Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) initiatives in Europe have existed for much longer than those in the United States (US). In the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), as well as in select countries in Asia, several rehabilitation and de-radicalization programs have been established with the aim of reintegrating former Islamist militants into society. Despite making some progress in understanding the phenomenon, many of these countries have not succeeded in stemming the tide of extremism, as witnessed by the unprecedented number of foreign fighters— including a growing number of women and girls—traveling to join the Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS). The fact that the threat is now a combination of homegrown terrorist attacks and traveling, and potentially returning, foreign fighters has complicated matters further. States must now contend with a jihadist threat that has eclipsed that of al Qaeda's in its social media savvy and, more importantly, its control of territory. Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda associates may have often talked of erecting "Islamic" states and the caliphate; Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi seems to have partially realized one.
What has become apparent from following Western discourse on violent extremism is that there remains much confusion on how radicalization actually happens. While academics and practitioners have made ground in understanding the dynamics of radicalization, there are still many questions left unanswered. Moreover, the partially religious nature of the phenomenon adds an additional level of complexity, as the debate on the religion-ideology nexus is subjected to political censors and considerations, thus hindering progress. The sensitivity is understandable, and the focus on Islam has had real negative repercussions for Muslims. While religion is central to the debate on Islamist extremism, other factors crucial to processes of radicalization demand more serious consideration. One of these factors, and the focus of this report, is the role of identity in radicalization.
Many scholars of political violence are by now aware of the role identity plays in radicalization, regardless of whether radicalization leads to violence. An overview of mainstream models of radicalization also shows that identity dynamics lie at the heart of the process. This essay provides an overview of how identity relates to Islamist-inspired radicalization. The aim here is twofold. First, the essay highlights issues relevant to the identity-radicalization debate, and their relation to extremism. Then, drawing from this discussion, it develops a number of points to consider for those considering developing community-based rehabilitation and de-radicalization initiatives. The essay refers primarily to Western democratic contexts, and by no means covers the scope of the discussion on radicalization.
The findings can be summarized as follows:
•The inclusion of parents and vulnerable target groups is integral to the success of CVE efforts.
• There is a need for role models to counter the “jihadi cool'” identity promoted by Islamist extremist countercultures.
• “It takes a network to defeat a network.” In CVE this means creating a wide network of partners from the grassroots to the state-level, as opposed to few select organizations that are not representative of all stakeholders involved.
• Government officials working in relevant fields should be involved in community efforts, with the aim of fostering trust and dialogue among all those involved in CVE efforts.
• Developing counter-argumentation composed of a political counter-narrative and a religious counter-theology is key to the process of countering violent extremism.