Terrorism is an attempt to intimidate citizens of a given country or try to coerce the government to further religious, social, or political goals/beliefs through the illegal use of violence and force. In most cases, terrorists are not born-terrorists; most of them are just ordinary people who once held ordinary views before they were radicalized. Radicalization is the transformational process from being law-abiding citizens into terrorists who justify the use of violence and threats to achieve their goals. Indeed, many cases of terrorist attacks have been reported in many parts of the world over the past two decades. Investigations into terrorist activities have led to many arrests in North America, Australia, and Western Europe. This paper will compare and contrast at least two different radicalization models that explain terrorist motivations. The paper will also summarize behavioral and psychological factors associated with disengaging from terrorism as well as describe what efforts or programs are most effective in countering radicalization .
The NYPD’s Radicalization Process
This model proposed by the NYPD intelligence division contains four stages, which are; pre-radicalization, self-identification, indoctrination, and Jihadization (King &Taylor, 2011). The pre-radicalization stage is the period before the terrorist was involved in the radicalization process. At this stage, no behavior can be generalized to all potential perpetrators; however, some traits are common in all suspects. These traits include being young, male, Muslim, and middle-class social background (King & Taylor, 2011). Suspects may be converts, immigrants, and have no history of a felony. This may be termed as pre-disposing characteristics.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
In the self-identification stage, which is the second in this model, the process of radicalization gets started for those with the pre-disposing traits. Here, it is common for individuals to convert to Islam as a means of coping with personal stress. Identity crises, financial crises, loss of a job, or discrimination are the main causes of stress (Johnson & Hobfoll, 2009). At this stage many individuals come across the extreme and radical concepts of Islam such as the jihadi ideology which are now easily found on the internet; if unguarded, the individual may substitute their old ideologies with the newly found radical positions. If such an individual meets people with similar positions, there is a high chance of the formation of a more extreme radical group.
The second step sets the stage for the third step, indoctrination. In this stage, the individual fully accepts the extremist positions and now justifies violence against their opposers. The religious jihadi views are often politicized (King & Taylor, 2011). In most cases, individuals at this stage of radicalization alienate themselves from common religious meetings and hold more private and political meetings with fellow jihadists. The fourth stage is Jihadization, which is the last step in The NYPD's Radicalization Process. Here, the individual now proclaims themselves as holy warrior or mujahedeen (King & Taylor, 2011) and are ready to perpetrate violence in the name of jihad. Individuals at this stage are part of the training, planning, information collection, and execution of terrorist attacks and activities.
Moghaddam’s Staircase to Terrorism
This process has six steps describing the stages of radicalization; each stage is seen as a floor on the staircase. Through each floor, an individual chooses a reaction to some factors that may influence them into accepting radicalized ideas. On the ground floor are deprivation feelings as the first factors that lead many individuals towards extremist beliefs. The feeling is mostly in people who feel disadvantaged when they compare themselves to others; these people have a bigger probability of moving up the floors (Klausen et al., 2018). From the first stage, individuals move up to the first floor, where individuals chose to confront the perceived unfairness. According to Moghaddam, procedural justice and social mobility will determine whether individuals at this stage will continue moving up the stages (King & Taylor, 2011). This means that people are less likely to continue with radicalized ideas if there is a possibility of participating in decision making to affect the injustices perceived. Those who move on to the next floor are those who feel they cannot move up the social hierarchy and those who feel there are no possibilities of rectifying the injustices.
Individuals on the second floor stop focusing on the source of their dissatisfaction and channel it towards other targets. The west is mostly blamed for the terrorist’s deprivations when the displacement of aggression happens. At this point, individuals consider entertain radical ideas; interaction with like-minded individual and jihadi groups leads to the formation of extremist groups. The fourth floor involves joining the terrorist groups where individuals develop a consolidated alliance. In the fifth step, which is the last in Moghaddam’s Staircase to Terrorism, individuals are willing to take part in committing acts of terrorism (Emmelkamp et al., 2020). At this stage, an individual respond to orders from the terrorist supervisors willingly.
Similarities and differences between the Two Models
The first similarity is that both models find that the transformation from a law-abiding citizen to an extremist is based on a social and psychological process. Emotions, ways of thinking, and social influences are the factors that lead individuals to entertaining terrorists’ ideologies. More specifically, feelings of deprivations and identity crises are two psychological factors that stand out in the two models. The two factors make appearances in other models as well, proving that indeed the two play a significant role in the radicalization process (Toft, 2016). Despite their similarities, the first model has four steps while the second model has six steps. Religion plays an important role in the first step, unlike the next model where religion plays a passive role. The role of the radical organization is portrayed differently in the two models with the first portraying them as passive players while the second depicts the extremist organizations as active players in the radicalization process.
Disengagement
According to Horgan (2008), disengagement from terrorism examines why people separate themselves from terrorist movements and what influences them to leave. Disengaging may involve complete social and cognitive change as a result of growing differences of attitude/ideas or separating oneself from terrorist operations while still holding some of the terrorists’ values (Horgan, 2008). Factors contributing to disengagement from terrorism may fall under physical factors or psychological influences.
Fear of capture by authorities is an example of a physical factor that influences disengagement (Horgan, 2008). Changing roles by individuals in the radical groups or increased involvement in other roles such as politics or business also contributes to disengagement from radical organizations. Psychological factors are also referred to as emotional influences; the first is the development of negative emotions towards the movement; the negative experiences may involve traumatic disorders, anxiety, or dismantling of the illusions created by the recruiters. Personal growth which leads to a change in priorities and differences in views, especially on the execution of violence on innocent people, may also lead to disengagement from terrorism.
De-Radicalization Programs
With the increasing feelings of deprivation, identity crises, social isolation, as well as misinformation on the internet, rates of recruitment into extremist organizations may go high (Schmid, 2013). Therefore, governments must continue developing programs to reduce radicalization. The Saudi Arabian de-radicalization program started in 2004, has succeeded in rehabilitating many terrorists to date (Soto, 2020). Other programs include The Aarhaus program in Denmark, EXIT-Germany, and the first de-radicalization in the US located in Minnesota which was started in 2016 (Soto, 2020).
Conclusion
With nations now focusing on deradicalization as a strategy to countering terrorism, it is crucial to understand the transformational process whereby, law-abiding citizens are radicalized to hold jihad ideologies. The two models or radicalization discussed are The NYPD’s Radicalization Process and the Moghaddam’s Staircase to Terrorism. Feelings of deprivations and identity crises are two psychological factors that stand out in the two models. The two factors make appearances in other models as well, proving that indeed, the two play a significant role in the radicalization process. Even though disengagement from terrorism may occur as a result of physical and psychological influences, deradicalization programs must continue with their aim of reducing terrorism.
References
Emmelkamp, J., Asscher, J., Wissink, I., & Stams, G. (2020). Risk factors for (violent) radicalization: A multilevel meta-analysis. Aggression And Violent Behavior , 55 .
Horgan, J. (2008). Deradicalization or Disengagement? . Terrorismanalysts.com. Retrieved from http://www.terrorismanalysts.com/pt/index.php/pot/article/view/32/html.
Johnson, R., & Hobfoll, S. (2009). Mental Health and Terrorism. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/handbook-for-the-study-of-mental-health/mental-health-and-terrorism/E6133D349A94C0DB4DF25DA5456B87C9.
King, M., & Taylor, D. (2011). The Radicalization of Homegrown Jihadists: A Review of Theoretical Models and Social Psychological Evidence. Terrorism And Political Violence , 23 (4), 602-622.
Klausen, J., Libretti, R., Hung, B., & Jayasumana, A. (2018). Radicalization Trajectories: An Evidence-Based Computational Approach to Dynamic Risk Assessment of “Homegrown” Jihadists. Studies In Conflict & Terrorism , 43 (7).
Schmid, A. (2013). Radicalisation, De-Radicalisation, Counter-Radicalisation: A Conceptual Discussion and Literature Review. Terrorism And Counter-Terrorism Studies .
Soto, J. (2020). Deradicalization Programs: A Counterterrorism Tool . American Security Project. Retrieved from https://www.americansecurityproject.org/deradicalization-programs-a-counterterrorism-tool/.
Toft, M. (2016). Networks fighting networks: Understanding and combatting extremism and radicalisation on a smaller scale. Juncture , 23 (1), 37-40.
