Terrorism: Prevention Not a Cure

The problem of tackling terrorism does not just consist of stopping bombs going off. It consists of stopping people going off. And in recent weeks there seems to be a growing awareness of the fact that the place from which you need to tackle terror begins a step earlier than many people had realised.

This week the British Foreign Secretary, Phillip Hammond, used a speech to specifically call out those people he identified as ‘apologists’ for terror. Everybody knew who he had in mind. After the whole nation has been watching members of the group ‘Cage’ choking up as they praised the alleged good character traits of their friend Jihadi John (Mohammed Emwazi). It is a very good thing that Cage have been so exposed.

But the rolling up of this problem must also necessarily start a level before that. For the problem of Cage – which is not a charity – is that it has been funded for years by registered charities. Among them some of the oldest and most venerable charities in Britain.

Earlier this week The Times printed a letter signed by a number of public figures in support of the Joseph Rowntree charitable trust. It followed the news that the charity along with another prominent charity – the Roddick Foundation – had promised not to keep funding the extremist group Cage. They were obviously feeling some public pressure for their earlier support. As indeed they should. The letter of support in The Times was obviously their way of making themselves feel better. But pointing to the historical good works of the Rowntree trust is one thing. Stopping foundations and charities like that doing anything like this again is quite another.

Which brings us back to the question of where responsibility for tackling terrorism and extremism actually lies. The police often say that the public need to be vigilant, and indeed they do. But that vigilance does not only consist of keeping an eye out for suspect packages on tube trains. It includes keeping an eye on civil society institutions with which they are involved to ensure they do not end up going wrong. In recent years the Quaker traditions of the Rowntree trust went badly awry, with the group ending up funding the worst apologists for Islamist terror. That wasn’t inevitable. It was the result of a set of bad choices and ignorance as well as poor oversight and accountability. It is eminently possible that this – and the wider problem – can be solved. But only if people first learn to recognise the apologists and their supporters when they see them. And realise that it is everybody’s responsibility to act.