In a significant policy decision, UK Home Secretary Yvette Cooper is set to reject internal Home Office advice that suggested potentially expanding the definition of extremism beyond the current focus on Islamist and far-right threats. The proposed approach, outlined in a report commissioned after the tragic Southport murders last year, advocated for a “behavior-based and ideologically agnostic” strategy rather than centering on specific “ideologies of concern.” However, Cooper is expected to maintain the Home Office’s emphasis on combating violence stemming from Islamist and far-right ideologies, which currently account for the vast majority of terrorism cases in the UK.
Report Sparks Debate on Extremism Definition
The leaked report, which found its way to the right-leaning think tank Policy Exchange, has ignited a debate about the government’s counter-terrorism strategy and the scope of what constitutes extremism. Key recommendations include:
- Shifting to a behavior-based approach rather than focusing on specific ideologies
- Acknowledging the mainstreaming of certain right-wing extremist beliefs and narratives
- Recognizing the potential for extremism in the “manosphere” and its overlap with right-wing ideologies
- Identifying possible Hindu extremism in light of tensions and disinformation campaigns
However, the report has drawn criticism for suggesting that claims of “two-tier policing,” often used by Conservative politicians to describe concerns like the handling of pro-Palestinian protests, are a “right-wing extremist narrative.”
Cooper’s Stance and the Southport Attack
Yvette Cooper’s decision comes amidst heightened scrutiny of the government’s counter-terrorism approach, particularly in the wake of the Southport attack. The perpetrator, Axel Rudakubana, had an obsession with extreme violence and genocides but no specific ideology identified by police. This has led to calls for a review of who can be charged under terrorism laws, with Labour leader Keir Starmer arguing that the attack aligns with the public’s understanding of terrorism.
However, experts like former police counter-terror commander Neil Basu and independent reviewer of terrorism legislation Jonathan Hall KC have cautioned against widening the definition, arguing that it could bring too much into scope and strain resources. Former Met Police Chief Superintendent Dal Babu echoed these concerns, emphasizing the need for a measured approach and the challenges of allocating resources to tackle terrorism effectively.
Maintaining Focus on Primary Threats
The Home Office has stated that the report’s findings are yet to be signed off by ministers and reaffirmed its commitment to tackling the most prominent threats posed by Islamist and extreme right-wing ideologies. This aligns with the assessment of MI5 Director Ken McCallum, who noted in October that three-quarters of identified threats were Islamist, while a quarter involved far-right extremists.
As the debate surrounding the definition of extremism continues, Yvette Cooper’s anticipated decision to maintain the current focus of counter-terrorism efforts highlights the challenges faced by policymakers in striking a balance between addressing evolving threats and allocating limited resources effectively. While the Southport attack has underscored the need for vigilance against violence motivated by various factors, the Home Secretary’s stance suggests a cautious approach to expanding the scope of extremism definitions and a continued emphasis on the most pressing threats to UK security.
