called "Eppsicles" after their inventor Frank Epperson.