And finally this evening, a new piece for the Telegraph exploring how the terrorist threat has evolved and how government’s need to be careful in their responses to not make it worse.
One year since the Manchester bombing, the West risks playing into terrorists’ hands
- RAFFAELLO PANTUCCI |DIRECTOR OF INTERNATIONAL SECURITY STUDIES, RUSI
A year has passed since innocent children leaving a concert in Manchester were brutally murdered by another young Mancunian twisted by Isil ideology. That attack illustrated once again how foreign conflicts can reach directly back into the UK.
While there is no doubt that the heart of the threat we face in Britain lies within radicalised young people, born and raised within our shores, it is important to remember the connections – both ideological and physical – that exist between them and extremist networks abroad.
The persistent nature of terrorism is clear to see. Most recently, Indonesia faced its first female suicide bomber, while Paris was scarred once again by a random stabbing attack, which has lately become the signature of Isil inspired or directed terrorism. Yet while both attacks led to deaths and drew some attention, neither was able to muster the sort of attention that such attacks would have generated even as little as a year prior. As people become more accustomed to attacks, their perception of the threat picture recedes.
In some senses, this is a positive development. Terrorism’s power to scare is what gives it strength. In its absence, the group loses its ability to project fear and draw attention. But there is a negative side to this as well. In the first instance, terrorist groups will find themselves seeking to do ever more atrocious and dramatic attacks to capture our attention once again. An outcome of this race to the bottom is more human misery.
There is also the risk of the issue slipping off the official agenda. One year on from Manchester, the terror threat in the UK and Europe shows no sign of abating, though it is shifting in its nature. As MI5 head Andrew Parker recently made clear, the expulsion of Isil from Raqqa and Mosul raises the threat of fighters returning to the UK and other countries to perpetrate more complex attacks.
Counter-terrorism is a long-term management effort focused on reducing risk from a small contingent of individuals. For this, what is needed is a well-resourced security apparatus which is working closely with partners to ensure measures are in place to manage these dangers. As Parker warned, European countries will be key to managing this threat. While we cannot make it go away entirely, we can control and minimise it.
But some of the bigger questions lie abroad. Even home-grown extremists are often influenced and inspired by foreign affairs: for instance, the feeling that there is a worldwide war by “crusaders” against Muslims. Crackdowns, human rights problems, massacres and mass imprisonments create more fuel for extremists even in countries where these are not a problem.
Dealing with that means we have to be proactive in ensuring issues of justice and rule of law are addressed through proper institutions, even in faraway countries. If we don’t, we allow the creation of spaces and contexts from which groups like Isil can emerge.
Isil, after all, was the product of a feeling among Sunni Muslims in Iraq that they were persecuted in their own country. Iraq’s next government seems likely to be partly controlled by the Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, who established and ran one of the country’s stronger Shia militias, after his party won the largest number of seats in the Iraqi parliament. So ensuring that the new administration does not pursue a sectarian agenda and makes Iraqi Sunnis feel represented will be crucial to ensuring the embers in Iraq do not once again catch fire.
None of this is easy. Britain does not have control over foreign governments and cannot simply dictate to the world. Resolving these issues requires dealing with fundamental historical and tribal questions which a limited aid budget will struggle to resolve. But we can chip away at them and help foster better institutions. We can certainly make sure we are not doing anything that will make the situation worse.
This in many ways is the biggest lesson that western governments need to bear in mind when trying to manage these issues in the longer term. Our actions on the world stage have consequences. Whoever the blame lies with, the violence that American decisions in Israel are stirring up will have consequences.
Tearing up accords, making divisive pronouncements and disregarding public opinion or allies’ views can stoke anger. This can catalyse confrontation which ultimately provides sustenance to the “clash of civilisations” world view which extremist groups thrive upon to define their narrative and attract recruits, funding and attention. As long as our enemies foster these narratives to advance their goals, we are doing ourselves a disservice if we self-inflict such injuries.
Terrorism is a sadly perennial issue. But let us make sure that we are not actively making it worse, and feeding the flames of the very fires we are trying to fight.
Raffaello Pantucci 