Terrorism

When Jeremy Corbyn says it is better to bring people to trial than to shoot them, he is right. So one might feel a little sorry for him as the critics attack his reaction to the Paris events. But in fact the critics are correct, for the wrong reason. It is not Mr Corbyn’s concern for restraint and due process which are the problem. It is the question of where his sympathies really lie, of what story he thinks all these things tell. Every single time that a terrorist act is committed (unless, of course, it be a right-wing one, like that of Anders Breivik), Mr Corbyn locates the ill as deriving from the behaviour of the West, especially the United States and Britain (and, where relevant, Israel).

On a day when Jeremy Corbyn has been making clear his concerns about both the government’s use of drones and any shoot-to-kill policy for terrorists on British streets, Theresa May’s statement on the Paris attacks was striking for the level of cross-party agreement. Andy Burnham paid generous tribute to the Home Secretary and pledged Labour’s support for her anti-terror crackdown. The only discordant note came on the question of police funding. Burnham aligned himself with Bernard Hogan-Howe’s warning that cuts of more than 10 percent to police funding would make it harder to keep the streets safe. May set out how the police here would ‘intensify’ their approach to big events in an attempt to prevent a Paris-style attack here.

When British troops were on patrol in Iraq and Afghanistan, we faced many enemies, from jihadis to press-ganged civilians. But for me, the most terrifying ones lay buried. Bullets usually miss. Improvised explosive devices – IEDs — don’t. They are frighteningly simple. Old munitions wired together or plastic bottles packed with fertiliser and ball-bearings could destroy a vehicle and kill its passengers. During my four years in Afghanistan I saw IEDs evolve: first came remote triggers, then pressure plates and then low-metal-content devices. Curiously, IEDs evolved in a similar way in Iraq. This should be no surprise, since the groups trying to kill British troops shared one common resource: Iranian support. For years, Tehran has armed insurgents.

Does the government hold a ‘kill list’ of terrorists fighting for the so-called Islamic State who can be taken out at a moment’s notice? Michael Fallon certainly seemed to suggest so this morning on Radio 4, saying the government ‘would not hesitate’ to launch further attacks on those who posed a threat to this country. The Prime Minister’s official spokeswoman neither confirmed nor denied the existence of a list when asked about it. She said: ‘It means the government remains absolutely committed to doing what is necessary to protect British people here on the streets of Britain.’ Pressed on the existence of a list of names, she said: ‘It means that our approach is to protect us from that threat.