How to prevent violent radicalisation is a question society is wrestling with. Latest research into the impact of mindfulness on vulnerabilities shows how it could act as an effective addition to prevention strategies.

Research indicates lacking a sense of significance in life can increase one’s risk of being violently radicalised. Mindfulness has been demonstrated to foster a sense of significance in life. Investigating the efficacy of mindfulness interventions to reduce vulnerabilities to violent radicalisation could be a proactive approach to preventing terrorism.

What is Mindfulness?

Mindfulness is the capacity to actively focus one’s attention and awareness on one’s thoughts, feelings, and experience of the present moment. It is a mental state as well as an ancient meditative practice. Practicing mindfulness is to exercise receptive and non-judgmental thought on a moment-by-moment basis, in order to attain higher dispositional mindfulness.

Changing the approach to terrorism

The question of why people engage in acts of terrorism has been long debated by different professionals across various fields; from historians and theologians to psychologists and politicians. In finding out why, we can then potentially remedy what brings people to this point.

In the past, national and international approaches to terrorism have been palliative ones. Armed conflict as a reaction to an event proves unsuccessful as a long-term solution since it fails to address the root of the problem. Fortunately, current research has provided us with a more comprehensive understanding of why violent extremism occurs and in turn allows for the development of more effective means of tackling the issue.

This has been achieved by moving away from macro-factors, such as ethnicity or religion, towards micro-processes within an individual. While radicalisation has been demonstrated to occur at a group level, current literature focuses on individual trajectories and the dynamic elements involved.

Looking at the individual

It is important to acknowledge that no one factor is considered to have the determining role in someone being violently radicalised.

Nevertheless, it is understood that for external influences to have an effect, individuals would have to have a pre-existing internal state of incongruence. Then, even regarding internal angst, many mechanisms are at play and all contribute differently to a person’s vulnerability to being radicalised. However, one factor which has gathered substantial support is one’s sense of significance in life.

The need for significance

Michelle Dugas and Arie. W Kruglanski developed the Significance Quest Model as a means for understanding one’s vulnerability to radicalisation. According to the authors of the model, significance is defined as ‘the fundamental desire to matter, to be someone, to merit respect’. The research indicates a lack of significance in life leads people to engage in terrorism in an effort to restore said lost significance. The notion is not as alien as one would assume but, in fact, relatable to many people.

When we feel down and detached from our community we can be swept up by the first group that gives us a sense of belonging and purpose, especially when the narrative is tailored to satisfy these specific needs. Unfortunately, as is the case for some individuals, finding a sense of significance may be through becoming involved in terrorist organisations or movements.

Using mindfulness to combat vulnerabilities to violent extremism

Such situations mean we should be looking at ways to foster a sense of significance in the lives of the general public. In doing so, a step towards combating vulnerabilities to violent extremism can be achieved.

For example, due to the commonalities between one’s sense of significance and dispositional mindfulness, mindfulness could be the way forward. The capacity for mindfulness entails awareness, attention and openness to the present experience as well as exercising acceptance of our internal states above judgement towards situations. It is a state of mind as well as a practice. Natural aptitudes for dispositional mindfulness vary depending on the person. However, one would train in mindfulness so as to achieve higher dispositional mindfulness.

Mindfulness as a protective factor

A recent piece of research, conducted in 2018 by the author of the present article, looked at dispositional mindfulness as a potential contributor to increased life significance; the intent was to focus on the implications of mindfulness as a protective factor against violent radicalisation. The study used online surveys measuring dispositional mindfulness and life significance among 217 participants.

The results demonstrated mindfulness to predict life significance. In other words, the more mindful a person is then the higher their sense of life significance.

When applied to the context of violent radicalisation, mindfulness could prove a cost-effective and useful tool for preventative programmes, risk assessments, and interventions for at-risk individuals. But it is not only those at risk that merit our attention. It is worthwhile to look after the mental health of the general public so that no one has to reach the point of being labeled a risk.

The simple acts of promoting mindfulness in general and introducing mindfulness training into schools, universities, workspaces and prisons could go a long way. And, thanks to our ever growing technological world, computer-based mindfulness training programmes allow for this practice to be easily accessible for the masses.

We need to be proactive, as opposed to reactive, when it comes to violent radicalisation. It is all very well helping at-risk individuals and rehabilitating terror-related offenders, but being at the forefront of terrorism as opposed to managing the aftermath of terrorism would be conducive to the prevention of violent radicalisation.

Therefore, understanding mindfulness as a protective factor and a push towards utilising its benefits will have a positive impact on the well-being of individuals and in turn ensure the public safety of our society.

Isabella Rogge

Isabella has a masters degree in forensic psychology from Newcastle University. She is currently looking to further her career in crime prevention and security.

See also:

Prevent: safeguarding younger people by Waqar Ahmed MBE, Prevent Manager, Equalities, Community Safety & Cohesion, Birmingham City Council

Understanding the Jihadist Mindset: Adam Deen, Head of Outreach at anti-extremist think tank, The Quilliam Foundation, and former senior member of the British-based, Islamist extremist group Al-Muhajiroun

Prevent – resilience to radicalisation: Chris Williams, Senior Prevent Adviser, Office for Security and Counter Terrorism Home Office.

The post Mindfulness can reduce violent radicalisation appeared first on City Security Magazine.

Safeguarding vulnerable people from being drawn into terrorism is the primary aim of the government’s Prevent strategy. A strategy that aims to build resilience, to challenge extremist and terrorist ideologies in all forms – Far Right as well as Islamist extremism.

Prevent is a strategy intended to act as a safeguard for people who are vulnerable to radicalisation in a similar way to other safeguarding strategies designed to protect people from gang activity, physical/sexual abuse and bullying.

In the face of constant terror attacks across the world and numerous terrorist related arrests in the United Kingdom, one would think the aims of Prevent are noble and much needed. However, Prevent as a strategy is constantly debated, with numerous calls for review, questions about its suitability or effectiveness and calls for it to be removed entirely. The government, though, remains resolute in its conviction that Prevent works and is an integral part of the wider counter terrorism strategy known as CONTEST.

Prevent – a personal perspective

As a Prevent practitioner in my tenth year of working on Prevent and having worked through three different government interpretations (Labour, Coalition and Conservative), I have not only seen the evolution of the strategy but have also worked through the evolution of threats we face from terrorism. The experiences of Prevent practitioners up and down the country, the many civil society organisations working on Prevent initiatives building resilience in our communities, and the thousands of individuals supported via Prevent are reasons why I and many thousands of others continue to feel committed to the strategy and will continue to do so. It is not possible or desirable to respond to the threats we face simply by arresting and prosecuting people.

The alternative to a strategy such as Prevent operating in the non-criminal place is to stand by and allow individuals to be drawn into terrorism and take action only when they are planning an attack. But by operating in the non-criminal space, Prevent is often accused of creating a climate of fear and targeting certain communities. This is caused largely by  misconceptions of Prevent aims and objectives. For example, despite there being nothing in law, in the Prevent Duty guidance, or in any form of Prevent training that requires, authorises, or encourages any form of spying whatsoever in connection with Prevent, the strategy is regularly cited by those opposing Prevent as encouraging spying. The Prevent duty does not require teachers to spy on pupils, health workers to spy on their patients or for anyone to carry out unnecessary intrusion into family life. Rather, the strategy ensures that teachers and other public sector workers know how to identify behaviour of concern and how to refer individuals who may be at risk of radicalisation for appropriate support such as mentoring or counselling. Involvement in such interventions is always voluntary and confidential.

Prevent is saving lives

In Birmingham we have seen individuals become radicalised to such an extent that they wanted to travel to Syria. A Birmingham Prevent funded project, via its outreach team, showed the youngsters the barbarity of Daesh. They did not realise that radicalisation was an issue for them until they were identified and supported by the project.

The intervention led to the individuals, who had already made plans to travel, open up to those working with them and destroy their tickets; they are now working as part of the project that helped them.

It is hard to say what could have happened to the individuals had they travelled, what we do know is that between 10-30% of individuals who have travelled to Syria have lost their lives.

I believe, as do the families of those individuals, that the Prevent intervention by the local civil society organisation saved their lives.

Elsewhere in Birmingham, a former member of the armed forces supported for his alcohol and substance misuse opened up following treatment to reveal he was being targeted by extreme far-right individuals to use the skills he had learnt in the military against local mosques in Birmingham. He also believes the Prevent intervention saved his and possibly other lives too.

Others have not been so lucky, we must not forget that many people who travel, like the three young British Muslim girls from Bethnal Green, are often misguided and confused and find it hard to deconstruct the world around them. They are ruthlessly exploited by terrorist groups, whose propaganda preys particularly on the young and their families have been left traumatised.

The Prevent Duty

Some have argued that Prevent didn’t help them or missed identifying their vulnerabilities, yet the reality is the Prevent Duty was introduced after the girls had already travelled and their case was cited as one of the reasons why Prevent needed to be put on a statutory footing. In fact, more than 150 attempted journeys to the Syria/Iraq conflict area were disrupted in 2015. This includes action by the family courts, which have increasingly been taking measures to prevent travel.

The courts protected approximately 50 children from being taken to the conflict area in 2015. Unfortunately, whilst these children had been safeguarded, one of the three girls from Bethnal Green – Kadiza Sultana – has reportedly, and tragically, been killed.

For me, Prevent does work and is not just an integral part of the wider counter terrorism strategy, but also integral to broader safeguarding in general.

It is not without its challenges and Prevent could do more to improve community engagement and better present its successes, but on the whole it is as effective a strategy as any in the world.

Waqar Ahmed MBE

Prevent Manager, Equalities, Community Safety & Cohesion

Birmingham City Council

The post Prevent: safeguarding vulnerable people appeared first on City Security Magazine.

This year Britain has been hit with a number of horrific terror attacks: Manchester, London Bridge and Finsbury Park, to name a few. It is a concerning trend and stopping people committing appalling acts of terror is something we should all be working towards.

The Prevent strategy

Prevent is the early intervention component of the government’s counter-terrorism strategy. It aims to stop people becoming terrorists or supporting terrorism, through safeguarding those who are most vulnerable to radicalisation. It is often unfairly maligned by critics who either misunderstand its practices, or actively seek to undermine it for their own agenda without providing any credible alternatives.

Prevent tackles radicalisation through a number of interventions, including training frontline professionals to spot the signs which may signal that someone is being radicalised, and referring them to supportive interventions. The vulnerabilities that make somebody at risk of radicalisation are by and large the same that make somebody vulnerable to any type of grooming, including social isolation, mental health problems, unemployment – generally by exploiting a lack of protective factors in someone’s circumstances.

The Prevent programme helps bring together agencies to identify those gaps and ensure support is provided by addressing those factors that make the individual less resilient.

Over 850,000 frontline staff have so far received Prevent training. These professionals now understand the radicalisation process and know what to do if they have concerns.

The Channel Programme

A key intervention is the Channel Programme, which provides support for those identified as being most at risk of radicalisation. Chaired by safeguarding experts in local authorities, it is a voluntary, confidential programme and support is only provided following careful assessment by experts. Following this assessment a holistic programme of support will be tailored to the individual: this may include support with substance misuse, housing or 1:1 mentoring with a Channel Intervention Provider (IP).

If, for example, an individual is expressing extreme right-wing views, they might be paired with a Channel IP who was formerly a member of a right-wing group, who has credibility to explore and challenge these views. They can work with the individual to divert them from this path by providing them with a counter narrative which expands their understanding and demonstrates an alternate viewpoint.

Channel is not any form of criminal sanction, and to date, over 1,000 vulnerable people have received support through Channel. Around a third of those people who are supported by Channel are linked to far-right extremism.

Partnership with communities

Prevent works to tackle all forms of extremism, and works best when delivered in partnership with communities. In 2016/17, 169 community-based projects were delivered across the country, with 44% of these projects being delivered in schools, aimed at increasing young people’s resilience to terrorist and extremist ideologies. Projects can range from theatre or sports groups which work with young people to explore issues of cohesion and extremism, to sessions for parents teaching them about the dangers of online radicalisation and how to monitor their child’s internet use.

Prevent is not about restricting debate or free speech. On the contrary, the Government has explicitly said that schools should be safe spaces in which children and young people can understand and discuss sensitive topics. That includes terrorism and the extremist ideas that are part of terrorist ideology. They need to learn how to challenge these ideas; ideas that they see in the newspapers and on the internet every day.

The ease of access to unregulated information online can prove a boon for those seeking to radicalise vulnerable individuals. Part of Prevent’s work is to make people and communities more resilient to radicalisation; this is as relevant in the online space as it is in the back streets of our inner cities. The Government is taking robust action to identify and tackle extremist content online; since 2010 the Counter Terrorism Internet Referral Unit has identified and removed hundreds of thousands of pieces of extremist material from the internet.

The Government works closely with Communications Service Providers (CSPs) to come up   with new, innovative ways for tackling terrorist use of the internet. In June 2017, Facebook, Microsoft, Google and Twitter announced the launch of the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism. However, more needs to be done in this space and CSPs need to continue to work harder and faster to remove terrorist content from their platforms.

Whilst the security industry may not be statutorily covered by the Prevent Duty, it is worth considering how professionals can contribute to keeping Britain safe and ensuring that support is provided to all who are vulnerable to radicalisation, including security staff themselves. Consider accessing WRAP (Workshop to Raise Awareness of Prevent) training or similar, which will help your teams understand the signs of safety and how to access support.

Prevent is showing a demonstrable impact; more than 150 attempted journeys to the conflict zone in Syria and Iraq were disrupted in 2015 alone, and last year community- based projects reached over 42,000 participants. The work of Prevent is difficult but it is absolutely vital to keep our communities and country safe from the threat of radicalisation.

Chris Williams

Senior Prevent Adviser, Office for Security and Counter Terrorism Home Office.

See also:

Prevent: Safeguarding vulnerable people, Waqar Ahmed MBE, Prevent Manager, Equalities, Community Safety & Cohesion, Birmingham City Council

Understanding the Jihadist Mindset: Adam Deen, Head of Outreach at anti-extremist think tank, The Quilliam Foundation, and former senior member of the British-based, Islamist extremist group Al-Muhajiroun

The post Prevent: Resilience to radicalisation appeared first on City Security Magazine.

Why would Muslims born, raised and educated in the West gravitate towards extremism?

This is a question that puzzles many onlookers and the actions of these nationals seem beyond any moral comprehension. Adam Deen, Head of Outreach at anti-extremist think tank, The Quilliam Foundation, and former senior member of the British-based, Islamist extremist group Al-Muhajiroun, discusses why he joined an extremist group, why he left and what the West can learn from his experiences to encourage others to renounce Islamic extremism.

Personal experience

I was born in London. My parents came to London from Turkey in the 1970s and, as part of a secular liberal family, my early relationship with Islam was one of culture, not ideology. It was in my late teens that my interest in Islam developed, yet I felt somewhat disconnected from the elders who were viewed as religious leaders in the community and I began to grow disillusioned.

I was then presented with the idea that every Muslim should want an Islamic State. I was in my teens, I wanted to learn about my faith and this group intrigued me and sparked my curiosity. They were young, I could relate to them and they spoke a language I could understand. They spoke of Islam in a way that made it come alive, presenting an intellectual version that was worlds away from the abstract and distant concepts I had previously been subjected to, Members of Al-Muhajiroun wove religious rhetoric into geo-political ideas, involving me in the universal Muslim struggle striving for the implementation of an Islamic state. It was something I had not heard before. They made Islam seem relevant. As a young Western Muslim, I was captivated.

Driving factor

The media have perpetuated the narrative that socio-economic conditions are the most prominent driver in association with an extremist ideology. Being in a poor socio-economic position often perpetuates certain grievances and fosters ill-founded beliefs about how you are in such a position. This presents a gateway to being more susceptible to extremist ideology and leads to individuals channelling their feelings through an extremist organisation such as Al-Muhajiroun.

However, in my opinion this is not the predominant factor in radicalisation. The driving force is the ideology – it is the ideas that move people. I didn’t come from a poverty stricken background or a broken home. I went to university, I didn’t feel angry and I was apolitical. Yet, I was indoctrinated with a radical Islamist ideology and became impassioned with the idea of an Islamic State.

Intellectual ideology

It was the intellectual side of Islam that made the radical ideology so appealing, Al-Muhajiroun made it sound smart and intelligent. The point is, the extremists were doing something that no one else in the Muslim community was doing. Their success is based on a dialect that made me and so many others like me feel part of something bigger than myself. I was part of this global struggle and challenge to re-establish my true identity, which could be born through an Islamic state.

As I matured, I developed critical thinking skills with the help of a former Al-Muhajiroun member and mentor. I learnt more about Islam and alternative readings of the religion. I was presented with a singular version of Islam, but came to realise other interpretations of my faith better reflected society. I had been fed a lie and they lost my respect. There was an intellectual and emotional change as I discovered that there was more than this organisation.

Counter narrative

Throughout my formative years there was no counter narrative to this extremist ideology. De-radicalisation is a new phenomenon. I had no one offering an alternative to the extremist ideals, it appeared as if it was ‘the only game in town’. This demonstrates that the counter narrative has to be loud and it has to be strong, otherwise young people can be susceptible to a radical, politicised Islam just as I was.

But what can the West, more specifically the UK security forces, learn from my experiences and how should it go about de-radicalisation?

In terms of identifying potential extremists, that is a very difficult task unless they actively engage in radical activity. What we need to be concerned about is the literature they read, the type of attitude they have towards the West, and if they propagate such ideas as an Islamic State or a subscription to Sharia Law.

These are not an indictment of terrorism, but represent a culmination of ideas and actions that signal extremism. There is a gradual journey to radicalisation for an individual and the UK security forces need to realise when one is on this path and intervene when necessary.

De-radicalisation

However, it is vital that we handle a radicalised individual in the right way. Yes, we should stop them going abroad and confiscate their passports, but we also need to introduce them to a programme of de-radicalisation and rehabilitation.

There needs to be a two pronged approach to de-radicalisation, the first can be described as prehabilitation. We need to inoculate individuals before they are introduced and attracted to radical ideas.

Speaking at schools, universities and mosques, publishing materials that counter this extremist version of Islam and offering a real, alternative, interpretation of Islamic doctrine are just some of the tactics available to us. Making these alternative interpretations widely available is vital and encourages young Muslims to look beyond the slogans, propaganda and the veneer of extremist groups.

The other approach involves countering extremist sentiment head on and showing a real alternative to those that subscribe to these ideas. This presents a strong and positive rebuttal to the extremist ideology.

In order to stop future recruits, we have to uproot the intellectual and emotive narrative that radical Islam taps into. Some have described what is playing out as the reverberations of a “clash of civilisations”, a notion perpetuated by extremists from polar opposites – Muslim extremists and anti-Muslim bigotry. I don’t see this, but rather a clash between the civilised and the uncivilised. We need to expose the extremist ideology by presenting it in its true light through a strong and persistent counter-narrative.

Adam Deen

Security & Counter Terror Expo

The post Understanding the Jihadist mindset to counter extremism appeared first on City Security Magazine.

Following Paris, and other terrorist incidents, I sometimes sense the unease, or even hostility, of fellow travellers in London and elsewhere, when they can tell from my appearance that it is probable that I am Muslim. This is an uncomfortable and unwelcome position for anyone.

But it is not just this discomfort, nor my role, that leads me to support efforts to counter terrorism. I believe it is beholden on everyone in all communities to play their part.

It is a difficult balance to get the response right. If by our actions we instill more fear in people, about possible terrorist attacks or about terrorists in our midst, then the terrorists are winning. We need a considered, informed approach from all parts of the community.

The Muslim community

As a member of the Muslim community, I share the dismay at the shocking incidents in Paris and Sydney and the atrocities being committed by ISIL in the name of Islam. As Malek Merabet, the brother of the French Muslim police officer killed in the Charlie Hebdo attack, said, “Islam is a religion of peace and love”. The majority of the Muslim community in the UK is peaceful, law-abiding and proudly British.

The continuous focus on the Muslim community leads to some of its members wanting  no part in counter terror activity: they don’t want to be linked or seem complicit in any way. This is an understandable position, but I don’t believe it is sustainable. Each new atrocity impacts our community; causes further Islamaphobia. It could be your mother or sister that is abused going about their daily lives.

I support the #NotinMyName Campaign, which utterly condemns ISIS as abusing the name of Islam with their acts of terrorism. In addition, I believe it is important to involve every level of the Muslim hierarchy. But they cannot act alone and must continue to be involved and integrated with police and governmental initiatives such as the Prevent strategy.

The Contest strategy

The Contest strategy has sometimes been viewed unfavourably as unfairly targeting the Muslim community. I welcome recent changes to focus on all aspects of terrorism, including acts motivated by far right ideology. Everyone can be at risk from terrorist activity. Indeed the Home Secretary recently said, “I never thought I would see the day when members of the Jewish community in the United Kingdom would say they were fearful of remaining here in the United Kingdom.” The Jewish and Muslim communities in the UK are facing the same challenges to live in peace. In many locations they are working together, with the whole community, to keep everyone safe.

In my role, on a daily basis I see that the business community has a clear role to play. It is important that business organisations communicate with their staff regularly about taking responsibility for the safety of people, property and intellectual property.

Concerning behaviour

Those managing staff or with HR responsibilities need a clear understanding of what to do when someone’s behaviour causes concern. It could be radical changes in appearance or time keeping, or sudden mood swings or offensive views, or unusual IT activity. This should not just be directed at Muslim members of staff.

There could be many reasons for changes in behaviour – perhaps there are serious issues at home, maybe domestic abuse, addiction issues with drugs or alcohol. These may be linked with a radicalisation process or not.

Are there clear procedures in your organisation for those looking after staff to recognise and signpost those in need? And if you do have concerns about someone – do you know where to go?

Your local police force will be happy to discuss this with you, in complete confidence. In the majority of cases, this is about assisting someone in a vulnerable situation who needs help. If they are on the path to radicalisation – there is help at hand.

We all have a role to play as British citizens. We must demonstrate, especially to our young people, that there are many options open to them to voice their concerns and bring about change.

As British citizens we must all take responsibility for defeating terrorism at all levels in our society.

This is not just an issue for British Muslims, but for us all.

Asif Sadiq, President of the National Association of Muslim Police (at time of writing)

The post Prevent extremism: not just an issue for British Muslims appeared first on City Security Magazine.

The International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation assesses that in excess of 20,000 foreign fighters have travelled to join the Syria / Iraq conflict. Nearly a fifth of those are believed to be from Western European countries, with 500-600 having travelled from the UK (Neumann, ICSR 2015)

The threat level to the UK from international terrorism remains at Severe, meaning an attack is highly likely. Set against the backdrop of the terror attacks in Paris and Australia, the ongoing dialogue around the potential security risk posed by homegrown terrorists and returning foreign fighters, we consider the UK Government’s programme for countering extremism.

CONTEST is the UK’s over-arching Counter Terrorism strategy, a strand of which is PREVENT. The primary objective of PREVENT is to deter people from being drawn into terrorism.

A key element of this is the Channel Project, a multi-agency scheme working with both children and adults to safeguard them against extremism. The purpose of Channel is the prevention of terrorism and the intention is to intervene at a very early stage.

Sir Peter Fahy, National Police Prevent Lead and Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police, describes Prevent as “a straightforward example of good policing”. Channel’s safeguarding approach originates from experience gained in successfully tackling gang related crime in London, Glasgow and Manchester. Integrating a broad range of agencies into one process can turn around those at risk. There is a huge shared benefit of working together to prevent all forms of crime. “Terrorism generates such a huge strength of feeling: the tragic events in Paris, and cases such as the twin schoolgirls who travelled from Manchester last year to join ISIS, are bringing people together to recognise the real threat posed by extremism. The mode of radicalisation has moved from personal contact between individuals to the social media space, which can be much harder to detect. This is why it is so important to raise awareness, for individuals to be alert and to contact the authorities with any concerns.

“In terms of managing returnees from Syria or Iraq, each case needs to be judged on its own merit. We must make a decision as to whether they have broken the law and need investigating, or, if that is not the case, identify how we can work with them to reduce the risk and protect the community.”

The Channel Process

A safeguarding and partnership approach: Channel seeks to engage with individuals who may be vulnerable to radicalisation, intervening prior to any terrorism related criminality occurring. Channel’s occupation of this ‘pre-criminal space’ has historically been crucial in reinforcing its function as a safeguarding process, as opposed to a means to gather intelligence from communities. Referrals to Channel come from a wide range of sources: health, education, social services, concerned family members and employers.

Police practitioners coordinate and present referrals to a multi-agency panel chaired by the local authority. The panel is attended by partner agencies relevant to each referral. Where a referral is accepted as a Channel case, the partners work in collaboration to formulate an appropriate support package. In many cases this includes ‘one to one’ mentoring from a Home Office approved specialist intervention provider. Intervention providers are expert in countering extremist narratives, whilst encouraging the individual to develop critical thinking skills and build their own resilience to extremist ideology.

Not all referrals to Channel will be suitable for the process and may be ‘signposted’ to other agencies such as health, education or diversionary social activities. Some individuals may benefit from faith guidance but not meet the Channel threshold in terms of being vulnerable to extremism.

Channel is entirely voluntary. There is not any legislation to enforce engagement with Channel. The programme is being placed on a statutory footing, but this is to support the consistent delivery of Channel across England and Wales and ensure that individuals have access to appropriate support services.

Rashad Ali is a specialist interventionist and mentor for CENTRI and a senior research fellow at the Institute of Strategic Dialogue. As a Channel intervention provider, he explains his role:

“People become involved with extreme ideas, politics or behaviours for many different reasons. There is not a single ‘pathway’ to embracing violent extremism, nor is there a single ‘cause’. There are various factors which may draw an individual to extremism: how integrated or not they feel, what kind of narrow and selective political narrative they have embraced, the extreme ideological reading of scripture, personal circumstances and environment all play a role. Any intervention has to consider all these issues and more. The Channel panel assesses each of these areas and coordinates appropriate support. The interventionist plays a key role in this process.

“Looking after the interests and the needs of the individual, whether it is in helping people form an identity and a sense of belonging to our society, or help coming to terms with the complexity of modern politics, or demonstrating the fallacies of extremist ideology and religious interpretations, are fundamental to an intervention. It is important that individuals who are involved within the Channel programme understand, and actually feel that this is primarily in their interests – we are on their side – and they need to see that. Often they have been fed a narrative which when they sit back and question it, they can see that life is more complicated, and therefore their religion must have that nuance too. Or that the interpretations of scripture put forward as authentic and orthodox are, more often than not, heretical and certainly not the definitive and only understanding of the religion or political and ethical concepts of Islam.

“We don’t wish to tell them exactly how they should understand life, religion and ethics, but we often focus on challenging extreme narratives, and help them to see through the rhetoric and ideology of extremists and terrorists.

“It is also important that they are looked at as people, individuals with their own needs. We work closely with mainstream services to help them with other concerns such as education, personal circumstances and their mental or physical wellbeing. This takes time, energy, and emotional strength; but when it can help turn around an individual’s life it is highly rewarding.“

Countering all forms of extremism: People of any faith, ethnicity and age can be referred to Channel. A significant number of cases relate to far right extremism. Tackling extreme right wing ideology as well as that of radical Islam is vital in fostering social cohesion and denying the voice of those who reference sectarianism within the UK as justification for terrorism.

Nationally, 3934 individuals were referred to Channel between its inception as a pilot in 2007 and 31st March 2014. In 1450 of those cases the person was under 18 years old.

Amy Thornton is a PhD Researcher at University College London’s Department of Security and Crime Science, and interviewed Channel intervention providers for her thesis: “Building a close partnership with educational institutions and using existing relationships where possible were viewed as positive elements. Early intervention is perceived as key to the success of the programme. In the case of young persons, if the intervention can happen in the school environment, with the school’s assistance they were more successful. The ability to empathise with young persons in these settings and having the knowledge to discuss what they wanted to talk about was also essential to success.

“This last point touches on the issue of credibility of intervention providers. For one interviewee, his former participation in an extreme Islamist group and detailed knowledge of the Al-Qa’ida-inspired narrative offered him that credibility. The holistic approach to interventions made possible by the Channel process was a key ingredient of success highlighted by many of the interviewees.

“By having representatives of various arms of the local authority on the panel, it was possible to get help for individuals regarding housing, employment, healthcare and education, as well as any counselling or ideological intervention needed from a counter-terrorism perspective. This allows intervention providers to focus upon the diversionary activities an individual could get involved with in order to remove them from the radicalising setting and the social network which was exposing them to the radicalising narrative.”

The Channel programme has an important role in the pre-criminal space with its ability to deter individuals from terrorism at an early stage. The challenge ahead is the management of individuals who may already have crossed the line into terrorist related criminality and are returning from fighting in the Middle East.

Dr Noemie Bouhana, lecturer in Security and Crime Science at University College London who specialises in understanding radicalisation, commenting on the management of returning foreign fighters, believes that, “The difficulty in terms of designing interventions is that it’s a relatively new phenomenon, so there’s not yet an evidence base from which to draw.

“There’s a controversial programme being implemented in Aarhus, Denmark, which aims to counsel and reintegrate people who are returning, but who did not take part in criminal activities abroad. Those who did demonstrably take part in illegal action are sent down the criminal justice route. It’s too soon to tell how the programme is performing, but I think they’ve done well in recognising from the start that a one-size-fits-all approach won’t do. We apply the broad heading of ‘foreign fighters’ to very different kinds of people. Whatever ends up being put in place, you need a systematic way of assessing each individual and tailoring the response. That requires a good appreciation of the factors involved in radicalisation in the first place, not only at the individual level, for example in terms of cognitive susceptibility to influence, but at the ecological level as well.

“Who are these people and what kind of environments are they returning to? What’s the point of offering them therapy if they go right back to the places that exposed them to the radicalising influence in the first place? You have to operate lasting changes to suppress the emergence of radicalising spaces, or you’re not addressing the problem in the long run. The logic is purely epidemiological: social-ecological control is how you deal with Ebola and ultimately it’s how you deal with homegrown radicalisation. Heal the places, not just the people.”

A large proportion of those travelling to Syria or Iraq may not have been under the spotlight of the security agencies, making it more difficult to prevent them from travelling (Briggs and Silverman, 2014, p12). This reinforces the vital role of both communities and institutions in raising concerns they may have about someone planning to travel or who may be vulnerable to extremism.

You can talk in confidence about your concerns with your local police force Prevent Engagement Team or call 101 (non-emergency) or the Anti-Terrorist Hotline on 0800 789 321

The post Countering UK extremism in 2015: the Channel Programme appeared first on City Security Magazine.

In December 2013, the Prime Minister’s Task Force on Tackling Extremism and Radicalisation, created in the wake of Drummer Lee Rigby’s murder, published its final report. The document reiterated the commitment of the UK government to combat all forms of extremism and outlined priorities for action; notably, countering the promotion of extremist ideologies in the online environment.

Radicalisation

Tackling extremist activity online is a challenge, if only because the problem is hard to scope. The technical difficulties involved in capturing an accurate picture of online activities are compounded by the conflation of related yet distinct problems, namely, extremism, radicalisation and terrorism. In the 2011 Prevent Strategy, extremism is characterised as “vocal or active opposition to fundamental British values, including democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs”, while terrorism, defined at length in the Terrorism Act 2000, is characterised as a set of actions which involve, but are not limited to, the perpetration of violence against civilians for the purpose of influencing a government in service to religious or political aims. As for radicalisation, it is most pragmatically understood as the process of moral development through which an individual comes to see terrorism as a plausible and legitimate course of action.

Radicalisation can lead to involvement in terrorist activities, but the progression from one to the other is not straightforward. To see terrorism as a plausible course of action does not, on its own, drive an individual to get involved in terrorism, much like ownership of a driving licence is not, on its own, enough to get someone behind the wheel of a car. Some kind of motivation is needed to get out of the house and inside the vehicle. One challenge for those groups who want to promote terrorism is to get those individuals who have been successfully radicalised off the couch – and keep them from sitting back down as soon as the material and psychological effort involved in committing acts of terrorism becomes apparent.

An analogy can be drawn with “Get Out The Vote” campaigns, which target those people who are predisposed to vote but who, left to their own devices, would not make it to the polling station. And like “Get Out The Vote”, those who would promote terrorism have set their sights on digital technologies, in particular social media platforms, as the best instrument to amplify their message and get people moving.

Online extremism

Understanding how extremist online environments enable individual involvement in terrorism is crucial to the design of coherent prevention strategies. Extremist online fora are a concern, because extremist social settings can act as a vector of exposure to radicalising environments. The promotion of extremist discourses is a concern, because extremist narratives articulate frictions and frustrations (cultural, moral, political), which can be perceived as provocations by radicalised individuals and succeed in getting them off the couch. Inasmuch as extremists – including those who do not condone terrorism – successfully promote values which undermine citizens’ trust in the legitimacy of state and community leaders to enforce certain norms, they weaken communities’ ability to police themselves, leading to the emergence of spaces where terrorism can be promoted with impunity. From a pragmatic perspective, resources devoted to monitoring extremist organisations, whose message may be unpalatable but not necessarily unlawful, are resources which are not available to police terrorist activity.

In dealing with online extremism and radicalisation, the UK Government has chosen to target in priority the supply-side of the equation. The Counter-Terrorism Internet Referral Unit is charged with the removal of unlawful extremist internet content. It coordinates the national response to referrals from industry, governmental agencies and the public, and has responsibility for serving take-down notices issued under Section 3 of the Terrorism Act. UK authorities also support internet companies, schools and families in implementing filtering and hiding mechanisms to disrupt access to extremist material. This includes, for example, ways to manipulate search engine results or blacklist certain web addresses to prevent the promotion of extremist content.

Of course, no supply reduction strategy can succeed without close cooperation between public and private stakeholders. The EU Clean IT Project was launched to bring together governments, competent agencies, NGOs and internet companies around the table.

Best practices to counter radicalisation

It concluded in January 2013 with the publication of a report on ‘best practices’ to reduce the impact of terrorist use of the internet.

• Proactive best practices include the adoption of national legal frameworks, which clearly communicate what constitutes terrorist use of the internet while preserving freedom of expression; the establishment of competent agencies, which must strive for cooperation with internet companies and encourage self-regulation; the adoption by internet companies of terms and conditions, which provide clear examples of what constitutes terrorist use; the conduct of awareness programmes, which convey information about where to find assistance, as well as illustrate the problem of terrorist internet use.
• Reporting best practices include stimulating the implementation of explicit flagging mechanisms, which encourage users to report terrorist content; the development of user-friendly, browser-based reporting plugins, which could allow users to report problematic content regardless of platform; the creation of well-advertised referral units and public, civil or industry hotlines, which assist users who report problematic content.
• Reactive best practices include the adoption by internet companies of explicit ‘notice and take action’ procedures; the adoption by competent agencies of standards, which make clear the difference between notifications, which bring knowledge of terrorist use to the awareness of internet companies, and orders, which are binding requests made of an internet service provider; the creation of public, civil and industry points of contacts dedicated to reducing terrorist use of the internet; the adoption of agreed standards for cooperation between competent agencies and internet companies in the context of criminal investigations, which should make clear whether cooperation is mandatory or voluntary, and which should respect the technical integrity of the service provider; the extension of systems designed to share data on known cases of abuse between internet companies, which should include data on confirmed cases of illegal terrorist use; the inclusion of terrorist use of the internet within existing voluntary end-user controlled services, such as parental control interfaces.

Would the faithful adoption of these best practices by public, civil and industry partners truly make a dent in online extremism and radicalisation? Experts are unconvinced. Experience suggests that reliance on supply-side strategies, which underpin most of the aforementioned practices, is ineffective, although the need for governments to clearly advertise and enforce the law of the land is uncontested.

Positive strategies

A 2013 report by the Institute for Strategic Dialogue called into question the recommendations of the UK Extremism Task Force, which remain largely biased towards content-removal or suppression measures. According to its authors, given the sheer volume of content generated each day on the internet, and given the fact that most extremist online content is not terrorism and therefore doesn’t breach any laws, a single-minded, repressive approach cannot make a difference. Instead, governments should support more positive strategies, which exploit the characteristics of the internet to their own advantage. For example, they should encourage the mass production of counter-extremist content, in order to drown out extremist voices. This could involve training a large number of ‘credible messengers’, upping their digital and rhetorical skills, and helping them (though not directing them) to propagate effective counter-messages.

There is intuitive appeal to the idea that the most effective way to derail an online, grassroots, “Get Off The Couch” effort is to pit it against another. Recent election campaigns provide precedents. Political marketers have been quick to realise that Internet users are always on the front lines and that they have the numbers.

Is there a role for industry in any kind of positive strategy? Google’s funding of the Radicalisation Awareness Network, an ongoing initiative which brings together former ‘radicals’ and victims of terrorism, is one example. Beyond philanthropy, however, one may look to the social responsibility paradigm for a taste of things to come.

Human communities now straddle online and offline settings, bringing into the digital sphere their political, cultural, and moral concerns. Most citizens – the consumers of internet services – are unlikely to want to spend time in communities rife with offensive, extremist content. They might be more likely to welcome service providers who demonstrate a genuine awareness of the problem and are willing to empower them to fulfil their self-ascribed cultural and moral commitments, in much the same way that in recent years many companies have demonstrated their awareness of sustainability concerns and empowered consumers to honour their social and ecological obligations.

Dr Noémie Bouhana

CT Group Research Lead,

University College London and Director for Academia

Women’s Security Society

The post Countering radicalisation online: industry’s role appeared first on City Security Magazine.

The recently launched film, Your Mother, is set to make a big impact across UK communities. Produced by Women Without Borders / Sisters against Violent Extremism (SAVE) and screened for the first time in London at a recent Shanaz Network meeting, it is a powerful new tool in the fight against terrorism.

Mothers of terrorists

The film captures the stories of mothers whose children have committed acts of violent extremism, or who intended to do so. These women discuss how their children’s choices destroyed their and their families’ lives. It is hoped that sons and daughters will realise that acts of terrorism will not lead to glory, but rather the devastation of those they love most. Bothaina, one mother featured, whose eldest son, aged 17, killed himself in a suicide attack, summarises her feelings, “I wish all young people could feel for their mothers, fathers and relatives and realise how much they will suffer and struggle their whole lives. It’s true they will be gone forever, but their families will still be there.”

As well as influencing young people, it is intended that mothers will feel empowered to protect their own families. Vicky, whose son was convicted of plotting to blow up a shopping centre, reveals, “It’s very difficult in front of people. You try to give a sense of normality, but inside you’re crying… for the loss of my son.”

The film makes an emotional impact on those who see it and it is likely to prompt meaningful conversations around terrorism, radicalisation and the importance of women in preventing it.

Your Mother in the community

Your Mother, distributed on DVD, with supporting guidance, will be used throughout England and Wales by Shanaz, the network of 50 women community leaders from each of the 45 police force areas to support the Government’s Prevent strategy. Shanaz has representatives from numerous women’s groups, professional women and institutions, giving it tremendous reach into the community. The network, which is now a constituted body, has come together specifically to address violent extremism from a female perspective.

“These Muslim and non-Muslim female role models are socially involved, civically engaged, powerful agents of change, who are working together to become a living, breathing counter-narrative to both far-right and Al Qaida style ideology,” says Inspector Khizra Dhinda, until recently lead officer for England and Wales in the Women’s engagement against violent extremism and radicalisation.

The Shanaz network

The Shanaz network has built on hard-learnt lessons of early counter terrorism measures. Initially viewed as an exclusively male issue, most counter terrorism structures, advisory bodies and methods were created around this misunderstanding, leading them to not cater well for women’s inclusion. “Muslim women matter and should be able to contribute to efforts to counter terrorism. Our communities belong to other women too and every kind of terrorism is a whole community problem, requiring the combined efforts of all,” says Khizra.

Prevent initiatives succeed where its key concepts have been explained. This enables local women to step up and lead the response. Counter-terrorism engagement and education activity tends to become more credible and palatable in communities as it becomes removed from delivery by police and partners. Women wish to safeguard the next generation and protect their community. Some women describe it as their Islamic duty, “If you save one innocent life, you save all humanity.”

“Certainly women are often best placed in the home and the community to notice the absence of the normal or the presence of the abnormal,” says Khizra, adding, “They should be equipped with the knowledge to address these concerns so that they are not rendered silent witnesses to the descent into extremism.”

Women in counter terrorism

SAVE, headquartered in Vienna, the organisation which produced Your Mother, brings together women from across the globe for international advocacy and research. “Including women in the security arena is one of the greatest challenges facing us all today, but times of crisis are often times of opportunity,” says their founder and executive director Edit Schlaffer. Khizra would agree, “It is not until women from our diverse communities have an effective voice at every level of decision making, and governments and international actors respond to that voice that we will see effective results.”

Andrea Berkoff

City Security magazine

The post Your Mother: the emotional counter terrorism film appeared first on City Security Magazine.