What changes when the United Kingdom labels Wagner a “terrorist” group?

Wagner, the infamous Russian mercenary group, It is about to be declared a “terrorist” organization in the United Kingdom., as announced last week by the country’s Ministry of the Interior – meaning that support for the group will be illegal.

“Wagner is a violent and destructive organization that has acted as a military tool of Vladimir Putin’s Russia abroad,” said Interior Minister Suella Braverman.

“They are terrorists, plain and simple,” he added.

Anna Meier, associate professor at the School of Politics and International Relations at the University of Nottingham and an expert on terrorism, told Euronews that while outlawing terrorism works a little differently in each country, in the UK this would mean that being a member or supporter of Wagner would be illegal, as would spreading the group’s propaganda and providing financial or other donations.

But the impact of the UK’s decision would go far beyond criminal sanctions.

“The ban can have many other, more political consequences,” Meier said.

“When the UK banned the neo-Nazi group National Action in 2016, MPs raised concerns about the implications for free speech if more far-right groups were banned in the future,” he said.

“It is important to remember that the level of violence is one of many criteria for outlawry, and political concerns are always more important for these decisions and when they occur,” Meier continued.

In part, the UK’s decision responds to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s request to treat Wagner’s mercenaries as terrorists, the Interior Ministry said.

“Wagner’s ban is attracting so much attention partly because it would be the first time that a country, not just the United Kingdom, has listed a for-profit company as a terrorist organization. “This action therefore sets an important international precedent for who it is acceptable for governments to consider ‘terrorists,’” he said.

Is there evidence that these policies work?

“Proponents of the ban argue that it can act as a deterrent, preventing people from joining or supporting certain terrorist organizations, or it could disrupt terrorist attacks by attracting more attention from security services,” said Lee Jarvis, a professor of international politics in the University of East Anglia and terrorism expert told Euronews.

But in short, Meier said, “the evidence is mixed,” since labeling a group a terrorist organization is effective in reducing the threat it poses.

ADVERTISEMENT

“There is some research to suggest that outlawing can reduce the frequency of attacks by a group, although this depends largely on the degree to which foreign governments cooperate in attacking outlawed groups, as well as how well organized the group is. group,” he told Euronews. .

“The ban has also been successful in some cases by financially hampering groups by freezing their accounts and shutting down their cash flows,” he continued. “However, it can also be easy, sometimes ridiculously easy, for a group to avoid ban-related sanctions by doing something as easy as changing its name, or for members to disband one group only to form another.”

Meier personally doesn’t think this type of policy will work. “All terrorist bans increase the power of the state to exercise violence in unpredictable ways, and there is nothing ‘effective’ about that.” she said.

“The UK has already sanctioned Wagner as a transnational criminal organisation, and the main additional advantage to banning them as ‘terrorist’ offerings is the UK government’s ability to criminalize other private actors later under the guise of counterterrorism,” he concluded. .

But Jarvis believes that labeling Wagner a terrorist organization can also lead to some real results, including more serious legal consequences for its followers and members.

ADVERTISEMENT

“The big problem here is that there is very little evidence about what works in counterterrorism, in general,” he said.

What the UK’s decision will do is establish clearly where the country stands on Wagner and his actions.

For Jarvis, having a list of terrorist organizations is a way for countries to “draw lines between groups and activities that are legitimate and those that are not, it’s about demonstrating the inherent difference between us and them.”

A knockback effect

Meier is wary of the real impact the UK’s decision will have, especially in terms of the type of power it will give to the British government.

Calling their actions “counterterrorism,” Meier said, governments have cracked down on immigration, denied refuge to asylum seekers, and made it incredibly difficult for humanitarian organizations to work in conflict zones.

ADVERTISEMENT

“It’s no coincidence that these policies tend to harm immigrants and people of color, even if that was not the stated intent,” Meier said.

“The Wagner Group is a horrible organization that has done horrible things, but we can acknowledge this without expanding the UK government’s ability to cause harm.”