The push and pull of radicalization and extremist disengagement: The application of criminological theory to Indonesian and Australian cases of radicalization

Abstract

Research shows there is variability in factors that cause a person to radicalize to violent extremism. The use of the push/pull distinction has been one way in which scholars have aimed to provide clarity to the process of radicalization and extremist disengagement. However, it remains a conceptually underdeveloped distinction. In this paper, we draw on aspects of criminological theory to better understand the push and pull distinction. The paper draws on research comprising interviews with three Indonesians and two Australian individuals who have radicalized to violent extremism that is aligned with jihadist ideologies. Based on this primary data, case descriptions and narratives are provided on each individual examining pathways into and away from violent extremism. We draw on aspects of strain theory, social control, differential association, and desistance theory to understand common patterns across each case and to highlight the relative influence of various push and pull factors. Implications for theory and policy are highlighted. We also acknowledge limitations in our approach.

Radicalization in Adolescence: the Identification of Vulnerable Groups

“…This can be the return to a prior state (e.g., by disengaging with a group) or the discarding of problematic attitudes (deradicalization). Research on Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) offers insight to improve tertiary prevention efforts (Altier et al, 2017;Bubolz & Simi, 2015;Cherney et al, 2021;Dalgaard-Nielsen, 2018;Horgan et al, 2017a;Windisch et al, 2016). All three areas of prevention can potentially benefit from our findings, as we identified unique characteristics such as male gender, as well as high levels of relative disadvantage and social deprivation within the group of "the extremists" that can inform the development of primary prevention programs (e.g., include educational resources on social deprivation), secondary prevention (e.g., focus on males), and tertiary prevention (e.g., address the identified risk factors when planning measures of deradicalization).…”

Challenges to reintegration: a case study of violent extremist detainees and their reintegration into Malaysian society

“…Seeking guidance from religious scholars and counsellors familiar with Islam and the specific sociocultural context would be beneficial for obtaining tailored advice and support in such situations. For instance, socio-cultural factors, such as cultural expectations, familial pressures or community attitudes, can influence an offender’s decision to seek divorce while in prison (Cherney et al , 2021). As indicated in prior literature, socio-cultural factors can have an influence on a person’s marital circumstances.…”

“…The term “invisible wall” refers to the metaphorical barriers or obstacles that prevent violent extremist detainees and prisoners from successfully reintegrating into society. It represents the societal, cultural and structural challenges that impede their acceptance, reintegration and assimilation (Nakamura and Bucklen, 2014; Cherney et al , 2021). This invisible wall can encompass factors such as stigmatisation, prejudice, discrimination, lack of opportunities, social exclusion and the difficulties in overcoming their past actions or beliefs (Liem and Weggemans, 2018).…”

Dealing With Radicalised Youth Offenders: The Development and Implementation of a Youth-Specific Framework

“…This is important given it has been suggested in the literature that CVE outcomes may be time limited in the absence of ongoing support (22). This is reinforced by increasing commentary regarding the assessment and supervision of enduring or residual risk (104,110).…”