Program: Is Bondi the start of a new era of terror?

Advertisement: Terrorism has changed the world and Australia is not immune. All of us can play a part by keeping an eye out for anything suspicious. Be alert, but not alarmed. Together, let's look out for Australia.

Andy Park: If you lived through 9-11, you would have heard that ad on repeat. And by all reports, the terror hotline did work to prevent terror. But what else actually works? The Prime Minister says new laws to tackle anti-Semitism will, including powers to deport so-called hate preachers and a new criminal charge for those advocating racial supremacy. He's ultimately been pressured into adopting the Special Envoy to Combat Anti-Semitism's recommendations in full. Today, the Lowy institutes Lydia Khalil on how to stop the next terror attack. I'm Andy Park on Gadigal land in Sydney. This is ABC News Daily.

Andy Park: Lydia, two years ago, acts of terrorism in the West were, in fact, at a 15-year low. And since then, Australia's terror threat level was raised once. And after an escalation in anti-Semitic attacks and, of course, the weekend's terror attack on Bondi Beach, Australians have rightly been asking if they're safe. So I'm asking you, are we safe?

Lydia Khalil: Well, Andy, it's very difficult, obviously, at a time like this in the immediate aftermath of the worst terrorist attack on Australian soil to make claims of safety. And this is especially the case when many members of the Jewish community have been feeling unsafe and apprehensive since the rise in anti-Semitic attacks and intimidation and rhetoric for the past two years since the October 7th attacks and the ensuing Israel-Hamas conflict. But I'll try to give some broader context. So since the September 11th attacks over 20 years ago, Australia has been a persistent target of terrorism. There's been homegrown radicalisation and self-directed plots and attacks by people inspired by all sorts of ideologies, including violent jihadist ideology like the Islamic State. There's been other extremist threats from the far right, from anti-government conspiracy groups as well. And the terrorism threat level has been probable since 2024, which means there's a greater than 50 percent chance of an onshore attack or attack planning in the next months. And we've also had our social cohesion come under strain from a variety of things, including cost of living, greater social isolation. That said, because Australia does have capable and well-resourced national security agencies, we've been able to intercept many plots. We also have a relatively successful multicultural democracy. We've got relative prosperity and a high degree of social services. And so this has spared us the worst of what could have happened. Authorities have thwarted many attacks and plots, and their overall track record in stopping them in plots over the past 20 years has actually been quite good. To use the cliche, Australia has punched above its weight in this regard for many decades.

Andy Park: Most Australians, the average Australian, would have heard much more about the rise of the far right in recent months and years as opposed to any kind of focus on jihadism and extremism. Should we have been more focused on Islamic extremism?

Lydia Khalil: I would say that counterterrorism authorities and law enforcement have a much more difficult job now than when the global war on terror first started. The terrorism threats are now much more diffuse and diverse. You have violent jihadist groups like the Islamic State continue to inspire and motivate violence. There has been this growing far right extremist threat. Neo-Nazi movements in Australia have grown. They've motivated lone actor violence and plots. But you've also got things like nihilistic violence movements that are growing and preying upon young people or grievance fuelled anti-government individuals and movements and conspiratorial movements as well. And so law enforcement and intelligence need to be across multiple threats in the way that they haven't had to before. But I think the important thing to note is that anti-Semitism, which we believe to be a driver, at least in part, for this Bondi attack, it forms a part of nearly all violent extremist movements. It's an element of violent Salafi jihadist ideology like the Islamic State. And similarly, you have neo-Nazi ideology and white supremacist groups calling for all Jews to be eradicated. Even conspiracy movements like QAnon have strong elements of anti-Semitism in that they blame the world's evils on this global elite cabal, which is controlled by Jews. So all forms of violent extremism need to be taken seriously. And unfortunately, many, if not all, violent extremist movements and ideologies have some element of anti-Semitism to them.

Andy Park: Bondi Beach has cancelled its New Year's Eve celebration in fear of further violence. So do you think that planning for large crowded events, particularly this summer, particularly after what we've seen last weekend, will have to change?

Lydia Khalil: Crowded places have long been a preferred terrorism target. They tick all the boxes in terms of a terrorist attack. They're in a public space and terrorism is a communicative public act. They're nearly impossible to completely secure because you're in an outside open space. And they can also very easily lead to mass casualties, which is why terrorists often target them. We also have had early reports saying that there were two police officers that were assigned to the event in Bondi. And I think in light of that terrorist attack and the targeting of public Jewish celebrations in this atmosphere of increased anti-Semitism, we'll adjust assessments about security resourcing of similar events. I'm sure that will be taken a look at. But it's also important that as a society, as a public, we don't give into the terrorist intention, which is to cause fear and terror, to undermine our sense of safety and normalcy and to radically change how we live our lives, because that's the very intent of a terrorist attack like the Bondi attack.

Andy Park: Lydia, I want to talk about what is proven to be effective when it comes to preventing and responding to terrorism. And it's not like the world hasn't had plenty of experience with this type of terrorism over the last few decades. I mean, 9-11, the London bombings, the 2015 Paris attacks. What lessons can be learned from how authorities responded to those attacks that might be applicable to the case of Bondi Beach?

Lydia Khalil: So after the 9-11 attacks, there was an extensive review, which culminated into a 585 page report called the 9-11 Commission Report. And that attack highlighted the need for greater intelligence sharing among agencies and jurisdictions. It also highlighted the fact that we need to take an enemy's intentions seriously, no matter how far fetched or fantastical we think they are. You also had attacks like the 2008 Mumbai attack, which demonstrated that a well-resourced terrorist group could conduct a style of urban warfare in a non-warfare setting.

News report: On the evening of November 26, 10 terrorists armed with machine guns and grenades arrived here by boat, split up into groups and laid siege to the city.

Lydia Khalil: So we didn't think it could be done, say, by local cells in a Western capital, but the 2015 Paris attacks demonstrated that it could be done because they also had simultaneous attacks across the French capital by various cells working in coordination. The London bombings, as you say, it served lessons both, I think, for first responders, how to improve communications and radio networks, particularly underground. And it also offered further lessons about intelligence sharing and the importance of looking at digital footprints and trails because the suicide bombers for the London bombings had some behaviours and messaging online that indicated clues of their intentions and plans.

Andy Park: What about lessons learned from events closer to home? I mean, we had inquests into the Lindt siege and also the Bondi Junction stabbing attack. What did we learn from those events that could help here?

Lydia Khalil: So after the Lindt Cafe siege, they went from an approach that was contain and negotiate to one where you intervene immediately. Law enforcement officials were instructed to disarm and intervene immediately. It also led to the creation of the fixated persons investigation unit due to the nature of Man Monis, which was the perpetrator of the Lindt Cafe siege. So he was an individual who didn't meet the threshold of falling under the counterterrorism investigations radar, but he did pose a violent danger to society. And I think for this most recent attack, authorities will be looking to review protocols around information sharing and intelligence sharing yet again, of course, but also about who's registered on firearms registries, protocols for examining and improving gun licenses, what types of links or associations would merit a ban of someone not receiving a firearms license. Although it's important to note that actually intelligence authorities were aware of this risk that radicalised individuals be looking to associate with people who so-called clean skins who had gun licenses. So this is something that intelligence and law enforcement had been in tune to. And so that might trigger some reforms around this area.

Andy Park: I'm interested to ask you about something that you've written about, which is that several high profile terrorist incidents have also included multiple family members. How does that make the job harder for counterterrorism authorities to sort of sniff out these activities and try and prevent future terror attacks?

Lydia Khalil: The alleged attackers in Bondi were father and son. Family members being involved in terrorist attacks is a quite common occurrence in modern terrorism. You had the Boston Marathon bombing, the Charlie Hebdo attack in Paris, the San Bernardino shootings in California. All were committed by people either related to each other as siblings or husband and wife. This is the first alleged father and son attack outside of a conflict zone I've come across, but it's the same principle. The Islamic State in particular has encouraged involvement in Islamic State ideology and in the movement and to make it a family affair. So the other thing to note is that radicalisation can happen quickly and be more intense if you have someone you trust or in close proximity with or have a loving relationship with like a family member or a partner, which reinforces and validates your extreme beliefs. So you're literally living in a hothouse of extremism. Plots carried out by close family members are much harder to track and there's greater operational secrecy and security. So that helps evade law enforcement's ability to disrupt plots.

Andy Park: A few years ago, de-radicalisation programs received a lot of funding, a lot of press attention, particularly in the wake of 9-11. Is there any evidence to suggest they work to prevent terror attacks? What do we know?

Lydia Khalil: So these type of intervention programs, they're meant to address and intervene with people who are showing signs of radicalisation to violence. But that can only happen if a person comes to the attention of authorities before they're planning an attack. And we know that prevention and intervention programs can and do work, but not all the time. And that's why we need robust intelligence and law enforcement capabilities, which we do have in Australia.

Anthony Albanese, Prime Minister: I have done my best to respond. Do I regret... Anyone in this position would regret not doing more and any inadequacies which are there. But what we need to do is to move forward. We are taking action. We have taken action.

Andy Park: Lydia, the Prime Minister has announced new laws to tackle anti-Semitism, including powers to deport so-called hate preachers and a new criminal charge for those advocating racial supremacy. This happened after days of pressure and he'll now adopt the Special Envoy to Combat Anti-Semitism's recommendations in full. What do you make of these sorts of measures? Do you think they'll tackle that central question about preventing the next terror attack?

Lydia Khalil: I think they're important first steps. We've had anti-hate and vilification laws on the books for a long time. So it'll be interesting to see how these additional measures intersect with that, whether they increase the thresholds for bringing people before the court. There's also an interesting recommendation of creating a registry of individuals and movements who espouse extremist views. And that's clearly in response to a challenge that's been in the community for a long time. Many movements have skirted up until the point of the law, but have been very careful not to cross that line into criminality. And so I think this measure will be an important one. I think a lot of it depends on how it will be implemented. But it goes to addressing that very difficult challenge of movements that we know are dividing the community, potentially radicalising individuals, but either preachers or movements or organisations that are relying on the openness of democracy and freedom of speech to continue their engagements while remaining lawful. So they fall into this awful but lawful category that's been quite a challenge.

Andy Park: So are you worried that we're in a new era of terrorism here in Australia? Or do you think this will be just a rare one-off?

Lydia Khalil: Terrorism, thankfully, by its very nature is rare. But it's also what makes it so destructive. I think we've been in this quote-unquote new era for some time, where all of the threats we talked about are more diverse and diffuse. And our law enforcement and intelligence agencies have been pretty clear about this. I think it's government's ultimate responsibility for national security. But individually, I think we can all look to see what we can do as citizens and community members to keep our social cohesion, ensure that we support each other, especially those that are feeling vulnerable at this time, like the Jewish community, to be careful about what information we consume and how to be a strong link in a chain that holds our peaceful society together and support anyone who feels vulnerable.

Andy Park: Lydia Khalil is an extremism and counterterrorism expert and the director of the Transnational Challenges Program at the Lowy Institute. This episode was produced by Jessica Lukjanow, audio production by Sam Dunn. Our supervising producer is David Coady. I'm Andy Park and thanks for joining me this week. I'm sorry it was such a terrible time for the country. Join us next week as our special series of summer episodes begins. Sam Hawley is joined by our favourite ABC presenters and journalists, looking back at some of their best stories and interviews of 2025. You'll hear conversations with Alan Kohler, Stephanie March, Matt Bevan, Leigh Sales and 7.30's Sarah Ferguson. That's next week on ABC News Daily.