Sir, The news that some disillusioned jihadists are seeking ways of returning to Britain offers the government a possible way out of its legal impasse (“Let us come home, say young British jihadists”, Sept 5). Given their reported belief that “if they died fighting other rebels or jihadist groups they might not qualify for martyrdom and its benefits in paradise”, there is clearly a long way to go before these fighters are ready to be reintegrated into society.
Nevertheless the fact that they seem prepared to undergo mandatory deradicalisation programmes and continuing surveillance by the British authorities suggests that it would be worthwhile instituting a rehabilitation programme rather than simply denying British passport-holders the right of return, which would almost certainly be illegal.
Components of the programme would need to include a channel of communication for willing returnees to identify themselves and to make safe and secure arrangements for their return to the UK; formal arrest on arrival in the UK and remand to a dedicated secure detention facility to enable thorough debriefing, rehabilitation and assessment of returnees prior to release (or charge where appropriate); and continuing surveillance after release until the authorities are satisfied that an individual presents no security threat.
The government is right to take a tough line on terrorism and to refuse re-entry if a suspected jihadist would not be rendered stateless, but for British passport-holders who wish to return there must be a way of facilitating this while at the same time ensuring the safety of the public. Michael Patterson Swineshead, Lincs
Sir, The idea that we might seek to reintegrate young British Muslims who become disillusioned with killing in Syria and elsewhere is the utmost folly (“Experts raise fears over strategy to deal with Jihadists back from war”, Sept 6).
Advertisement
Aside from providing a clear route for terrorists back into the UK, it would also send the unambiguous signal that going off to experiment with murderous jihad abroad was a viable gap year option.
Shaun Gregory
Professor of International Relations
Durham University
Sir, What an opportunity to demonstrate the contrast between the brutal, unforgiving philosophy of the “Islamic State” and the compassionate civilisation of a Christian based society. The proverb of the prodigal son springs immediately to mind.
Moreover, the pragmatic view that there is no stronger instrument of transformation than a mind driven by idealistic fervour that has been changed by the personal experience of a very different reality is one that should not be dismissed by equally entrenched dogma on behalf of our own authorities.
Advertisement
Many of the young men who went out to fight were disillusioned by the British reticence to engage in the early days of the Syrian uprising, and very likely felt disempowered in their personal lives.
A compassionate and intelligent understanding of their motives, as expressed by the German model, would be much more constructive in defeating extremism than a punitive response to their desire to return to what they now seem happy to consider “home”. Putting them in prison is not the answer, but learning how to deal constructively with their undoubtedly traumatising experiences would be educative for us all.
AMS Hutton-Wilson
Evercreech, Somerset