For Global Counter Radicalisation Experts and Governments- vital extract

For Global Counter Radicalisation Experts and Governments- vital extract

The prevention of radicalization leading to violent extremism and terrorism has been, is, and will continue to be of fundamental interest for public safety, national security, sustainable democracy, and global stability. For counter-radicalization efforts to have true operational value, radicalization must be understood as a complex process, encompassing all its driving variables, forms, phases, directions, range, and intensity. This process involves an individual or a group adopting a radical ideology or belief system that justifies, accepts, or employs violence, including acts of terrorism, to achieve specific political or ideological objectives.

Therefore, all activities, local prevention programs, and national action plans must address radicalization in its entirety its various forms, manifestations, content, and presentations. This requires multidirectional, multi-sectoral, and multifaceted solutions and responses. A comprehensive approach must be taken to tackle all drivers, root causes, triggers, catalysts, and perceived grievances in a holistic manner. Equally, efforts should focus on addressing extremist ideologies, internal cognitive variables, and external socio-political variables while recognizing that not all radical ideas lead to acts of terrorism and that violent behaviour does not always stem from extremist ideologies.

The Need for a Scientific and Systematic Approach

The only exclusive and effective method for addressing radicalization is dynamic process modelling. This approach allows for a structured and knowledge-based analysis of the problem by linking its contents directly with scientifically grounded solutions. By utilizing this systematic methodology, we can examine cognitive dissonance, cognitive distortions, and various rational functions within mind-set structures.

Traditional counter-radicalization efforts have often been based on observation, experience, and anecdotal evidence. While these methods have provided some insights, they lack the necessary rigor to develop operational tools and validated indicators. Instead, a knowledge-based, scientific framework is essential to ensure that radicalization prevention strategies are effective, accountable, and results-oriented.

Addressing Indicators of Radicalization

A critical component of counter-radicalization efforts is the identification and confirmation of radicalization indicators. Current methods often lack a clear, systematic approach to verifying the authenticity of these indicators, which leads to ambiguity and inefficiency in prevention programs. To rectify this, a process model must be employed that scientifically validates each indicator's origin and relevance.

For example, frontline practitioners, educators, and law enforcement personnel must be equipped with precise tools to identify early signs of radicalization. Without a proper framework to confirm and operationalize these indicators, counter-radicalization efforts risk being ineffective or misdirected. The dynamic process model provides a structured methodology for mapping radicalization at both micro and macro levels, ensuring accurate identification and intervention.

Implementing Dynamic Process Models

Dynamic process models offer the most comprehensive approach to preventing and countering radicalization. These models enable stakeholders to:

  • Develop tools and methods for radicalization mapping at micro and macro levels.
  • Design prevention programs that incorporate scientifically validated content.
  • Implement de-radicalization strategies through tactical dialogue, engagement, and rehabilitation.
  • Evaluate the effectiveness of counter-radicalization initiatives using measurable indicators.
  • Establish counter-narratives based on systematic evaluations, targeting ideological, social, theological, and psychological dimensions.

To illustrate the current gaps in radicalization prevention, a simple test can be conducted: randomly select 100 first-line practitioners or school teachers and ask them fundamental questions about the radicalization process, indicators, and methods of identification. The responses would likely highlight the existing deficiencies in knowledge and training, reinforcing the need for a scientific and systematic approach.

Call to Action

Experts and authorities must transition from observational and experience-based approaches to a structured, scientific, and systematic framework for counter-radicalization. This knowledge-driven approach will enable the reform of prevention programs globally, ensuring best practices, accountability, and performance-driven results.

For further exploration of radicalization indicators, models, mapping, and definitions, refer to the my upcoming book.

Conclusion

The concerns outlined above have been repeatedly addressed in European conferences, expert panels, and research forums, including discussions at the European Parliament. Despite advancements in understanding radicalization, numerous gaps remain, posing ongoing risks to our societies. Recent attacks, such as those in London, serve as stark reminders of the urgent need for knowledge-based intervention rather than reactive blame and media narratives.

As a logical conclusion based on years of research, the dynamic process model remains the most effective method for operationalizing radicalization prevention. Through the implementation of scientific methodologies, societies can develop effective tools for radicalization mapping, prevention, and de-radicalization. These approaches will ensure that counter-radicalization efforts are not only theoretical but also practical and operationally valuable.

About the Author: Tahir Mahmood

Tahir Mahmood is a renowned expert in the field of counter-radicalisation, known for his extensive work with various governments to solve complex challenges through knowledge based methods and out of box solutions. He has pioneered numerous initiatives aimed at fostering security, peace, and stability. His work spans across policy-making, innovation projects, and strategic interventions, contributing to global discussions on complex problems including radicalisation and extremism.

In addition to his independent research at Norwegian resource centre for Diversity, Integration and Peace (Organisation No 912472760) Tahir served as an advisory scientist in a European Commission-sponsored project, RISKTRACK, which involved three leading European universities. He was also the organiser of an International expert’s conference at the European Parliament, bringing together scholars, policymakers, and security experts to discuss innovative counter-radicalisation strategies, methods, tools and future direction for knowledge based scientific work.

Tahir has also served as a technocrat, been chief coordinator for former Prime Minister Pakistan to introduce more than 20plus valuable initiatives in diverse areas of governance, social welfare and finance.

As a firm advocate for interfaith dialogue and social cohesion, he is founder designed and established two famous organisations in Norway dedicated to interfaith dialogue for understanding and social cohesion. His practical experience in both desk and fieldwork provided him with a unique perspective, allowing him to develop scientifically grounded insights into radicalisation processes to lecture at European universities and also publish articles. Upcoming the book Science of radicalisation is pure and applied extract from his desk and field work-knowledge pool to introduce equation, dynamic process model and 400 indicators of radicalisation for new scientific direction of counter radicalisation research, global interests of security, stability and peace.? ?

?

要查看或添加评论,请登录

TAHIR MAHMOOD的更多文章

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了