TRUMP IS RIGHT TO ASK, WHAT ABOUT WESTERN JIHADISTS
DONALD Trump has thrown down the gauntlet to Britain and her European allies. The US President is warning that 800 jihadists from the UK, France and Germany must be dealt with in their home countries following the collapse of Islamic State as a territorial power. If not, they will be freed.
As the last enclave of the fabled caliphate falls in Syria, ending a reign of terror involving beheadings, sexual slavery and other forms of medieval barbarity, the UK government is being asked by its most important ally just what it intends to do with British Isis supporters – some of them battle-hardened terrorists – now languishing in captivity following their surrender to US and UK-backed Kurdish fighters.
The Americans are right to demand action: British jihadis, including the so-called Beatles, have beheaded and otherwise butchered US citizens. Yet, clear answer from the UK government comes there none.
Confusion and dither are becoming the hallmarks of this administration, distracted as it is by the paralysing turmoil of Brexit. And the case of 19year-old jihadi bride Shamima Begum, who has just given birth to a son in a refugee camp in Syria, illustrates this perfectly. No sooner is her case highlighted in the press than UK Home Secretary Sajid Javid starts trumpeting that those filled with hatred for Britain will be blocked from returning – only to be reminded by the head of MI6 and cooler heads that there is such a thing as international law. Whether a hardened jihadist or a victim of Islamic State indoctrination, Begum is British and cannot simply be rendered stateless by a home Secretary in search of macho headlines. Culture secretary Jeremy Wright rowed back on the threat to bar Begum’s return yesterday, promising instead that she will have to ‘answer for her actions’ if she comes home.
Overshadowing an essentially moral debate over the treatment of Begum and her child – though it would be great if Britain can get this deeply misguided young woman back on track – is the much more pressing issue of jihadis seeking a return to a country they profess to loathe. Some 950 Britons, including women and children, travelled to Syria to savour the wonders of Isis rule. As many as a fifth may have died as the so-called caliphate, stretching across northern Syria and Iraq, slowly evaporated.
BUT what has happened to the rest? It would be good to know, as it was a jihadist returnee from Libya who detonated the 2017 bomb at a Manchester pop concert that killed 22 people.
When a drone appears over Gatwick Airport the government activates its Cobra emergency committee. But when the UK is threatened by a mass influx of terrorist fighters, we get Mr Javid and his soundbites. Britain needs a coherent policy on this issue, and fast.
About 450 Isis followers are thought to have returned to Britain already, with another 350 or so still abroad. The UK government is curiously coy about the treatment of those who have returned, claiming that 40 have been prosecuted for terrorism and non-terrorism offences while refusing to give more details – MPs will be pressing for answers this week. Certainly, only a dozen or so have been put through the court process in the UK on terrorismrelated matters.
Prosecuting Britons for offences allegedly committed in a chaotic warzone is not easy, and intelligence sources must be protected when presenting cases in court. But is it not incumbent on the government in Britain to come clean on what exactly is going on? Are the security services and Crown Prosecution Service overwhelmed by the workload involved in monitoring and prosecuting these people? Thanks to the weasel responses of ministers hiding behind ‘national security’, we have no idea.
Of course, imprisonment in the UK is not the only solution to the returnee problem. Deradicalisation counselling under the Prevent anti-terrorism strategy can help some, no doubt. And there is legislation in place allowing for the temporary exclusion from the UK of dangerous individuals, or restrictions on the movement of those allowed back in.
But why has it taken years to draft legislation making it a serious criminal offence to be British and in terrorist conflict zones like Syria, unless engaged in legitimate activities such as humanitarian aid or journalism? The British government is threatening ten-year sentences for people who spend time in these places – but why only now? This problem has been brewing for years, yet it has taken a US president to bring this pressing issue to the fore.
Trump may be wrong about declaring ‘100%’ victory in Syria and writing off Isis simply because its territory has been conquered. Terrorist groups have a habit of returning in different guises when the military heat is off and Isis shows signs of morphing into a guerrilla organisation based on a cell structure. But the US president is surely right to highlight the problem of the Westernborn jihadists who are the legacy of Isis and the risk they present.
HERE is a suggestion: while MPs sit around at Westminster mourning their aborted half-term break and await the climax of the tortuous debate over Brexit, why not use these underemployed law-makers to pass a law updating the concept of treason?
Imagine being a relative or friend of someone tempted by dreams of jihadist glory. How can you warn your loved one of the consequences of this dangerous delusion if your own government cannot spell out clearly what those consequences will be?
Painful as it is to recognise the fact, Britain’s jihadists are British – and must be dealt with in the court and prison systems in Britain. This task cannot be sub-contracted to others, protesting when the Americans come up with another Guantanamo Bay-type solution.
Britain owns this problem. Potential murderers could soon be at large on its streets in big numbers. It is time to stop dithering and do something about it.