Communist Party of Australia  

Home


The Guardian

Current Issue

PDF Archive

Web Archive

Pete's Corner

Subscribe

Press Fund


CPA


About Us

Why you should ...

CPA introduction


Contact Us

facebook, twitter


Major Issues

Indigenous

Unions

Health

Housing

Climate Change

Peace

Solidarity/Other


State by State

NSW, Qld, SA, Vic, WA


What's On

Topical


Resources

AMR

Links


Shop@CPA

Books, T-shirts, CDs/DVDs, Badges, Misc


 

Issue #1657      September 24, 2014

From prying plumbers to snooping social workers

Waled*, aged 31, was working at a youth centre in Hammersmith, London, when the centre decided to accept funding that the local authority was making available under the Prevent program, one of the elements of Britain’s anti-terrorism strategy. It was 2009 and the youth centre was under “terrorism” scrutiny, so the funding was a way to stay in the game.

The government claims that Prevent is designed to “engage” the Muslim community, but many have grown sceptical and see it as a surveillance program.

“Faith-based youth provision services were always struggling financially, so it was just an opportunity for them,” Waled explains now.

The government claims that the Prevent program is designed to “engage” the Muslim community, but many have grown sceptical and see it more as a surveillance program.

“The criteria for [the funding] was really looking at how to put together a project or an event that could identify young people who may have extremist views. No doubt about it, we all walked away feeling it was an intelligence-gathering forum,” says Waled.

Thirteen years after 9/11, the “war on terror” continues. The Prevent program was first introduced by the then Labour government after the July 7, 2005 London bombings, with the aim of identifying those at risk of radicalisation for early “intervention”.

Under the program, those reported as “individuals at risk” are referred to a multi-agency panel and assessed. Referrals have increased steadily. Recently released figures show that their number nearly doubled between April 2013 and the end of March 2014, compared to the same period the previous year, a rise which coincided with the aftermath of the murder of soldier Lee Rigby by two British Muslim men.

Only 20 percent of those referred on by Prevent have been deemed “individuals at risk” by the multi-agency panel.

Tougher measures

After the radical Islamic group IS released two propaganda videos in which a man with a British accent beheads American journalists Jim Foley and Steven Sotloff, the British government raised its terrorism threat level from substantial to severe, and laid out new counter-terrorism measures.

These include new proposed powers to make it easier to revoke passports from British citizens and those with dual nationality, and to prevent suspected British terrorists from returning to Britain.

It is believed that around 500 Britons have travelled to Syria and Iraq, some of whom are fighting in the ranks of the IS – a group that is known to have decapitated, buried alive, raped, enslaved or expelled hundreds of Iraqi Yazidis, Christians and Shi’a minorities.

Muslim leaders across the board have condemned the actions of IS and have tried to isolate the group’s interpretation of Islam from that of the Muslim community. Some influential British imams have issued a fatwa that “religiously prohibits” British jihadists from joining IS.

British Prime Minister David Cameron recently stated: “It is not enough to target those who preach violent extremism – we need to go after those who promote the extremist narrative and life view that gives the terrorists and the men of violence support for what they do. It is not unlike the cold war, where we did not just pursue those who wanted to do us such harm, we also had to challenge all those who gave them succour.”

More harm than good

Some in the Muslim community claim Prevent has done more harm than good, and that the strategies used have contributed to radicalisation.

The program has been implemented in schools, doctors’ surgeries and social services and 37 percent of referrals made between April 2007 and the end of March 2014 were of people under the age of 18.

A pilot program that ended last June in the Greater Manchester county saw two social-housing providers – Mears and Adecco – train their staff on how to spot and report violent extremists, from managers and social workers to repair and maintenance workers.

Dr Muhammad Abdul Bari, writer, educator and former chair of the Muslim Council of Britain, an umbrella organisation for over 500 mosques, schools and associations in Britain, says the problem runs deeper – particularly after the new coalition government reviewed the Prevent program.

The government claims that Prevent is designed to “engage” the Muslim community, but many have grown sceptical and see it as a surveillance program.

“Unfortunately, most of the Muslim community wasn’t made part of [the review],” he says. “It’s based on a ‘conveyor belt’ theory, meaning that a young Muslim could be initially radicalised, then go through the process of non-violent extremism, then violent extremism, and could end up as a terrorist. We once again criticised this because there is no evidence; experts, in fact, say the opposite: that there’s no linear line between radicalisation and the act of terrorism.”

According to this “conveyor belt” theory, many mainstream Muslim organisations such as the Council of Britain could be considered non-violent extremists, and the government has virtually cut any form of dialogue with them.

“There’s a feeling in the community … that we are seen as Trojan horses or a suspect community, coupled with the media’s sensational headlines. Young Muslims feel the brunt of it because they are not like the previous first generation [of immigrants], who would keep quiet. We are also worried about our young people going to Syria, but we know these young people don’t come from the mosque.”

Cage, a civil liberties group campaigning on behalf of British Muslims affected by the “war on terror”, have claimed that Prevent is nothing less than a modern-day version of McCarthyism, targeting anyone accused of being a communist sympathiser. On this point at least, the civil liberties group and David Cameron agree.

* name has been changed
New Internationalist

Next article – Culture & Life – From the other USA

Back to index page

Go to What's On Go to Shop at CPA Go to Australian Marxist Review Go to Join the CPA Go to Subscribe to the Guardian Go to the CPA Maritime Branch website Go to the Resources section of our web site Go to the PDF of the Hot Earth booklet go to the World Federation of Trade Unions web site go to the Solidnet  web site Go to Find out more about the CPA