Michael Zekulin: Australian National University lecturer on how the Bondi Beach shooting occurred

Sydney's terror attack is raising questions about intelligence shortcomings and where security systems could be beefed up.  

A 50-year-old man and his 24-year-old son allegedly shot dozens of people celebrating the Jewish holiday Hanukkah at Bondi on Sunday evening. 

The younger man had been investigated by the country's security agency before and wasn't considered a threat. 

A senior lecturer of terrorism and radicalisation told Heather du Plessis-Allan that intelligence services are probably watching dozens of people, forcing them to make decisions as to who is likely to be the most relevant threat at that time. 

Australian National University’s Dr Michael Zekulin says the alleged shooter didn’t meet the criteria in this case, which is something that’s been seen time and time again, in other countries as well.  

LISTEN ABOVE  

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
So questions are of course being raised about possible intelligence failings.
As was just mentioned, the Sun was across the radar
of the Domestic Spy Agency AZO as early as October
twenty nineteen. They decided though he was not a threat.

Speaker 2 (00:12):
Now.

Speaker 1 (00:12):
Doctor Michael Zacculin is the senior Lecturer of Terrorism and
Radicalization at the Australian National University. Morning, Michael, Hi, how
are you very well? Thank you? Deciding he was not
a threat in retrospect was a massive misjudgment. How did
they get it so wrong?

Speaker 2 (00:27):
Well, you have to take into account the fact that
at the time they're probably watching dozens and dozens of people,
and so basically you have to make decisions about who
you believe is the most relevant threat at that time,
and in this case, he didn't meet that criteria. And unfortunately,
this is something that we've seen time and time again

(00:49):
if you go back and look over the past sort
of a couple of years in other countries as well,
is that after these individuals are known or on the
periphery for police or in law enforcement LGIT agencies. But
the reality is is that they're having to watch so
many people and make decisions and other people are deemed
to be more of a threat.

Speaker 1 (01:08):
Does this I mean, does this mean that he took
whatever it was that he was consuming that radicalized him offline,
so that whatever he was doing online wasn't triggering the
intelligence guys?

Speaker 2 (01:20):
Oh, well, that depends. I mean. One of the things
that's very interesting about this case is the fact that
the father and son duo. The key is going to
be what happened sort of within that family. So was
this a case where the father also had extremist beliefs
and throughout this entire person's childhood they were sort of

(01:41):
you know, that they were exposed to these types of ideas.
It's less likely, but it's also possible that the son
sort of brought the father along. If you think about
the relationship between a father and son, just like sort
of any relationship, there there's a power dynamic there, and
we have seen that previously in other cases. You talk

(02:03):
about the Boston bombers, for example, who were brothers and
one was clearly radicalized and then brought the other brother along.
And in Canada there's the case of the Cotter family
in the two thousands, where essentially the father dragged along
all of his children into extremism, So it does happen,
but that's going to be one of the interesting dynamics

(02:23):
that they're going to have to sort out is what
was going on within that family.

Speaker 1 (02:27):
There are claims that Iran may have been involved in
this in some way or but behind it, is that
likely to be nonsense or to be possible.

Speaker 2 (02:35):
Well, you're going to you know, look under every stone
to make the determination. There have been suggestions here that
some of the earlier anti semitism attacks over the past
sort of a year or so involved relationship between members
of the IRG, the Revolutionary Guard in Iran, and organized
crime here. Again, the extent to what that is, you know,

(02:59):
how high up these people are in the food chain
are sort of either way formally or informally. That hasn't
become public yet. But again, you're going to turn over
sort of every single every single storm to make a
determination of what happened here.

Speaker 1 (03:11):
All right, Hey, Michael, thank you, Doctor Michael Zaculan, Senior
Lecturer of Tourism and Radicalization at Australian National University. For
more from the Mic Asking Breakfast, listen live to news talks.

Speaker 2 (03:22):
It'd be from six am weekdays or follow the podcast
on iHeartRadio,