The tragic events in Paris this week have horrified and united right-minded people of all faiths.
The reaction from the overwhelming majority of decent moderate Muslims has been one of shock, shared by us all – but also the depressing realisation that their religion has again been hijacked by violent terrorists in pursuit of their sectarian political objectives.
Their cowardly actions were designed to terrorise ordinary citizens. But the response in France and across the world has been one of anger underpinned by an impressive determination to stand together in solidarity with those whose lives have been changed forever.
The debate about how we stop more such atrocities – here in the United Kingdom, or anywhere – is heating up, with the head of MI5 Andrew Parker calling for greater powers for our security services.
And, while I believe there is merit in this, our intelligence agencies and police will always be playing catch-up with would-be terrorists.
Both the brothers responsible for the slaughter of innocent journalists and police officers in Paris, and the men behind the murder of Fusilier Lee Rigby in Woolwich, were known to security services – but they were still unable to prevent these outrages occurring.
I believe we must do more to counter the twisted version of Islam used to justify murder and mayhem in the name of the faith.
To do so we need the government and politicians of all colours to show leadership in countering the hate-filled ideology that draws young people into the arms of the jihadists and poisons their minds to the point where they are prepared to murder innocent people.
It was timely, if ironic, that as these acts of terror were being carried out in Paris parliament was debating new counterterrorism legislation in the wake of the dreadful murder of Fusilier Rigby.
The legislation includes welcome proposals to place the Prevent programme – which I introduced as counterterrorism minister – on a statutory footing, requiring councils and other public bodies to work with those at risk of being drawn into extremism.
There is also a commitment to give further support to the programme’s Channel strategy, which helps to challenge and divert those at risk of radicalisation and includes intensive one-to-one mentoring.
However, I moved amendments to the legislation calling for the inclusion of a legal requirement for the government to support respected Muslim leaders and scholars in developing a counternarrative to extremist ideology. One which exposes the falsehoods being peddled and explains the true meaning of the faith in an accurate and accessible way relevant to the challenges faced by young people.
Unless we tackle the roots of this hateful and divisive worldview we will always be dealing with those who are already radicalised.
We must expose the poverty of this medieval ideology, build the resilience of young people to counter and reject it and strengthen communities to be able to isolate and undermine those who promote it.
As counterterrorism minister at the time of the 7/7 London bombings I visited Muslim communities all over the country. My discussions, particularly with women and young people, convinced me of the need to work with those who care deeply about this country and their religion to strengthen their ability to reject the messages of hate which were being targeted towards them.
As secretary of state for communities I helped to take the work forward in those places which were the most vulnerable to extremism.
It was an innovative approach and, while the Prevent programme has developed in recent years, I feel it has not been given sufficient priority compared to intelligence-gathering, surveillance, disruption and prosecution of those seeking to do us harm.
If we are able to reduce the pipeline of those taking the path to radicalisation and ultimately violence, we can reduce the number of plots we face as well as the costs of attempting to disrupt them. Most importantly of all, we can save lives.
This problem has been highlighted with events in Syria. The International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation and Political Violence has estimated that more than 500 men and women from the UK have gone out to fight. Approximately 250 of them have already returned.
One academic study has estimated that one in nine of those will want to carry out attacks here. That is a significant challenge for our police and security services and it will be very costly to have effective and comprehensive surveillance.
So it is now more important than ever for us to commit long term to working with our communities to develop an effective counternarrative to this barbaric ideology and to support families who are vulnerable to extremism.
We must build the resilience of our young people and make sure the values of freedom, liberty, solidarity, love and compassion are stronger than the messages of hate and division.
———————————
Hazel Blears MP is a former secretary of state for communities and local government
For Hazel, the ideology of this perversion of Islam, is “medieval”.
This is an inadequate analysis. An ideology is not wrong because it is old. Magna Carta is medieval too. But it was a first step toward a democratic ideology whose high water mark was the assertion of the “rights of man”.
The common political idea threading through organisations such as ISIS, Al Qaeda, Al Shabaab, Boko Haram and the like is the aim of establishing an authoritarian state
* where an unelected elite rules
* where only a single ideology drawing confusedly on myth and religion is allowed
* where anyone with a differing ideology is denied any human rights (i.e. is sub-human) and faces summary execution.
We have seen this kind of political idea in practice in the past. It was called Nazism. It is a variety of fascism, of totalitarianism.
It is about time we faced up to this.
The term “radicalisation” is therefore ridiculous. There is nothing radical about ISIS and co. They are deeply conservative. What we are seeing is the rise of totalitarianism disguised with religious words.
That is what government must counter-act. Not just by encouraging moderation in one religious ideology, but also by encouraging anti-fascist, anti-racist, pro-democratic action and thinking among all sectors of our society.
That is the meaning of Francois Hollande’s condemnation of the racism implicit in today’s hostage taking in a Paris kosher supermarket.
That is the meaning of Hollande’s planned participation in a march for the French Republic (i.e for liberty, equality and fraternity) in Paris on Sunday.
Hollande has recognised the urgency of such anti-fascist, anti-racist, pro-democratic action in France. Why? Because the threat from the Front National is a real and present danger.
Will the Labour Party learn from our French sister party? Or do we have to wait until UKIP shows its true colours? Do we have to wait until after the next Woolwich murder?
Now I’m really confused. Those who gunned down the unbelievers, while devout enough to offer their own lives for their faith, praying loudly to allah and holding the koran to their chests while screaming ‘Alahu akba’ and ‘The prophet is avenged’ were not muslim?
it’s not about religion.it’s targeting the west because it wants to change our freedoms.freedom of the press.what did labour do for 13 years.’community cohesion’ a stupid phrase.it begins at home.when you won’t allow any other thoughts or other lifestyles.that’s fascism.we fought to get rid of that .labour has made the situation worse.ignored other voters,totally.look at Rotherham,and Rochdale.sorry Ms Blears but to come up this this idea when you are standing down in 2015.too little.too late.Je Suis Charlie.