It’s ludicrous to deny the threat to the UK from ISIS

ISIS and al Qaeda may attempt to 'out-jihad' each other with a high-profile attack on the West.

ISIS and al Qaeda may attempt to ‘out-jihad’ each other with a high-profile attack on the West

In the last week, the United States has urged tightened security at airports across the world on the back of ‘credible’ warnings that a terror attack was imminent.

The roots of the threat are inevitably difficult to trace, but it seems that there is strong intelligence to suggest that individuals trained by Yemeni bomb maker Ibrahim Hassan al-Asiri have made their way to the Syrian battlefield, where they are mixing with – and training up – foreign fighters from across the world.

Whether we like it or not, this heightens the threat of terrorism in the UK.

Nevertheless, in past weeks there has been much speculation about whether returnee foreign fighters will put the country at greater risk of an attack. Some passionately argue that they do not, that this is just more of the usual scaremongering aimed at marginalising and persecuting British Muslims. This position is based on a reductive analysis of Islamist militancy that serves a negativist, incoherent and eristic agenda.

The fact of the matter is that, especially in light of what has happened in recent weeks in Iraq, global jihadism now enjoys more prominence than it ever has before. Its threat cannot – and must not – be downplayed.

What with the most recent concern of ‘body bombs‘, methods are becoming ever more sophisticated. Certainly, counter terrorism initiatives are more sophisticated too but, with the melting pot of jihadism that is Syria and Iraq, it is becoming increasingly difficult to have a firm handle on the situation.

The recent declaration by the ‘Islamic State’ (IS, as it’s now known) of the restoration of the ‘caliphate’ further distils the level of risk we face.

It was effectively a declaration of war by Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi against Ayman al-Zawahiri, the leader of al-Qaeda. More likely than one group attacking the other, though, is the emergence of a competition between IS and AQ in which they will attempt to ‘out-jihad’ each other with a high-profile attack on a Western target.

This is because, as it stands now, IS is trying to drive al-Qaeda into obscurity. An IS attack on the West would be the last nail in al-Zawahiri’s coffin, because it would show the world that, not only is al-Baghdadi financially, ideologically, militarily and territorially more powerful than al-Zawahiri, but that he is also the new standard-bearer of international terrorism.

Certainly, his first announcement as ‘caliph’ suggests this is the direction he’d like to go in. On the other side of the same coin, we could well see an attempted attack by al-Qaeda, one that would come in an attempt to boost the group’s dwindling legitimacy.

It is imperative that the unprecedented instability in Syria and Iraq is understood for what it is – an injection of adrenaline into global jihadism. Indeed, as a recent TSG report states, in only three years, more foreign fighters have gone to the region than went to Afghanistan during the whole of the decade-long war and its bloody aftermath in the 1980s and 1990s.

So yes, there is a credible terrorist threat facing the UK, and yes, it has been heightened by the foreign fighter phenomenon. It is ludicrous to think otherwise.

If someone radicalised in the UK decides to go abroad to fight for a group that summarily crucifies people whom it considers to be dissidents, then of course they will present a threat if they manage to return home undetected.

In particular, fighters for IS and its affiliates pose a threat, largely because they are exposed to a refined and rejectionist strand of jihadism too extreme for al-Qaeda. This, coupled with the advanced level of military training they receive, makes for a troubling combination.

So, to play down this threat as a Whitehall-led conspiracy is irresponsible. Certainly, we must not allow it to become a scapegoat for the introduction of draconian counter terrorism measures, but to be sceptical of it just for the sake of being sceptical will only serve to put British society at greater risk.

Charlie Cooper is a researcher at Quilliam

As you’re here, we have something to ask you. What we do here to deliver real news is more important than ever. But there’s a problem: we need readers like you to chip in to help us survive. We deliver progressive, independent media, that challenges the right’s hateful rhetoric. Together we can find the stories that get lost.

We’re not bankrolled by billionaire donors, but rely on readers chipping in whatever they can afford to protect our independence. What we do isn’t free, and we run on a shoestring. Can you help by chipping in as little as £1 a week to help us survive? Whatever you can donate, we’re so grateful - and we will ensure your money goes as far as possible to deliver hard-hitting news.

28 Responses to “It’s ludicrous to deny the threat to the UK from ISIS”

  1. swatnan

    I don’t know about you but I’m getting bloody annoyed with having to take my belt off.
    The sooner Al Queda, ISIS and all these mental Islamofacists are consigned to the grave the better.

  2. Leon Wolfeson

    Fine, but let’s do away with security theatre and have effective screening at airports, thanks.

  3. treborc1

    Blooming heck you do not need to bend down do you…. yes but of course sending these people to the grave will cost us just as many dead.

    If ever we had a need to be in Iraq this is it and what do we do we say no. We do not need to put people on the ground just in the air.

  4. ChrisEstMonNom

    I don’t care what happens in Iraq. I won’t send a single one of my people to die over there. Not one.

  5. Guest

    LOL. They’re Bush and Blair’s children. Islamist terrorism was nothing before the Iraq War.

  6. Guest

    LOL everything is the fault of ol whitey I see.

    It is time that ethnics take responsibility for their actions and stop with the victim mentality


    We preach freedom and support tyranny and then act surprised and hurt when we are hated.
    It is time for all Western forces to withdraw from the Middle East. Every one. But that will not happen. Instead we are fed lies about how withdrawing would make the terrorist threat worse.

    ISIS is becoming a threat to us because we are a threat to them.


    I want all Western military out of the Middle East. We have no business there. Let them get on with it. But American conservatives do not want that. The Pro-Israel lobby doesn’t want that. Big oil does not want that. We preach freedom and support tyranny. Expect consequences.

  9. Lamia

    Which western military? ISIS have thrived in Syria where there is no western involvement, let alone support for Assad’s tyranny, and those aiding its opponents were the Russians. It invaded Iraq where there were no western troops. It has murdered countless innocent Syrian and Iraqi civilians, murdered POWs, kidnapped schoolchildren and raped and crucified people – and you treat that as some sort of revenge against ‘the West’? You are clueless. ISIS are no kinf of resistance, they are imperialist scum and those paying the price of their barbarism are the ordinary Muslims you seem to be implying they are resisting on behalf of.

  10. EBCEBC

    US bases in Kuwait, Bahrain and Qatar. MIlitary links with Saudi Arabia. If you see no connection, then you do not know much about the way the folk in the Middle East work. They see Americans supporting cruel Premodern governments. They hate their governments so they hate America. Total withdrawal would reduce threat to the West significantly. if do not want to understand that, fine. But don’t come back at me with some rationalised nonsense.

  11. Guest

    Yes, I fully expect domestic terrorism from the far right against Jews here.

  12. Leon Wolfeson

    So, you haven’t bothered to study history.

  13. Leon Wolfeson

    Keep making excuses for ISIS’s values. That you think running away makes the bad people stop…

  14. Leon Wolfeson

    Well, the Kurds need ammunition as well.

  15. EBCEBC

    I lived in Saudi Arabia in the 80’s and again in the 90’s, for a total of ten years.

    In the 80’s, Palestine/Israel was high up the radical, Islamist agenda of both regime supporters and oppositionists. But the Kuwait invasion and expulsion changed all that because Palestinians supported Saddam. The change was profound. Talk was that over 200,000 Palestinians left Saudi Arabia 1992-1994. No contract renewal kept it quiet.

    By the late 90’s all talk among Saudis was of hatred for their own government which they saw as cruel, corrupt and supported by the United States. Israel/Palestine was hardly ever mentioned.

    From what I read and hear from friends I think that trend has continued. The Jewish community in the United States may be facing more problems from ultra-right crazies than Islamic terrorism though there is always the danger of individuals choosing to do terrible things.

    I would be very surprised if ISIS attacks Israel. They hate the Shi-ite Hizbollah (allied to Hamas) and the PLO hates ISIS. ISIS benefits from the cruel fluid warfare of terror they fight which is like European war the late Middle Ages. Static warfare of deadlock like Israel/Palestine would not suit them.

    ISIS’s greatest fear must be an attack from the West in full force. So, moving into anti-Western terrorism for them would be both dangerous and stupid as after the first act they will receive retribution from the West.

    I think they will consolidate in their little gangster state and make their main priority holding their borders. We shall see.

  16. Dave Roberts

    Which means what exactly?

  17. Leon Wolfeson

    What I wrote was plain English. It means *exactly* what it says.

    So sorry History is inconvenient for your narrative.

  18. Leon Wolfeson

    You’re assuming rationality from ISIS.
    This is…not a good assumption.

    They’re already sending threats to Jordan.

  19. yyy

    Jordan is a soft target. Israel is not.

  20. Dave Roberts

    Still would like it in English, and which bit of English?

  21. Dave Roberts

    They certainly do. AK 47 calibre which we don’t have.

  22. Mark Law

    “I want all Western military out of the Middle East. We have no business there. Let them get on with it. But American conservatives do not want that. The Pro-Israel lobby doesn’t want that. Big oil does not want that. We preach freedom and support tyranny. Expect consequences.”

    This comment gets to the real issue here. The wider and more pernicious attempted manipulation of the public’s attitude and mood by Govts, big business and the Media in order to allow them to impose more controls and constraints on the masses.

    If your economic system has collapsed, divert peoples’ attention by frightening them. Simple. Control the masses by making them cower. Scare them witless whilst picking their pockets at the same time (no-one will notice).
    are no bombs. After millions spent and travellers’ lives made so very miserable, they haven’t found a single bomb

  23. Leon Wolfeson

    Er…one, check which weapons they have. Two, also heavy weapon and vehicle ammunition…

    (Also, AK-47’s and the ammunition are in fact manufactured within the EU…)

  24. Leon Wolfeson

    Er…one, check which weapons they have. Two, also heavy weapon and vehicle ammunition…

    (Also, AK-47’s and the ammunition are in fact manufactured within the EU…)

  25. Leon Wolfeson

    You want a plain English statement “in English” and a “bit of English”?

    You’re making no sense. Take more ESOL lessons, and read about the history of Islamic terrorism. Your revisionism..

  26. Leon Wolfeson

    Democracies are always soft targets for terrorism.

  27. yyy

    That must be why there are so many more attacks In democratic Israel than in fake democratic Iraq or fake democratic Afghanistan or fake democratic Pakistan or fake democratic Kenya or fake democratic Nigeria.

    Oh but wait, there are not.

  28. Cole

    Interesting that the threats we heard about last week were barely mentioned in the major US papers. And today the ex head of MI6 has said that the whole thing has been overblown. The government trying to soften us up for a new Snoopers’ Charter?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.