COVID disinformation and extremism are on the rise in New Zealand. What are the risks of it turning violent? According to Alexander Gillespie, Professor of Law at the University of Waikato, the best defence against extremism is a “see something, say something” culture — one where people raise their concerns with authorities.
Last week’s [09 November] COVID protest outside parliament served as a warning that New Zealand is not immune to the kinds of anger seen overseas. As Labour Party whip Kieran McAnulty put it, “I think everyone needs to be aware that things are starting to escalate.”
Professor Alexander Gillespie holds a PhD from Nottingham University and completed post-doctoral studies at Columbia University in New York City. His areas of scholarship include international and comparative environmental law, the laws of war, and civil liberties.
McAnulty himself had been abused by some with strong antivaccination views, and there has been increasingly violent rhetoric directed at government politicians and Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern. As a result, security for MPs has been stepped up. As the recent report from research centre Te Pūnaha Matatini showed, there has been a sharp increase in the “popularity and intensity of COVID-19 specific disinformation and other forms of ‘dangerous speech’ and disinformation, related to farright ideologies”. The analysis noted a broader threat: “that COVID-19 and vaccination are being used as a kind of Trojan Horse for norm-setting and norm-entrenchment of far-right ideologies in Aotearoa New Zealand.” Terror threat: medium Last year, New Zealand’s Security Intelligence Service (SIS) warned
18
NZSM
of the “realistic possibility” that continued COVID restrictions or further vaccination requirements could trigger an act of violent extremism. The country is not alone in this, of course. COVID-19 has seen dissent and angry protest rise globally, with inevitable concern over an increased risk of terrorism or violent extremism. Right now, New Zealand’s official terror threat level is assessed as “medium”, meaning an attack is deemed “feasible and could well occur”. By contrast, Australia’s threat level is set at “probable” and Britain’s at “severe”. According to its Department of Homeland Security, the US “continues to face a diverse and challenging threat environment as it approaches several religious holidays and associated mass gatherings”. The lone actor problem An SIS terrorism threat assessment from February this year, coupled with a “Threat Insight” from the Combined Threat Assessment Group in November 2020, divided potential terrorists in New Zealand into three groups based on faith, identity
December 2021 / January 2022
