Connect with us

Opinion

A no-deal Brexit will leave both Europe and Britain more exposed to terrorists and organised crime

Published

on

no-deal Brexit will leave both Europe and Britain more exposed

With exactly five months to go until the UK is scheduled to leave the European Union, the 28-nation bloc appears no nearer to striking a deal with the British government over what Brexit will actually look like. Sticking to their “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed” mantra, EU chiefs are understandably playing hardball with the UK, keen not to offer London a deal that might encourage other nations to bail out of the union. As things stand, a no-deal Brexit is looking increasingly likely, which would mean the UK crashing out of the EU with no 21-month transition period in March next year, forcing it to revert to World Trade Organisation rules on trade, withdraw fully from the customs union and lose membership of various European regulatory bodies overnight.

Remainers fear such a scenario could result in severe economic hardship for the least well-off in Britain, and might even cause food and drug shortages. Whether or not this actually comes to pass, what is more worrying is the two sides’ failure to arrive at an agreement on security cooperation. While it is one thing to use potential trade deals, free movement and citizen residency status as bargaining chips in the Brexit negotiations, it is quite another to play fast and loose with security partnerships on which Britain, the EU and the wider world depend.

Security arrangements should have been ring-fenced from the main Brexit negotiations from day one, allowing law enforcement agencies in Britain and the EU to continue sharing intelligence and crime-fighting tools regardless of what was agreed in other areas. The fact this did not happen means both Europe and the UK could be facing a less secure future, all on account of negotiators refusing to recognise that the safety of every citizen of the EU and Britain should take precedence over relatively petty squabbles over far less important matters.

Speaking with the BBC last week, Lynne Owens, chief of the UK’s National Crime Agency (NCA), warned that a no-deal Brexit could result in British investigators losing access to key crime-fighting tools such as the European Arrest Warrant and the shared Schengen information system database. Noting how the NCA is working closely with law enforcement partners across Europe over the potential security consequences of a no-deal Brexit, Owens said Britain’s ability to share intelligence and jointly investigate crimes could be significantly impacted, affecting UK law enforcement agencies’ fight against serious and organised crime.

For the EU’s part, it risks losing access to vital British intelligence if no deal can be struck. Speaking in June this year at Nato’s headquarters in Brussels, GCHQ Director Jeremy Fleming told an audience that police in four European countries foiled planned terrorist operations last year thanks to intelligence provided by the UK. Fleming also highlighted how a number other European countries had enjoyed access to classified intelligence shared by Britain on cyber crime.

Just how much the UK stands to lose security-wise if it crashes out of the EU with no deal was last week laid bare in a new report from the National Audit Office (NAO). The agency warned that organised criminal networks are preparing to take full advantage of Britain’s failure to put systems in place to protect its borders once it leaves the union. In its report, the NAO cautions that the UK is on course not to deliver 11 out of the 12 critical border management upgrades that need to be in place before Brexit.

Commenting on the report, NAO boss Amyas Morse said: “Government has openly accepted the border will be sub-optimal if there is no deal with the EU on 29 March 2019. It is not clear what sub-optimal means in practice, or how long this will last. But what is clear is that businesses and individuals who are reliant on the border running smoothly will pay the price.”

It may well be the case that both sides in the Brexit negotiations are indulging in brinkmanship, and that a deal will be struck at the eleventh hour. But with time running out, things are coming dangerously close to the wire. If the UK crashes out of the EU, there will be a very real possibility that people in both Europe and Britain could be considerably less safe at the end of March next year than they are now. This will be a direct result of politicians using the issue as a bargaining chip in negotiations; a move that could end up making things much easier for organised criminal gangs and terrorist groups, and in a worst case scenario could even result in the loss of life.

Continue Reading

Opinion

The fact that stories about jihadists being trafficked into Europe do not make headline news is deeply troubling

Published

on

jihadists being smuggled into Europe

Astonishingly, we are now living through a time when reports of Islamist extremists being smuggled into mainland Europe from the Middle East and Africa by a people smuggling gang headed up by a Daesh supporter barely warrant any mention at all across international mainstream media. Italian police last week said they had arrested 15 members of a Mediterranean human trafficking network that may have been responsible for sneaking jihadists into Europe, along with contraband including cannabis and illicit tobacco. After originally being reported by Italian daily Il Giornale, the story was picked up by only a handful of English-language news outlets, suggesting that these types of incidents have now become so commonplace that members of the public no longer find them remarkable.

It is alarming to say the least that when applying the “man bites dog” test to stories such as these, it would appear that the majority of editors and journalists working across print, online and broadcast media deem the trafficking of dangerous ideologues into Europe to have become so routine that reporting around such incidents is no longer diverting enough to engage the attention of their audiences.

As it is likely that many readers will be unfamiliar with the story, it is worth taking a moment to go over its main points. Italian investigators said the trafficking network, which shipped migrants from Tunisia to Sicily using speedboats, was broken up after they received a tip-off from a reformed Islamist who was serving time in an Italian jail. The former extremist said he provided the intelligence that led to the gang members’ arrests to prevent the establishment of an army of “kamikaze” Islamists in Italy, suggesting that those smuggled into the country by the network may have had the desire and capacity to launch suicide attacks.

In an arrest warrant, police said the service the gang offered was particularly attractive to people who were wanted by law enforcement authorities in Tunisia, especially those who were being sought for questioning in relation to their connections with “religiously-motivated terrorist groups”. Revealing that those detained included both Italian and Tunisian nationals, investigators said they were still looking for a number of other suspects connected with the gang, who are wanted for questioning in relation to human trafficking offences. They include the group’s suspected leader, who is said to be a Tunisian man who has posted Daesh propaganda on his Facebook profile and is being sought for alleged terrorism offences.

The lack of reporting around the case is troubling for a number reasons, not least of which is a growing concern that the collapse of Daesh’s caliphate in Iraq and Syria might lead to an increase in the number of extremists linked to the group attempting to return to Europe. But what is perhaps more worrying is the fact that this is happening at a time when huge numbers of migrants are still being allowed to flood into Europe mostly unchecked from the Middle East and Africa. While the numbers are falling, migrant crossings of the Mediterranean into Europe topped 100,000 for the fifth year running in 2018. At the beginning of last year, Interpol warned that as many as 50 Daesh fighters had managed to enter Italy illegally after crossing the Mediterranean on traffickers’ boats. With the number of former militants fleeing Daesh’s former heartland on the rise, it would not be surprising if demand for such crossings increases, and plots such as the one uncovered by police in Italy result in more Islamists entering European countries while politicians and the media are looking the other way.

At the same time as all this is happening, governments across Europe appear willing to go to great lengths to keep right-wing activists out of their countries, such as the Canadian YouTuber Lauren Southern and the US white supremacist Richard Spencer. While both of these individuals openly harbour views that many people find extremely offensive, banning them from entering European countries while standing back and doing nothing as an unknown number of potential Islamist extremists are allowed to slip in illegally unchecked is utter madness. Europe must of course take its fair share of refugees who are fleeing war and persecution in the countries from which genuine asylum seekers are fleeing, but the time has surely come to insist that those who wish to make a claim for help do so legally.

Preventing migrants from illegally crossing the Mediterranean and encouraging them to apply for asylum through the proper channels will both ensure that only those in genuine need receive the help they deserve, and that governments in Europe have a vital opportunity to do all they can to ensure that extremists who mean to do their people harm are stopped from entering their countries. If things are allowed to continue the way they are, it will likely only be a matter of time before an Islamist who has slipped into Europe illegally while disguised as a migrant does something that truly is newsworthy.

Continue Reading

Opinion

The crime and exploitation social justice enthusiasts appear happy to ignore

Published

on

social justice enthusiasts

Social media has for years now been rammed with politically correct right-on types who enjoy little more than informing anybody who cares to listen about the virtuous manner in which they live their lives, and how the choices they make are helping to save the world. This might take the form of boasting about how they became vegan, not only due to the fact that eating meat and dairy products is so very cruel to animals, but also because living as a carnivore is terribly bad for the environment. Similarly sanctimonious individuals might make a big song and dance about their insistence that everything they buy is “ethically sourced”.

While this type of behaviour is highly admirable and is absolutely to be encouraged, it is not uncommon to find that the people who shout loudest about how woke they are in areas such as these actually make multiple life choices and purchasing decisions that support many forms of criminality and exploitation that they appear to be quite content to ignore. Often, merely scratching the surface of the lives of the scrupulously politically correct reveals that they indulge in easily avoidable behaviour that is not difficult to link back to forced labour and violence.

Drugs

While illicit drugs are of course in and of themselves illegal, middle class substance abuse is rife across the western world. So much so in fact that the head of London’s Metropolitan Police last year criticised the hypocrisy of people with outwardly progressive politics thinking little of the consequences of their after-dinner line of cocaine. Cressida Dick called out members of the chattering classes who “happily think about global warming and fair trade, and environmental protection and all sorts of things, [such as] organic food”, and then go on to take a drug linked to death, violence and suffering both in the UK and in the countries in which it is produced.

Earlier this week, Britain’s National Crime Agency warned that drug dealers on the dark web are actually marketing their products as “vegan” and “ethically friendly” in an attempt to attract this type of user. Dick is of course entirely correct; pontificating about fair trade coffee and bananas prior to taking a drug whose very presence in your country has left behind it a trail of blood and misery is surely the very height of hypocrisy.

Food

The perennially virtuous are often very keen on using food as a means by which to signal their progressive attitudes towards other sentient beings and the wellbeing of the planet in general. Leaving aside the fact that those who complain about factory farming are typically nowhere near as vocal when it comes to barbaric religious slaughter methods that ought to be outlawed – vegetarians, vegans and those who like to boast about how everything they eat is ethically sourced can be surprisingly ignorant about the role forced labour and crime can play in getting the food they eat on their table.

For years now, campaigners have been warning that the seafood industry is built largely on a form of modern slavery that sees workers paid little or no money to put in gruelling 20-hour shifts on fishing trawlers while being regularly beaten, in some cases to death. Despite this, it remains rare to hear anybody voice concern that the prawns they buy at their local supermarket might have been caught by a victim of forced labour. While it is of course unpleasant to think that a chicken could have spent its life in factory farm conditions, it seems curious that many consumers appear more worried about whether or not their eggs are free range than the possibility that a Thai trawler worker may have been killed while catching the shrimp they plan to eat for their supper.

Technology

It is an often quoted cliché that anti-capitalist hipsters who complain about the evils of consumerism and greed tend often to do so on social media using $1,000 smartphones while sitting in Starbucks drinking an absurdly overpriced latte. But all joking aside, the number of people who claim to care about social justice who use connected devices produced by workers toiling in slave-like conditions that would most likely be illegal in their own countries remains breath-taking. While it may be the case that Apple was last year handed an award for its efforts to eradicate modern slavery from its supply chains, the iPhone maker and its fellow hardware manufacturers have a long way to go when it comes to being able to guarantee that their products have not been made by people working in illegal conditions.

Regardless, the fact that revelations about abuses in the company’s supply chains still arise with alarming regularity seems to be of little concern to those who use their Apple products to signal their virtue on social media platforms, some of which have been known to promote human trafficking and paedophilia.

All of the above examples have been widely reported on by mainstream media outlets over recent years, but it appears that for some with progressive politics, there are certain instances where practicing the social justice doctrine they preach is simply too inconvenient.

Continue Reading

Opinion

The real crime is turning a blind eye to forced marriage in the first place

Published

on

turning a blind eye to forced marriage

An investigation conducted by the Times of London has revealed that the British government is asking UK victims of forced marriage who are sent overseas to cover the cost of their own rescue. According to the paper, victims who muster the courage to escape their fate before being wed to men they do not know are told they must repay the cost of their repatriation to the UK should they not be able to come up with the necessary funds immediately. According to the Times, the British Foreign Office confiscates victims’ passports until they have repaid their “debt”, and even adds 10% interest in the event they are unable to settle in full within six months.

The paper’s revelations have rightly prompted British Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt to call for an investigation into its findings, as well as drawing condemnation from commentators expressing disgust that the government could behave in such an abhorrent fashion. But while it is of course an outrage that young girls who have been betrayed by their own families should be forced to pay to secure their freedom and safety, the real scandal is that authorities are not intervening before they are sent overseas to be married to total strangers in the first place.

Unfortunately for them, it would appear that the cultural shift brought about by the “Me Too” and “Time’s Up” movements has yet to benefit victims of forced marriage, who are sent to countries they might never have been to, in most cases by their own relatives, to be forcibly married to typically much older men they have not met. As has been the case in the past with Asian paedophile grooming gangs and suspected cases of female genital mutilation, it is thought that police and social workers in Britain have been reluctant to intervene in cases of forced marriage through fear of being labelled “racist”. A blind eye is said to often be turned when female students from certain cultural backgrounds disappear from schools or colleges for no good reason, with authorities apparently just expecting this to happen with girls from some minority communities.

In August of last year, a separate investigation conducted by the Times found that the UK Home Office had been issuing visas to foreign men who had forcibly married young British girls, some of whom had been raped and made pregnant abroad in an apparent attempt to make their husbands’ applications for permission to enter the UK more likely to succeed. It was claimed that victims had been sent to countries such as Pakistan, Bangladesh and India to be made pregnant by their new husbands, before being returned back to Britain to give birth. At this point, victims’ husbands would apply for a UK visa, using the fact that their wives and children were already in the UK as leverage.

Despite evidence suggesting that this and similar practices have been routinely taking place in Britain for decades, the first forced marriage conviction in the UK was only secured in 2015, highlighting how woeful authorities’ response to the problem has been. While forced marriage is illegal in Britain, with offenders found guilty of the crime facing up to seven years behind bars, convictions are far and few between, suggesting that hundreds if not thousands of young girls are being forced  into marriages against their will with little hope of intervention.

With victims often too afraid to come forward, and police and social workers seemingly too afraid to intervene due to political correctness, it looks likely that these girls will continue to be exploited unless there is real institutional change. If any progress is to be made, police, teachers and social workers must be trained how to spot the signs that young girls might be at risk of forced marriage. At the same time, the stigma of calling out such practices must end, with any suggestion that doing so is in any way racist being dismissed.

If we are to be candid, the practice of forced marriage can involve or lead to all manner of other crimes, including child sexual exploitation, kidnap, rape, modern slavery and illegal immigration. Is it not “racist” to turn a blind eye when these offences occur within minority communities when they would in most cases be doggedly investigated and prosecuted when found in society at large? It should go without saying that victims of forced marriage should not have to pay for their own rescue, and one would hope that the revelations uncovered by the Times will lead to this rather cruel policy being brought to an end as soon as possible. However, it is undoubtedly more important that western societies do not allow cultural relativism or fear of being labelled racist prevent the investigation of a revolting crime that causes victims immeasurable harm and suffering.

Continue Reading

Newsletter

Sign up for our mailing list to receive updates and information on events

Social Widget

Latest articles

Press review

Follow us on Twitter

Trending

Shares