RESILIENCE and DIALOGUE: PREVENTING VIOLENT EXTREMISM in NAIROBI, WAJIR and KWALE COUNTIES in KENYA Introduction
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Resilience and dialogue Preventing violent extremism in Nairobi, Wajir and Kwale Counties in Kenya Romi Sigsworth, Akinola Olojo and Zaina Kombo Kenya continues to suffer multiple threats from violent extremism. While communities across Kenya are faced with challenges that can be considered risk factors for radicalisation and violent extremism, they also demonstrate strengths that can be developed into building resilience against such violent extremism. This study sought to understand how affected communities in Kenya demonstrate resilience to violent extremism, as well as what conditions encourage dialogue between various groups to address and resolve problems that might otherwise result in radicalisation and violent extremism. EAST AFRICA REPORT 33 | NOVEMBER 2020 Key findings Various fault lines for violent extremism were and ensuring access to justice for victims of identified by participants, including intra- and human rights abuses. intercommunity tensions, distrust of security Dialogue within communities is impeded by ethno- agencies as a result of human rights violations, religious discord, mistrust of elders who represent socio-economic deprivation and marginalisation. the local population and the exclusion of certain Signs of existing community resilience can be groups, particularly women. found in the integration between identity groups, coordination and agency on common problems Barriers to dialogue between communities and and loyalty to one’s community. law enforcement include police harassment and religious profiling of groups, extrajudicial killings Community members identified a range of and the exclusion of community voices. goals and strategies to further build resilience, including: raising awareness, maintaining cultural Dialogue between the community and justice actors or religious identity, strengthening social cohesion, is made more challenging due to the inaccessibility including the voices of the marginalised, improving of the justice system to many, a lack of accountability the relationship between state authorities and for historical injustices, and the complex and community members, economic development, dangerous nature of terror-related cases. Recommendations Communities Law enforcement agencies should actively Communities should foster intra-community civic foster collaborative relationships with affected awareness and information sharing. communities, reformed returnees, civil society and Religious leaders must work together to human rights organisations. strengthen interfaith collaborations. Policymakers Community leaders must promote forums for intra- County action plans should be evaluated for and intercommunity dialogue in their counties. implementation, efficacy and impact; lessons Deliberate efforts must be made to include women learned should be integrated into future plans. in preventing and countering violent extremism Policymakers should allow for the active (P/CVE) initiatives. participation of community members in policy The youth must be included in community forums formulation. and allowed to express their concerns. Empowering communities with the infrastructure Community leaders need to build trust between and skills to engage with social media platforms their communities and security agencies. should be prioritised. Law enforcement and justice actors There is a need for greater investment in Law enforcement officials who commit human rights economic development programming to violations must be held criminally accountable. strengthen affected communities. Enhanced collaboration between law enforcement Enhanced collaboration between national agencies and the justice sector should be promoted government agencies, county governments, local to address the delayed prosecution of cases. leadership and development partners must be The capacity to investigate terror-related cases prioritised to ensure P/CVE work is positioned should be extended beyond the capital city Nairobi. within development goals. 2 RESILIENCE AND DIALOGUE: PREVENTING VIOLENT EXTREMISM IN NAIROBI, WAJIR AND KWALE COUNTIES IN KENYA Introduction East Africa continues to face multiple threats from violent extremism and terrorism. Although other groups operate in localised spaces, Harakat al- Shabaab al-Mujahideen – more commonly known as al-Shabaab – poses the most persistent threat to security across the region, including in Somalia (where it is based) and in neighbouring Kenya. Kenya has endured numerous terrorist attacks by al-Shabaab over the last decade, costing the country countless lives and having a profound impact on its people, physical infrastructure, development and economic growth. Major attacks on the Westgate Mall in Nairobi in 2013, in and around Mpeketoni in 2014, on the Garissa University College in 2015 and the DusitD2 complex in Nairobi in 2019 claimed over 400 lives in total. Certain areas within Kenya have also become key locations for al-Shabaab recruitment and radicalisation. These insecurity dynamics have compelled the Kenyan government to respond in various ways, from militarised counterterrorism operations to the development of strategies to prevent and counter violent extremism (P/CVE) at the national and county levels. Al-Shabaab poses the most persistent threat to security across the region, including in its base, Somalia, and in neighbouring Kenya Many Kenyans have therefore had direct experience of violent extremism. This has either been through the radicalisation of family or community members (especially among the youth), being stereotyped and discriminated against by people within their own communities, being profiled as terror suspects by law enforcement agencies, or even experiencing direct attacks from violent extremist groups. Different identity groups (including men, women, the youth and Muslims) within communities affected by violent extremism in Kenya have had vastly different experiences of both the process of radicalisation and their exposure to violent extremism. While all of the different groupings in affected communities are faced with challenges that can be considered risk factors for radicalisation and violent extremism, some groups and some communities have proven to be more resilient than others. This resilience is both to direct radicalisation campaigns by violent extremist groups and to the radicalising effects of state-sponsored violence. This research study sought to understand the factors that enable a community (or identity group within a community) to adopt processes, strategies and relationships that will help them respond to the often- SOME COMMUNITIES ARE MORE dynamic threat of violent extremism affecting their peace and/or RESILIENT THAN OTHERS development. EAST AFRICA REPORT 33 | NOVEMBER 2020 3 Figure 1: Map of Nairobi, Kwale and Wajir Counties in Kenya SOUTH SUDAN ETHIOPIA UGANDA SOMALIA TANZANIA Source: https://d-maps.com/carte.php?num_car=35032&lang=en 4 RESILIENCE AND DIALOGUE: PREVENTING VIOLENT EXTREMISM IN NAIROBI, WAJIR AND KWALE COUNTIES IN KENYA The study aimed to consider two distinct but interrelated extremism and the role of dialogue in addressing violent issues: extremism in Kenya. • How do different identity groups within communities Primary data was collected in July and August 2020 affected by violent extremism in Kenya demonstrate through semi-structured key informant interviews (KIIs) or build resilience to violent extremism? and facilitated focus group discussions (FGDs) in Nairobi, • What are the conditions conducive to dialogue Kwale and Wajir Counties (see Figure 1). within these communities, as well as between these communities and security and justice actors, to The process of identifying FGD address and resolve problems that might otherwise result in radicalisation and violent extremism? participants was driven by the This paper begins by outlining the methodology used in need for diversity the research and giving a broad context to the threat of violent extremism in Kenya. It then explores the concept Nine key stakeholders were interviewed, including of community resilience to violent extremism as well as law enforcement officers, academics, criminal justice the question of dialogue and the accountability of security actors and religious leaders. FGDs were conducted with and justice actors in the context of Nairobi, Kwale selected identity groups within the communities (see and Wajir Counties in Kenya. The paper concludes by Table 1). The process of identifying FGD participants was providing recommendations that can be used or adapted driven by the need for diversity and therefore included to help strengthen the resilience of and use of dialogue in marginalised and ethnic minority groups, such as people similar communities. living with disabilities (PWDs), Nubians and other informal settlement residents within each county. It is important Methodology to note that the fieldwork complied with all the Covid-19 A mixed methodology was employed for this study. regulations as directed by the Government of Kenya. Desk-based literature reviews were conducted on the The target areas were chosen because communities two interrelated themes of community resilience to violent in each of the selected counties have experienced Table 1: Focus group discussions Geographical location Target group No. of No. of No. of Total males females PWDs Nairobi County Youth (mixed gender, faith and ethnicity) 6 4 2 women 10 Men (mixed faith, ethnicity) 10 0 1 10 Women (mixed faith, ethnicity) 0 11 1 11 Community leaders 8 1 0 9 Kwale County Youth (mixed