The London Blasts: Media Review

ONE MONTH ON

DAY 40: 16 August 2005

ERASED - THE IRAQ LINK

The topic that was at the centre of political debate just over two weeks ago - with the Prime Minister having to publicly concede ground - is now completely off the media agenda.

The link between British participation in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, on the one hand, and the heightened risk of terrorism in Britain, on the other, has disappeared from news reports and from commentary.

The Prime Minister has changed the topic, and focused attention on extremism in the Muslim community through his draconian deportation and detention proposals.

In other words, he is marshalling public outrage against some of the symptoms of the problem in order to distract attention from the causes of the problem - the causes identified by the Home Office and the Foreign Office in the Young Muslims and Extremism report.

We cannot rely on the mass media to disobey or to break ranks.

If there is going to be a national debate on the real causes of this crisis, if we are going to discover and implement the measures that are going to reduce and perhaps eliminate the threat of al Qaeda-type terrorism, it will be up to grassroots movements and civil society initiatives.

We will have to break the silence ourselves.

OMAR BAKRI MOHAMMED - CLARKE EXPLAINS

'Mr Clarke said he had acted against Bakri now rather than earlier because his absence from the country meant that the situation had changed and he could be prevented from returning.' (Telegraph, page 8)

So that is the increased threat from radical preachers. The further away they are, the more dangerous they become to people in this country, until they can no longer be allowed to return.

Is the critical parameter distance from British territory? Does this include overseas British territories?

Or is the determining factor distance from Mr Clarke himself? Perhaps the closer Muslims are to the Home Secretary, the more "moderate" they become. Could he have a cloaking device? Or a gravity-like force field that diminishes geometrically with distance? An "Amiability Field"?

If Mr Bakri ends up in Syria as a result of Mr Clarke's decision, he will meet people who are less amiable, but no less deadly than Mr Clarke.

MORE EXPULSIONS ON THE WAY

'Charles Clarke yesterday signalled a fresh wave of expulsions and exclusions of extremist Islamists once the Government has concluded its review of the law later this month...' (Telegraph, page 8)

'Mr Clarke said: "We will be looking at further steps that need to be taken to ensure that people who are working against the interests of this country are properly dealt with." ' (Telegraph, page 8)

What about Tony Blair, who invaded Iraq despite being warned by British intelligence that this would 'heighten' the risk of al Qaeda terrorist attacks against 'Western interests'?

Almost every step Mr Blair takes in the Global War On Terrorism (President Bush has blocked the new term 'Struggle Against Violent Extremism') has worked against the interests of this country and heightened the risk of terrorism.

BOOKSHOP OWNERS, WRITERS, TEACHERS AT RISK

'The security services and immigration officials are understood to have drawn up a list of foreign extremists to be deported. Many are understood to be young clerics who have come in recent years from Pakistan and North Africa. These so-called preachers of hate are not as well known as clerics such as Abu Qatada and Omar Bakri Mohammed but are seen as stirring up hatred and extremism among young followers.'

'Muslim leaders have been consulted about a number of the suspects who are expected to be arrested shortly. Their identities are being kept secret for fear that the men may go into hiding before arrests can be made. As well as clerics, the list is understood to include owners of radical Islamic bookshops, writers, a number of teachers and website operators of different nationalities.' (Times, page 8)

ARAB FEARS GROW: BLAIR FEEDS FEAR

A report in the FT indicates that the Blair proposals are not increasing security, but are bolstering the extremists.

'But the planned deportations and a raft of other proposed measures to curb militant Islamist activity in the wake of the July bombs in London, are bashing a fresh dent in Britain's reputation in the wider Arab world.'

'Dia Rashwan, an expert in Islamism at the Cairo-based Al Ahram Centre for Political and Strategic Studies, argues they could be counter-productive by playing to the perception that in the war on terror, the rights of all Muslims are under attack.'

'Many exiled radicals in London have been under close surveillance, he argues, and there is no proven legal case yet that they have contributed to radicalising British-born Muslims who carried out the bombings.'

'Yassir al-Sirri, a London-based Egyptian condemned to death in absentiain Egypt, goes further, suggesting the government's measures, if adopted, would hand a victory to extremists. He was among a small group of Islamist exiles in London who urged the British government yesterday not to betray Muslims "by deporting them to countries from which they fled".'

'After a decade in which London's position as a centre for Arab publishing and political debate has been reinforced, the reverberations are also felt further afield.'

' "We don't want the UK to act like a third world country when it comes to the law. We look at the UK as a country of freedoms where Arabs and Muslims have had an opportunity to breath," said Mohammed Habib, the deputy leader of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood, the outlawed opposition group.'

'His view of Britain is widespread in both secular and Islamist circles in North Africa and the Middle East.'

'Despite hostility to Britain's involvement in the Iraq war, the UK has been seen by many Arabs to distinguish itself from the US by resisting the temptation to adopt measures such as restricting visas.'

No longer. And are we the safer for it?

Yet again, the government follows a policy that is wrong in itself, and that also damages the national security of Britain.

US UNEASINESS

'Growing public dissatisfaction with both the war in Iraq and US relations with the Muslim world could soon lead the American public to demand a change of course by the administration, according to a new poll of foreign policy attitudes.'

'Nearly six in 10 Americans are worried that the US may not be meeting its goals in Iraq, and they hold the Bush administration responsible, says the survey, to be published next month in Foreign Affairs, a journal published by the Council on Foreign Relations.'

'That combination of strong public opinion and the belief that the government is responsible for addressing it makes the Iraq war “the foreign policy issue that most clearly appears to have reached a tipping point”, said Daniel Yankelovich, a pollster and chairman of Public Agenda, a nonprofit research group that conducted the poll.'

'The survey is the first in a new foreign policy index to be conducted every six months.'

'Illegal immigration and unease about US relations with the rest of the world, especially Muslim countries, are also near a tipping point, Mr Yankelovich writes.'

' “If the war in Iraq lingers, the standoff with Tehran lasts, and relations with Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Syria remain troubled, the next reading of [the index] could well reveal that the vague apprehension the American public now feels has crystallised into a demand for changes in US foreign policy,” he said.' (FT, page 7)

Nothing could be more welcome than such a change in public opinion.

Nothing could be more helpful in beginning to reduce the risk of terrorism, and the elimination of injustice around the world.

JNV welcomes feedback.