Wikisource

Intelligence and Security Committee Report: Extreme Right-Wing Terrorism/Ideologies

< Intelligence and Security Committee Report: Extreme Right-Wing Terrorism
←
Introduction
Intelligence and Security Committee Report: Extreme Right-Wing Terrorism (2022)
the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament
How the Extreme Right-Wing Terrorism Threat has Evolved
→
4595106Intelligence and Security Committee Report: Extreme Right-Wing Terrorism2022the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament

​IDEOLOGIES

9. The terminology used to describe Extreme Right-Wing Terrorism (ERWT) is complex and subject to change, as the understanding of the threat and indeed the threat itself has evolved. In particular, the terms used by the Intelligence Community and Counter Terrorism Policing (CTP) to describe this threat have evolved, as primacy for ERWT has transferred to MI5 from CTP. Even the term 'ERWT' was only adopted within Government during the course of our Inquiry.

10. ERWT is closely linked to a broader Far-Right movement—most of which does not directly engage in violence. There is a wide disparity of terminology and definitions across academia and the Government to describe the Far Right, Right-Wing Extremism and ERWT. For clarity, this Report has used the terms delineated below.

Terminology used in this Report

Far Right (FR)[1] is used as an umbrella term to encapsulate the entire movement which has a Far-Right political outlook in relation to matters such as culture, race, immigration and identity. Critically, this includes groups and individuals who hold that Western. civilisations are under threat from 'non-native' people and ideas. The term encompasses individuals and movements including the quasi-democratic and populist, and extends from the British National Party through to the proscribed group National Action.

Extreme Right Wing (XRW) will be used to refer to Right-Wing Extremist groups and individuals within the Far Right who maintain active opposition to democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty, and respect for and tolerance of different faiths/beliefs.

Extreme Right-Wing Terrorism (ERWT) describes the segment of the Far-Right movement involved in politically motivated violence. It is this that falls within the remit of Counter Terrorism Policing (CTP) and MI5—for example, the actions of Darren Osborne (the Finsbury Park mosque attacker).

Terrorism, as defined by Section 1 of the Terrorism Act 2000 (TACT), encapsulates the use or threat of action which is designed to influence the government or an international governmental organisation, or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and which is used to advance a political, religious or ideological cause. Such actions include those that: involve serious violence against a person or serious damage to property; endanger another person's life; create a serious risk to the health or safety of the public; or are designed to seriously interfere with or disrupt an electronic system.

Hate crime is defined as "any criminal offence which is perceived, by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice based on a personal characteristic. Hate crime can be motivated by disability, gender identity, race, religion or faith and sexual orientation".[2]

​Extremism is defined as "the vocal or active opposition to [British] fundamental values, including democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty, and respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs". Calls for the death of members of the British Armed Forces are also considered extremist.[3]

'Domestic Extremism'

11. Following the 2017 UK terror attacks,[4] MI5 and CTP conducted an internal review (known as the Operational Improvement Review, or OIR), which was overseen by David Anderson QC (later Lord). As part of the review, Lord Anderson recommended that there should be a common approach for Islamist and non-Islamist terrorism (which includes ERWT), and that the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre (JTAC) should incorporate ERWT into its national threat assessments.[5]

12. The review also found that the terms 'Domestic Extremism' and 'International Counter-Terrorism', which were in use at that time, were "manifestly deficient" for several reasons, primarily because:

  • 'Domestic Extremism' had been used to describe everything from proscribed Right-Wing Extremist organisations, such as National Action (which presents a real terrorist concern), to left-wing and 'single-issue' groups (such as animal rights activists), which rarely cause more than occasional public order concerns. The terminology did not, therefore, reflect that the most likely root of any terrorist concern in this category was ERWT.
  • The terminology incorrectly implied that Islamist terrorism is always 'international' (even though a significant proportion of perpetrators are entirely 'home-grown') and that ERWT is always 'domestic', despite its clear transnational links. Describing non-Islamist activity as 'extremism' even when it is a threat to national security appeared to imply that it is taken less seriously than Islamist 'terrorism'.

As a result of the OIR, JTAC undertook a review, in the autumn of 2018, of the categories that define terrorism.

13. Following the review it was decided in January 2019 that JTAC would cease using the terms 'international' and 'domestic' to identify different types of terrorism, and the following new definitions would now be used:

  • Islamist Terrorism (incorporating Sunni extremist terrorism and state-sponsored Shia terrorism); ​
  • Right Wing Terrorism (incorporating offences motivated by both so-called Far Right and Extreme Right Wing ideologies);
  • Left-Wing, Anarchist and Single-Issue Terrorism (LASIT);
  • Ethno-nationalist/Separatist Terrorism (including Sikh terrorism, Basque separatists); and
  • Northern Ireland-Related Terrorism (NIRT).[6]

'Right-Wing Terrorism'

14. JTAC assesses that most individuals in this area are motivated by an ideology somewhere between the Far-Right and Extreme Right-Wing perspectives, with there being significant overlaps between the two. Whilst an extremist motivated by Extreme Right-Wing or Right-Wing ideologies may demonstrate many of the same beliefs as a terrorist, the key differential is that terrorists believe in, and potentially pursue, the use of terrorist violence to further that ideology. It is only those with a terrorist intent that are considered in this Report.

15. On 16 May 2019, JTAC, MI5 and CTP began using new terminology separating out the Right-Wing Extremist ideologies that might provide justification for what was (then termed) Right-Wing Terrorism, into three broad categories.[7] The following are MI5 and CTP's definition and categorisation of ideologies that potential terrorists might adopt: as with Islamist terrorism there is no suggestion that all those who hold these views or subscribe to these ideologies have terrorist intent—this categorisation process is used as a means of assessing those who might be potential terrorists:

  • 'Cultural Nationalism' is a belief that 'Western Culture' is under threat from mass migration into Europe and from a lack of integration by certain ethnic and cultural groups. The ideology tends to focus on the rejection of cultural practices such as the wearing of the burqa or the perceived rise of the use of sharia law. In the UK this has been closely associated with anti-Islam groups.
  • 'White Nationalism' is a belief that mass migration from the 'non-white' world, and demographic change, poses an existential threat to the 'White Race' and 'Western Culture'. Advocates for some sort of 'White' homeland, either through partition of already existing countries, or by the (if necessary forced) repatriation of ethnic minorities. Much of this rhetoric is present in the 'Identitarian' movement.[8]
  • 'White Supremacism' is a belief that the ‘White Race’ has certain inalienable physical and mental characteristics that makes it superior (with some variation) to other races. Often associated with conspiracy theories that explain the decline in 'white' political and social status over the last hundred years. This can also ​ encapsulate a belief in the spiritual superiority of the 'White Race', often describing racial differences in quasi-religious terms (such as the 'Aryan soul').[9]

16. In January 2020, there was a further shift in the terminology used by the intelligence and security Agencies,[10] with Right-Wing Extremist ideologies brigaded slightly differently into the following categories:

  • 'White Supremacists' and 'White Nationalists';
  • 'Cultural Nationalists'; and
  • 'Identitarians'.

(We consider how these terms compare internationally later in the Report.)

The importance of terminology

17. We questioned the efficacy and relevance of this plethora of categories and definitions, suggesting that this 'alphabet soup' of terminology was confusing, and whether it was relevant when it came to tackling the threat. MI5, CTP and the Home Office were, however, clear that having specific terminology which everyone recognised was essential. The Director General of MI5 explained:

We are not sort of fetishising endless subdivisions of these categories for its own sake. It is because, to make good sophisticated judgements about risk, we need to think more clearly about this phenomenon than the subjects of interest themselves think about it . . . one of the hardest pieces here is to differentiate between very aggressive violent rhetoric from many, many individuals and the much smaller number who will actually progress to plotting terrorism itself.[11]

18. The Head of CTP was clear that "defined language and defined ideology" was essential when it came to being able to put an "evidential case before the Crown Prosecution Services that gets over section 1 of TACT 2000"[12] and secure a conviction. He noted that after an attack "you will see in the media we quite often say 'we are open minded as to the motive' and 'counter-terrorism is supporting the local force' and that is because the only way to determine it is by deep investigation and the thing we are looking for is ideology".[13]

19. Homeland Security Group also endorsed this detailed categorisation, noting that in the online space it was an essential tool when dealing with communication service providers who were "looking for a degree of intellectual rigour" in determining the differing levels of XRW and ERWT material online.[14]

20. When the Committee met the Home Secretary in May 2021, she acknowledged that this complex terminology was a "challenging area", but that it was an important tool in ​ensuring that "we are effectively, to put this very bluntly, going after the right types, the right individuals with the wrong motivations, the behaviours and the characteristics that are deeply concerning."[15]

'Extreme Right-Wing Terrorism'

21. If the terminology is necessary, then it has to be accurate. Towards the end of our Inquiry—which had until that point been using the then terminology of 'Right-Wing Terrorism'—we were told that there had been a further review of terminology in May 2021. This time, it was to examine whether the term 'Right-Wing Terrorism' was the correct one to use as there were concerns that it was stigmatising those who hold mainstream right-wing political views. The review was undertaken by the counter-terrorism (CT) community, including CTP, MI5, GCHQ, JTAC, the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) and officials in the Home Office, who:

reviewed almost 40 options to identify credible alternatives that would primarily be operationally viable, accurate as a descriptor of the threat we face, and clearly understood by the general public.[16]

22. The review considered that the terminology should be changed, recommending that 'Extreme Right-Wing Terrorism' should be used as the "umbrella term" covering the various sub-ideologies identified by JTAC (Cultural Nationalism', 'White Nationalism' and 'White Supremacism'). There would, however, be no changes to the way the threat would be evaluated—MI5 and CTP would still be looking at the same group of Subjects of Interest (SOIS). When we questioned why the change was felt to be necessary, the Home Office explained:

This addition of 'Extreme' as a prefix to Right-Wing Terrorism' makes it clear that mainstream political views are not what operational organisations are interested in. Of all the prefixes the CT community assessed, 'Extreme' has the clearest negative connotations and best describes the activity in question.[17]

A. It is clearly difficult to delineate precisely the ideologies that might motivate Extreme Right-Wing Terrorists; however, we recognise that MI5 and Counter Terrorism Policing must be able to differentiate between them, not least because of the evidential thresholds.

B. Nevertheless, there is a risk that the varying terminologies used to categorise potential terrorists may cause confusion, including, most worryingly, to risk conflation of ideology with intent. It is important to be clear that there is no suggestion that all those who subscribe to these ideologies have terrorist intent; this is simply a means to establish what might be motivating potential terrorists.

C. More broadly, we welcome the recent addition of the word 'Extreme' to the previous term 'Right-Wing Terrorism'—it allays any possibility of the stigmatisation of those holding mainstream right-wing views.

  1. ↑ The Far Right is also sometimes referred to as the "Radical Right'.
  2. ↑ Home Office, 2010-2015 Government policy: Crime Prevention, 8 May 2015.
  3. ↑ 2015 UK Counter-Extremism Strategy.
  4. ↑ During 2017, the United Kingdom suffered five terrorist attacks: Westminster (March), Manchester (May), London Bridge (June), Finsbury Park (June) and Parsons Green (September).
  5. ↑ The Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre (JTAC) is the UK's centre for analysing intelligence on the threat from terrorism, and is responsible for setting the threat level. JTAC is a multi-agency body, with officers from across Whitehall, the military and the intelligence and law enforcement communities. It is based in Thames House (MI5's headquarters), and the head of JTAC reports to the Director General of MI5.
  6. ↑ Written evidence—MI5 Quarterly Report, 1 January – 31 March 2019.
  7. ↑ JTAC paper, 16 May 2019.
  8. ↑ Identitarian groups such as Generation Identity stress the importance of protecting the 'white race', and advocate a 'white homeland' to be achieved by the 'repatriation' of people of colour. Brenton Tarrant, the Christchurch mosque attacker, named his 'manifesto' The Great Replacement' after a key theory advocated by Identitarians (among others), which maintains that white 'natives' in the West are being 'replaced' by non-white (usually Muslim) immigrants.
  9. ↑ JTAC paper, 16 May 2019.
  10. ↑ MI5 Strategic Intelligence Group paper, 13 January 2020.
  11. ↑ Oral evidence - MI5, 28 April 2021.
  12. ↑ Oral evidence - CTP, 28 April 2021.
  13. ↑ Oral evidence - CTP, 29 April 2021.
  14. ↑ Oral evidence - Home Office, 28 April 2021.
  15. ↑ Oral evidence - Home Secretary, 20 May 2021.
  16. ↑ Written evidence - Home Office, 8 June 2021.
  17. ↑ Written evidence - Home Office, 8 June 2021.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Intelligence_and_Security_Committee_Report:_Extreme_Right-Wing_Terrorism/Ideologies&oldid=14436776"