Advertisement

Terror-linked attack in St-Jean-sur-Richelieu should give security experts pause

Terror-linked attack in St-Jean-sur-Richelieu should give security experts pause

A fatal vehicle collision and the death of a member of the Canadian Forces which were quickly linked to terrorism could spark some significant changes in the way Canadians consider domestic terrorism, and the way officials handle potential threats inside the country.

One day after the death of Warrant officer Patrice Vincent in St-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Que., was identified by the federal government as a “possible terror attack,” details continued to emerge about what led to Vincent and another member of the military being struck by a suspect who has been identified as a “radicalized” supporter of a terrorist ideology.

Several media reports identified the man driving the car that struck two members of the military in a parking garage on Monday as Martin Rouleau, one of about 90 potential terrorist sympathizers placed under security surveillance after travelling to terrorist hotspots.

The Canadian Press cites RCMP Commissioner Bob Paulson, who confirmed the suspect’s passport had been seize and that he was under investigation by the RCMP. But it may take time to understand what this all means for Canada’s strategy against the Islamic State terrorist group, against domestic terrorism, and the country’s role overseas.

Thomas Juneau, an assistant professor at the University of Ottawa’s Graduate School of Public and International Affairs, said it would be a stretch to link the attack to Canada’s role in opposing the Islamic State (IS) terror group in the Middle East.

"It is wrong to jump to the conclusion that this is a direct reprisal for Canada’s role in the U.S.-led coalition against the Islamic State," Juneau told Yahoo Canada News on Tuesday, adding that “Canada can be a target no matter what we do in Iraq.”

Juneau added that while there is no indication the suspect had direct ties to a larger terrorist group, the details surrounding the incident are indicative of a strategy shift from the dominant terrorist threat.

While al-Qaeda’s focus was on “spectacular attacks” against Western targets, the Islamic State (IS) has preached followers to launch less expensive, low-scale assaults. Those that take less planning, fewer expenses and don’t require explosives, which can draw the attention of authorities.

“They (al-Qaeda) really wanted the flash that comes with large-scale attacks. IS … is actually keen to focus on less flashy attacks,” Juneau told Yahoo Canada News. “In terms of sophistication, this is absolutely basic. As a rule, IS has tried to do what it said it would do.”

Juneau added that these are attacks are extraordinarily difficult to prevent. Even if the suspect is known to security officials and under surveillance, there is nothing illegal about sitting in a parked car.

“In a democracy, there is nothing you can do about that,” he said. Juneau added while there won’t be a sudden onslaught of similar attacks, Canadians should do a “sober assessment of the threat.”

The St-Jean-sur-Richelieu attack was first brought to national attention on Monday, when a backbench Conservative MP asked Prime Minister Stephen Harper in the House of Commons to comment on unconfirmed reports of a suspected terrorist attack. Harper called the incident “extremely troubling.”

At a news conference on Tuesday, Public Safety Minister Steve Blaney doubled-down on the assertion, saying the incident was “clearly linked to a terrorist ideology”.

"We are taking terrorist threats very, very seriously. This incident reminds us that terrorist threats are very real," Blaney said in French. He later added, in English: "This is a terrible act of violence against our country, against our military, against our values."

The Royal Canadian Mounted Police have confirmed that the suspect in the attack was known by the Integrated National Security Investigations team in Montreal, which was “concerned that he had become radicalized.”

The RCMP statement in full:

This individual was known to Federal authorities including our Integrated National Security Investigations team in Montreal who along with other authorities were concerned that he had become radicalized.

Out of respect and deference to the ongoing Criminal investigation arising from today’s terrible events the RCMP will not comment further except to say that we are working with our law enforcement partners to ensure all avenues of investigation are pursued.

Christian Leuprecht, a terrorism expert who teaches at Queen’s University and the Royal Military College of Canada, said the attack could have implications for how Canadian security officials operate in the future.

If it is true, for example, that the suspect’s passport had been seized then the Canadian Security Intelligence Service would have not only been investigating him but would have also flagged the file for the RCMP as well. There could be questions about how long the RCMP’s investigation had gone on for, and whether there is any way to hasten that process in the future.

"There needs to be more by in large that simply chatter about violence, extremism or crazy ideas. There needs to be some evidence that individuals are looking to move from thought to action," he said.

"That is probably in the end what is going to come out of this. The RCMP is going to open up its evidence and say, ‘this is what we had on him.’ And it isn’t going to be enough to get a conviction."

Leuprecht said there could be some consideration to attempt to limit the movement of those whose passports are seized, though that would collide with the mobility provisions in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and the province’s responsibility over driver and vehicle licencing.

“We need to consider that society has been pretty resilient from these attacks,” Leuprecht said, noting the last successful terrorist attack on Canadian soil dated back to the 1980s. “These incidents are very rare. We need to make sure we don’t overreact to one. At the same time, we need to make sure we have the balance between security and freedom right. And security and freedom aren’t a dichotomy, they are complimentary.”