The murder of Lee Rigby last Wednesday in Woolwich was undoubtedly a horrific incident which Boris Johnson was right to describe as a ‘sickening, deluded and unforgiveable act of violence.’ The perpetrators should be heavily punished and attempts are rightly being made to clamp down on any such extremism emerging in the future. Nevertheless, to view the crime as one solely produced by the individuals who committed it is to close off debate to the wider causes of the murder, causes very much related to the treatment of Muslim communities both in the UK and abroad. To understand an act of violence is not to excuse it or to deny any agency to the murderers themselves, and constitutes a far more enlightened approach than simply bashing the criminals for their barbaric behaviour, and seeing all possible influences upon the act as having emanated from within the individuals themselves.

Muslim communities are being unfairly and unequally treated both within our borders and outside them, and it is this ill-treatment that has made the proliferation of extremism such an attractive proposition for those involved. To close off all debate over the UK’s foreign policy is to take a wholly narrow-minded approach to the incident; one which politicians almost inevitably adopt, though, due to their involvement with overseas atrocities and the harsh response of much of the population to the murder. Consider the West’s support for Israeli domination of Palestinian people, the occupation of Afghanistan and the lack of security which has resulted from it, the illegal invasion of Iraq and the continuing drone warfare which kills innocent civilians in numerous countries. The USA and UK took the almost laughable view that you could defeat terrorism and introduce democracy to a country by simply bombing it, not recognising that their actions would only spark even greater hostility towards them. It is almost inevitable that such forceful involvement and cultural imperialism in Muslim communities will incite hatred and opposition to the West among many, and since there is a large Muslim population in the UK violence ‘from within’ becomes a distinct and likely possibility.

The more equal treatment of Muslim communities in general would make the emergence of extremism from within these communities much less attractive. We need to ask what is going through the mind of those who take up these extremist positions. They clearly have a strong and passionate wish to rebel against the West, a feeling of antagonism towards the UK as their host country, and sentiments of ill-treatment and injustice. Rather than attacks such as the Woolwich murder and 7/7 bombings being seen as the death knell of multiculturalism (or our acceptance that a variety of cultures can live side-by-side within the same society), they are actually evidence that more multiculturalism is needed. A greater recognition of the value of mainstream Muslim communities and their equal place within our society would raise their self-esteem, give them a more positive conception of themselves, and make them feel a greater sense of belonging to the nation. This, in turn, would make them less likely to see the host country and culture as ‘other’ to themselves, as something hostile which they feel the need to rebel against. It may seem counterintuitive to give Muslim communities more recognition after the Woolwich murder, but in a purely rational and logical sense it is the most favourable option.

Multiculturalism is not the same thing as moral relativism: it maintains a strong liberal framework and evaluates the cultures that operate within a given society, and this is why extremist branches of cultures will never be positively recognised or tolerated. Theresa May is right to want to cut off these dangerous branches through counter-terrorism measures, but these will be largely futile unless the underlying root of such violence (the desire to rebel) is also tackled.

The increased recognition of difference and its value to our society must take place at both the level of the state and of civil society, and must involve the media taking a much more positive view of mainstream Muslim communities as opposed to the subtly derogatory portrayal that they often give them. Do the media really think that their present attitude encourages Muslims to integrate into our society, as they so passionately want them to do? Making distinctions between ‘Brits’ and ‘foreign-born people’ is only going to hinder this process, as will articles equating guns with Islam. Many newspapers portray us as a country of primitive close-minded bigots, and quite frankly insult vast swathes of the population who want a multicultural society to thrive. The Institute for Strategic Dialogue, an independent think-tank based in London, provides a good example of how we could encourage mutual tolerance in a deep-rooted way, drawing on social media to raise awareness of difference and its benefits to our society.

Ultimately Muslim communities must be viewed in a more equal way both at home and abroad if extremism is not to continually re-emerge in the way that it did last Wednesday. Positive recognition of Muslims in general, in the moderate and mainstream sense, makes the fruition of extremism from within these mainstream communities much less likely, since this is the position from which anger and frustration are initially built. To understand some of the reasons for the Woolwich murder is vastly different from excusing it as an act of violence, and to understand is what we must do if such ‘sickening, deluded and unforgiveable’ atrocities are to be prevented in the future.      

This piece is one of three in Varsity Comment's coverage of the controversial issue of terrorism in Britain. The others are available here and here.