RADICAL IGNORANCE

For years, Australians have been told, both directly and indirectly, that radical Islam constitutes the country’s greatest danger. This narrative has been repeated so frequently that it has become embedded in public consciousness as common sense. Terrorist attacks abroad, isolated incidents domestically, and a continuous flow of overhyped and at times racist political and media commentary have reinforced the perception that Muslim extremism is the primary threat. Once established, fear is difficult to dispel. But when the discussion shifts from emotion to the assessments provided by Australia’s security agencies, a different picture emerges. While radical Islam remains a legitimate concern, it is not the nation’s greatest threat. Persistently framing it as such diverts attention from broader, more persistent, and ultimately more damaging risks.

Australia’s intelligence community has increasingly emphasised that espionage and foreign interference are now occurring at unprecedented levels. This characterisation does not suggest a minor or secondary issue; rather, it reflects a shifting global environment in which major powers compete for influence, technology, and strategic advantage. Australia is central to this competition due to its geographic position, research sector, defence partnerships, and critical infrastructure.

Foreign state actors are targeting defence technologies, including projects related to the AUKUS submarine program, and are employing increasingly sophisticated methods. Artificial intelligence enables large-scale data theft, while deepfakes and coordinated disinformation campaigns seek to distort public discourse. Diaspora communities may also experience pressure or coercion linked to foreign governments. Although these activities rarely generate dramatic headlines, they steadily erode national sovereignty and institutional stability. ASIO has indicated that more Australians are now targeted by foreign intelligence activities than ever before. Scientists, business leaders, public servants, and ordinary citizens may become involved in efforts to extract information or influence decision-making. The threat extends beyond traditional espionage, encompassing preparations for sabotage, cyber attacks on infrastructure, and even the potential for state-sponsored violence.

These threats often remain hidden from public view, making them easy to overlook, yet their cumulative effects can surpass those of a single terrorist act. They gradually undermine systems rather than causing immediate disruption, complicating political responses because they do not fit straightforward narratives.

At the same time, the terrorism landscape itself has changed. Politically motivated violence remains a serious concern, but it no longer belongs to one ideology. Right-wing extremist and nationalist movements have grown in influence in many Western countries, including Australia. In some periods, investigations into racially motivated or nationalist extremism have matched or exceeded those linked to religious motivations. Online radicalisation has fragmented the problem, with individuals drawing on conspiracy theories, grievance politics, or mixed ideological influences rather than on organised groups. The result is a threat environment that is more unpredictable and harder to categorise.

At this point, public perception and official assessment diverge. Public discourse often remains anchored in the fears of the early 2000s, when Islamist terrorism dominated global attention. In contrast, security agencies now characterise the threat landscape as one of cumulative harm, with no single dominant danger. Australia currently faces multiple high-intensity risks simultaneously, including foreign interference, cyber sabotage, espionage, and politically motivated violence from various ideologies. While each risk may seem manageable in isolation, their combined effect creates a fragile environment where disruptions can have far-reaching consequences.

ASIO Director-General Mike Burgess has described the current security environment as the most challenging Australia has faced in fifty years. This assessment alone should prompt a reconsideration of how threats are publicly discussed, but unfortunately, neither our media nor political actors are up to the task. While radical interpretations of Islam continue to contribute to terrorism risk, the official consensus is that this is not the most significant overall security threat. Espionage and foreign interference present broader and more systemic dangers, and the terrorism landscape has diversified beyond any single cause.

Persistently framing radical Islam as the central threat carries high costs. It fosters suspicion toward entire communities rather than targeting individuals responsible for violence. This approach undermines social cohesion and exacerbates divisions, creating conditions that extremists of various kinds can exploit. Security agencies recognise that community trust is essential for preventing radicalisation. When public debate is driven by fear or generalisation, this trust is eroded, ultimately compromising security outcomes.

Foreign interference may not evoke the same emotional response as terrorism, yet it can influence elections, shape policy, and compromise critical infrastructure. Cyber attacks may not result in immediate casualties, but they can disrupt essential services and undermine economic stability. These are gradual but nonetheless genuine dangers.

In essence, the official consensus of Australia’s intelligence community is that the country faces a layered, evolving threat picture. Radical Islamist extremism remains part of that picture, but it is not the defining challenge. Understanding this reality allows for policies grounded in evidence rather than fear, and for a national security approach that responds to the world as it actually is, not as it is often imagined to be. Unfortunately, both our politicians and media are either too stupid, too bigoted or too compromised to guide Australians through these complexities.

If you’re enjoying my posts, please consider chucking in a few bob to support me.