In their methods all terrorists agree: violence against innocents aims to spread terror, to take as many lives as possible. The attack by the Saudi doctor, who drove an SUV into a crowd, killing five people and injuring more than 200, many of them seriously, fits the familiar pattern.
However, this is where the similarities between the 20 December carnage in Magdeburg and other terrorist crimes end. “After 25 years in this business, you think nothing can surprise you” wrote the German terrorism expert Peter R. Neumann a few hours after the attack.
The expert, whose analyzes are in high demand these days, added: “But a 50-year-old ex-Muslim from East Germany who loves the AfD and wants to punish Germany for its tolerance of Islamists – I really didn’t expect that.”
Top politicians, particularly the government, were initially reticent about the conclusions. In the foreground were the horror and the collective mourning, which occupied the country for days. But now political debates about the causes of crime are intensifying. An emergency meeting of the parliament’s internal affairs committee is scheduled for Monday in Berlin.
There, party representatives will begin the systematic investigation and seek answers to questions that, more than any other issue, preoccupy German public opinion these days: what were the motives of what many consider a mysterious Taleb al Abdulmohsen; How was this crime possible and – most importantly – could the deadly attack on December 20 have been prevented?
While the democratic parties avoided recriminations, the far-right Alternative for Germany () immediately placed some of the blame on what it sees as the government’s failed immigration policy. The party president Alice Weidel described the arrested perpetrator as “Islamist full of hate”.
We still don’t know every detail about the perpetrator’s motives. These will be revealed by police investigations, psychologists and, ultimately, judges. We can already rule out with almost certainty, based on what is known from his statements on social networks, that Abdulmohsen was an Islamist.
One evidence that indicates this is his will, which was found in the car in which the crime was committed. In it the 50-year-old stipulated that, in the event of his death (which he apparently considered likely), his entire fortune would be transferred to the German Red Cross – an act hardly suggestive of an Islamist killer.
In the German media there is talk of the perpetrator’s sympathies towards the AfD. In his posts on X he allegedly made references to joint plans with the AfD. Among them was the creation of an academy for Muslims who have abandoned their faith. About this he wrote: “Who else is fighting Islam in Germany (besides the AfD)?”.
AfD’s numerous statements on the matter make no mention of them, because they do not fit the populists’ simplistic worldview. The commentator of the liberal newspaper “Süddeutsche Zeitung” accuses the party of deception: “Truth twisted into lies is part of the DNA of populism.”
The German far-right, which in recent polls gathers around 20%, can count on strong supporters from the US. “Only the AfD can save Germany” wrote the .
In the same post, he described the German chancellor “incompetent fool” and demanded his immediate resignation – an insult that does not bode well for German-American relations in the new year. Those offended see Musk’s call in favor of the AfD as “attack on German democracy”: every democrat should be concerned “when Putin and Musk simultaneously intervene in the German election campaign” said the head of the Social Democratic Party (SPD) Lars Klingbeil. “The fact that they are both campaigning for the AfD speaks for itself.”
It has now become known that the authorities knew the perpetrator at least since 2015. In addition, reliable sources state that the government of Saudi Arabia had warned the German authorities about its notorious citizen last year and had requested his extradition. It is also known that the German authorities had launched an investigation into the perpetrator. However, he was not known for acts of violence, but only for threats and insults which – according to the defense of the Authorities – were not sufficient, under the strict rules of the law, even for arrest, let alone deportation.
In addition to the legal investigation of the case, the terrorist attack in Magdeburg also puts the scientific community dealing with violent extremism in a difficult position. The case, according to the German expert on terrorism Hans-Jakob Schindlershows that beyond the classic categories of Islamist extremism and Far Right and Far Left extremism, there is now another category: people “who create their own ideological, personalized narratives.”
In this particular case, in addition to political and ideological factors, possible psychological disorders play an increasingly important role in explaining the bloodbath. “He wanted to cause society the maximum possible pain” says the forensic psychiatrist Reinhard Haller. “As for the disorder, there are two possibilities. Either it was a paranoid personality disorder with strong fanatical features or a person with hallucinations who orients their behavior accordingly.”.
It will be weeks, maybe even months, before the last word is said on this great tragedy. In two months, a new parliament will be elected in Germany and the election campaign is nearing its peak. Populists will use rumors and half-truths to win votes, putting the issue of immigration even more at the center of the political debate. This is not good news for the democratic forces. They will have a hard time convincing the electorate of the complexity of reality.
Dr Ronald Maynardous is a political analyst, commentator and principal researcher of ELIAMEP.
