Progress on counter-terrorism

The announcement that the new government is going to review counter-terrorism policy is a welcome one. I am particularly pleased that the review is likely to mean an end for the prevent strand. Whilst in many ways the aims behind prevent are good- getting to the root causes of terrorism, and stopping people from getting engaged in terrorism before they even start- what it has meant in practice in terms of damaging civil liberties and targeting particular communities is problematical.

Alongside this review of counter-terrorism we’ve got the announcement that there will be a 40% increase in aid to Afghanistan. I welcome this, as it seems to me that development is a better way of tackling the root causes of terrorism than either a prevent strategy that damages civil liberties, or an offensive strategy in Afghanistan where more bad feeling is created by what is perceived as occupation by western troops. That does not mean I am entirely comfortably with using aid budgets to tie in with military objectives, or that I would not prefer the money to be diverted from the military’s budget instead of other aid budgets, but it is a positive step at least.

An important problem in this whole debate is whether we can ascertain what the root causes of terrorism are in order to stop them. This is incredibly difficult, and I am sceptical of anyone who tells me they know for definite what the root causes are. I am tempted to argue that poverty and inequality breed terrorism, but there is insufficient empirical evidence to prove this. Some academic studies have found that civil liberties issues, not poverty, are more likely to lead to terrorism (see for example Malečková’s chapter in Root Causes of Terrorism: myths, reality and ways forward Ed. T Bjorgo, Routledge, 2005).

So while there are many unknowns in this debate, my opinion is that increasing aid to Afghanistan has to be a good thing as development is an essential requirement for that country, regardless of whether there is a link to terrorism. And the end of prevent is likely to improve civil liberties in our country, and so has to be a positive step. After all, as Paul Wilkinson has commented, any tyrant can stop terrorists if they are willing to ignore people’s rights (in Terrorism and the Liberal State 1977, p.121), the problem is how to stop terrorism without losing our values.