The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

We will continue to spy on Muslims, says Theresa May

"I don't see anything wrong with identifying people who are vulnerable to being taken down a certain route."

By Samira Shackle Published 06 June 2011 10:16

The Home Secretary, Theresa May, has set out some more details of the government's new counter-terrorism strategy.

Ahead of the publication of the updated Prevent scheme this week, she told the Telegraph that universities are complacent about the threat of radicalisation and criticised the Federation of Student Islamic Societies for not challenging extremism sufficiently.

She also outlined measures to fight extremism online, limiting access to certain websites from public buildings. Details of partnerships with YouTube and AOL will be made public later this week.

I blogged yesterday about the disastrous impact that the Prevent scheme has had. Not only has it had no discernable impact on radicalisation, but in classing the entire Muslim population of the UK as a suspect community, it has been seriously detrimental. Every area with more than 2,000 Muslims has received funding, irrespective of other factors: it is assumed that the whole population needs to be targeted.

Moreover, Prevent's failure to separate community cohesion work from intelligence gathering means that it is largely viewed as a way to spy on Muslims. In some areas, Prevent funding is seen as dirty money; buying Muslims to work against Muslims. When the Telegraph put this to May, her response was:

I don't see anything wrong with identifying people who are vulnerable to being taken down a certain route, who could become a threat to members of the public.

We need to encourage people to be willing to identify vulnerable individuals. Most people recognise the value of using all the tools available to prevent terrorist activity and encourage people to actively talk to the police.

Everyone who has an interest in being part of British society should recognise that we are all in this together.

So spying on mainly innocent Muslims will continue unabated and to question this practice means that you do not have an interest in British society. This is hugely problematic. At present, the Prevent "schools toolkit" essentially establishes thought crime, where students named can be passed to police on the basis of extreme opinions - which is not the same as advocating terrorism. The Channel programme specifically targets young people through schools and other agencies.

Spooked, a report on the Prevent scheme by the Institute for Race Relations, criticises this:

Teachers and social, youth and cultural workers must have the integrity of their professional norms protected against the expectation that they become the eyes and ears of counter-terrorist policing. To turn public services into instruments of surveillance only serves to alienate young people from institutional settings that would otherwise be well-placed to give them a sense of trust and belonging.

The whole scheme is predicated on the idea that every Muslim is engaged in a battle for their souls between extremist and moderate forces. This is hugely overstated: the vast majority of ordinary Muslims go about their lives in the same moral universe as the rest of the population. A better idea would be to return to the pre-9/11 era of community cohesion work - integrating communities to foster a sense of belonging in the UK, rather than entrenching divisions along religious lines.

According to the Telegraph piece, the government's new strategy will also attempt to incorporate David Cameron's "big society", by trying to mobilise this "silent majority" of Muslims. But how exactly will it do this while simultaneously tarring this majority with the same brush as the extremists who make up a tiny proportion of the community? Until the misguided thinking behind domestic counter-terrorism strategy is changed, it is doomed to failure.

More from Samira Shackle

18 comments

Mon, 2011-06-06 11:00 — JumbosTeaParty (not verified)

"She told the Telegraph that universities are complacent about the threat of radicalisation and criticised the Federation of Student Islamic Societies for not challenging extremism sufficiently"

A more elegant and cheaper solution to fight violent extremism would be for the Home Secretary and her Government to stop engaging in violent extremism.

Extremism thrives in a world where imperialists are invading countries, selling weapons and supporting dictators.

Mon, 2011-06-06 12:07 — Fergus Pickering (not verified)

I hope spying on muslims will contnue unabated. In fact I hope it will be increased.

Mon, 2011-06-06 12:14 — JoeDeMocritus

The security of the UK requires that all threats are monitored. As a result I would have thought that islamofacsist organisations and their members and associates would be pretty near the top of the list.

Mon, 2011-06-06 12:36 — Rob (not verified)

Well, when the Muslim community finally gets around to admitting to itself that there is a problem rather than blaming Jews, The West or everyone else for Islamic terrorism, blaming the 7/7 attacks on MI6 or Mossad, then perhaps surveillance won't be necessary.

One wayto move on would be to consider joining the 21st century, and accept sexual equality, gays, secularism and free speech.

If parts of the Muslim community can't do that, perhaps they might consider relocating to countries more in tune with medieval belief systems.

Mon, 2011-06-06 13:01 — Siraj Datoo (not verified)

Interesting to see the reaction here and how well this propaganda has worked.
Rob, in your post you both generalised the Muslim community as 'blaming Jews' and later said 'part of the Muslim community..'

This is an important point but it's alright - you're taking the same line as David Cameron. He'll talk about this 'silent majority' but then blame Muslims for not doing anything about Muslims who become terrorists.

For too long, a blame culture has developed - 'You're a Muslim so you should be able to sort out this problem. It's your community after all.' No. My religion is about peace. When a minority decide to twist the words in a manner that makes the original incomprehensible, there is a clear problem. But just became I'm Muslim, it doesn't mean that I understand these terrorists.

Mon, 2011-06-06 14:22 — hugh markey (not verified)

Not a peep out of this Home Economics Secretary about 'Bunny Girls'. Teresa, the daughter of a reverend, who attended a Catholic Girls School before moving to state school may be ecumenical in her remarks but Britain is now an ethnic society. Her views should be more all-inclusive.
Glad the HS did not wear the burka with those 'kitten-heels' peeking out at the hemline. Definitely would have given the wrong impression.And after all that guff about the Tories being the nasty party.

Reformatory Girl

Mon, 2011-06-06 14:24 — Roger Dodger (not verified)

@Siraj

"When a minority decide to twist the words in a manner that makes the original incomprehensible"

Yeah yeah keep dreaming mate. The words don't need twisting because they are already deeply twisted. That minority give direct quotes and follow them.

Of course the Muslim community needs to do far more. Where were all the moderate Muslims protesting the arrival of Al Qaradawi. Why no placards at airports.

This myth that the it is just a tiny minority that hold extreme views is nonsense. Just look way back when at the Satanic Verses protests. Was that a tiny majority calling for his murder?

Mon, 2011-06-06 14:57 — JohnL (not verified)

"My religion is about peace". Hmmm. Mohammed offered peace to his vanquished enemies but only as long as they joined him and his religion, i.e. were assimilated. If they refused, they were eliminated.

Mon, 2011-06-06 15:23 — Stuart Eels (not verified)

Nice to see the usual crowd using this post to air their own extreme views about Muslims. What a sad bunch.

Mon, 2011-06-06 15:43 — Iden (not verified)

I love how the NS comments section has become a wretched home of neoliberal sock-puppets and Islamophobe racists.

Its like they sit there waiting for a moderate-left website to publish articles critiquing Chicago School economics or mentioning Islam so that they can rush on and flood the comments with their bullshit.

This wouldn't happen if the NS was properly moderated and had some kind of sign-up restrictions. Ok - I admit - it would happen less.

Mon, 2011-06-06 15:47 — Stu (not verified)

Well every religion might be pure but they are always twisted by humans that practice them it is I believe not the islam that is the problem BUT the culture of the people that practice it. Mostly for financial gain..

Mon, 2011-06-06 16:04 — Trampolene (not verified)

The NS cheapens itself by publishing an article with such a disingenuous headline.

May is talking about extremist Muslims, not Muslims in general. The government is no doubt spying on BNP sympathisers. That doesn't mean they have a policy of 'spying on white people'. Please stop.

You are bringing the journalistic standards of a once great magazine down to those of a crass tabloid rag.

Mon, 2011-06-06 17:34 — sb want you to know the truth (not verified)

I just wanna pass a massage for all who are intrested to know the truth
>

Mon, 2011-06-06 18:16 — Ajmal (not verified)

@JohnL

You can't be serious. Mohammed isn't someone who exists in the modern day, he isn't some bloke down Kent who led an Islamic army and executed his enemies if they didn't join his religion.

That was 1500 years ago, invasion, warring armies, pillaging, sacking of towns and cities was all the rage back then - particularly throughout Europe as well. To try and hold that against Islam is ridiculous and historically illiterate. In fact Islamic armies were surprisingly merciful compared to their contemporaries; at least they gave them the choice to assimilate - most armies of the era would execute outright.

You can't use today's standards to judge someone living 1500 years ago.

Tue, 2011-06-07 00:10 — Christopher Hobe Morrison

I wonder if some of the "Muslims are all fanatics" bunch posting here will also be spied upon, since they are showing signs of fanaticism too. Probably it was a mistake for the Empire to rule over all these places since it gave them an opportunity to infiltrate our lovely England. But now that they are all here, it seems better to give everyone a chance to become a part of a larger society. This would be one in which there is a core of values which we have in common, including tolerance of others, and elements which people may differ on. Where the borderlines are should be subject to discussion and revision. If you decide to apply the death penalty to people who leave Islam you should also find it acceptable to apply it to people who leave Christianity, but punishing people's opinions probably isn't acceptable no matter who it is. Physical punishments, especially when they involve needless cruelty, are also probably unnacceptable.

By all means, spy on extremists, but spy on all extremists equally and not on the basis of your own predjudices or the latest opinion polls.

Tue, 2011-06-07 09:21 — mcquade

So what is the difference between say a GP, teacher, social or youth worker informing on a fellow citizen to the way say the Stasi operated with its army of citizen informers?

Tue, 2011-06-07 10:03 — Andy Gill

Good for Theresa. Islamic extremism is the major social problem of our time, and it is good to see the government is at last taking it seriously. Like any other form of fascism, Islamic extremism should be rooted out of our national life.

Tue, 2011-06-07 12:37 — georgia s (not verified)

@Trampolene - that's not true. Look at the Telegraph piece - May was plainly asked about the perception that Muslims IN GENERAL feel that the Prevent scheme is being used to spy on them and she didn't say that it wasn't. when she says "those vulnerable" to extremism she means ALL Muslims - that is a deeply offensive view.

Look at the Guardian's reports on spying on the whole Muslim population - the INNOCENT population, that is http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/oct/16/anti-terrorism-strategy-spies-i...