Building resilience to radicalization has become a key pillar of many policies for preventing violent extremism. However, sustained debates over the precise nature of the terms radicalisation and resilience impact the ability to implement these policies. A growing body of literature argues that the way in which key ideas are understood matters to what happens in practice. Additionally, the cross-sector collaboration called for in PVE policy can be made more challenging through divergences in understanding of central concepts. As such, the way in which resilience to radicalization is being understood by frontline workers matters. In light of this, a q-methodology study was conducted, which identified four perspectives on resilience to radicalization amongst policy-makers and practitioners in Belgium, the Netherlands, and the UK. These perspectives are examined in light of the broader debates around both resilience and radicalization, and the extent to which the divergences matter for collaboration is considered.
DOCUMENT
In recent years, the fight against terrorism and political violence has focused more on anticipating the threats that they pose. Therefore, early detection of ideas by local professionals has become an important part of the preventive approach in countering radicalization. Frontline workers who operate in the arteries of society are encouraged to identify processes toward violent behavior at an early stage. To date, however, little is known about how these professionals take on this screening task at their own discretion. Research from the Netherlands suggests that subjective assessment appears to exist. In this article, we argue that the absence of a clear norm for preliminary judgments affects prejudice or administrative arbitrariness, which may cause side effects due to unjustified profiling.
DOCUMENT
Despite the widely held notion that processes of radicalization tend to happen in relation to others, systematic evidence on the social context in which actors meet and form ties is scarce. This is problematic, as without a more thorough understanding of the relational dimension of radicalization, any strategy to intervene may turn out less effective than perhaps hoped for. Based on our access to detailed police information on eleven Dutch Salafi-Jihadi networks (2001–2014; 273 actors), this article presents a descriptive analysis of the social context in which actors meet and form ties. In most networks, we observe pre-existing family and friendship ties, actors to frequent Salafi mosques and radicalizing settings, and committed actors engaged in functional roles. We also find indications for these elements to facilitate actors to form ties. It is important to note however that we also observe exceptions, both in terms of prevalence and impact of the relational factors we study. In the article, we describe our detailed empirical findings and reflect on the (differential) social context is which actors participating in Dutch Salafi-Jihadi networks meet and form ties.
DOCUMENT
Frontline professionals such as social workers and civil servants play a crucial role in countering violent extremism.Because of their direct contac twith society,first liners are tasked with detecting individuals that may threaten national security and the democratic rule of law. Preliminary screening takes place during the pre-crime phase. However, without clear evidence or concrete indicators of unlawful action or physical violence, it is challenging to determine when someone poses a threat. There are no set patterns that can be used to identify cognitive radicalization processes that will result in violent extremism. Furthermore, prevention targets ideas and ideologies with no clear framework for assessing terrorism-risk. This article examines how civil servants responsible for public order, security and safety deal with their mandate to engage in early detection, and discusses the side effects that accompany this practice. Based on openinterviews with fifteen local security professionals in the Netherlands, we focus here on the risk assessments made by these professionals. To understand their performance, we used the following two research questions: First, what criteria do local security professionals use to determine whether or not someone forms a potential risk? Second, how do local security professionals substantiate their assessments of the radicalization processes that will develop into violent extremism? We conclude that such initial risk weightings rely strongly on ‘gut feelings’ or intuition. We conclude that this subjectivitymayleadto prejudiceand/oradministrativearbitrariness in relationtopreliminary risk assessment of particular youth.
DOCUMENT
Early detection of radicalization processes that may lead to violent extremism takes place in a grey area. Primarily because no one can truly predict when someone poses a risk before there are any indications of criminal acts. The local police have been given an important role in countering violent extremism (CVE) policy; namely proactive information gathering at a stage in which people are still law-abiding citizens. However, little is known about how they perceive their role in CVE. Therefore, this article examines how community police officers deal with their mandate to engage in early detection, and discusses the side effects that accompany this practice. Based on open interviews with 22 constables in the Netherlands, we focus on the risk assessments made by these local professionals. In this article, we aim to contribute to a more thorough, inclusive, and well-informed debate about community policing with regard to suspicions of extremist behaviour among youth.
LINK
Secondary schools are well placed to avert radicalization processes toward extremism because such trajectories often begin in adolescence. Adolescents are in the process of forming their identities, and most adolescents are idealistic, which makes them susceptible to groups that passionately pursue utopian visions. To avert the path toward extremism, Doret de Ruyter and Stijn Sieckelinck propose to balance a prevention approach with a positive educative ethos that is sensitive to the emotions involved in students' quest for meaning in life and identity formation. This involves schools being places where all students experience that they matter and where they can express their passion for their ideals and experiment with their identities without being ridiculed; at the same time, schools must guide students in learning that not everything they value will be accepted and that they must also take into account the interests and rights of others. The schools' role is thus complex and precarious, and teachers are in a position of navigating a politically sensitive minefield daily. Therefore, any theoretical proposition regarding what schools can realistically do to prevent extremism must be informed by everyday educational practice.
DOCUMENT
Whereas different aspects of teaching and learning in Higher Education are often discussed within an academic community, teaching the EU seems to receive less attention. Especially in recent years we testimony the decreasing interest to EU studies in universities, including some signs of disappearing from educational curricula. Even more sad is the state of teaching the EU in economic faculties and other disciplinary areas. Teaching the EU is not always considered as an important and necessary part of these curricula. At the same time, in the still remaining studies of the EU, mainly situated in studies of politics or international relations, there is a tendency, with a few exemptions, to stick to a rather traditional approach of teaching the EU that does not change for years, no matter what the developments in the world are. In this paper I plea for the change of the existent paradigm in teaching the EU. The new global realities, such as a developing climate crisis and EU green economic transition, war in Europe and changing global security landscape, (still) continuing migration crisis and growing poverty worldwide, radicalization of political systems and intensifying populism, require to change the way the EU subject has been taught in universities. The scholars teaching the EU subject have to rethink the existent answers to the main educational questions, such as what, why, how and who is being taught about the EU. I propose a different approach to teaching the EU that not only redesigns the existent teaching practices of the EU, but also makes the introduction of EU studies in other than political science or international relations curricula, such as economic, business, environmental or many other interdisciplinary studies, possible and indispensable.
DOCUMENT
Full text via link. It became clear early on in the SAFIRE project that different EU countries have different views on targeting groups in social work and especially with regard to preventing or countering radicalization. Consequently, a programme developed in one country to prevent radicalization cannot necessarily be used in another country, because targeting a specific group may not be allowed.
LINK
This is the last of a series of 3 columns on uncertainty. A response to uncertainty can be radicalization, It is argued that confirmation bias plays a role in this initial “radicalization”: the tendency to prefer information that confirms one's belief as “facts” to contradictory information (“fake news”). People who have just switched to something new, vegetarianism for example, or who have just started a new study, can be very fanatical at first and want to lecture everyone. But no one has the energy to compete again and again on the cutting edge of the “game” (infatuation, new beliefs, etc.), so luckily the nuance returns with time. After the radical "infatuation" (outshout/ignore uncertainty), uncertainty regains its place and space is once again created for the human dimension, for solidarity and nuance. The couple in love who give themselves completely to each other eventually regains an eye for the rest of the world. I have been a vegetarian for over 50 years, so I never really talk about that anymore. Bias fades with time.
MULTIFILE
This is the last of a series of 3 columns on uncertainty. A response to uncertainty can be radicalization, It is argued that confirmation bias plays a role in this initial “radicalization”: the tendency to prefer information that confirms one's belief as “facts” to contradictory information (“fake news”). People who have just switched to something new, vegetarianism for example, or who have just started a new study, can be very fanatical at first and want to lecture everyone. But no one has the energy to compete again and again on the cutting edge of the “game” (infatuation, new beliefs, etc.), so luckily the nuance returns with time. After the radical "infatuation" (outshout/ignore uncertainty), uncertainty regains its place and space is once again created for the human dimension, for solidarity and nuance. The couple in love who give themselves completely to each other eventually regains an eye for the rest of the world. I have been a vegetarian for over 50 years, so I never really talk about that anymore. Bias fades with time.
MULTIFILE
