COMMENTARY

Spring 2010

by Hugo MacPherson

RELATED ARTICLES:

---

Thomas de Maizière outlines three factors he thinks essential to a re-think of the home-grown terrorism threat in Europe.

He emphasises preventative and community-based approaches because by looking at the root causes of how and why some people are radicalised we can perhaps intervene earlier. He also calls for Muslim communities to accept special responsibility for fighting Islamist extremism, and lastly he says closer East-West and intra-European co-operation is key.

But this looks more like a wish list than a game plan. Reams of research have already explored why people are radicalised, and they’ve found that no "profile" of potential terrorists exists. That makes identifying people who are vulnerable to radicalisation very difficult.

The community-based approach that de Maizière suggests is a good start. Work is now underway in the UK to raise awareness of the myriad factors that can lead to radicalisation with local political leaders, police, teachers and youth workers all increasingly aware they have a part to play in recognising the early signs of radicalisaton.

These are delicate relationships that can only be built up over time, so a vital ingredient for any counter-terrorism effort is gaining the support of Muslim communities. Any suspicions of “government spying” on young Muslims or perceptions of a culture of Islamophobia are likely to see Muslim community leaders rejecting the idea of joining forces to tackle the threat. Even a soft approach is better than nothing, because no counter-radicalisation effort can survive without support from the Muslim communities.

Governments have to shoulder some of the blame for the phenomenon of home-grown terrorism. Research suggests that perceptions of neo-colonialist foreign policies of some EU countries have helped the radicalisers’ recruitment of young people. But it’s forging partnerships outside Europe that is going to be equally important, even if fraught with complications. Working alongside countries like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan doesn’t automatically yield high-quality intelligence and a greater understanding of the terrorist threat. These countries are often slow to identify extremist groups operating within their borders, and they also tend to be powerless to stop them. But it’s also true that radical groups from these countries do sometimes influence Europe's young people, especially through the internet, so we should be investing more in technological methods to combat these on-line threats.

The bulk of radicalisation nevertheless still takes place among young people through personal relationships based on face-to-face contacts. If home-grown terrorism is to be an important focus of our security efforts, then home is where we must start. Al-Qaeda-inspired terrorists thrive on the way we continue to underestimate them. They are not, as Thomas de Maizière apparently hopes, operating to "sow distrust in our societies", but rather they are motivated by a desire to see their vivid revolutionary fantasies – based though they may be on a warped version of Islam – made reality in Europe and around the world.

So is a Europe-wide re-think what's needed to combat the home-grown terrorism threat? Yes, Europe can do better on sharing information on the activities of radical groups, on creating profiles of recent radicalisation cases and by promoting counter-terrorism best practice. Above all European governments should be looking again at policies that have contributed to the radicalisation of young people. And because Europe's Muslim communities are not all the same we should be cautious about any calls for a Europe-wide counter-terrorism strategy. It might look neat on paper, but it is the slow-burning local community-focused approaches that are beginning to show dividends. Building a European framework for sharing information comes later.