PREVENT: creating “radicals” to strengthen anti-Muslim narratives

“She is of good behaviour and a good Muslim. Against this background, I accept on the evidence before me that this defendant gathered together the contents of the SD card in order to explore and understand the charges which her brothers faced. There is no evidence that she was motivated by their ideology or was preparing to follow them.” The judge in the case of Umm Ahmed clarified to the court that she had not been involved in illegality or had any intention to pose a threat to the UK. Despite this recognition, he sentenced Begum to a 12-month prison term for possessing the magazine Inspire which she had been reading to understand her charged brother’s case. What is unknown is the story of how Umm Ahmed was subjected to a deradicalisation programme, under the auspices of PREVENT and CHANNEL, without any indication of actual involvement in terrorism. The use of deradicalisation narratives in schools, universities and hospitals has led to the criminalisation of large sections of the various Muslim communities in the UK. Based on our experience of cases such as Umm Ahmed, we hope to present a view of how an aggressive anti-Muslim narrative that is based on assumptions subverts the political expression/identity of individuals by turning them into potential threats. The advocacy group CAGE has been working with Umm Ahmed in order to highlight the abuse of the terrorism narrative in her case, but also to understand the actual implementation of PREVENT and CHANNEL beyond their conceptual promotion as a safeguarding tool. By understanding the everyday interactions with PREVENT, a picture can be formed of the way that a false presentation of narratives can lead to a person becoming an “extremist” or “terrorist”, while the truth may lie in a completely alternative place.     

In Extremis: a Self‐defeating Element in the ‘Preventing Violent Extremism’ Strategy

The main policy reaction to the terrorist attacks of 7/7 and 21/7 of 2005 has been the development of the £6 million ‘Preventing Violent Extremism’ (PVE) initiative which aims, as part of the government's broader counter‐terrorism strategy (CONTEST), to tackle support for, and the promotion of, violent Islamist ideologies within British society. One crucial component of this strategy is providing support for Muslim groups and individuals to tackle radicalisation and extremism directly at the local level. Funding and charitable status for mosques, Muslim community and youth groups and initiatives, ‘forums against extremism’, anti‐extremism ‘road shows’, and the training of imams are included as part of this strategy. This article argues that this aspect of PVE is not only ill‐advised, but potentially deeply counter‐productive. It takes issue with two reasons that inform the PVE strategy: first, that what motivates individuals to join extremist groups are the religious ideas themselves; second, that government intervention or involvement is an effective method for rendering the moderate antidote attractive. Arguably, neither of these assumptions is warranted in the face of contrary evidence. Consequently, this arm of PVE is, at best, barking up the wrong tree; at worst, fuelling extremism.     

Performing PREVENT: anti-extremist theatre-in-education in the service of UK counter-terrorism,a Freirean analysis

ABSTRACT

This article reveals a new trend in UK counter-terrorism: the emergence of anti-extremist Theatre-in-Education (TIE) to deliver counter-terrorism projects in schools and colleges. Using Paulo Freire’s vision of critical and dialogic pedagogy, I offer an analysis of anti-extremist TIE against a backdrop of PREVENT, the UK counter-terrorism strategy. The September 11 attack, the London Transport bombings and the more recent attacks in Europe and the UK have contributed to a strengthening of counter-terrorism measures in all spheres of public life. In 2015, the UK government introduced a statutory duty for education providers to prevent young people from being drawn into terrorism. This is known as the PREVENT Duty. The implementation of the duty has not been without controversy, with commentators noting a disproportionate focus on Islamist forms of terrorism. My study has shown that the guiding principle of TIE to enact social change is threatened in this climate, whilst maintaining the possibility of engaging young people in meaningful dialogue about terrorism and violent extremism.