For two ex-Security Service directors to wonder aloud critically on the UK's CT strategy is unprecedented, even more so as the effects of Paris are in political and media foreground.

Eliza Manningham-Buller, who retired as Director in 2007, spoke in a House of Lords debate on the government's latest proposed CT law:
It seems to me that Prevent is clearly not working. This is not altogether surprising because it is difficult. We do not really know what works. I retired nearly eight years ago. I know that a great deal of effort has gone into thinking about how to counter this toxic and murderous ideology. I believe that we must have a better understanding of the roots of terrorism than we used to, and a better understanding of how to divert people—particularly vulnerable young people who have, in some cases, been groomed and exploited—from their path.
Some of those who come back from Syria will not be terrorists; some need to be reintegrated. The Channel programme is obviously to be applauded, but I am still concerned that it is bound to be slow, even over the long term.
It is understandable that it will be slow, but we do not seem—I beg to be corrected by others who are more up to date than me—to be having much effect. We are told that 600 dangerous extremists who are British citizens have fought in Syria. That is a large number. If Prevent had been working for the past 10 years, we might not have seen so many going.
It follows that I rather doubt that the Government, however laudable their efforts, are well placed to counter this ideology. A lead on that has and is beginning to come from moderate, mainstream Islam, which has itself suffered so much from the distorted version of its faith propounded by terrorists. One of the most appalling scenes from Paris was that of the Muslim policeman on the pavement being executed brutally by one of the terrorists.
It also follows, therefore, that I am not convinced of the value of putting Prevent on a statutory footing. I am out of date. The Government may be able to convince me, but I cannot see how legislation can really govern hearts, minds and free speech.
Link:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...as-failed.html and her full speech is on:http://www.theyworkforyou.com/lords/...5-01-13a.750.0

Jonathan Evans, who retired as Director in April 2013, in a maiden speech in the House of Lords, stated:
....the “hesitancy” of the Government to “engage with the religious dimension of the threat we face” was making it harder to prevent young men becoming radicalised....events in Syria and Iraq had caused a “jolt of energy that has gone through the extremist networks in this country”, turning would-be jihadists into battle-hardened terrorists. A similar situation existed in Afghanistan before 9/11, he said, and: “Those circumstances led to a series of attacks internationally and over a long period. I fear we may be facing the same situation as we go forward today…
“Inadequate security will breed vulnerability and fear and that in turn will tend to limit people’s ability to contribute to civil society, will tend to provoke vigilantism and will tend to diminish people’s ability to exercise the very civil liberties and human rights that we wish to sustain.”
Link:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...oss-warns.html and his entire speech is on:http://www.theyworkforyou.com/lords/...5-01-13a.690.0

'Prevent' is one of the four strands in 'Operation Contest', the UK national CT strategy; the other three strands are Pursue, Prepare and Protect.

'Prevent' has long been the weakest strand, both in its design, level of resourcing, public acceptance and credibility.

There are two main SWC threads on UK CT:
a) UK CT:http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/...ead.php?t=7768
b) Foreign Fighters: preventative action (UK mainly):http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/...ad.php?t=20549

Leaving aside the impact here I do wonder as the 'Contest' strategy has been widely copied elsewhere, will those nations think again. I include the USA, where CVE is the 'Prevent' equivalent.

Bizarrely Westminster-Whitehall have managed to think and now via this new law make counter-radicalisation extend to nursery schools! When six hundred people have reported left to fight in Syria, that does seem weird.