On December 15, 2014, a gunman took hostages in downtown Sydney, Australia, leading to three deaths and four injuries. At 10:01 p.m. on July 7, 2016, a bombing took place on the 1258 local train of Taiwan Railway, leading to 25 injuries. Both of these cases received high international attention, caused severe casualties, and were categorized as cases of lone wolf crimes or lone wolf terrorism that were quickly solved by the police forces of Australia and Taiwan. A comparison between the measures of the police forces in the two countries can provide future references for other police forces when preventing, responding to, and investigating similar cases.

Identifying Lone Wolf Terrorism/Lone Wolf Crimes

Definition of Lone Wolf Terrorism

U.S. terrorism specialist and researcher Jeffrey D. Simon stated in his book Lone Wolf Terrorism: Understanding the Growing Threat that in the definitions of “terrorism” and “lone wolf terrorism” both have gray areas.

According to Simon’s personal experience through research and observation, although behaviors such as throwing gas bombs, shootings, and arson occur during protests, demonstrations, or mass uprisings, these incidents are not viewed as terrorist attacks and should not be equated with terrorism.

According to Simon, lone wolf terrorism should be defined as an individual acting alone—or with minimal support from one or two other people—to further a political, social, religious, financial, or other related goal, or, when not having such an objective, nevertheless has the same effect or potential effect upon government, society, business, or the military in terms of creating fear, disrupting daily life, or causing government, society, business, or the military to react with heightened security or other responses.¹

Differentiating Elements of Lone Wolf Terrorism

The attacks of lone wolf terrorists are violent crimes that should come with consequences such as arrest and conviction. However, the conduct of a single criminal can fall into three main categories: (1) general single person crimes, (2) lone wolf crimes, or (3) lone wolf terrorism. While different, the results of the latter two categories are very similar and have severe impacts on social order. However, three distinctive differences between the three types of crimes can be used to determine whether an act is a general single person crime, a lone wolf crime, or a lone wolf terrorist attack.²

Ideology: The motives for general single person crimes and lone wolf crimes are seldom connected to religious, separatism, or nationalism ideologies, while the actions of lone wolf terrorists often are driven, at least in part, by ideology.

Political Purposes: Most single person and lone wolf crimes, except for political assassinations, rarely involve political purposes, while the attacks of lone wolf terrorists are often connected to clear political goals. Lone wolf terrorists are usually dissatisfied with certain governmental policies and attract the attention of the government through extreme terrorist attacks in an attempt to force the government to change policies.

Offender-Victim Acquaintance: In most single person crimes, the offender is acquainted with the victim. Therefore, police and prosecutors are usually able to find evidence that leads to solving the crime by tracing the people, incidents, objects, and records related to the suspect. However, the offenders and victims of lone wolf crimes and lone wolf terrorist attacks are usually unacquainted and have no connection whatsoever.

To sum up, as show in Table 1, ideologies, political purposes, and the acquaintance between the offender and victim, are key elements that differentiate single person crimes, lone wolf crimes, and lone wolf terrorist attacks.:

Table 1: Key Differentiators Between Single Person Crimes, Lone Wolf Crimes, and Lone Wolf Terrorist Attacks

Summaries of the Two Cases

2014 Sydney Hostage Crisis

The 2014 Sydney hostage crisis occurred in downtown Sydney, Australia, on December 15, 2014, when a gunman, Man Haron Monis, held 13–30 customers hostage at the Lindt Chocolate Café located at Martin Place in Sydney, while the Hizb ut-Tahrir black flag (a symbol used by some terrorist groups) was held high. After a 16-hour standoff, the Australian police and Royal Australian Regiment stormed the café and rescued the hostages. Two people died and three were severely injured, and the gunman was killed during the raid.³

2016 Taiwan Train Explosion

At 10:01 p.m. on July 7, 2016, the Songshan Branch of Taipei Precinct, Railway Police Bureau of the National Police Agency, received a report issued by the station staff at Songshan Railway Station alerting them to an explosion in the sixth car of the 1258 train (from Hsinchu to Keelung), which was on the 2nd platform. The Railway Police immediately dispatched people to cordon off and control the area, provide aid and rescue, and make a record of those who were wounded. The Railway Police also notified the National Police Agency and contacted the Criminal Investigation Bureau to assist in the investigation, evidence gathering, and inquiries. A total of 25 wounded people were immediately sent to six nearby hospitals for care.⁴

Summary of Police Measure on Each Case

2014 Sydney Hostage Crisis

The measures taken by the Australian police after the 2014 Sydney Hostage Crisis follow:⁵

Established the Specialist Unit for centralized command and response: The Specialist Unit is an emergency response unit under New South Wales Police Force dedicated to terrorist attacks and hostage incidents. The convener of the unit is the deputy commissioner, while members of the unit include specialists in tactical operations, bombing preventions, intelligence, and negotiations. The Specialist Unit was immediately put into operation after the incident took place, with the convener responsible for command and response strategy.

Cordoned off surrounding streets and evacuated residents of nearby buildings: New South Wales Police Force promptly cordoned off surrounding streets and evacuated residents in buildings close to the incident scene, including people on the upper floors of the crime scene, the Lindt Café.

Cautioned media about reports to avoid unnecessary panic: The media were reminded to be cautious when reporting the hostage incident and to avoid spreading unproven, speculative information. Caution against being used by the offender as a channel for messages and giving rise to public panic were also advised.

Established the Public Information Inquiry Centre to respond to public inquiries: The Public Information Inquiry Centre was established to respond to public inquiries regarding the development of the hostage incident and the latest services provided by the government.

Urged everyone to remain calm and maintain a normal lifestyle: Police urged everyone to remain calm and refrain from going to the cordoned off area. Individuals who worked within the cordoned-off area were encouraged to work from home, while activities outside the area were encouraged to maintain normalcy.

Increased patrol frequency to give citizens reassurance: After the hostage incident, New South Wales Police Force announced a three-week police patrol project that targeted popular sites, stations, sports centers, and other crowded locations. The frequency of the 24-hour police patrol was increased to give those living, working, and recreating in Sydney reassurance.

2016 Taiwan Train Explosion

The measures taken by the Taiwan Police after the 2016 Taiwan Train Explosion follow:⁶

Immediately reported to the National Security Bureau and other related units to construct a Special Task Force: Director-General Kuo-En Chen of the National Police Agency and Commissioner Po-Liang Liu of the Criminal Investigation Bureau arrived promptly at the scene to become familiar with on-site situations and held a meeting with all concerned institutions. All developments were reported to the minister of the Ministry of the Interior.

Increased police visibility to reassure civilians: The National Police Agency contacted each police office to strengthen posts such as patrol and police watch and to increase efficiency at airports, harbors, the Taipei Metro, Taiwan High Speed Rail, and other public transport; landmark buildings; and locations of large international activities to ensure safety and to give a sense of reassurance.

Gathered a Special Investigation Team and started evidence collection and investigation: Director-General Chen asked the Criminal Investigation Bureau and Railway Police Bureau to put together a Special Investigation Team for explosives inspection and detection, on-site evidence collection, forensics, and eyewitness interviews. Taipei City Police Department assisted in providing CCTV records and traffic control, in addition to setting up a communication group on social media to enable instant information and communication from all sides.

Implemented victim response: The Special Investigation Team compiled a list of the people injured in the attack and provided the list to be broadcast by the media so that family members could be informed. The contact number of the Songshan Branch of Taipei Precinct, Railway Police Bureau of the National Police Agency, was also broadcast through media for community members to report information and for family members to inquire about the injured. Also, the Special Investigation Team immediately sent personnel to hospitals where the injured were being treated to provide comfort and clarify the case. The Ministry of Health and Welfare contacted all hospital staff to assist in making reports of the wounded.

Confirmed the public statement system and actively released news when appropriate: A spokesperson was appointed while information was actively released to clarify the questions of the public and to eliminate social fear.

Analyzed information to rule out suspicions of terrorism: No suspect or specific group expressed ideology or claimed to be responsible for the crime after the incident, and the management system of national security did not receive intelligence on the terrorist attack. Therefore, the possibility of the incident being a terrorist attack was ruled out. At 10:00 a.m. the next day (July 8, 2016), the incident was officially determined not to be a terrorist attack, but a severe sporadic offense on public order. This statement stabilized society and reduced fear.

Similarities in the Taiwan and Australia Police Response

Since the crime in Australia was determined to be a lone wolf terrorist attack caused by a single armed suspect taking hostages—and the suspect was killed during the police raid—the incident differs in attributes and orientation from the 2016 Taiwan Train Explosion, which is essentially a suicide bombing attempt targeting unspecified individuals who happened to be on a public transport system. Nonetheless, the responses had some key similarities.

• The Taiwan and Australia police both gathered a special investigation team immediately for central command and to start the investigation.
• Both the Taiwan and Australia police immediately cordoned off the crime scene and evacuated those in the area. However, the evacuation action carried out by the Australian police also included the surrounding streets and entire buildings near the crime scene.
• Both Taiwan and Australia police paid attention to the content broadcast by news media, and even actively sent out press releases to clarify doubts of the public, calm public fear, lead public opinion, and settle public emotion.
• Both Taiwan and Australia police increased police patrol. Taiwan swiftly increased police visibility, while the Australia police announced a three-week plan to increase patrol after the incident.

Preventing Lone Wolf Crimes and Terrorist Attacks

Whether the incident was a lone wolf terrorist attack, as in Australia, or a lone wolf crime, as in Taiwan, the countries where the incident took place held the responsibility of warning and intelligence gathering before the incident (however little there might have been), emergency response and investigation when the incident occurred, and restoring and maintaining public order after the incident.7 However, preventing the two types of crimes are no easy matter; both lone wolf crimes and lone wolf terrorism are forms of attack that are difficult to prevent. To effectively respond to the developmental trend of unusual, localized and lone wolf crimes and terrorist activities, governments should come up with thorough law strategies, security, intelligence, and Internet management systems to strengthen the integration of anti-terrorism and comprehensive judgments of situations. At the same time, potential lone wolf offenders should be identified, documented, and watched by family, friends, and neighbors through neighborhood watch.⁷ There are a number of ways to encourage community participation in this effort. For instance, in Malaysia, the project Amanita (“peace-loving women”) involves the assignment of a trained female officer to each district as the contact person for stay-at-home women who see suspicious characters or behavior or hear of crimes in their neighborhoods.⁸ Other projects drawing on the eyes and ears of the community is the United States’ If You See Something, Say Something campaign and UK efforts to encourage community members to report suspicious activities.⁹

Also, international police forces should share experiences in coping strategies before, during, and after crimes to efficiently handle lone wolf crimes and lone wolf terrorism to lower its impact on national and social order and to ensure a safe global society.

Notes:

¹ Jeffrey D. Simon, Lone Wolf Terrorism: Understanding the Growing Threat (Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, 2016); Fu-Chang Chang, “Lone Wolf Terrorism and Internal Security,” (presented at the 9th Terrorism and National Security Academic Conference, Central Police University, Terrorism Research Center Taoyuan, Taiwan, 2013).

² Chang, “Lone Wolf Terrorism and Internal Security.”

³ Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA), The Police Measure of Australia Police on the 2014 Sydney Hostage Crisis (Australia: Taipei Economic and Cultural Office, 2015).

⁴ Criminal Investigation Bureau (CIB), The Crisis Intervention and Investigation of Taiwan Police on 2016 Taiwan Train Explosion (Taiwan: Crime Investigation Affairs Division, 2016).

⁵ MOFA, The Police Measure of Australia Police on the 2014 Sydney Hostage Crisis.

⁶ CIB, The Crisis Intervention and Investigation of Taiwan Police on 2016 Taiwan Train Explosion.

⁷ “Taiwan Railway Explosion: Possibilities of Terrorist Attack Ruled Out,” United Daily News, July 9, 2016.

⁸ Farik Zolkepli and Jastin Ahmad Tarmizi, “Cops Take Amanita Plan to the Next Level,” The Star, September 6, 2013.

⁹ U.S. Department of Homeland Security, If You See Something, Say Something, “About the Campaign”; Tim Cushing, “UK Law Enforcement Telling Citizens to ‘See Something Say Something’ About Dark Web Use,” Tech Dirt, June 23, 2017.