ener.: o EUROPEAN NETWORK OF EXPERTS ON RADICAlISATION EU counter-terrorism policy: Main achievements and future challenges Presentation by Rokhsana Fiaz, ENER Director European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) Public hearing on EU Counter-terrorism policy 9 th February 2011...,..,.' [!'lea iii SUIlIiI" \W l>y the [u'lii'w" CUI""" i"" Oi'QC10f~IO Gu,,~( ~1 Hom~ Aff" ils
Introduction Thank you Chairperson. I want to begin by explaining the role and purpose of the European Network of Experts on Radicalisation (ENER), an independent and multidisciplinary network of leading experts on radicalisation who are renowned specialists in their field. Our focus is on violent radicalisation and extremism that leads to acts of terrorism, and our work aims to deepen understanding of the violent radicalisation phenomenon in order to enhance counter-terrorism and preventative approaches being pursued at EU and Member State levels. The Commission has supported the establishment of ENER, as its work falls within the preventive strand of counter-terrorism policy. The main objectives of ENER are to: Contribute to the analysis of the factors contributing to radicalisation that leads to acts of terrorism within Europe; Support co-operation and the exchange of expertise and knowledge among academics, policy makers, law enforcement and security officials, local authorities, field experts and civil society organisations; Support the improvement, development and evaluation of counter-radicalisation policies; Establish links with other regional networks or Centres of Excellence around the world in order to exchange knowledge and expertise. EU Counter-Terrorism Policy The focus of my presentation today will be an exploration of some of the top-line challenges as set out in the Commission s Communication on the EU Counter- Terrorism Policy, taking into account the Preliminary Draft Opinion produced by the EESC. These include accurately identifying the most effective ways to combat radicalisation and recruitment; assessment and effectiveness of approaches being pursued; indicators that can be used to measure success and the role of the internet. 2
Specifically I will offer some thoughts - drawing on discussions with a range of ENER experts - as to the impact these have in the development and delivery of interventions being pursued across three principal constituencies - researchers, practitioners and civil society that are driving thinking on this front. Since the inception of the ENER in 2008, developments in the study of violent radicalisation have evolved considerably. Within academia, the literature has moved away from overarching grand explanations of what causes violent radicalisation. Instead, there is a renewed focus on the processes of and routes into violent radicalisation - processes and routes that involve the non-mechanistic yet complex and concurrent interaction of religious, social, historical, and psychological factors which operate at individual, group and pan-social levels. These factors, representing a range of permissive causes that can lead to radicalisation have also highlighted the importance of social ties - the variety of social and group dynamics that can act as a tipping point into violence. For instance, there is growing research focus on the influence of extremist propaganda and the role of the internet, whose main function is to support real world recruitment by: o Reinforcing religious and political themes o Facilitating networking o Creating a climate of exaggeration o Promoting militant online activism The enhanced understanding of the phenomenon of violent radicalisation has also informed the development of policy and practice, alongside interventions being pursued by Member States (MS) contributing to the emergence of good practice in this field though it is important to emphasis that this is patchy in the absence of comprehensive EU-wide evaluation of MS approaches framed by a coherent and robust assessment methodology. At the EU level, the Commission has been at the forefront of developing strategies and supporting approaches to deal with the threat of terrorism. 3
However, there remain challenges relating to: Research which informs decision making and policies driven by MS and at European level The requirements FROM policy practitioners operating in this field; Facilitating the engagement of civil society. I will highlight what some of these challenges practically mean. Violent Radicalisation research There is emerging consensus among some practitioners and experts that there is too much poor quality research being disseminated, which impedes effective practitioner delivery in the field. Consequently, there has been increasing calls for strong filtering mechanisms when it comes to research in this field. Networks such as ENER can provide such filters, but further mechanisms that can provide a research quality assurance guarantee are needed; Equally, within academia, there remains no consensus on the processes of violent radicalisation which can impede the work of practitioners: research has to offer tools / skills for intelligent analysis by practitioners; A significant issue for policy makers is that current approaches to violent radicalisation research insufficiently responds to the just in time research delivery requirements of policy makers given the fluid nature of the phenomenon. Additionally, research needs to provide practitioners with appropriate insights that enables early consideration of emerging threats / issues; There needs to be more collaboration in research particularly between practitioners and academics so that multi-disciplinary expertise from the academic and practitioner communities can be leveraged in the same way that Public Private Partnerships are promoted. Equally, a partnership culture needs to emerge to establish a purposeful two way street for policy practitioners and academics to come together to effect improvements in research and practice; Furthermore, the disengagement phase remains the most poorly understood and least researched dimension of the radicalisation process, but it is in this phase that practical counterterrorism initiatives - aimed not only at facilitation of disengagement but also at prevention of initial involvement - might actually become very effective; 4
Insufficient attention is being given to the socialisation processes relating to terrorism and the existence of multiple pathways. Studying profiles when looking at the terrorists overshadow the dynamics that shape and support the development of the terrorist. As a consequence, practical avenues for policy interventions are obscured; There remain practical challenges to change the push factors (i.e., the broad sociopolitical conditions) that give rise to violent radicalisation and terrorism, so counterterrorism programs may be more effective in concentrating on addressing the pull factors, since they tend to be narrower, more easily identifiable, and specific to particular groups and contexts. This should inform the focus of research and interventions being pursued at MS and EU levels; It is important to emphasis that profiling the individual and his or her presumed associated qualities has no future in serious analyses of either the terrorist or the pathways to radicalisation in which he or she engages. Rather, more consideration should be given instead to profiling the routes into violent radicalisation: how an individual engages in a specific route that leads to terrorist acts - this is critical for informing future interventions; Measuring effectiveness remains important and there needs to be systematic evaluation integrated into all programmes being delivered at European and Member State level, alongside systematic approaches to assessing existing interventions to establish their efficacy; There is also a need for academics to undertake more experimental applied research, integrating control groups in order to establish if the intervention being tested actually works; Moreover, it is important to manage expectations about the degree to which measures / metrics developed to assess the effectiveness of counter-terrorism interventions will be wholly beneficial and whether it is possible to develop adequate metrics in this field; More research is required on the role of the individual as a consumer of propaganda particularly in the context of conflict and on the internet and how this impacts on the process of and routes into violent radicalisation; 5
Interventions that are developed need to be more prosaic and need to integrate communication strategies - especially in the case of counter-propaganda initiatives and those that seek to identify the most credible counter-messages - as these may have a real impact at the initial stages of involvement; Research and interventions also needs to be responsive to the political environment and be policy relevant, with consideration given to its role in intelligence and counter radicalisation efforts; Research is also required on the rise and impact of New Right movements and single issue extremist groups in the arena of violent extremism to inform policy responses; Research is also required on virtual communities in response to the growing importance of the internet in the process of radicalisation. Current research efforts heavily focus on content issues as opposed to the focusing on who gets involved; Additionally research is required on the free rider / lone wolf phenomenon - individuals that straddle the community activist terrain - and how they claim a representative role or cement traction in wider civil society; Research examining recidivism needs to explore tipping points to violence, alongside inhibiting factors. Requirements from Practitioners The role of policy practitioners is evolving and it is becoming increasingly important for practitioners to focus on individuals not organisations when developing interventions; Furthermore, practitioners increasingly need to recognise their role supporting individuals that they have identified as having traction within civil society. The role of the practitioner should be to create support structures around those individuals, alongside demonstrating personal commitment through giving their time and effort; 6
Cultures within counter-terrorism institutions need to loosen up, as they frequently impede innovative development and design of policy and interventions that seek to combat radicalisation and recruitment. The Role Civil Society Civil society needs to be understood as a social ecology which operates at multiple levels and tiers. There is a value in community based partnerships, where civil society acts as a buffer to the appeal of violent radicals. However, there is a need to be clear about the parameters of government and community roles in counter-terrorism efforts; There remains a need to integrate the involvement of civil society when developing policy responses to violent radicalisation. Additionally, there needs to be a corresponding process of developing appropriate metrics in order to assess what constitute effective outcomes when engaging with civil society; More research is required on the role of civil society in undermining the street credibility of the violent radicals. Additionally, research needs to more thoroughly explore the role of civil society in supporting de-radicalisation efforts and recidivism rates. For further information about the work of ENER, please contact: Rokhsana Fiaz ENER Director rokhsana@changeinstitute.co.uk 7