ensuring that "we are effectively, to put this very bluntly, going after the right types, the right individuals with the wrong motivations, the behaviours and the characteristics that are deeply concerning."[1]
'Extreme Right-Wing Terrorism'
21. If the terminology is necessary, then it has to be accurate. Towards the end of our Inquiry—which had until that point been using the then terminology of 'Right-Wing Terrorism'—we were told that there had been a further review of terminology in May 2021. This time, it was to examine whether the term 'Right-Wing Terrorism' was the correct one to use as there were concerns that it was stigmatising those who hold mainstream right-wing political views. The review was undertaken by the counter-terrorism (CT) community, including CTP, MI5, GCHQ, JTAC, the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) and officials in the Home Office, who:
reviewed almost 40 options to identify credible alternatives that would primarily be operationally viable, accurate as a descriptor of the threat we face, and clearly understood by the general public.[2]
22. The review considered that the terminology should be changed, recommending that 'Extreme Right-Wing Terrorism' should be used as the "umbrella term" covering the various sub-ideologies identified by JTAC (Cultural Nationalism', 'White Nationalism' and 'White Supremacism'). There would, however, be no changes to the way the threat would be evaluated—MI5 and CTP would still be looking at the same group of Subjects of Interest (SOIS). When we questioned why the change was felt to be necessary, the Home Office explained:
This addition of 'Extreme' as a prefix to Right-Wing Terrorism' makes it clear that mainstream political views are not what operational organisations are interested in. Of all the prefixes the CT community assessed, 'Extreme' has the clearest negative connotations and best describes the activity in question.[3]
A. It is clearly difficult to delineate precisely the ideologies that might motivate Extreme Right-Wing Terrorists; however, we recognise that MI5 and Counter Terrorism Policing must be able to differentiate between them, not least because of the evidential thresholds.
B. Nevertheless, there is a risk that the varying terminologies used to categorise potential terrorists may cause confusion, including, most worryingly, to risk conflation of ideology with intent. It is important to be clear that there is no suggestion that all those who subscribe to these ideologies have terrorist intent; this is simply a means to establish what might be motivating potential terrorists.
C. More broadly, we welcome the recent addition of the word 'Extreme' to the previous term 'Right-Wing Terrorism'—it allays any possibility of the stigmatisation of those holding mainstream right-wing views.
7
