Prisons play a significant role in the radicalisation of vulnerable individuals. Terrorists have used prisons as incubators to mobilise outside support and radicalise other prisoners in order to recreate operational command structures. Prisons can also play a positive role in tackling radicalisation and terrorism in society as a whole, however. This briefing offers an analysis of the ways in which prisons can aid the fight against terrorism by helping governments and policy-makers spot new ideas and avoid costly and counterproductive mistakes.
Briefings
The UK’s relationship with Saudi Arabia and human rights
Recently, there have been calls for the UK to re-evaluate its relationship with Saudi Arabia. These calls have been based on the idea that the UK is muting its human rights criticism due to the country’s importance as an ally and arms trading partner.
Amidst this criticism, the government has argued that human rights in the region are best promoted when security co-operation and economic interdependence with the Saudi Arabia are maintained. Others argue that human rights in the region would be better served through a more assertive strategy, and that the UK government is not genuinely concerned with human rights in the region.
Evidence suggests that the government’s strategy of engaging Saudi Arabia on security matters to export more ethical international norms is not working. Moreover, any professionalisation that is achieved through continued close cooperation is overshadowed completely by the UK’s continued support of Saudi Arabia’s involvement in the war in Yemen.
The Big Chill – our relationship with the Arctic in the face of climate change
Executive Summary
Our closest polar neighbour has more of an impact on us than we realise. In the aftermath of a harsh end of Winter in Britain because of Arctic winds, it is time to have a look at our relationship with the North.
For many years the Arctic has merely existed unchecked in the North, a looming and unnoticed region that largely does not get registered by the mind on a weekly basis. Yet this is foolish, as we have more stake in the Arctic than we believe, and more now than ever before.
This briefing attempts to initiate a discussion on how we can re-evaluate our relationship with the great white North. By examining some of the most important legacies and perspectives of the Arctic in history, as well as the current state the Arctic is in as we witness the Climate Change crisis worsening, we might seek to reconsider how we approach the region in future years and how our actions may impact our future livelihoods.
Environmental Policy Post-Brexit: Reflections on the 25 Year Environment Plan
Executive Summary
Since the outcome of the Brexit referendum was announced in 2016, multiple environmental charities and advocacy groups have expressed the concern about how the departure from the European Union will impact environmental policy.
As the government announces plans to release a new Environment Bill, it’s important to see where the strategy’s priorities lie. Ahead of the bill the author looks at the 25 Year Environment Plan report, released by the government at the beginning of 2018, and what their future policies may include following the UK’s eventual departure from the EU.
British pragmatism? European defence and security institutions in the Brexit negotiations
Executive summary
Brexit negotiations, thus far, have mostly focused on the triad of citizens’ rights, the Irish border and the divorce bill, but since September talks are underway concerning the future of the UK-EU defence and space relationship. This paper examines four of the most important institutions and cooperation agreements in defence and space, offering an assessment of their economic and political significance to the United Kingdom.
This paper finds that UK participation in the EU’s Common Security & Defence Policy (CSDP) is of low political and economic importance to the UK. Limited UK troop contributions in recent years, apart from the EU’s anti-piracy mission ATALANTA, are indicative of this low priority. Instead, post-Brexit military operations are more likely to align with NATO deployments rather than with CSDP missions. Joint UK-EU CSDP operations could, however, be feasible where the UK government’s national interests align with the EU27’s mission priorities.
Since the Brexit referendum, the EU has forged ahead in the field of collaborative European defence research and development (R&D) by launching a European Defence Fund (EDF). The UK’s Ministry of Defence (MoD) is equally aware of the need to support its defence industrial base, initiating a similar fund via its Defence Innovation Initiative. Post-Brexit, the UK government will be hard-pressed to justify politically contributions to such a new EU project. Hence, this suggests a preference for a national R&D programme under UK oversight.
In addition to the launch of the EDF, the EU is expected to strengthen the role of its defence agency which encourages defence procurement as well as pooling and sharing of defence equipment. However, since its inception, the EDA has at most been peripheral to UK procurement initiatives. Therefore, as the UK leaves the Union it is also expected to discontinue its European Defence Agency (EDA) membership. More likely, the UK will continue to strengthen its ongoing strategy to gain economies of scale for its industry through major export programmes to non-EU countries.
Finally, the UK is a major stakeholder in the European Space Agency (ESA) which itself is not an EU institution. However, the EU has commissioned and finances the agency’s two flagship programmes, the Galileo Satellite Navigation System and the Copernicus Earth Observation programme. Unlike the above EU programmes, Westminster and the UK space industry are cognisant of the high economic and political stakes here. Consequently, the ESA and its two satellite programmes are likely to feature prominently in the upcoming Brexit negotiations.
Overall, this paper’s findings suggest that the UK has relatively few political and economic ramifications from leaving the EU’s defence institutions in their current form. The exception to this would be the EU’s space programmes which support Britain’s aerospace technology sector. After Brexit, the UK-EU relationship might well be headed towards pragmatic and problem-centric cooperation in defence, based on ad-hoc coalitions to solve common issues. However, the sheer number of stakeholders and current political volatility in Westminster may affect the political-economic calculus, altering the outcome of future relationship talks.
One issue, multiple perspectives. Views on potential restrictions on the free movement of people post-Brexit
Executive summary
If British media is anything to go by, it is often hard to see the UK as anything other than a fractured and, at times, even directionless nation; heading into Brexit negotiations with the EU as a perceived “enemy” (to use Chancellor of the Exchequer, Philip Hammond’s recent term). Moreover, when speaking to British people, it is clear that many are worried about the fate of the country. Some are more optimistic than others, but many feel concerned about the uncertainty that awaits the UK as it looks to a future outside of the EU. Many worry that – amidst the many points of discussion – issues that affect them personally may be low on the Government’s agenda.
Given this landscape, Agora has sought to champion a new way of commenting on the issue of Brexit in this debut publication. This work seeks to fill the void of fractured and ambiguous voices, often existing in echo chambers of Remainers and Leavers, by bringing together a range of opinions on restrictions to the free movement of people post-Brexit.
Using the contacts of Agora members’ networks as a basis, it gathered opinions from millennials and baby boomers, Brexiters and Remainers, people from across Europe and people from across the UK, including rural and metropolitan areas in the North as well as Northern Ireland and Gibraltar.
The collection of responses builds on two important assumptions that drive Agora’s work. First, that providing an objective platform can give insight into important and often ignored voices. Second, that there is a policy relevance to giving such voices a platform, not only revealing some of the areas which people are worried about but also providing some – albeit rudimentary – advice on future actions for policymakers and influencers.
We chose to focus on the free movement of people as it is just one aspect of the many political, economic, social and security issues that the UK Government must face. However, it is also an issue that touches most people: from UK citizens living in other member states and EU nationals living in the UK, to those that use doctors and tradesmen from other EU countries, to those that study abroad or have family and friends across the EU.
This report does not aim to address all the issues and opportunities restrictions to the free movement of people to and from the EU could produce. However, it does aim to offer an insight into some primary concerns as well as develop some initial suggestions for how to deal with these issues based on suggestions and concerns from a wide variety of people.
This work is basic and does not aim to make any broad claims about the British people or forgotten voices; however, it is a proof of concept. It reveals that these endeavours are important. Thus, this is the first report among many that will attempt to bring together a variety of people, providing a platform for unheard voices and tapping into valuable but neglected ideas.