Sydney Stories

Away from the fires, there is anxiety over terrorism, says Kathy Marks, who wonders if the city's inhabitants are not enjoying their status as targets

You could not wish for a more beautiful setting for hearing Elgar and Beethoven than the forecourt of the Sydney Opera House, overlooking the harbour. But despite the balmy evening, many of the seats were empty for a performance by the Sydney Symphony Orchestra last weekend.

The outdoor concerts are a new phenomenon and, unfortunately for the organisers, they were launched at an unpropitious time. With the city gripped by paranoia about terrorist attacks, many locals are avoiding landmarks such as the Opera House, below, and Harbour Bridge as well as major sporting venues.

Australians never used to have such fears, but the explosions in Kuta Beach in October changed all that. Although all the evidence suggests that the Bali bombs were aimed at Western tourists in general, Australians are convinced they were specifically targeted. The next inevitable step, they believe, is a terrorist strike on home soil and Sydney is regarded as the most likely location.

Post-Bali anxieties have reached fever pitch since the government warned two weeks ago that it had received intelligence about a generalised but credible terrorist threat. Since then, 24-hour security has been mounted around icons such as the Opera House.

Sydneysiders are taking the threat seriously. A friend told me she no longer shopped in Pitt Street Mall, a pedestrianised precinct in the middle of town. Another friend, on hearing that my parents were about to visit from Britain, asked: "Aren't they worried about coming to Australia?"

The fears may be irrational, but they are real. More than 90 Australians died in Bali – the biggest peacetime loss of life in the nation's history – and many believe the government courted disaster by enthusiastically supporting US policy on Afghanistan and Iraq. It is difficult to avoid the sneaking suspicion that, notwithstanding its genuine shock and grief, Australia is enjoying its new status as a terrorist target. It has joined the select group of nations important enough to be picked out by fanatics.

This attitude is understandable in a country where the cultural cringe – the feeling that nothing of Australian origin counts unless it is validated by Britain or, more latterly, the US – still exerts a powerful hold. The shame is that an easygoing city that still feels safe as houses is so eager to surrender the qualities that make it unique.

It is a very different Sydney from the city that hosted the Olympics two years ago – but, according to a report last week, the city was under threat even then.

The plot to launch a terrorist attack at the 2000 Games was allegedly directed by Riduan Isamuddin, alias Hambali, the Indonesian fugitive accused of being operations chief until recently of the regional terrorist group, Jemaah Islamiyah (JI). It seems that Hambali was bitterly disappointed when the plan was rejected by the head of JI in Australia, Abdul Rahim, for reasons unclear.

Some observers are sceptical about the report, which appeared in Singapore's Straits Times and quoted regional intelligence officials. Two days earlier, the Australian Prime Minister, John Howard, had infuriated South-east Asian leaders by declaring that he supported pre-emptive strikes against terrorist groups planning attacks against Australia from neighbouring countries.

The report, suggesting there was an active terrorist cell in Australia, could not have been better timed. Was someone trying to tell Mr Howard something? Such as, Australia should put its own house in order before it interferes in other nations' affairs?