Media reports from Spain appear to indicate that the country’s counter-radicalisation efforts among prison inmates are not producing results. Spain is not unique in grappling with both the management of its counter-radicalisation efforts and measuring their outcomes.
All too often, any overlaps between crime and terror are seen as forming part of a single problem of the ‘crime/terror nexus’. In reality, they present a range of disparate issues that should be addressed in their proper context.
A week after the atrocity in Manchester, it is now possible to draw some preliminary conclusions: there clearly was a breakdown in the intelligence flow that led to suicide bomber Salman Abedi slipping through the net; there are enduring questions about the UK’s Prevent anti-terrorism strategy; and, finally, there are the weaknesses of ‘soft targets’ that such an attack invariably expose.
The investigation into the 3 April terrorist attack on the St Petersburg metro has focused on a man of Central Asian origin with possible ties to Syrian rebel groups. The attack raises concerns about the threat posed both by Daesh and extremists within Russia’s sizeable Central Asian community.
As the battle for Mosul rages on and Daesh is put under increasing pressure in other parts of Iraq and Syria, how will the threat from the group evolve? Will Daesh end up following the path of Al-Qa’ida, with regional affiliates becoming more prominent?
Europe is on a high state of alert after several terror attacks – and more are thought to be in the pipeline. So which strategy should governments adopt to address radicalisation and prevent future attacks?