Three years after the Vienna terrorist attack: Expert Nicolas Stockhammer analyzes how effectively the authorities are combating extremism. The calm is deceptive.
Paris, Berlin and Brussels. Then it happened in Vienna too. November 2nd marks the third anniversary of the terrorist attack. A few days before the anniversary, the security situation is tense. The terror expert Nicolas Stockhammer has examined the terrorist attack in the new book “Deceptive Calm” (Amalthea Verlag). For the “Krone” he analyzes what conclusions the Austrian authorities have drawn from the terrorist attack and where there are still gaps. What conclusions have been drawn? The new DSN (Directorate of State Security and Intelligence) was set up relatively quickly after the terrorist attack. In addition, the state security force has massively penetrated the “Islamist scene” and “broken up the networks,” says Stockhammer. A few “bad eggs were brought out”. The terror expert concludes: “We have improved quantitatively and qualitatively, but the threat situation has changed.” How high is the danger? Vienna and Graz have a pronounced jihadist scene. “We are the gateway to the Balkans,” says Stockhammer. On the other hand, Vienna is also the focus of extremists because it is home to many international organizations. There are between 50 and 70 menaces in the country. Another 200 people show an affinity for extremism that could become dangerous. How are the perpetrators currently radicalizing themselves? Around 80 percent are radicalized on social networks. The latest trend is “influencer preachers.” They flirt with conspiracy stories. For example, that politics promotes anti-Muslim racism and the population is being re-educated to hate Islam. The development of the Viennese assassin was “typical” for that of a European assassin. As a “lone perpetrator plus” he had a network that supported his ideology, but he planned the attack alone. We are currently confronted with “casual terrorism”. Where are the shortcomings? A real drawback for Stockhammer is the fact that the authorities are not allowed to monitor the cell phones of potential threats for data protection reasons. The Constitutional Court overturned a corresponding law. “Here, the right to data protection conflicts with the right to life.” In general, the expert misses more commitment from the judiciary in the implementation of anti-terror laws.
source site-12