Edge of violence cover 11/17/10 5:01 PM Page 1 The path into terrorism in the name of Islam is often The Edge of Violence | described as a process of radicalisation. But to be radical is “Tackling home-grown not necessarily to be violent. Violent radicals are clearly enemies of liberal democracies, but non-violent radicals might sometimes be powerful allies. This pamphlet is a terrorism requires a summary of two years of research examining the difference between violent and non-violent radicals in Europe and Canada. It represents a step towards a more nuanced radical approach…” understanding of the behaviour of radicalised individuals, the appeal of the al-Qaeda narrative, and the role of governments Jamie Bartlett · Jonathan Birdwell · Michael King and communities in responding. The Edge of Violence suggests that government policy must distinguish clearly between radicalisation that leads to THE EDGE OF VIOLENCE violence and radicalisation that does not: ways must be found to ensure young people can be radical and dissenting without Jamie Bartlett violent consequences. The pamphlet argues that the best way to fight radical ideas is with a liberal attitude to dissent, as Jonathan Birdwell silencing radical views can create a taboo effect that Michael King inadvertently makes such ideas more appealing. The threat of violent radicalisation can never be ‘solved’ or completely neutralised, it can only be managed. The process of radicalisation to violence still eludes complete understanding: any response will entail controversial decisions and unintended consequences. Therefore, governments must focus on the things they can realistically change, while the lead role in prevention must be played by society: individuals, groups, organisations and communities. Jamie Bartlett is Head of the Violence and Extremism Programme at Demos. Jonathan Birdwell is a Researcher at Demos. Michael King is a PhD student in the psychology department at McGill University ISBN 978-1-906693-56-5 £10 © Demos 2010 Edge of violence cover 11/17/10 5:01 PM Page 2 Demos is a think-tank focused on power and politics. Our unique approach challenges the traditional, ‘ivory tower’ model of policymaking by giving a voice to people and communities. We work together with the groups and individuals who are the focus of our research, including them in citizens’ juries, deliberative workshops, focus groups and ethnographic research. Through our high quality and socially responsible research, Demos has established itself as the leading independent think-tank in British politics. In 2010, our work is focused on four programmes: Family and Society; Violence and Extremism; Public Interest and Political Economy. We also have two political research programmes: the Progressive Conservatism Project and Open Left, investigating the future of the centre-Right and centre-Left. Our work is driven by the goal of a society populated by free, capable, secure and powerful citizens. Find out more at www.demos.co.uk. First published in 2010 © Demos. Some rights reserved Magdalen House, 136 Tooley Street, London, SE1 2TU, UK ISBN 978 1 906693 56 5 Series design by modernactivity Typeset by Chat Noir Design, Charente Printed by Lecturis, Eindhoven Set in Gotham Rounded and Baskerville 10 Cover paper: Flora Gardenia Text paper: Munken Premium White THE EDGE OF VIOLENCE Jamie Bartlett Jonathan Birdwell Michael King Open access. Some rights reserved. As the publisher of this work, Demos wants to encourage the circulation of our work as widely as possible while retaining the copyright. We therefore have an open access policy which enables anyone to access our content online without charge. Anyone can download, save, perform or distribute this work in any format, including translation, without written permission. This is subject to the terms of the Demos licence found at the back of this publication. Its main conditions are: · Demos and the author(s) are credited · This summary and the address www.demos.co.uk are displayed · The text is not altered and is used in full · The work is not resold · A copy of the work or link to its use online is sent to Demos You are welcome to ask for permission to use this work for purposes other than those covered by the licence. Demos gratefully acknowledges the work of Creative Commons in inspiring our approach to copyright. To find out more go to www.creativecommons.org Contents Acknowledgements 7 Introduction 9 1 Muslim communities in the West 23 2 Why do people radicalise? 37 3 The current threat of terrorism and radicalisation 47 4 The policy response 55 5 Violent and non-violent radicals: social and personal characteristics 67 6 Violent and non-violent radicals: religion and ideology 79 7 Violent and non-violent radicals: attitudes to terrorism 91 8 Violent and non-violent radicals: the journey of radicalisation into violence 97 9 Violent and non-violent radicals: organisations 105 10 Violent and non-violent radicals: the community 115 11 Recommendations 127 Annex 1 – Research methodology 153 Contents Annex 2 – Glossary of terms 165 Notes 173 Bibliography and references 215 7 Acknowledgements In March 2010, we released a summary version of this pamphlet that was available electronically from the Demos website. We had been unable to publish the full version of the pamphlet due to an ongoing terrorism trial that involved individuals who were subjects of the research. With the conclusion of the trial, we are now able to publish the pamphlet in its entirety. This pamphlet presents two years of research examining the difference between violent and non-violent radicals across Europe and Canada. While Europe has been debating the problem of al-Qaeda inspired terrorism and the appropriate policy response for the past decade, the problem of 'home- grown' terrorism in Canada is more recent and growing in concern. This final version contains for the first time significant primary research around al-Qaeda inspired extremism and radicalism in Canada. This report owes much to many people. We are grateful to Public Safety Canada, Justice Canada and the UK Economic and Social Research Council for supporting this research. We would like to thank all those across the Canadian government who provided support and helpful feedback throughout, in particular Brett Kubicek. At Demos, thanks are due to several former and current colleagues: Rachel Briggs, Alessandra Buonfino, Charlie Edwards, Catherine Fieschi, Peter Harrington, Sian Jones, Beatrice Karol Burks, Julia Margo, Richard Reeves and Susannah Wight. A long list of research assistants and interns provided invaluable assistance, including Melodie Bouchard, Juliano Fiori, Mariam Ghorbannejad, Maryem Haddaoui, Zarlasht Halaimzai, Judith Ireland, Nary Lou, Camilla MacDonald, Carl Miller, Malthe Munke, Nehal Panchamia, Davina Reid and Steven Simon. We would also like to thank the members of our steering group and associates who provided advice and guidance throughout, but whose names should remain anonymous. Most importantly, we would like to thank everyone who participated in this research by granting us interviews, sharing contacts, and making the work possible. Their names we must keep anonymous. The report does not reflect the views of the Acknowledgements Canadian government and the Economic and Social Research Council. Any errors or omissions remain our own. Jamie Bartlett Jonathan Birdwell Michael King November 2010 9 Introduction What is to be done with the millions of facts that bear witness that men, fully understanding their real interests, have left them in the background and rushed headlong to meet peril and danger… ? Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Notes from Underground, 18621 The rise of ‘home-grown’ terrorism, inspired by al-Qaeda, is one of today’s most pressing security concerns. However, the journey to becoming a ‘home-grown’ terrorist is still difficult to explain and predict, despite dozens of theoretical models and profile studies. What is clear is that there is no such thing as a typical terrorist, and no such thing as a typical journey into terrorism.2 This journey into terrorism is often described as a process of ‘radicalisation’. However, to be a radical is to reject the status quo, but not necessarily in a violent or even problematic manner.3 Of course, the process of radicalisation is a problem when it does lead to violence, and the most obvious case of this is al-Qaeda inspired terrorism. But the last decade in particular has also seen a growth in many types of non-violent radicalisation. Therefore a successful counter-terrorism strategy must be based on a clear understanding of these distinct forms of radicalisation. Separating different types of radicalisation is not an easy task. There is an overlap in the ideologies and goals of many radical groups and individuals including Islamist groups, religious conservative movements, and ultra-orthodox organisations and individuals.4 Differentiating between these types of radicalisations is extremely important because targeting the wrong people can breed resentment and alienation, and erode the freedoms Western governments want to preserve. Violent radicals are clearly enemies of liberal democracies but non-violent radicals might sometimes be powerful allies. Introduction The method This report seeks to cast light on how and why some types of radicalisation develop into violence and others do not, how the different types relate to each other, and what implications this has for social and security policy. To answer these questions, the report compares two phenomena: · Radicalisation that leads to violence (‘violent radicalisation’). This is a process by which individuals come to undertake terrorist activity, or directly aid or abet terrorist activity. To understand this process, 62 in-depth profiles of ‘home-grown’ terrorists were created. They were drawn from seven cells or plots across Canada and Europe. The appellation ‘cell’ is applied to a group of individuals, some of whom have been convicted of terrorism- related crimes but which might also include individuals who were ultimately found innocent of such charges.