In contrast, similar acts by Islamist extremists would likely be swiftly classified as terrorism, the think tank argued in an article published by the newspaper. The criticism comes in the wake of week-long riots across England and Northern Ireland, during which asylum hotels and mosques were targeted…reports Asian Lite News
The government’s approach to tackling extremism has been criticized for being “two-tiered,” with far-right attacks not being treated as seriously as Islamist ones, according to a leading think tank.
The Royal United Services Institute has raised concerns that right-wing violence is often dismissed as “mere thuggery” by politicians, prosecutors, and security services, The Observer reported on Sunday.
In contrast, similar acts by Islamist extremists would likely be swiftly classified as terrorism, the think tank argued in an article published by the newspaper. The criticism comes in the wake of week-long riots across England and Northern Ireland, during which asylum hotels and mosques were targeted.
The violence has been linked to neo-Nazi and far-right activity, highlighting what RUSI described as “double standards” in how different forms of extremism are addressed. RUSI, which was established in 1831 by the Duke of Wellington and is often cited as the world’s oldest think tank, said this double standard had allowed far-right extremism to flourish in the UK.
Dr. Jessica White, acting director of RUSI’s terrorism and conflict research group, research fellow Claudia Wallner, and Emily Winterbotham, director of terrorism and conflict studies, co-authored the article. They wrote: “RUSI’s research suggests that the nature of far-right violence, which is often seen as low impact and disjointed, coupled with institutional bias and racism, means that far-right violence has historically not triggered the same responses from politicians, security services and the media as jihadist violent extremism.
“There exists a clear double standard, or two-tier approach, in how different forms of extremism are addressed, particularly when comparing security and legal responses to far-right and Islamist violent extremism. “Far-right-motivated violence is often classified as mere ‘thuggery’ or hooliganism, while similar acts motivated by Islamist extremism would likely be swiftly labeled as terrorism. This inconsistency undermines the perceived severity of far-right threats and hinders the political will and the necessary legal precedent to take equivalent action.”
The article criticized British Prime Minister Keir Starmer for his recent description of an attack on a hotel housing asylum-seekers as “far-right thuggery,” The Observer reported. While acknowledging the ideological roots of the violence, the authors argued that the term “thuggery” minimized the organized, ideological nature of the riots and the groups behind them.
RUSI advocated for treating severe incidents of far-right violence as terrorism. Recognizing severe cases of far-right violence as terrorism would “align with a more equitable legal strategy, ensuring that all forms of extremism are prosecuted with the seriousness they warrant,” it said.
It argued that the recent riots should be viewed as part of a broader “pattern of violence” across Europe that had been largely overlooked by both politicians and the public.
It added: “Similar far-right riots have occurred in Dublin in 2023 and in Chemnitz in Germany in 2018, both in reaction to stabbings that sparked widespread anti-immigrant sentiment, with far-right groups exploiting the incidents to incite violence against migrants and refugees.”
The RUSI’s findings followed recent allegations of bias within the UK’s legal and political systems, particularly in the context of pro-Palestinian protests that have taken place since Oct. 7.