State Policy and Strategy: Prevent, “Multi-agency” Responses, and the Way Forward

  • Julian Richards


In this chapter, questions of British state policy in the areas of counter-extremism and counter-terrorism are examined from the perspective of their effects on identity. The frame for analysis is an expansive chronological examination, which notes how contemporary counter-terrorism policy was shaped by the experience of “the Troubles” in Northern Ireland in the latter part of the twentieth century. A detailed and empirical analysis is then undertaken of the contemporary “Prevent” policy, which lies at the heart of British security debates and narratives in a most controversial form.


  1. BBC (2005) Universities attack terror plans. Accessed 1 December 2016.
  2. Burman J (2015) TERROR ALERT: 3,000 Islamist extremists in Britain ready to ATTACK the UK in weeks. The Express. Accessed 1 July 2016.
  3. CAIN (undated) Conflict archive on the internet. accessed 18 November 2016.
  4. Campbell C and Connolly I (2003) A Model for the ‘War against Terrorism’? Military Intervention in Northern Ireland and the Falls Curfew. Journal of Law and Society 30(3): 341–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Coventry City Council (2016) Freedom of Information Act (2000), Request ID: REQ01517. Accessed 21 December 2016.
  6. Croft S (2012) Securitizing Islam: Identity and the Search for Security. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Edgerton G (1996) Quelling the “Oxygen of Publicity”: British Broadcasting and “The Troubles” During the Thatcher Years. Journal of Popular Culture 30(1): 115–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fisher KM (2015) Security, Identity and British Counterterrorism Policy. Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Glees A (2006) Anthony Glees: internment should be a policy option. The Independent. Accessed 1 December 2016.
  10. Glees A and Pope C (2005) When Students Turn to Terror: Terrorist and Extremist Activity on British Campuses. London: Social Affairs Unit.Google Scholar
  11. Greer S (2010) Anti-Terrorist Laws and the United Kingdom’s ‘Suspect Muslim Community’: A Reply to Pantazis and Pemberton. British Journal of Criminology 50: 1171–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Heath-Kelly C (2012) Reinventing Prevention or Exposing the Gap? False Positives in UK Terrorism Governance and the Quest for Pre-emption. Critical Studies on Terrorism 5(1): 69–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Henderson M (2014) You’re playing for England, Moeen Ali, not your religion. The Telegraph. Accessed 9 August 2016.
  14. Hillyard P (1993) Suspect Community: People’s Experience of the Prevention of Terrorism Acts in Britain. London, Pluto PressGoogle Scholar
  15. House of Commons (2010) Preventing Violent Extremism: Sixth Report of Session 2009–2010. Communities and Local Government Committee. HC65. London, TSO.Google Scholar
  16. House of Commons (2016a) Counter-Extremism Policy: An Overview. Briefing Paper Number 7238. London, TSO.Google Scholar
  17. House of Commons (2016b) Radicalism: Written question – 21897. Accessed 21 December 2016.
  18. HM Government (2011) Prevent Strategy. Cmd 8092. London, TSOGoogle Scholar
  19. Khaleeli H (2015) ‘You worry they could take your kids’: Is the Prevent strategy demonising Muslim schoolchildren? The Guardian. Accessed 1 December 2016.
  20. Kundnani A (2009) Spooked! How not to Prevent Violent Extremism. London, Institute of Race RelationsGoogle Scholar
  21. Lloyd M and Dean C (2015) The Development of Structured Guidelines for Assessing Risk in Extremist Offenders. Journal of Threat Assessment and Management 2(1): 40–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Manningham-Buller E (2011) Securing Freedom: Lecture One - Terror. Reith Lectures, BBC Radio 4, broadcast 6 September 2011.Google Scholar
  23. McDonald H (2014) Ireland to clash with UK at human rights court over hooded men judgment. The Guardian. Accessed 19 November 2016.
  24. Miller D (1995) The Media and Northern Ireland: Censorship, Information Management and the Broadcasting Ban. In Philo G (ed.) Glasgow Media Group Reader, Volume 2. London, Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Mulcahy A (1995) Claims-Making and the Construction of Legitimacy: Press Coverage of the 1981 Northern Irish Hunger Strike. Social Problems 42(4): 449–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. NPCC (2016) National Channel referral figures. Accessed 1 December 2016.
  27. NUS (2016) CTSA and Prevent – Organising opposition and non-cooperation. 30 November 2016.
  28. Pantazis C and Pemberton S (2009) From the ‘Old’ to the ‘New’ Suspect Community: Examining the Impacts of Recent UK Counter-Terrorist Legislation. British Journal of Criminology 49: 646–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Quinn B (2015) Petition urges Cardiff University to cancel Germaine Greer lecture. The Guardian. Accessed 1 December 2016.
  30. Richards J (2010) Evaluation of the Aylesbury Vale Prevent Programme and Research into local Muslim Communities. Buckingham, University of Buckingham.Google Scholar
  31. Richards J (2012) A Guide to National Security: Threats, Responses and Strategies. Oxford, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Rosendorff BP and Sandler T (2004) Too Much of a Good Thing? The Proactive Response Dilemma. Journal of Conflict Resolution 48(5): 657–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ross A (2016) Academics criticise anti-radicalisation strategy in open letter. The Guardian. Accessed 1 December 2016.
  34. Universities UK (2016) Universities and counter-terrorism. Accessed 1 December 2016.
  35. Walker P (2016) Counter extremism bill branded confusing by Peers and MPs. The Guardian. Accessed 1 December 2016.

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Julian Richards
    • 1
  1. 1.University of BuckinghamBuckinghamUnited Kingdom

Personalised recommendations