Are There ‘Best Practices’ in Deradicalisation? Experiences from Frontline Intervention and Comparative Research
In this chapter, Koehler evaluates the difference between successful and failed deradicalisation and countering violent extremism programs. He recognizes that poorly designed programs are not only a waste of resources but also may increase the risk of violence. Koehler uses the Indonesian deradicalisation program as case study, giving two examples of former inmates convicted of terror offenses who conducted attacks months after leaving prison. With a growing demand for a successful deradicalisation program, Koehler underlines the importance of establishing trusted models and methods to bolster existing program infrastructure. By evaluating suggestions and approaches offered by scholars in the field, Koehler demonstrates that although many ideas and models have been put forward, “very limited attempts to implement them in practice have been tried.” Koehler concludes by noting that the key to a successful deradicalisation program is structural integrity. Although staff who are well versed in extremist ideologies, risk assessment, and the psychology of radicalisation are important, Koehler underlines that in order to be most profitable to the radicalized individual, “a solid and well-founded program design with the highest structural integrity possible” must be provided.