Nine years on from 7/7, we’re asking the same questions [AL ARABIYA]

July 8, 2014

On July 7, 2005 I was in the UK, only a few miles away from where the attacks on London took place. The repercussions of that day shaped Britain and it shaped my own life, for years to come. Some things change, and some things stay the same.

I had just completed my doctoral degree at the University of Warwick, an hour north of London. My work had not been in radicalisation or terrorism. But because my research had, in part, looked at Muslim British communities, it was suddenly of great interest to policy makers and others. I remember two weeks later, on July 21, arriving into central London on a train to give a talk on a panel at the Royal Institute for International Affairs at Chatham House – and walking. I walked from Euston Station to Chatham House. The police had uncovered a second terrorist plot and public transport was so severely handicapped it made sense to just walk – even though it took me about an hour to do so.

I remember doing that talk, and having a neoconservative pundit declare in the midst of the Q & A that “Muslims had to condemn terrorism” – even though that had already happened, by a plethora of groups inside and outside the UK already.

Bizarrely, when it came time to respond to him he had already left the room – his job of disruption and provocation was done. He is now the director of a not-so-insignificant think-tank and that discourse of problematizing Muslim communities far beyond what they are capable of being responsible for continues.

Indeed, the securitization of Muslim communities, in an emerging “kulturkampf” (cultural war) continues – and not just in marginal quarters. If the far-right was becoming more influential on the European continent in the years leading up to 7/7, substantial parts of its discourse became mainstreamed after that dreadful day. Six years later, Anders Breivik in Norway took that sort of discourse to its logical conclusion and dozens were killed in Oslo and Utoya. The discourse continues.

What drove these men?

When those attacks happened, we all wondered: what drove those young men, seemingly well integrated into British society, to turn on that society in such a violently aggressive fashion? The report of the Home Office working group on tackling radicalisation, that I was deputy convenor of, argued that there were a multitude of factors that might apply and it could vary from person to person. Today, nine years on, we’ve not only failed to crack that particular issue but in another way, it has intensified. Hundreds of Britons and other Europeans have left our continent, and gone to fight in Syria with the most radical of Islamist groups. Most of the Britons are clear that they have no interest in returning, but that does not mean none of them will not. Will any of them turn their radical ideology on Britain in the future? Nine years after the attacks on London, we don’t know but we would be foolish not to think it’s a possibility.

In the aftermath of those attacks in London, the relationships between different types of Islamist groups in the UK suddenly became ever more pertinent to the public arena, and government. What were the links between the Muslim Brotherhood and al-Qaeda? Were Salafists the problem, or could we (the wider public) rely on them for certain tasks in counter-terrorism work? The irony of thinking back on these types of issues nine years later, and realising that these questions are still asked, still strikes me.

Across the world

But such questions are not asked only in the UK – but all across Europe and within the Arab world. During the early months of the Arab uprisings, I remember communicating with counter-radicalisation experts I had known in the aftermath of the 7/7 attacks, and finding it almost amusing that so much of what we had discussed in the UK then, was suddenly so incredibly pertinent to an entirely different situation in a country like Egypt. Today, indeed, the public arena in Egypt is asking what the links are between the Brotherhood and al-Qaeda, for example, to the point where many in the political elite are pleased that the British government itself is conducting a review into that very question. (They’re not likely to be entirely pleased with the likely results of that review – but I digress). Things change, and yet, they stay the same.

A few days after the 7/7 bombings, I published a letter in the Times in the UK, condemning the attacks, but also calling for a constructive and appropriate response. A response that would not give the terrorists victory in causing us to overlook our own principles around the rule of law and human rights; a response that would cause our children and grandchildren to be proud of our commitments to our principles. I’m not sure if history will record our response as especially praiseworthy. But less than a decade later, again, in a completely different country, I’m looking at another “war on terror” unfold and seeing the discourse of that “war on terror” justify all sorts of abuses. At some point, every society realises that such a discourse hurts far more than it heals but by that time, it’s already lost something of itself. The question is: can it ever get that thing that it has lost back?

Minimizing harm

I’ve been asked before: why did you get into this world of public engagement? And I date it back to that tragic day on July 7, 2005. I did not volunteer my services that day, I didn’t really think I had much to offer. When I was asked to serve as deputy convenor of the government’s taskforce on tackling radicalisation and extremism, I really only had one motivation and that was to minimise harm. Nine years on, I just hope I didn’t add to the harm. Because, truly, it seems that the harm that arises out of our response to events like the July 7 attacks is simply a greater gift to those who seek to attack us.

That, perhaps more than anything else, is the most enduring lesson I took from the July 7 attacks – that how we, as peoples and societies, respond to adversity and difficulties says a great deal about us. Perhaps more than it does about those who would attack us. I’m not sure if we’ve learned all the lessons about what we did wrong after the July 7 – and I am even less sure that other countries have learned from our mistakes. But one thing that seems clear, whether it is in the UK post 7/7, or Egypt and the Arab world now, there are more people than there have ever been who seek to know what wrongs need to be averted, even – perhaps, especially – when they feel under attack.

Indeed, some things change and some things really do stay the same.

____________

Dr. H.A. Hellyer, non-resident fellow at the Brookings Institution, the Royal United Services Institute, and the Harvard University Kennedy School, previously held senior posts at Gallup and Warwick University. Follow him on Twitter at @hahellyer.

Source: Al Arabiya

Photo credit: