Skip to main content

Michael Zehaf Bibeau

After last Wednesday's shooting in Ottawa, a little tug-of-war over the nature of the event emerged. Some said it was terrorism. Others said it was crime, swayed by mental illness or drugs. It was probably in some measure both.

The RCMP's weekend statement that it has a video of shooter Michael Zehaf-Bibeau that showed his ideological motivation won't completely shake the view that he was troubled, or evidence of his crack addiction. But it is clear that there are lone wolves, plural, citing ideological inspiration to attack. They're acting alone, but there's more than one.

Now politicians are thinking about how to make national policy to deal with loners on the fringe.

Story continues below advertisement

That's a difficult problem to confront, but there's still an urge to do something – something. The Conservative government so keen to tell people they're acting that they're accidentally telling Canadians that till now, they were doing too little in their eight years in power.

"We will not over-react," Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney said in the Commons on Monday, "but it is also time that we stop under-reacting to the great threats against us."

You'd almost think the government is flailing. Luckily, they have done some valuable things even before last week's attacks that are likely to be more effective than the new measures Mr. Blaney is touting.

The government will make at least two new laws, Mr. Blaney said – although the first one, planned before the attacks, doesn't have much to do with lone wolf attacks in Canada.

It's a response to court decisions that concluded CSIS was overstepping its legal powers, especially its powers to spy outside of Canada. It might help deal with "homegrown terrorists" who leave to fight abroad, but won't do much about lone wolves here. Neither will the bill's measures to protect the identity of undercover spies in court hearings.

In testimony before a Senate committee on Monday, senior RCMP officers suggested there are some law-enforcement tools that might be useful, like a lower legal threshold on so-called peace bonds. But they also noted these are hard crimes to foil, and no tool provides much of a guarantee. Commissioner Bob Paulson drew attention to the simple fact that it's hard to detect an attack planned by one person alone.

Charlie Edwards, director of national security and resilience at the Royal United Services Institute, a defence and security think tank in London, puts it more bluntly. Police have a hard time foiling a planned attack by lone actors – who carry out attacks by themselves, but might have some support who helped them with some kind of logistics. With a solo actor, who really acts alone, the chance is slim to none.

Story continues below advertisement

There's no single path or profile for a radicalized lone actor, which makes it difficult to identify them, he said. But there are characteristics, by themselves ordinary traits, that can be meaningful when clustered. A number of radicalized individuals have been converts to Islam, for example, but obviously, most converts are not radicals, Mr. Edwards said. They may suddenly become much more conservative in their views, and change their style of dress. He said other factors fill out the picture: "Was he a loner? Had he been isolating himself from his previous friends?"

Why does that matter? Because those are the kinds of questions police are learning to ask. They might find signs of potential radicalization, and they're learning to make contact with community organizations who are more likely to see them, and who also might help them intervene with someone who seems on the road to radicalization.

Commissioner Paulson stressed those kinds of efforts when he testified before that Senate committee. There's a simple reason: just about every expert believes preventing violent radicalization is more successful than trying to foil the violent attack itself. And there's a need to prioritize people who come to police attention: the commissioner noted there are thousands of reports that range from someone who doesn't like the look of someone else, to someone who has evidence of a plot.

Luckily, the Canadian government hasn't been asleep. They put $10-million into the Kanishka Project to study terrorism, including Mr. Edwards' work on lone-actor terrorism. The RCMP are trying to come to grips with identifying and preventing radicalized lone actors.

But any quick move to enact new laws is likely to be more emotional reflex than useful response. "This is not about sweeping legislative reform," said Mr. Edwards. "This is about a careful, sober assessment of a threat."

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Cannabis pro newsletter