New Zealand's national terrorism threat level remains unchanged – but with newly introduced language now describing an attack as "possible".
The update on the threat level followed an annual inter-agency review by the Combined Threat Assessment Group, an inter-agency group hosted and led by the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service.
It meant a future terrorist attack remained a possibility, but the threat was not at the most extreme levels. The country was warned it "should not be complacent".
Someone acting alone, radicalised online, using basic weapons such as knives or vehicles while taking steps to avoid detection, was determined to be the most likely form of attack.
The latest review introduced new language, renaming the previous five tiers from very low, low, medium, high, and extreme to unlikely, possible, likely, and expected.
The new level of "possible" is equivalent to the previous level of "low".
Following the 2019 mosque terror attacks in Christchurch, New Zealand's terror threat level was raised to "high", which under the new language would be "highly likely".
The threat level could be changed at any time based on up-to-date intelligence.
Threat level 'meaningful and accessible'
Director-General of Security Andrew Hampton said the new language was part of an effort to explain the threat of terrorism in a "more meaningful and accessible" way.
“The threat level of POSSIBLE is exactly what it says under our new language – a terrorist attack in New Zealand is assessed as possible. This is something we should all be concerned about."
NZSIS said the decision to keep the threat level in place was based on present events and New Zealand's current intelligence picture.
As part of the investigation, the group considered what it called the "domestic terrorism context" and "relevant international threat factors" – drawing on classified and publicly available information to reach its findings.
Hampton said the NZSIS had talked publicly about the "deteriorating global threat environment" for some time.
"We have seen that deterioration continue.
“We are not yet at a point where the impact of this on New Zealand requires a change in our domestic terrorism threat level, but we are dealing with increasing complexities, which makes it harder to detect terrorism threats."
He said a "small number" of individuals in New Zealand had continued to express intent to carry out an act of violent extremism.
"Some almost certainly have access to the basic capabilities needed to carry out an attack."
Difference between terrorism and a fixation on violence
He described an "increasing complexity" with a growing crossover of ideological and non-ideological violence alongside a "shopping around" between different ideologies by individuals.
"Individuals fixated on violence with mixed, unstable or unclear ideological perspectives remain a particular concern. It is also getting harder to determine whether individuals are ideologically driven, or just fixated on violence in itself."
The CTAG investigation identified white identity, faith, politics, and online conspiracy theories as some of the major motivations for violent extremism.
“It is important to note that, as we’ve previously said, there is no one ideology which dominates in the New Zealand threat environment," Hampton said.
He said international events, including overseas attacks, had continued to feature in extremist narratives.
"This enables people to connect without knowing the real identities and motivations of others they are dealing with."
"However, generally speaking, we are not seeing this progressing from online rhetoric to violence targeted within New Zealand. We do remain concerned about how young people are being exposed to violent extremism in the online environment."
SHARE ME