See also:
- ← RECORA
- Summary
- Radicalism
- Participants
- Conference
In preventing radicalization of its citizens local governments face a complexity of problems and obstacles. A vital link for signalising radicalization tendencies are professionals and semi-professionals who are in a direct relationship of trust with a potentially radicalizing person. Insufficient knowledge of and experience with each phase of the radicalization process for those directly involved with vulnerable groups to adequately signalise, interpret and respond to such developments is a hindrance for signalising radicalization tendencies in time.
The main objective of the project is the development of a tool to assess situations and match needs and requirements with adequate training programmes for recognising and dealing with radicalization. To this objective an inventory of the most important European action programmes within countries and cities will be made, analysed and evaluated. This should eventually lead to an overview of the most effective approaches within training modules and will provide insight into the factors leading towards radicalization of individuals and how to prevent that.
The project will therefore create an overview of existing action programmes within the different cities, draw up ambition maps per city, training needs and requirements and make an analysis of the gap in this respect to be filled. In this process the target group, ie. intermediaries such as Muslim leaders, police officers, youth and social workers, teachers and youth leaders will be involved. Experts will assess the situations and develop a Solution Matrix for matching the most adequate training modules to different local situations. This will be achieved by exchanging experience between and setting up a network of the cities of Amsterdam (NL), Birmingham (GB), Essen (DE), Rotterdam (NL), The Hague (NL) and Utrecht (NL). The tool will be independently of these cities’ contexts widely applicable to other European cities dealing with similar issues and tendencies and contribute to the EU’s integrated policy on prevention of violent radicalisation and terrorism based on an abusive interpretation of Islam.
Radicalism concerns a philosophy that focuses on endangering the democratic legal order. There are obviously different levels of radicalism. Means used by radicalists vary from peaceful to violent and anywhere in between. Moreover not all violent acts should be seen as ‘radical’ in the sense that they do not all intend to create severe impact in society. Another possibility is radical behaviour with a relatively low level of violence yet high impact. The severity of the problem of radicalization is related to the combination of both radical violence and the major after-effects of violent acts that could potentially lead to mass-defection from society or escalation and polarisation. Incidents can trigger a process in which citizens or communities en masse loose faith in the building blocks of democracy, such as fundamental rights, equality, political participation or the state monopoly of violence. It also polarises the relationships between citizens with long-lasting effects on tolerance and respect for diversity. Radicalization could lead to radicalism and eventually to terrorism.
Local governments should address the problem of radicalization as:
Radicalization is a current-day phenomenon in European cities. There have been recent examples such as the Hofstad-group proving the gravity and urgency of the problem in a city like Amsterdam. A complete overview of and insight into the size and scope of radicalization is however lacking at city administration levels. This is partly related to the fact there are different understandings of the meaning of radicalization due to the multitude of different ways in which it manifests, varying from relatively innocent to seriously threatening, either at individual or group level. Knowledge about radicalization has been developed by cities the last few years; solid statistics however are still not at hand. The multidimensionality of the problem hampers a solid argumentation of when and why local government should interfere. Last year the Amsterdam administration has sought to define an appropriate attitude and adequate policy towards radicalization. Crucial in that is to strike a balance between respecting the rights of individuals and taking responsibility for the safety of the collective and safeguard social cohesion.
The Amsterdam approach for example focuses on early stages of radicalization rather than terrorism itself, meaning looking into behaviour and acts that do not (yet) breach the law. This immediately touches upon the complexity of the issue and the caution with which local government should address this. Government should be wary of when to label behaviour as problematic and which measures are appropriate. Decisive argument for local government to take responsibility in this issue is the potential impact of radicalization processes at the local level. It is exactly for this reason that local government will be the most adequate level for covering the entire scope of the problem. It has already been acknowledged by national government that local government is in the best position to signalise problems in time and take appropriate action. By focussing on the soil for radicalization and signalising current tendencies and threatening active radicals, local government adequately complements national policy.
At the same time Islamic radicalization is a pan-European problem. European cities such as London and Amsterdam have already been confronted with attacks committed by radicalised citizens: “home grown terrorists”. Also Belgium, Germany, Spain, France and Italy have suffered from (planned) attacks some set up externally some home-grown. Although there are clear differences between countries, the increase of religiousness among Muslim youth is a wide-spread phenomenon. There is a growing search for answers about Islam and identity. Frustrations about integration and the generation gap with their parents and traditional imams lead young people to look for answers elsewhere. At the same time there is an overwhelming number of fundamentalist, intolerant and even jihadist interpretations of Islam on offer on the internet and through travelling missionaries. Demand and supply find each other in cyberspace and through radical mission, a process to be found in many European countries. It is extremely difficult to recognise Islamic radicalization as possible external features could easily be confused with (ultra) orthodox expression of Islam. European co-operation in this field could lead to a constructive exchange of knowledge and experiences to further the insight of and approach by local governments to adequately tackle this issue.
The EU facilitates operational cooperation in the fight against terrorism through establishing improved forms of information exchange among the police and intelligence communities tasked with the fight against terrorism. Under The Hague Programme closer cooperation has been established between Member States in the area of justice and home affairs, mainly focussing at the national level. The international exchange information is crucial for fighting terrorism as terrorists are not bound by national borders and have developed strong international networks. However for addressing factors that lead up to people feeling attracted to a radical ideology and being vulnerable for recruitment for terrorist acts the local level should not be overlooked. Growing segregation and exclusion are underlying factors that are often cited as creating fertile ground for the receptiveness of radical Islam. A high degree of isolation and exclusion is being experienced by some Muslim communities making some Islamic youth in a deprived socio-economic situation highly vulnerable for the promotion of radicalization. It is therefore necessary to cooperate closely with those communities in developing prevention strategies. These communities and this combination of factors are most often found in larger cities which makes local governments a crucial partner in the chain of actors fighting terrorism and preventing radicalization. To be able to formulate adequate prevention strategies it is a sine qua non that the exchange of information is increased between local governments dealing with similar issues and between national security agencies and local governments, as these can provide the intelligence on where and how potential radicalists have been recruited within their communities in the past. This knowledge will enable local governments to target the parts of communities most vulnerable and address the underlying factors by formulating socio-economic policy, youth policy and education schedules.
In preventing radicalization of its citizens local governments face a complexity of problems and obstacles. A vital link for signalising radicalization tendencies are professionals and semi-professionals who are in a direct relationship of trust with a potentially radicalizing person. Insufficient knowledge of and experience with each phase of the radicalization process for those directly involved with vulnerable groups to adequately signalise, interpret and respond to such developments is a hindrance for signalising radicalization tendencies in time.
The main objective of the project is the development of a tool to assess situations and match needs and requirements with adequate training programmes for recognising and dealing with radicalization. To this objective an inventory of the most important European action programmes within countries and cities will be made, analysed and evaluated. This should eventually lead to an overview of the most effective approaches within training modules and will provide insight into the factors leading towards radicalization of individuals and how to prevent that. A widely applicable model will be developed that enables local authorities to match needs and requirements deriving from the specificities of the local context with adequate training modules for intermediaries, being professionals, semi-professionals and community leaders. Thereby providing them with tools to signalise, prevent and intervene in early radicalization of individuals.