Advertisement

Canadian Journal of Public Health

, Volume 108, Issue 5–6, pp e633–e635 | Cite as

And if there were another way out? Questioning the prevalent radicalization models

  • Cécile RousseauEmail author
  • Ghayda Hassan
  • Youssef Oulhote
Commentary
  • 5 Downloads

Abstract

Violent radicalization is increasingly conceptualized as a public health issue, associated with psychological distress, a sharp increase in discrimination and profiling, and an increase in hate crime and some types of terrorist acts.

This brief paper addresses the limitations of the current conceptual models of violent radicalization. Beyond understanding the path leading from radicalization of opinion to violent radicalization, it proposes to consider the non-violent outcomes of radicalization of opinions in the current social context and to study these outcomes in multiple settings for both minorities and majorities. Moving beyond the implicit linearity of current models and promoting a systemic vision would help to decrease the actual profiling of targeted communities and support the design of community-based prevention programs structured on these alternative outcomes, and in particular on the emergence of social solidarities in groups expressing discontent with the status quo.

Key words

Violent radicalization prevention theoretical models determinants 

Résumé

p ]La radicalisation violente est de plus en plus conceptualisée comme une question de santé publique, associée avec de la détresse psychologique, une augmentation importante de la discrimination et du profilage, de même que des crimes haineux et de certains types d’actes terroristes.

Cet article interroge les limites des modèles conceptuels prévalents de la radicalisation violente. Au-delà de la compréhension des trajectoires conduisant de la radicalisation des opinions à la radicalisation violente, il propose de porter attention aux évolutions non violentes de la radicalisation d’opinion, et d’étudier ces évolutions dans de multiples sites en considérant à la fois les dynamiques des majorités et des minorités.

Dans une perspective systémique, dépasser la linéarité implicite des modèles actuels permettrait de réduire le profilage des communautés ciblées et de soutenir l’élaboration de programmes communautaires de prévention, visant à favoriser ces évolutions non violentes, et en particulier l’émergence de solidarités sociales dans des groupes exprimant un mécontentement face à l’ordre social actuel.

Mots clés

radicalisation violente prévention modèles théoriques déterminants 

References

  1. 1.
    Stares PB, Yacoubian M. Terrorism as a Disease: An Epidemiological Model for Countering Islamist Extremism. Pittsburgh, PA: Mathew B Ridgeway Centre for International Security Studies, 2007.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Harris-Hogan S, Barrelle K, Zammit A. What is countering violent extremism? Exploring CVE policy and practice in Australia. Behav Sci Terror Polit Aggress 2016;8(1):6–24. doi: 10.1080/19434472.2015.1104710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bjorgo T. Strategies for Preventing Terrorism. Springer, 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    CIPC (Centre International pour la prévention de la criminalité). Comment Prévenir la Radicalisation: Une Revue Systématique. Montréal, QC: CIPC, 2015.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bhui K, Warfa N, Jones E. Is violent radicalisation associated with poverty, migration, poor self-reported health and common mental disorders? PLoS ONE 2014;9(3):e90718. PMID: 24599058. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0090718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Weine S, Horgan J, Robertson C, Loue S, Mohamed A, Noor S. Community and family approaches to combating the radicalization and recruitment of Somali-American youth and young adults: A psychosocial perspective. Dyn Asymmetric Conflict 2009;2(3):181–200. doi: 10.1080/17467581003586897.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Simeonsson RJ. Primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention in early intervention. J Early Interven 1991;15(2):124–34. doi: 10.1177/105381519101500202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bhui KS, Hicks MH, Lashley M, Jones E. A public health approach to understanding and preventing violent radicalisation. BMC Med 2012;10(1):16. doi: 10.1186/1741-7015-10-16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bhui K. Flash, the emperor and policies without evidence: Counter-terrorism measures destined for failure and societally divisive. BJPsych Bull 2016;40(2):82–84. PMID: 27087991. doi: 10.1192/pb.bp.116.053603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Borum R. Radicalization into violent extremism I: A review of social science theories. J Strat Security 2011;4(4):2.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Moghaddam FM. The staircase to terrorism: A psychological exploration. Am Psychol 2005;60(2): 161–69. PMID: 15740448. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.60.2.161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Moghaddam FM. From the Terrorists’ Point of View: What They Experience and Why They Come to Destroy. Wesport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2006.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sageman M. A strategy for fighting international islamist terrorists. ANNALS Am Acad Polit Soc Sci 2008;618(1):223–31. doi: 10.1177/0002716208317051.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Silber MD, Bhatt A, Analysts SI. Radicalization in the West: The Homegrown Threat. New York, NY: Police Department City of New York, 2007.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wiktorowicz Q. Joining the cause: Al-Muhajiroun and radical Islam. Paper Presented at: The Roots of Islamic Radicalism Conference, Yale University, London, UK. In F Devji (Ed.), Landscapes of the Jihad: Militancy, Morality and Modernity. London, UK: C Hurst & Co Publishers Ltd, 2005.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    de Wenden CW. La Question Migratoire au XXIe Siècle: Migrants, Réfugiés et Relations Internationales. Paris, France: Presses de Sciences Po, 2010.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Doosje B, Loseman A, Bos K. Determinants of radicalization of Islamic youth in the Netherlands: Personal uncertainty, perceived injustice, and perceived group threat. J Soc Issues 2013;69(3):586–604. doi: 10.1111/josi.12030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Moskalenko S, McCauley C. Measuring political mobilization: The distinction between activism and radicalism. Terrorism Polit Violence 2009;21(2):239–60. doi: 10.1080/09546550902765508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Schmid AP. Radicalisation, de-radicalisation, counter-radicalisation: A conceptual discussion and literature review. ICCT Research Paper 2013.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ellis BH, Abdi SM, Horgan J, Miller AB, Saxe GN, Blood E. Trauma and openness to legal and illegal activism among Somali refugees. Terrorism Polit Violence 2015;27(5):857–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Schmid AP. Comments on Marc Sageman’s polemic “The stagnation in terrorism research”. Terrorism Polit Violence 2014;26(4):587–95. doi: 10.1080/09546553.2014.895651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kundnani A. A Decade Lost: Rethinking Radicalisation and Extremism. London, UK: Claystone 2015.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Aly A, Taylor E, Karnovsky S. Moral disengagement and building resilience to violent extremism: An education intervention. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism 2014;37(4):369–85. doi: 10.1080/1057610X.2014.879379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Grossman M, Peucker M, Smith D, Dellal H. Stocktake Research Project: A Systematic Literature and Selected Program Review on Social Cohesion, Community Resilience and Violent Extremism 2011–2015. Footscray, VIC and Carlton VIC: Victoria University and Australian Multicultural Foundation, 2016.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rutter M. Psychosocial adversity: Risk, resilience and recovery. In: Richman JM and Fraser MW, (Eds.), The Context of Youth Violence: Resilience, Risk, and Protection. Westport, New London, CT: Praeger, 2001; 13–37.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Canadian Public Health Association 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cécile Rousseau
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ghayda Hassan
    • 2
  • Youssef Oulhote
    • 3
  1. 1.Division of Social and Cultural PsychiatryMcGill UniversityMontrealCanada
  2. 2.Département de psychologieUniversité du Québec à MontrealMontréalCanada
  3. 3.Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public HealthBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations