4.2 Assumption: Deradicalisation is possible

Loading...

En provenance du cours de Universiteit Leiden

Terrorism and Counterterrorism: Comparing Theory and Practice

1937 notes

Universiteit Leiden

Terrorism and Counterterrorism: Comparing Theory and Practice

1937 notes

Terrorism has arguably been one of the defining factors of our age. It frequently makes headlines, threatening or attacking governments, private business and ordinary citizens. And in many parts of the world, it has been one of the most important threats to peace, security and stability. But what does this exactly mean? What is the nature of this threat? Who or what is threatened, how, by whom and why? What can be done about it or how can we at least limit the impact of terrorism and make sure that terrorists do not make headlines and manage to scare us? These are just a handful of questions that will be addressed in this course that consists of three parts. First it focuses on the essence of terrorism as an instrument to achieve certain goals, in addition to an exploration of this phenomenon and the difficulties in defining it. The second part provides an overview of the state of the art in (counter) terrorism studies. Since ‘9/11’ terrorism studies have grown exponentially, reflecting the rise in perceived threats. But what has academia come up with? What theories, assumptions and conventional wisdom has it produced that could be of help in understanding terrorism and dealing with it? The most interesting results are examined and compared with empirical evidence with the aim to either stress their importance or to debunk them as myths. The final part looks into the implications and possibilities for policy making. The course ends with a module specifically designed to address one of today's most topical issue: the foreign fighter phenomenon.

À partir de la leçon

5 Assumptions on Counterterrorism

In this module, we will continue the work of module 3 and look into five assumptions on counterterrorism. It is highly relevant to keep investigating assumptions that underlie CT-policy, both from an effectiveness perspective (is it really countering terrorism?) but also because these policies often have a large impact on societies and might also have unintended consequences.

4.1 Assumption: One can recognise a terrorist18:10

4.2 Assumption: Deradicalisation is possible12:50

4.3 Assumption: Decapitation of terrorist organisations works16:50

4.4 Assumption: Terrorism cannot be defeated17:02

4.5 Assumption: Terrorism can best be managed by a holistic approach17:06

Interview with Dr. Jamie Shea (NATO)8:55

Video presentation of Quirine Eijkman of Amnesty International on Drone Strikes in Pakistan3:12

Rencontrer les enseignants

Edwin Bakker
Prof. dr.
Institute of Security and Global Affairs, Leiden University
Jeanine de Roy van Zuijdewijn
drs.
Institute of Security and Global Affairs, Leiden University

[MUSIC]

In the previous video, we investigated the idea that

we could recognize a terrorist by way of profiling.

In this video we will explore and

analyze the assumption that terrorists can be deradicalized.

In other words, we look into the idea that individuals change their attitudes

and behavior and leave terrorism behind. Is that indeed possible, or

just wishful thinking? What can we learn from past experience?

And what have scholars and experts to say about this?

Before we will address these questions, we first have to define the term.

What is deradicalization?

What is meant by this term?

Well, deradicalization, like most concepts, can

have different meanings to different people.

And I will use the definition by John Horgan, who did

a lot of research into this field, into radicalization and deradicalization.

And he regards it as a social and psychological

process whereby an individual's commitment to, and

involvement in violent radicalization is reduced to the

extent that they are no longer at

risk of involvement and engagement in violent activity.

The deredicalization can also be understood as a policy or program.

So not only a process, an individual process

or group process but also as a government or

civil society program.

And that program seeks to reverse the radicalization

process for those already are particularly radicalized or help

them to disengage from radical or extreme groups

they are involved in of which they are members.

And it's important to say that

deradicalization is not radicalization in reverse.

These are two very distinct processes.

Who has said that it is possible to deradicalize a terrorist?

According to Angel Rabasa and his colleagues at RAND

Washington, this is a simple fact that can be observed.

And in a report in 2013, they stated just as there are processes through which an

individual becomes an extremist, there are also processes

through which an extremist comes to renounce violence,

leaves a group or movement, or even rejects a radical worldview.

Well, the last part is contested.

Do people really give up their radical worldviews?

Is that possible?

And is it possible to actively deradicalize persons and, if so, how?

Well, these are of course very important questions for those who fight terrorism,

who deal with terrorism.

The first proof that it is possible are individuals who left terrorism

behind and who are now involved

in counter radicalization and deradicalization projects.

They turn from terrorists into experts that try to

help people to prevent them from joining terrorist organizations.

Now, within the field of terrorism studies there are

a number of them that are quite well known.

Here,

you have three examples of them.

Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, who worked for a Wahhabi charity that proved to

be an al-Qaeda financier, and who is now director of the

Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, which is based in Washington,

and he's a scholar in the field of terrorism and counterterrorism studies.

I'm also proud to say that he's

a former guest researcher at the ICCT Den Haag, just a few offices away

from this office. And then Norman Benotman, who was

a leading figure of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group active in Afghanistan.

And who is now a senior analyst at the British Quilliam Foundation.

and he, for instance, wrote an open letter to Bin Laden

in 2010 recommending him to hold your violence and reconsider

your aims and strategy. And then an example from Northern Ireland,

Henry Robinson, who joined the Official Irish Republican Army in 1979.

And who left it, and in 1990 was the

co-founder of the foundation Families Against Intimidation and Terror.

Besides these individuals who left terrorism behind, also known as formers or

former terrorists, there are deradicalization programs.

Well, in general these deradicalization programs are of two types.

The first category focuses on individual

ideological deradicalization using psychological or religious counseling.

To produce

a change of mind, a change of attitude, and in the end, also change of behavior.

And the second category aims for collective deradicalization, using

for instance, political negotiations to obtain a type of change of behavior.

And it includes measures such as ceasefires or the decommissioning of arms.

In Europe there are many examples of deradicalization programs that are

aimed at right wing extremists, especially in the Nordic countries,

Sweden, Denmark, Norway, as well as in Germany and the Netherlands.

For instance in Norway an exit model was developed based on research conducted by

[FOREIGN]

And this model was also used in Sweden, where

it consists of five phases, from motivation and disengagement

to being re, well, making sure that these people

are part of society again with settlement, reflection, and stabilization.

And on the other side of the globe in Indonesia, there are

quite a number of deradicalization programs

that mainly are aimed at prisoners.

And, some of them, and prisoners were, that were involved in Jihadi terrorism.

And some of them are now closely cooperating with the police.

And in Saudi Arabia such programs also aim mainly at

prisoners focus on rehabilitation through

religious re-education and psychological counseling.

And then in Colombia, they tried to

disengage not only prisoners, but also active

members of the FARC.

And the Colombian judiciary tries to facilitate this by suspending the

militant's trial in an attempt

to encourage and sustain, their demobilization.

There the keyword is demobilization, and not deradicalization.

But the same idea is the basic idea is

to make sure that they leave terrorism behind, and perhaps

also change their attitudes and behavior.

Well, in other words, many examples from around the world.

Each with a different size and scope, methods and goals.

What do experts and academics have to say about deradicalization and

deradicalization programs? Well, about five years ago, quite a few

of them pointed at a lack of attention, expertise, and research into this field.

But in recent years there has been an increase in the amount

of studies and the amount of programs that has helped us to

gain more insight into the challenges and possibilities of

deradicalization in general and that of programs in particular.

it also raises new questions.

And an important one is whether or not one

can speak of deradicalization, as defined by John Horgan.

When a person leaves a terrorist group behind, but not his or her radical ideas.

Is that deradicalization, or should we just, call that, call that differently?

For instance, label it disengagement and nothing more.

Well the prevailing opinion today is that leaving terrorism behind

does not necessarily mean that the person is also deradicalized.

He or she can still have very radical ideas and they often have.

And many deradicalization programs are in fact primarily aiming for this idea

of leaving terrorism behind there aiming

for disengagment and also much deradicalization.

And I guess that that is more cost effective and also from a point of view

from society it should be given more priority

as change behavior matters more then changed ideas.

What about the success of these programs? Do they work, and are they proof

of the assumption that it is possible to deradicalize a terrorist?

John Horgan is skeptical about certain types of programs especially the ones that

aim for demobilization, defection deescalation and rehabilitation.

And in his eyes

this is not the same as deradicalization.

Demobilization is not the same as deradicalization.

Well I guess he's right and he seems to suggest that many of the person that goes

through these programs might still pose a risk of

involvement and engagement in violent activity in the future.

And there are indeed quite a few examples of graduates of these programs that return

to violence, that return to terrorism after they

were released, especially in the case of Saudi Arabia.

But it should be noted that the programs in this particular country were enormous.

They processed more than 4000 detainees but there have been a number

of people who after that ended up in the ranks of terrorist organizations.

So, successful or not,

well here's an example or study that

indicates that there has been some success.

A survey of deradicalization programs conducted by the Institute for Strategic

Dialogue based on 30 brief case studies from around the

world show that, under certain conditions, programs can be effective.

And they also listed a number of very interesting

recommendations and important lessons from these cases

and one of them is that programs are

effective and this is very important when they

are voluntary and that personal commitment is vital.

It makes sense, but also the studies show that that is an very important element.

For a copy of this very interesting

report well, see the list of recommended readings.

All in all, it's clear that deradicalization is indeed possible.

Many people leave terrorism behind.

Some thanks to deradicalization programs and

some also leave behind their radical ideas.

In sum, we define the term and

notice a difference between deradicalization and disengagement.

We've seen an increase in both the number of

programs, and the number of studies into this field.

Most of the deradicalization programs primarily aim at disengagement

rather than deradicalization. There are successes

of individual and group deradicalization Therefore, we

regard the assumption that deradicalization is

possible to be true. In the next video, we will investigate the

idea that decapitation of terrorist organizations and terrorist groups work.

Explorer notre catalogue

Rejoignez-nous gratuitement et obtenez des recommendations, des mises à jour et des offres personnalisées.

Coursera propose un accès universel à la meilleure formation au monde, en partenariat avec des universités et des organisations du plus haut niveau, pour proposer des cours en ligne.

© 2019 Coursera Inc. Tous droits réservés.

Télécharger dans l'App Store

Disponible sur Google Play