This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/25/world/europe/terrorist-or-disturbed-loner-munich-attack-reveals-shifting-labels.html

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Terrorist or Disturbed Loner? Munich Attack Reveals Shifting Labels Terrorist or Disturbed Loner? Munich Attack Reveals Shifting Labels
(about 9 hours later)
WASHINGTON — Munich’s police chief, Hubertus Andrä, the morning after a gunman killed nine people and then himself, offered two pieces of information that seemed at odds.WASHINGTON — Munich’s police chief, Hubertus Andrä, the morning after a gunman killed nine people and then himself, offered two pieces of information that seemed at odds.
The massacre, he said, appeared likely to be “a shooting rampage” rather than an act of terrorism. But when asked about Anders Behring Breivik, the right-wing Norwegian terrorist who killed 77 people exactly five years earlier, Chief Andrä answered that “this connection is obvious.”The massacre, he said, appeared likely to be “a shooting rampage” rather than an act of terrorism. But when asked about Anders Behring Breivik, the right-wing Norwegian terrorist who killed 77 people exactly five years earlier, Chief Andrä answered that “this connection is obvious.”
“We must assume that he was aware of this attack,” he said, referring to the Munich gunman, 18-year-old Ali Sonboly.“We must assume that he was aware of this attack,” he said, referring to the Munich gunman, 18-year-old Ali Sonboly.
Information about Mr. Sonboly is still emerging. But regardless of what details surface, Mr. Andrä’s classification of the attack — as potentially inspired by a famous terrorist attack, yet not terrorism itself — reflects more than the increasingly blurry line between mass assailant and terrorist. Information about Mr. Sonboly is still emerging. But regardless of what details surface, Chief Andrä’s classification of the attack — as potentially inspired by a famous terrorist attack, yet not terrorism itself — reflects more than the increasingly blurry line between mass assailant and terrorist.
It also highlights that this line is often drawn differently depending on the attacker’s apparent ideology.It also highlights that this line is often drawn differently depending on the attacker’s apparent ideology.
When mass killers show even minor hints of affinity for jihadist groups, as they did in recent attacks in Orlando, Fla., and Nice, France, their actions are swiftly judged to be terrorism. But when their source of inspiration appears to be right-wing extremism, as Mr. Andrä speculated could be the case in Munich, they are often treated as disturbed loners. When mass killers show even minor hints of affinity for jihadist groups, as they did in recent attacks in Orlando, Fla., and Nice, France, their actions are swiftly judged to be terrorism. But when their source of inspiration appears to be right-wing extremism, as Chief Andrä speculated could be the case in Munich, they are often treated as disturbed loners.
This has fed concerns by civil rights groups and Muslim organizations, in Europe and the United States, that there is a lower bar for labeling something as terrorism when it can be linked to Islam. This tendency, they warn, feeds into anti-Muslim sentiment at a time when far-right populist movements are calling for special restrictions on Muslims.This has fed concerns by civil rights groups and Muslim organizations, in Europe and the United States, that there is a lower bar for labeling something as terrorism when it can be linked to Islam. This tendency, they warn, feeds into anti-Muslim sentiment at a time when far-right populist movements are calling for special restrictions on Muslims.
The Islamic State has contributed to the blurring of this line. Because it encourages individuals to act alone, it can be nearly impossible to differentiate an attacker acting on behalf of the group from one who is merely grasping for justification to commit violence. The group benefits from this uncertainty, playing up claims of responsibility to better terrorize faraway communities that it might otherwise strain to reach.The Islamic State has contributed to the blurring of this line. Because it encourages individuals to act alone, it can be nearly impossible to differentiate an attacker acting on behalf of the group from one who is merely grasping for justification to commit violence. The group benefits from this uncertainty, playing up claims of responsibility to better terrorize faraway communities that it might otherwise strain to reach.
But nonjihadist ideologies, though they might receive less scrutiny, are also capable of inspiring violence.But nonjihadist ideologies, though they might receive less scrutiny, are also capable of inspiring violence.
Mr. Breivik, in planning his 2011 attack, appeared to draw ideologically on European far-right websites on which he was an active commenter, according to a research paper by Raffaello Pantucci, a terrorism expert at King’s College London. Mr. Breivik wrote a 1,500-page manifesto that, like the propaganda of the Islamic State, provides ideological justification and some tactical advice for anyone interested in following his model.Mr. Breivik, in planning his 2011 attack, appeared to draw ideologically on European far-right websites on which he was an active commenter, according to a research paper by Raffaello Pantucci, a terrorism expert at King’s College London. Mr. Breivik wrote a 1,500-page manifesto that, like the propaganda of the Islamic State, provides ideological justification and some tactical advice for anyone interested in following his model.
At a time when terrorism is a major issue in Western politics, defining something as terrorism is not just a matter of determining motive. It is a political statement in itself.At a time when terrorism is a major issue in Western politics, defining something as terrorism is not just a matter of determining motive. It is a political statement in itself.
Consider 22-year-old Dylann Roof, who last year killed nine people at a predominantly black church in South Carolina. A Facebook photo of Mr. Roof showed him wearing flag patches — one from apartheid-era South Africa, the other from white-ruled Rhodesia — that have been adopted by white supremacists. He later said he had hoped to ignite a race war.Consider 22-year-old Dylann Roof, who last year killed nine people at a predominantly black church in South Carolina. A Facebook photo of Mr. Roof showed him wearing flag patches — one from apartheid-era South Africa, the other from white-ruled Rhodesia — that have been adopted by white supremacists. He later said he had hoped to ignite a race war.
When the Justice Department announced charges against Mr. Roof, none mentioned terrorism. Legal scholars say that this accurately reflects federal law, which classifies only certain acts, such as airplane hijackings, as terrorism. But the decision appalled many African-Americans, who saw it as part of a pattern of playing down white supremacist violence against them.When the Justice Department announced charges against Mr. Roof, none mentioned terrorism. Legal scholars say that this accurately reflects federal law, which classifies only certain acts, such as airplane hijackings, as terrorism. But the decision appalled many African-Americans, who saw it as part of a pattern of playing down white supremacist violence against them.
This spoke to the significance of labeling something as terrorism, which implies that the attack represents a larger threat — and thus compels action against that threat.This spoke to the significance of labeling something as terrorism, which implies that the attack represents a larger threat — and thus compels action against that threat.
This is why many Republicans have criticized President Obama for, they say, being too slow to label an attack as terrorism, which they see as an excuse to avoid action.This is why many Republicans have criticized President Obama for, they say, being too slow to label an attack as terrorism, which they see as an excuse to avoid action.
But it is also why Muslim and civil rights groups worry that lone madmen are more likely be termed terrorists if they are Muslim, which they say encourages fear and suspicion of Muslims. Anti-Muslim attacks are rising in the United States and Europe, highlighting the consequences of that fear. But it is also why Muslim and civil rights groups worry that lone madmen are more likely to be termed terrorists if they are Muslim, which they say encourages fear and suspicion of Muslims. Anti-Muslim attacks are rising in the United States and Europe, highlighting the consequences of that fear.
Political scientists define terrorism as violence committed to further a political agenda. When an individual acts alone, and particularly if that individual has both a troubled background and a record of consuming extremist material online, it can be difficult to determine whether an attack fits that definition.Political scientists define terrorism as violence committed to further a political agenda. When an individual acts alone, and particularly if that individual has both a troubled background and a record of consuming extremist material online, it can be difficult to determine whether an attack fits that definition.
As those classifications have become more politically charged, they are increasingly treated as a strict binary: Something is considered terrorism or not terrorism. But this often obscures more than it reveals, reducing the complex drivers of mass violence to a simple matter of black and white.As those classifications have become more politically charged, they are increasingly treated as a strict binary: Something is considered terrorism or not terrorism. But this often obscures more than it reveals, reducing the complex drivers of mass violence to a simple matter of black and white.
In truth, terrorism analysts say, there is no hard distinction between an individual who commits violence for a political cause and one who is driven by his own demons.In truth, terrorism analysts say, there is no hard distinction between an individual who commits violence for a political cause and one who is driven by his own demons.
That is a difficult truth to take on, because it requires acknowledging a high degree of uncertainty about who is a potential threat and how to prevent future attacks. But resisting this realization can lead to some odd moments — such as suggesting that the attack in Munich may have been inspired by one of Europe’s most famous terrorists and yet not constitute an act of terrorism itself. That is a difficult truth to take on, because it requires acknowledging a high degree of uncertainty about who is a potential threat and how to prevent attacks. But resisting this realization can lead to some odd moments — such as suggesting that the attack in Munich may have been inspired by one of Europe’s most famous terrorists and yet not constitute an act of terrorism itself.