The unspoken element of the government’s new strategy is actually about tackling Muslim extremism in the UK, but they’ve failed to create a clear narrative, or to use today’s announcement to reframe the relationship between British Muslims and the state.
Relations between Muslim communities in Britain and the government reached crisis point in recent years. Sustained integration of Muslims into British society was perceived to have stalled, and the government’s legislative response to the increasing and real threat of international terrorism made many British Muslims feel victimised by the state.
Some extremists in Muslim communities across Britain have ruthlessly capitalised on issues such as the UK’s involvement in the Iraq war, and support for President Bush’s foreign policy, to encourage mistrust and resentment from some British Muslims towards the British state.
Today’s renewed CONTEST strategy however misses the strategic opportunity to move on from this recent past in a meaningful way, and I believe that the government may have underestimated the challenge that we face.
Research for Ipsos MORI shows that the potential for further isolation of the Muslim community in Britain is high. It’s not a massive jump to realise that, with more than 45 per cent of British Muslims reporting having suffered prejudice, abuse and discrimination because of their religion, many will therefore feel cut-off from mainstream British society.
Labour MPs with Muslim communities in their constituencies will know that while there is a risk of further isolation, there are also, however, a mainstream majority of British Muslims who do want the Government to be more robust with Islamic extremists. Research which was conducted after the attacks on London’s transport network in 2005 showed that the majority of Muslims in Britain agree that Muslim immigrants should learn English, pledge loyalty to the UK, respect the rule of law, and properly integrate into British society.
But these views and opinions are closely linked to the government’s response to the threat of international terrorism. The same research shows that 60 per cent of British Muslims agree it is unacceptable to detain suspected terrorists without trial, compared to 36 per cent of the public.
In January this year I wrote about detention without trial, and the government’s attempt to tinker with the legislative arrangements for investigating and preventing suspected terrorist activity. I maintain that then and now, the government has not addressed the main drivers for radicalisation and isolation of some British Muslims, and has instead focused on totemic issues such as control orders at the expense of producing a holistic programme in response.
Other European countries, in particular France, have developed an effective over-lapping approach for responding to Muslim extremists which is made up of three key elements. First, generic counter-terrorism policies which avoid references to Islam; second, policies designed to repress Islamist extremism; and, third, policies to enable and compel integration of Muslims into national life.
In March 2009, Labour’s then communities secretary Hazel Blears addressed the issue head-on by suspending the government’s relationship with the Muslim Council of Britain, an act which provoked a strong response from Muslims leaders. Ultimately, Blears was illustrating the government’s determination to challenge radical views that fall short of support for violence but reject and undermine British values.
The response from the shadow home secretary, Chris Grayling, was to deflect the substance of this important issue in order to score some political points. He claimed that Labour ministers were funding groups that ‘propagate extremism’. While this debate isn’t just about funding or community engagement programmes it is important to scrutinise the level of funding for anti-radicalisation activity, and compare that with Labour’s investment for example of £1m in running scholarship schemes for Muslims leaders and Imams at British universities.
Tackling extremism, while encouraging sustained integration is a very hard balancing act, and I’m not trying to score party political points either. The government should be looking to build a cross-party consensus on an action plan to tackle extremism, and in particular, developing new ways to ensure universities play their part in monitoring, addressing and preventing the growth of extremism of their campuses.
but we are in trouble here,we aren’t just dealing with freedom of religion but with cultural differences which are reinforced by the separatist social behaviour ( promoted by the mosques?) Muslim women/girls wear the hijab and long sleeves /leg covering to ankles.Tricky to addresss when we are at the same time trying to promote more modest dress for young girls encouraged to dress beyond their years by highstreet/pop culture. We would not ban the hijab as we would not have banned the turban for Sikhs, saris for women etc. But people can be sort of afronted by being presented with a moral authority displayed in muslim dress ? we simply cannot understand why muslim people dress thus ,it seems so extreme. Yes orthodox Jewish men wear hats and curls etc. .But the muslim dress seems to be more like the orange marchers in Ulster to me ,an insistence on an identity that belies a true sense of security. I am sure separatist behaviour will soften in time ,though look at the measures that have had to be taken in Oldham to integrate the schools.But round here ,NorthWestminster say,I think its going well. Lots of groups stay separate at the beginning don’t they, Irish say,and the Mass was in Latin until the 60’s (?) so that’s a bit like people doing the Koran.It’s community community community that’s the answer surely. In North Kensington where the muslim people are now encourage to move away to allow for the new development which we all know will go to yuppies, perhaps the council should not have designed living arrangements so that they then felt a ghetto had been created?