The Algerian justice ministry said that nearly 55,000 people accused of committing “terrorist offences” have faced legal proceedings in Algeria since the country’s bloody civil war in the 1990s. This was the first time the Algerian authorities openly discussed such numbers. The government uses the term “terrorists” for members of armed Islamist militias. These militias launched a vicious war against the country’s military and police – and against moderate s Algerians – in 1992, after the government cancelled the second round of the parliamentary elections for fear that the Islamist would win a majority.

The Danish government has launched a campaign to recover thousands of dollars worth of benefit money from a few dozens of Danish citizens who have left Denmark to join ISIS in Syria. At least thirty-four Danes who traveled to Syria to fight in ISIS ranks have continued to receive unemployment benefits. Last year, thirty-two Danes were identified as having continued to receive government assistance while being active members of the terrorist organization.

In just one weekend in December, a series of terrorist attacks killed nearly 200 people in five different countries – Germany, Turkey, Nigeria, Pakistan, Yemen, Egypt, and Somalia. This is a horrific spate of attacks, but while the resultant headlines are certainly alarming, all the attacks occurred in countries facing very specific challenges. Rolling them all together into one “wave” of violence is misguided, and misunderstands the real nature of global terrorist threats. Terrorism’s preeminent effects are psychological rather than a physical; it has a way of skewing our perceptions, meaning we perceive a bigger menace than actually exists. To fight it, we need to fight back against these psychological tricks. So long as we go on assuming that terrorist attacks are connected and trying to link them to a global extremist threat looming on our doorstep, we misunderstand the unique problems facing each country – and what’s needed to defang them.

The Christmas market truck assault in Berlin, which has left twelve dead and dozens injured, is a disturbing echo of the truck-borne attack on Bastille Day celebrants on the Nice promenade in July. How could such events be allowed to happen? Why weren’t intelligence agencies in Germany and France able to stay one step ahead of the perpetrators? The role of the security and intelligence agencies to remain vigilant and seek to monitor extremist elements will undoubtedly endure. The secret of their success will continue to be keeping their successes secret. However, this does not absolve the rest of society from remaining engaged in community, by being inclusive, welcoming, and helpful, while also maintaining a level of vigilance many had come to associate with a bygone era.

At least nine people were killed and more than fifty injured when a truck plowed into a crowd at the popular Christmas Market in Berlin two hours ago (Monday afternoon EST). The attack happened in Breitscheidplatz, a major square in the center of the German capital. The Mirror notes that every year, the city of Berlin hosts a Christmas market at the square. The market consists of “more than 100 beautifully decorated market stands and Christmas booths as well as 70 fairground rides,” according to the city’s Web site.

Saudi Arabia has intensified its lobbying campaign in the United States in an effort to persuade American lawmakers to change a the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA), a law which allows victims of the 9/11 terrorist attacks to sue countries implicated in terrorism against the United States – but a law which even its authors said was aimed at Saudi Arabia.

Fewer than two in ten people detained by police since September 2001 were convicted directly of terrorism or a terrorism-related offence. The Home Office figures show that 3,349 people in England and Wales were arrested under terrorism laws since the devastating 9/11 attacks in the United States. Of those arrested for terrorism and related offenses, 17.8 percent were convicted for involvement in violent jihad – including plotting attacks or funding or facilitating terrorism.

For the first time in the UK, the government has moved to ban a right-wing, neo-Nazi group called National Action. Our own research has argued that the power to ban groups has questionable value for reducing the threat of terrorism. This skepticism dovetails with the work of other researchers who doubt that contemporary terrorist groups are appropriate targets for “listing” because they tend not to exist as coherent organizations with a fixed identity and an identifiable membership. The effectiveness of banning National Action, however, might be far less important than the communication of a message that groups such as this are unwelcome in contemporary British society.

An Israeli air raid on a depot controlled by the Syrian regime two weeks ago hit a supply of chemical weapons being transferred to the Iran-backed terror group Hezbollah, a spokesperson for a Syrian opposition group said Sunday. Israeli Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman obliquely suggested last week that Israel was responsible for the strike and that the target had been Hezbollah-bound chemical weapons; other Israeli leaders have made it clear in public statements and conversations with foreign leaders that they will act to prevent Hezbollah from acquiring “game-changing” weapons or strengthening its positions on Israel’s borders.