Radicalization and Terrorism: Research within the Australian Context

Abstract

Abstract:Terrorism perpetrated by some Muslims has become a global phenomenon that has significantly impacted many nations. In the post-September 11 era, Australia has experienced threat of terrorist attacks from organisations including Al-Qaeda and Jemaah Islamiah. In response to this phenomenon the Australian government has heightened security measures and engaged various strategies to counter-radicalization. While the growing body of global research focussing on radicalization and terrorism may inform such strategies, research within the Australian context would provide a cogent platform for assisting in the response to terrorism at a national level. This paper provides discussion focussing on the paucity in literature on the question of radicalization and terrorism. Furthermore, significant gaps in the literature are highlighted and future research recommendations are suggested that would assist in broadening current understanding of the processes of radicalization and terrorism.

The “Syria traveller”: reintegration or legal sanctioning?

“…Policymakers often use definitions proposed by researchers, and this is clearly the case with regard to Islamic or jihadist radicalisation. Similar to the previously mentioned definition by Rahimullah, Larmar, and Abdalla (2013), both the Action Plan and the security police (PST 2015) define radicalisation as a process where a person increasingly accepts the use of violence as a means to achieve political goals. The Action Plan further defines violent extremism as "activities of persons or groups who are willing to use violence to achieve their political, ideological or religious goals", while terror is defined as the "ultimate consequence of radicalisation and violent extremism".…”

“…As pointed out by Kühle and Lindekilde (2010, 25), the use of the adverb "increasingly" in the definition by Rahimullah, Larmar, and Abdalla (2013) gives the impression of a linear process. Moreover, the definition implies that radicalisation is an individual process, whereas the concept of radicalisation in its original form, as used in the 1980s and 1990s, understands it as a collective process (Kühle and Lindekilde 2010, 25).…”

“…The term "radicalisation" is a broad concept, and there is an academic debate on how to define it, though it is commonly viewed as a "process of gradually subscribing to a violent ideology espousing terrorism" (Rahimullah, Larmar, and Abdalla 2013). A problem with this definition, which often spills over into counterterrorism policy, is that it builds on the assumption that there is a clear link between "extreme" attitudes and behaviour.…”

“…A new political discourse emerged in which American, Australian and European Muslims were portrayed as the new "enemy within" or a "suspect community" (Pantazis and Pemberton 2009, 646). Meanwhile, much of the research on radicalisation turned its focus towards Muslims and Islamisation (Rahimullah, Larmar, and Abdalla 2013), with important implications for policymaking to counter radicalisation. As described by Heath-Kelly (2013), for instance, British research on "vulnerability indicators" for radicalisation has led to interventions in communities that are rendered suspicious, despite the fact that only a small minority are in danger of becoming radicalised.…”

The Sydney Lindt café siege: The role of the consultant psychiatrist

“…A study of 12 Australian convicted terrorists identified features including attitudes that legitimised violence against westerners (Porter and Kebbell, 2011). An obligation to engage in jihad (holy war) to defend their faith 'against infidels' or 'martyrdom' -dying for jihad which brought great reward, including the forgiving of all sin and entry into paradise -was identified, as was the theme of 'retaliation' against the military policies of the West in Afghanistan and Iraq (Rahimullah et al, 2013). However, some individuals may simply be looking for acceptance or justification for their criminal lifestyle (Valasik and Phillips, 2017) including attitudes that support violence (Jensen et al, 2018;Schuurman and Taylor, 2018) or beliefs of superiority over kuffar ('non-believers') (Lakhani, 2018).…”