CEPOS, March 26, 2009 Threats Against Democracy and values – A Situational Report from Malmö

1. CEPOS, March 26, 2009Threats Against Democracy and values – A Situational Report from Malmö Research Director Magnus Ranstorp, Center for Asymmetric Threat Studies, Swedish National Defence College

2. European Commission DG JLS commissioned studies European Commission DG JLS commissioned studies • Lot 1: The trigger factors for violent radicalisation • Lot 2: The beliefs, ideologies and narratives of violent radicals • Lot 3: The recruitment and mobilisation of support ___________________ Aim: • Development of enhanced cooperation and exchange of experience to prevent and counter violent radicalisation within the EU • Establish exchange with regional experts, networks or CoE to promote the sharing of best practise • Analysis of factors leading to violent radicalisation • Develop and evaluate counter-measures – benchmarking. ___________________ • Lot 4: Best Practices - Change Institute (EU Network of Experts on Radicalisation): • Study on the best practices in cooperation between authorities and civil society with a view to the prevention and response to violent radicalisation • Priority Areas For Engagement: • Education; Spaces for Critical Engagement; Anti-discrimination and social justice issues

3. Social Movement theory – Q. Wiktorovitz Radicalisation as a three-pronged process: Cognitive Opening Religious Seeking Persuasion process Socialisation- process • reinforcement mechanisms • within group dynamics • Radical interpretation • of reality • A framework for • interpretation • Moral shock • Videos, talks, publication • and Internet • persuasion of rightousness • of jihadi mission and rewards • Personal crisis

4. Research on Radicalization- preliminaryfindings • Dynamic interplay between opposite poles of extremism • Radicalization processes - not just a linear progression, a complex combination of push-pull factors or that people move in and out of functions • Emerging patterns that recruitment precedes radicalization • Focus on ”R&R brokers” • Understanding group dynamics as the engine of radicalization processes • Focus needs to move beyond individual socio-psychological factors towards social network analysis based on social movement theories • Focus needs to be on the counter-cultural aspects of radical belief-systems.

5. Don’t just chaseradicalization ’football’

6. Future research directions (1) • Recognisediversity of Muslim communities • Not enough data on dynamicswithincommunities • Evaluatecommunityimpactassessment • Poorlycalibratedpoliciescancreate problems ratherthansolvethem • Toomuchdisconnectbetweenunderstandingradicalization as a process and the impact of measures on these same forces • Problem of radicalization has simultaneouslypolitical, social, cultural and religious dimensions • Howdowedeconstruct the ”Single Narrative” and createeffectivecounter-narrative?

7. Future research directions (2) New innovative deliverymechanisms (humour, soap-operas & PR-industries) Dynamics of gangs as vehicle for understanding this problem Focus on disengagement and rehabilitation after prison Howdowebenchmark ”Measures of effectiveness”? Sharing ’best practice’ betweencountries and regions is critical

8. Dutch Measures • Multifaceted Intervention • Leadership education for • youths • Education for schools, teachers • and counselors • Positive role models • Countering truancy • Inter-ethnic & inter- • generational dialogues • Measures directed against • women • Imam education • Koran education (instead of • Koran schools) • EMPOWERMENT – national strategy with 34 projects • Seminars/debates about extremism/radikalisation • Local strong ties b/w M. org. & politicians • Network of resource persons (barometer) • Integration Service Center • Leadership education (personal coaching) • Debate & dialogue training • Project BrugOver • Educational measures within • schools about dangers and • positive roadmaps • Mentoring for particularly • vulnerable ethnic minorities • Summer camp for youths • Information on web pages • Bus tour with parliamentarians, • imams and students • Amsterdamse Burgermonitor • Barometer: strengthen • resilience and against • causes of extremism • Local City Districts • Parental support on religious education • Educational measures to strengthen • critical thinking • Online religious Q&A • Chat-rooms with imams • Internet cafés • Report & Advice Center • Advice on detecting and responding • to radicalisation • Strengthening SSP-coordination

9. Cabinet Assignment on “Counter-Radicalization” • Description and definitions of what characterize violent extremism and radicalization by conducting an inventory of existing knowledge levels both in Sweden and internationally. • Through case studies describing the factual occurrences in Sweden and other countries as well as a current threat assessment. • Describe which tools that have been used to counter violent extremism, how effective these have been and an analysis of which of these tools or ‘best practices’ could be appropriately developed further to prevent groups with extremist views, who question the core values of society, from taking violent turns.

10. Sweden - Rosengård 21 955 residents 60% - 1st generation immigrants 26% - 2nd generation Employment level: 38% (b/t 20-64 years) In one district unemployment is 85%

11. Key Findings – Threats Against Democracy & Values: A Situational Report from Malmö • In depth interviews with SSP-representatives; youth workers and SÄPO • 29 out of 30 respondents report increase in levels of radicalization • Every five years half the population changes • Unofficial figures for residents (unregistered) are double • Crowded housing • Segregation • Deficient introduction for newly arrived immigrants • Garage mosques: 1-3 out of 15 with violent extremist message • “Thought Police”

12. 35 Recommendations • Legislative changes and politics • Enhanced coordination & educational initatives • Preventative efforts in schools • Cultural Associations • Prioritised Research

13. ? <www.fhs.se/cats>

14. Strong connections between extremisms (Muslim/right-wing) 1,500 belong to extremist groups Moroccans most vulnerable group followed by Somalis, Afghans and Iraqis Prisons are prominent radicalisation milieus Illegal and unregistered immigrants number 15-50,000. Radicalisation in schools is increasing Foreign financing (Saudi) Research: IMES influenced City’s radicalisation programme Evaluation in 2010 Successful measures: Strengthen self-confidence and identity among youths To address the surrounding root causes of radicalisation To reverse eroding confidence in politicians and local government Situation in Amsterdam

15. 276,000 out of 587,000 residents are immigrants (176 nationalities) Moroccans dominate North and Turkish the South – indication of a surrounding belt of rightwing extremism ”City-room mosques” are increasing in number Hizb-ut-Tahir establishing itself more strongly Moroccans are particularly vulnerable in socioeconomic terms. To address crowded housing legislation was introduced in 2007 that makes requirement that 20% above m. wage to move into housing estates Measures against social security fraud In 2008, four Muslim schools were closed due to poor standards (both cities). Rotterdam city council has commissioned geographical report on all Islamist, right-wing and animal rights groups Situation in Rotterdam

16. Radicalization has different centrifugal forces in CPH/Odense/Aarhus Model on intervention (hot spots) built on Rotterdam No ”thought police” visibly present Hizb-ut-Tarhir is strong but not considered a channel for violent radicalization Immigrant gangs connected to criminality and ’exclusion’ a growing phenomenon Four districts considered at risk for radicalization Mjölnerparken: 2,200 individuals (93% immigrants with 38 nat) and 80% on social welfare. 32,000 individuals in high risk zone (barometer) Citizenship test as a means to ensure language VI KBH’R (We Copenhageners): advise; education and mentors City network on radicalization – Amsterdam, Utrecht, Rotterdam, Liverpool and Essen. Situation in Copenhagen