The German government like its counterparts across Europe faces a very similar challenge: the spread of Islamic radicalism within many Muslim immigrant communities. The Germans, along with others, have been rightly accused of not responding adequately to this challenge, even though it was well known that Islamic extremists and terrorist were residing in Germany, including, of course, several of the 9/11 perpetrators. In their defense, the Germans argue that they have arrested all known terrorist suspects and kept the extremists under close surveillance. However, until evidence of a criminal act has been determined, the arrest of these radicals was not considered an option. Indeed, several countries, including Germany, have argued that the British approach, which involves the arrest and then the embarrassing release of terrorist suspects due to lack of evidence, is counter-productive because it undermines public confidence in the competence of the authorities and because it alienates Muslims, thereby undermining efforts to win hearts and minds.

Internment without trial is an option that few European countries favor both for moral and legal reasons, and several countries, Germany included, have condemned both Britain and the United States for allowing the indefinite detention without trial of terrorist suspects. However, of late, even in the more liberal democracies, such as Germany and the Netherlands , this somewhat permissive attitude has changed. In large part, this change has occurred for three key reasons. Firstly, most governments have woken up to the fact that Islamic extremists and terrorists do not limit their racial hatred or the call to wage holy war toward just the United States and the United Kingdom but to all Western democracies. Secondly, each has discovered that Islamic extremism is spreading rapidly within their Muslim immigrant communities. And thirdly, the Madrid train bombings vividly demonstrated the deadly potential of Islamic terrorist groups that are left unchecked.