British Muslims and the UK government's 'war on terror' within: evidence of a clash of civilizations or emergent de-civilizing processes?

In the immediate aftermath of the September 2001 attacks on America, defending civilization was quickly established at the core of the 'war on terror'. Unintentionally or otherwise this incorporation of civilization connected with Samuel Huntington's 'Clash of Civilizations' thesis. Within the 'war on terror' the dark side of counterterrorism has become apparent through international practices like extrajudicial killing, extraordinary rendition and torture. The impact of Western governments' policies upon their indigenous Muslim populations has also been problematic but social and political analysis has been relatively limited. This paper seeks to help address the scarcity of sociological contributions. Hidden costs of the UK government's attempts to utilize violence and enhance social constraints within the nation-state are identified. It is argued that although counterterrorism strategies are contributing to a self-fulfilling spiral of hatred that could be considered evidence in support of the 'Clash of Civilizations', the thesis is unhelpful when trying to grasp the underlying processes. Instead the paper draws upon Norbert Elias's application of the concepts of 'civilizing' and 'de-civilizing' to help improve levels of understanding about the processes and consequences of particular Muslim communities being targeted by security forces. The paper concludes with an exploration of the majority of the population's acquiescence and willingness to accept restraints upon Muslims in order to safeguard their own security.