This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/dec/05/terrorism-uksecurity
The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 1 | Version 2 |
|---|---|
| We need to get tough on extremism – in all its forms | We need to get tough on extremism – in all its forms |
| (35 minutes later) | |
| The death of Drummer Lee Rigby was in many ways a watershed moment in Britain's struggle against violent extremism. It was a brutal and highly symbolic killing of a member of our armed forces, and on British soil. Compared to the elaborate plots in New York, Madrid or Boston, the attack on the streets of Woolwich was shockingly simple. Two men, Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale, are currently on trial charged with his murder, which they both deny. | |
| The Woolwich attack was quickly followed by other events that underscored the changing face of extremism in Britain. There was a sharp rise in verbal and physical abuse against British Muslims, arguably fuelled by a more assertive far right. Then six men were imprisoned on terrorism offences after planning an attack on the English Defence League. Shortly after, it was revealed that since the London bombings in 2005, security officials had disrupted 34 terror plots. Then the case of Pavlo Lapshyn pushed the spotlight back on to rightwing violence: a lone attacker with far-right literature, Lapshyn murdered a Muslim pensioner and detonated three bombs outside mosques in the Midlands. All of this in less than 12 months. | The Woolwich attack was quickly followed by other events that underscored the changing face of extremism in Britain. There was a sharp rise in verbal and physical abuse against British Muslims, arguably fuelled by a more assertive far right. Then six men were imprisoned on terrorism offences after planning an attack on the English Defence League. Shortly after, it was revealed that since the London bombings in 2005, security officials had disrupted 34 terror plots. Then the case of Pavlo Lapshyn pushed the spotlight back on to rightwing violence: a lone attacker with far-right literature, Lapshyn murdered a Muslim pensioner and detonated three bombs outside mosques in the Midlands. All of this in less than 12 months. |
| This highlights how the challenge from extremism is not static. Extremists learn from the past, and adapt for the future. Increasingly, the days when we faced a clearly identifiable threat with top-down chains of command look obsolete. Instead we have lone attackers or small cells of fanatics whose "radicalisation" often takes place as much online as offline. | This highlights how the challenge from extremism is not static. Extremists learn from the past, and adapt for the future. Increasingly, the days when we faced a clearly identifiable threat with top-down chains of command look obsolete. Instead we have lone attackers or small cells of fanatics whose "radicalisation" often takes place as much online as offline. |
| After Woolwich, the government sought to meet this challenge by launching a taskforce on radicalisation and extremism. The taskforce's report, which has just been released, was shaped by an underlying view that Britain has been too reticent about challenging extremist ideologies, and needs a more muscular approach. Recommendations include: new orders to ban groups that preach hate; antisocial behaviour powers to make life difficult for those who seek to radicalise others; greater effort to remove extremist literature online through measures such as filters and exclusion from the UK of those who post material; trained Muslim chaplains to tackle extremism in universities and prisons; support for extremists in prison; and the ability for government to intervene in hotspots where councils are failing to take sufficient action. | |
| Inevitably, defenders of civil liberties and minority rights will argue that some of this goes too far, while others will argue it does not go far enough. There is no mention of the growing concern about extremist views in the military, and many will question government's ability to enact real changes online. As an academic, I was also surprised that the taskforce did not consult more widely (to my knowledge not one academic or research expert in extremism or terrorism was invited to engage directly with it). | Inevitably, defenders of civil liberties and minority rights will argue that some of this goes too far, while others will argue it does not go far enough. There is no mention of the growing concern about extremist views in the military, and many will question government's ability to enact real changes online. As an academic, I was also surprised that the taskforce did not consult more widely (to my knowledge not one academic or research expert in extremism or terrorism was invited to engage directly with it). |
| However, the report goes some way to addressing two criticisms often levelled at similar efforts. The first criticism is that government is only really interested in radical Islamists and ignores or only pays lip service to groups hostile to Islam. But this time the government, more than any of its predecessors, does stress the need to tackle extremism of all kinds, citing Islamophobia and the far right. It also advocates that the Channel programme, which supports individuals who are at risk of radicalisation, be made a legal requirement, which is significant given that a growing number of referrals relate to the far right, not simply Islamist violence. | However, the report goes some way to addressing two criticisms often levelled at similar efforts. The first criticism is that government is only really interested in radical Islamists and ignores or only pays lip service to groups hostile to Islam. But this time the government, more than any of its predecessors, does stress the need to tackle extremism of all kinds, citing Islamophobia and the far right. It also advocates that the Channel programme, which supports individuals who are at risk of radicalisation, be made a legal requirement, which is significant given that a growing number of referrals relate to the far right, not simply Islamist violence. |
| The second criticism is that British Muslims will be unfairly stigmatised, a view rooted in memories of the Prevent strategy that some say treated Muslim communities with suspicion while ignoring their grievances. Yet the government has arguably done more than others to tackle anti-Muslim prejudice, investing in work that recognises the sacrifice of Muslim soldiers and the atrocity in Srebrenica; setting up a programme to improve data on hate crime against Muslims; and establishing a cross-government working group on anti-Muslim hatred. Those who claim nothing is done to counter Islamophobia are increasingly at odds with reality. Much of this reflects the tireless work of Baroness Warsi, who after rightly saying Islamophobia had "passed the dinner table test", put it on the national agenda. | The second criticism is that British Muslims will be unfairly stigmatised, a view rooted in memories of the Prevent strategy that some say treated Muslim communities with suspicion while ignoring their grievances. Yet the government has arguably done more than others to tackle anti-Muslim prejudice, investing in work that recognises the sacrifice of Muslim soldiers and the atrocity in Srebrenica; setting up a programme to improve data on hate crime against Muslims; and establishing a cross-government working group on anti-Muslim hatred. Those who claim nothing is done to counter Islamophobia are increasingly at odds with reality. Much of this reflects the tireless work of Baroness Warsi, who after rightly saying Islamophobia had "passed the dinner table test", put it on the national agenda. |
| No counter-extremism strategy will unite us all. Such work lies at the notoriously fragile intersection between civil liberties and national security. But for the first time in a long while there are signs that we are moving in a better direction, and have acknowledged some failings in the past. While this week's recommendations provide us with a foundation rather than a coherent strategy, they are a useful starting point for us all. | No counter-extremism strategy will unite us all. Such work lies at the notoriously fragile intersection between civil liberties and national security. But for the first time in a long while there are signs that we are moving in a better direction, and have acknowledged some failings in the past. While this week's recommendations provide us with a foundation rather than a coherent strategy, they are a useful starting point for us all. |
| Matthew Goodwin is an associate professor at the University of Nottingham | |
| Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning. | Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning. |