TERROR ATTACKS AND BRITISH RESPONSE    

Europe is the latest front in the Islamic terror strikes on the West. Deadly strikes hit Brussels, Germany and elsewhere over the past year.  Assailants linked to the Islamic State attacked a concert hall, stadium and restaurants and bars in Paris in November, 2016 killing 130. Will the Vatican be next? A newspaper cutting featuring a Nostradamus prediction foreseeing a “Muslim army” marching through Europe went viral in the wake of the Paris atrocities. Did the 16th century mystic philosopher foresee the rise of the murderous ISIS cult?

Britain’s brush with terrorism is not new. The island kingdom  suffered attacks in the latter part of the twentieth century carried out by various Irish Republican Army (IRA) groups linked to the Northern Ireland conflict and  attacks by Middle Eastern terrorist groups linked to the Arab–Israeli conflict. What is new is that recent terrorist incidents have been linked to Islamic fundamentalism employing  fidayeen suicide attacks where terrorists launch a raid knowing they will probably die and aim to kill as many as they can. On July 7, 2005 four separate Islamist extremist suicide bombers detonated bombs on three underground trains and a double decker bus killing 56 civilians and injuring 700. After a lull (or heightened alertness post-9/11 in US?) of a dozen years the country has been hit by a series of terror attacks in 2017.

On 22 March 2017 six people, including the attacker, died and 50 people were injured in a terror attack near the Houses of Parliament.  Khalid Masood mounted the pavement in a hired car and drove into pedestrians on Westminster Bridge. He then ran towards Parliament and stabbed a police officer to death before being shot dead by officers.

On 22 May an attack in Manchester Arena left 22 people dead and 59 injured.  The suicide  bomber, Salman Ramadan Abedi, 22, was born in Manchester to Libyan parents. Abedi travelled between Libya and Britain, and was known to intelligence agencies in Germany and France.

 On 3 June a white van hit pedestrians on London Bridge before three men got out of the vehicle and began stabbing people in nearby Borough Market leaving seven people dead and 48 injured. The suspects were shot dead by police minutes later.  Khuram Butt, 27, a British national who was born in Pakistan, is believed to be the ringleader. Butt was open about his extremist views and was known among the public as such. But despite receiving calls from concerned members of the public about Butt’s increasingly radical views, police concluded that he was not a threat and the investigation was scaled back. Butt is the third terrorist in recent months to carry out an attack despite being known to security services. . Confronted with public outrage Assistant Commissioner Mark Rowley of London Police admitted Butt was known to police and MI5 but said there had been no evidence of "attack planning" and he had been deemed as a 'low priority.'

The attacks took place close to the general election on June 8. An exasperated Prime Minister Theresa May In a speech outside Downing Street   rounded on those who "tolerate" extremism as she told them: "Enough is enough.” She also made clear that county councils must play their part by breaking up ghettos where “evil” ideology can breed and stopping it spreading in schools. She may as well have said that local police must put in their bit .The Bobby in course of his beat patrolling knew and was known to each household and residents would confide in him any suspicious arrivals or absences. Lately police have largely abandoned visits to racially sensitive areas. Any law enforcement in these areas is treated with a simmering resentment which quickly erupts into violence. The easy option for the police has been to designate them as "no-go areas". It is worth mentioning that county police, of which Bobby is a part, is neither under nor have regular exchanges with the Metropolitan Police or the MI5.

Security and intelligence agencies have been and will continue to remain whipping boys in the blame game. Under the circumstances they have not done too badly. It is not as if the security services had lost control. While there had been three attacks since March, another five alleged plots had been foiled in the same period. They said it was difficult to prevent attacks that involved knives which gives the attacks a new dimension.

The bomb attacks on London have raised questions about how Britain's counter-terrorist services handle radical Islamists with suspected ties to terror groups and have emphasised differences between the UK and US. One of the striking areas of contrast is the degree to which each government legislates against the expression of unpopular, offensive or ‘extremist’ views, particularly those attributed to members of Muslim community. While both countries have long traditions of protecting the freedom of expression, the UK government has shown increasing tendency to legislate against allegedly ‘extremist’ speech, even in the absence of a connection to substantial criminal steps or potential violence.  By contrast, the US government has been particularly loath to intervene or legislate against the expression of unpopular, offensive or ‘extremist’ views so long as that speech is unconnected to violent or criminal action. As well as gathering more information about other components of a suspected cell, British tactics are also aimed at gathering evidence that will stand up in court. But US agencies have preferred early action against suspects in the hope that doing so will nip the possible plots in the bud and unnerve other conspirators.

Following 9/11 American approach has been more aggressive and direct with the result that there has been no major terrorist attack there after 2001. First, the US treats the fight against terrorism as a “war.” Consequently, there has been a heavy input from the Defense Department and armed forces in disrupting terrorist networks,  al-Qaida  most of all and now ISIS. The extraterritorial nature of al-Qaida led the Americans to view the threat’s external dimension. Consequently, the US approach consistently has been to “take the fight” to the enemy and push the borders out. Additionally, the US approach has been proactive promoting reform and democracy in the Middle East, recognizing that economic and democratic opportunities are needed to counter radicalized ideologies.

Britain seems to have neither the will nor the resources to go that far. She is caught in her own dilemma of making a choice between freedom and security. We would all like to have full freedom and total security.   The two do not co-exist in real life. We lose some to gain some. If life sans freedom is unthinkable, a life led in terror is not a life worth living. To strike the right balance between the two remains the biggest challenge before Britain today. If she goes too far she may be portrayed as a police state; if she does not she will be seen as a soft state and continue getting hit. ‘Thus far and no farther’ is no easy decision to make.

 What makes things worse for Britain is her over concern for human rights.  Having lambasted the autocratic regimes in the Arab world all these years for human rights violation spy glasses are constantly turned on Britain for any signs of similar transgression. Her erstwhile colonies even today accuse her of double standards, civil at home and barbarian abroad. She has to tread carefully. The Human Rights Act has played a crucial role in restricting the scope of counter-terrorism measures in Britain. The Act has also had a major influence upon which foreign terror suspects can be deported from Britain for preaching hate, or actually planning an atrocity. The 2001 legislation in the wake of the September 11 attacks on the United States allowed terror suspects to be detained without charge – leading it to be described by Amnesty International as “draconian” – but by 2004, the House of Lords had declared it incompatible with human rights. The security services are left to deal with terrorism with one arm tied behind their backs.

Sudhir Kumar Jha

(The author is retired Director General of Police, Bihar and a free-lance writer)