‘Dangerous Minds’? Deconstructing Counter‐Terrorism Discourse, Radicalisation and the ‘Psychological Vulnerability’ of Muslim Children and Young People in Britain

Abstract

Current British Government strategies to counter terrorism (exemplified in the Prevent policy and Channel programme) are based upon a problematic fusion of certain dominant explanatory models of the 'causes of terrorism' (specifically, 'psychological vulnerability' to 'radicalisation') with discourses of 'child protection/safeguarding'. Derived from particular mainstream traditions of social scientific epistemology and inquiry, these knowledge paradigms 'legitimise' a pre-emptive, interventionist and securitising approach that affects the lives of young British Muslims. The aim of this article is to challenge some of the assumptions that underpin the understanding of 'radicalisation', 'psychological vulnerability' and 'child protection' evidenced in these state practices and policies.

Radicalization as a Functional Aspect of Crime

“…Unauthenticated Download Date | 5/12/18 9:05 AM Some have argued that radicalisation is caused by grievances and vulnerabilities (Borum, 2011;Wiktorowicz, 2005;Bizina and Gray, 2014;Brown and Saeed, 2015), while others suggest radicalisation is driven by the Jihadi-Salafi ideology that seeks to purify Islam (Blanchard, 2007). The opposing view sees the explanation of radicalisation from theological and ethnic approaches as being problematic in that the meaning of the term radicalisation is unclear (Coppock and McGovern, 2014;Heath-Kelly, 2013;Kundnani, 2015;Hussain and Bagguley, 2012). The radicalisation debate is riven with controversy where one school argues it is a process that progresses through stages whilethe other viewpoint sees these explanations of a radicalisation process approach as a narrative to justify securitisation of some communities and religions (Sageman, 2006).…”

“…Some researchers of modern terrorism claim that radicalisation is driven by the Jihadi-Salafi ideology which seeks to purify Islam of western culture (Blanchard, 2007). Definitions of radicalization among security agencies is problematic because of the lack of clarity in the meaning of the term which can allow for differing interpretations with the potential for widening of its applicability by government agencies (Coppock and McGovern, 2014). The issues of contention revolve around approaches that focus on psychological and social factors that some scholars attribute as the main contributors to extremism while ignoring or paying meagre attention to other factors such as political acts and policies of Western countries that are claimed by others as the root causes of the problem (Sageman, 2008).…”

Framing the UK’s counter-terrorism policy within the context of a wicked problem

“…The development of the CONTEST strategy has evolved since the first report was published in 2003 (Home Affairs Committee, 2009;HM Government, 2009, 2011a) and a key element in its evolution has been that of PREVENT which is aimed, as its name implies, at preventing vulnerable individuals from becoming radicalized (HM Government, 2009, 2011bCoppock and McGovern, 2014). The PREVENT strategy seeks to identify and respond to early indications of behavioural changes, and is held to be grounded in psychological theories and particularly around the processes that exist in the various channels through which radicalization occurs (HM Government, 2012.…”

“…That sense of injustice can then carry over into a domestic setting in which national and international views around injustice can feed off each other (Dalgaard-Nielsen, 2010;Bangstad, 2013;Borum, 2014;Coppock and McGovern, 2014).…”

“…More recently, encouragement has been made from Al Qaeda* to mount individual attacks using knives, thereby increasing the diversity of attack threats. The subsequent public policy debates have centred on the nature and evolution of such attack strategies and the defences that can be deployed against them; the religious and ideological motivations that underpin the violence; the use, or intended use, of weapons of mass destruction; and the role of social media in shaping the mechanisms of radicalization (Asal et al, 2009;Browne and Silke, 2011;Kurtulus, 2011;Gill et al, 2013;Coppock and McGovern, 2014). Against this complex background, the issue of whether terrorism is a phenomenon that can be solved or tamed lies at the heart of the opening quotation from Camillus and it is also a central element of whether it is a wicked policy problem.…”