Islamic extremism has once again reared its head, this time tragically at Bondi Beach during a Hanukkah celebration. The mass shooting on December 14, 2025, marked a dark chapter in Australia’s history, killing 15 people and injuring about 40. This attack, inspired by ISIS ideology, is the deadliest mass shooting in Australia since the 1996 Port Arthur massacre and highlights critical failures in security and immigration policies.
Sajid Akram and his son, Naveed Akram, carried out the assault with chilling intent. Despite strict gun control laws, both were licensed firearm owners, raising serious questions about how such individuals could obtain weapons. Sajid, who had lived in Australia since arriving on a student visa in 1998, had held his firearm license for around a decade. His son, Naveed, had previously been scrutinized by intelligence services for links to an ISIS cell in Sydney. Authorities, however, determined that he did not pose an imminent threat and cleared him after six months of investigation. This incomprehensible oversight allowed the father-son duo to execute their deadly plan without intervention.
The attack featured a terrifying onslaught, with the attackers firing a staggering 103 rounds and using homemade explosives. The presence of Islamic State flags and explosive devices firmly ties this incident to a broader trend of Islamist terrorism, which has claimed countless lives worldwide. Data from the Global Terrorism Index and other authoritative sources underscore that Islamist organizations are disproportionately responsible for terrorist acts. Over 87% of terrorism-related fatalities from 1979 to April 2024 can be attributed to Islamist extremists, showcasing an alarming pattern of violence.
In response to this tragedy, government officials have called for stricter gun laws, implying that legislative changes could prevent future atrocities. However, this narrow focus on firearms overlooks the underlying ideological motivations of such attacks. As the research indicates, the true threat lies in the extremist views fueling these actors, not merely the tools used to carry out their agendas. Associating gun control with preventing terrorism feels like treating symptoms while ignoring the disease itself.
While some voices will point fingers at conservatives or nationalists as potential threats, the empirical evidence tells a different story. There are no parallel ideologies within Christian or nationalist groups that can be likened to the global jihad of Islamic extremism. No comparable organizations exist with the same history of mass violence or transnational coordination.
As the world grapples with the unfolding consequences of this attack, it is evident that a reassessment of policies surrounding immigration and domestic threats is crucial. The memory of the 15 lives lost at Bondi Beach should push officials to adopt a more comprehensive approach—one that acknowledges the persistent risks posed by radical ideologies.
"*" indicates required fields
