Berlin attack, group claims responsibility

So-called Islamic State (IS) has said one of its militants carried out the lorry attack on a Berlin Christmas market, which left 12 people dead. The identity of the attacker has not been established and there was no immediate way of verifying the claim. German prosecutors have freed the only suspect, citing insufficient evidence. He was identified by media only as Pakistani national Naved B. Officials suggested that a perpetrator or perpetrators might be on the run. IS said through its news agency that one of its "soldiers" had carried out the attack, in which 49 people were also injured, "in response to calls to target nationals of the coalition countries". German Interior Minister Thomas De Maiziere reacted cautiously to the claim, saying "several lines of investigation" were being pursued. Can police protect Christmas crowds? What we know A year of terror in Germany Before the suspect was released late on Tuesday, German officials said they could not be be sure if he was involved in the attack. Federal prosecutor Peter Frank told reporters that the style of attack and the choice of target suggested Islamic extremism. In other developments: The UN Security Council condemned "the barbaric and cowardly terrorist attack", saying "any acts of terrorism are criminal and unjustifiable, regardless of their motivation, wherever, whenever and by whomsoever committed" Police in London brought forward plans to close roads around Buckingham Palace during the Changing of the Guard ceremony, an event which regularly attracts large crowds Grey line IS opportunism? Analysis by Gordon Corera, BBC Security Correspondent An IS supporter in Iraq, August 2013Image copyrightAFP The IS claim does not prove much in terms of the attack in Berlin. The group often refers to individuals who carry out attacks as its "soldiers" but the crucial question is firstly whether the individual had any form of direct contact with IS. Face-to-face or online communication are possible but far from certain. If there was no direct contact, it could still be the case that an individual was inspired rather than directed by the group. In this case, an individual may leave his or her own pledge of allegiance in written form or online or in a video. But until such evidence emerges, it remains hard to know if this is just an opportunistic claim by the group rather than one based on real substance.