LONDON: The idea that “radical ideology” is a core factor in motivating extremism — a notion which has become “quite fashionable” in the UK in recent years — should be treated with caution, UK experts have warned.
Jane Kinninmont, deputy head and senior research fellow of the Middle East and North Africa program at Chatham House, said that extremism is driven by a “whole complex of social and political factors,” rather than “deeply religious ideological factors.”
Speaking at the launch of a report by the Henry Jackson Society on Thursday, she identified divergent definitions of extremism as a barrier to countering terrorism.
“Definitions of terrorism are quite far apart,” both among GCC states, and between Gulf countries and the West. This throws up “problems for international cooperation,” she said at the event, held in the UK parliament’s House of Lords on Thursday.
With Gulf states adopting different narratives around the origins of extremism, she suggested that focusing on countering terrorism rather than extremism could be a more useful approach in the GCC.
The report, “Terror Overseas: Understanding the GCC counter-extremism and counter-terrorism trends,” highlights the need for the UK government to step up its support for GCC countries. To date, the emphasis has been on intelligence and information-sharing but more input is needed to bolster GCC modernization projects that tackle the root causes of extremism.
“The West is seen as a strong ally” in the GCC said the report’s author, Najah Al-Otaibi, research fellow at the Center for the Response to Radicalization and Terrorism at the Henry Jackson Society.
“The UK should support civil societies in the Gulf states,” and “play a larger role” in mobilizing counter-extremism projects across the region, she said, citing Saudi Vision 2030 as a “strong statement” in countering extremism.
“This is the right time for Saudi Arabia to address extremism … I think the crown prince has already started,” she said, listing recent reforms that include the sacking of a large number of radical imams in the Kingdom, promoting moderate scholars of Islam to positions of authority and quelling the powers of the religious police.
The new Saudi leadership is an opportunity to “break with some of the past records,” Kinninmont said.
“A lot needs to be done of course but I think the Vision is an opportunity to reform the Islamic narrative and replace it with a more liberal and a more tolerant discourse,” Al-Otaibi said.
“The last time Islam was reformed was 200 years ago.” It will take “a lot of work,” she added.
Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has announced plans to transform the Kingdom into “a tolerant country with Islam as its constitution and moderation as its method” via Vision 2030, his blueprint for a modern Saudi Arabia.
The Kingdom’s large youth population, which stands at 70 percent under 30, presents a mounting challenge that the crown prince is confronting by rapping out reforms designed to improve access to education and employment for Saudi men and women.
Across the Middle East, almost 65 percent of the population is under 30, a demographic that poses significant challenges in a region where youth unemployment stands at 21 percent — and 25 percent in North Africa — higher than anywhere else in the world.
The situation has created fertile ground for extremist groups to prey on jobless youth disillusioned with the dearth of opportunities. In Saudi Arabia, King Salman has described religious extremism as the “biggest challenge facing the nation.”
Terrorism-related attacks killed 414 people in GCC countries between 2012 and 2016, including in Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait and the UAE.
Bahrain, which has seen the highest number of attacks in the GCC, with 140 cases of terrorism documented in the past five years, has adopted strict anti-terrorism laws and works closely with the US and UK to counter the threat.
The country was among 41 others that joined the Saudi-led alliance against terrorism in 2016 and foregrounds the work of local civil society organizations in promoting tolerance and inter-faith dialogue.
Countries are increasingly enlisting “soft power” to unpick radical ideologies. Kuwait, a hub for theater in the region, has made use of “the press, media and drama” to “give people correct information” and “stop the spread of extremist ideology,” the report says.
High digital penetration across the GCC provides a key entry point for extremist recruiters targeting young people in Gulf nations. “A large, young, online population makes GCC countries especially vulnerable to online radicalization,” the report states.
In Saudi Arabia, which has an estimated 23 million Internet users, the majority of terrorist attacks have been carried out by Saudi citizens, about 70 percent of whom were recruited online.
Social media is a favorite recruiting ground. In Qatar, the high number of Daesh sympathizers is evident from comments posted on Twitter and Facebook, where, according to a study cited by the report, 47 percent of social media posts referencing Daesh did so in favorable terms.
The report points to cooperation initiatives between Gulf nations and the US, including “a digital communications hub” established by the US and the UAE that works with civil society groups and community and religious leaders to “combat ISIS online propaganda.”
UK experts: Extremism stems from more than just ‘radical religion’
UK experts: Extremism stems from more than just ‘radical religion’
Proposals on immigration enforcement flood into state legislatures, heightened by Minnesota action
- Oregon Democrats plan to introduce a bill to allow residents to sue federal officers for violating their Fourth Amendment rights against unlawful search and seizure
NASHVILLE, Tennessee: As Democrats across the country propose state law changes to restrict federal immigration officers after the shooting death of a protester in Minneapolis, Tennessee Republicans introduced a package of bills Thursday backed by the White House that would enlist the full force of the state to support President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown.
Momentum in Democratic-led states for the measures, some of them proposed for years, is growing as legislatures return to work following the killing of Renee Good by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer. But Republicans are pushing back, blaming protesters for impeding the enforcement of immigration laws.
Democratic bills seek to limit ICE
Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul wants New York to allow people to sue federal officers alleging violations of their constitutional rights. Another measure aims to keep immigration officers lacking judicial warrants out of schools, hospitals and houses of worship.
Oregon Democrats plan to introduce a bill to allow residents to sue federal officers for violating their Fourth Amendment rights against unlawful search and seizure.
New Jersey’s Democrat-led Legislature passed three bills Monday that immigrant rights groups have long pushed for, including a measure prohibiting state law enforcement officers from cooperating with federal immigration enforcement. Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy has until his last day in office Tuesday to sign or veto them.
California lawmakers are proposing to ban local and state law enforcement from taking second jobs with the Department of Homeland Security and make it a violation of state law when ICE officers make “indiscriminate” arrests around court appearances. Other measures are pending.
“Where you have government actions with no accountability, that is not true democracy,” Democratic state Sen. Scott Wiener of San Francisco said at a news conference.
Democrats also push bills in red states
Democrats in Georgia introduced four Senate bills designed to limit immigration enforcement — a package unlikely to become law because Georgia’s conservative upper chamber is led by Lt. Gov. Burt Jones, a close Trump ally. Democrats said it is still important to take a stand.
“Donald Trump has unleashed brutal aggression on our families and our communities across our country,” said state Sen. Sheikh Rahman, an immigrant from Bangladesh whose district in suburban Atlanta’s Gwinnett County is home to many immigrants.
Democrats in New Hampshire have proposed numerous measures seeking to limit federal immigration enforcement, but the state’s Republican majorities passed a new law taking effect this month that bans “sanctuary cities.”
Tennessee GOP works with White House on a response
The bills Tennessee Republicans are introducing appear to require government agencies to check the legal status of all residents before they can obtain public benefits; secure licenses for teaching, nursing and other professions; and get driver’s licenses or register their cars.
They also would include verifying K-12 students’ legal status, which appears to conflict with a US Supreme Court precedent. And they propose criminalizing illegal entry as a misdemeanor, a measure similar to several other states’ requirements, some of which are blocked in court.
“We’re going to do what we can to make sure that if you’re here illegally, we will have the data, we’ll have the transparency, and we’re not spending taxpayer dollars on you unless you’re in jail,” House Speaker Cameron Sexton said at a news conference Thursday.
Trump administration sues to stop laws
The Trump administration has opposed any effort to blunt ICE, including suing local governments whose “sanctuary” policies limit police interactions with federal officers.
States have broad power to regulate within their borders unless the US Constitution bars it, but many of these laws raise novel issues that courts will have to sort out, said Harrison Stark, senior counsel with the State Democracy Research Initiative at the University of Wisconsin Law School.
“There’s not a super clear, concrete legal answer to a lot of these questions,” he said. “It’s almost guaranteed there will be federal litigation over a lot of these policies.”
That is already happening.
California in September was the first to ban most law enforcement officers, including federal immigration officers, from covering their faces on duty. The Justice Department said its officers won’t comply and sued California, arguing that the laws threaten the safety of officers who are facing “unprecedented” harassment, doxing and violence.
The Justice Department also sued Illinois last month, challenging a law that bars federal civil arrests near courthouses, protects medical records and regulates how universities and day care centers manage information about immigration status. The Justice Department claims the law is unconstitutional and threatens federal officers’ safety.
Targeted states push back
Minnesota and Illinois, joined by their largest cities, sued the Trump administration this week. Minneapolis and Minnesota accuse the Republican administration of violating free speech rights by punishing a progressive state that favors Democrats and welcomes immigrants. Illinois and Chicago claim “Operation Midway Blitz” made residents afraid to leave their homes.
Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin accused Minnesota officials of ignoring public safety and called the Illinois lawsuit “baseless.”
