Haroro J Ingram, Julie Coleman, Austin C Doctor, Devorah Margolin
This study analyzes the interplay of factors which drive states' approaches to the repatriation and reintegration of Foreign Terrorist Fighters (FTFs) and their family members. The literature is dominated by descriptive studies of state policies that tend to explain states' failure to repatriate and reintegrate citizens as the result of deference to governments' national security decisions. Our study builds on these foundations to offer the scholarly and policy fields both a framework to explain why governments adopt distinct policy postures, and a means to enable these same actors to engage in more systematic analysis and development of repatriation and reintegration policy. This study argues that a balance of four considerations are crucial for explaining state behavior in this policy context: (i.) the scope of the issue, including the number of citizens considered FTFs or affiliated persons, geographic proximity, and access to the conflict, (ii.) existing legal basis for repatriation and reintegration, (iii.) instrumentalization for institution building, and (iv.) programming strategy for repatriation and reintegration. As a pilot study, this paper applies the framework to assess cases of the United States, the Netherlands, Kosovo, and Iraq. As FTF management issues are not a relic of the recent past but a persistent policy concern that warrants more nuanced and forward-looking attention, this study also considers the continued application of the framework to explore the different ways in which states may balance these four considerations in policy design and practice in the future.
{"title":"The Repatriation & Reintegration Dilemma: How states manage the return of foreign terrorist fighters & their families.","authors":"Haroro J Ingram, Julie Coleman, Austin C Doctor, Devorah Margolin","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study analyzes the interplay of factors which drive states' approaches to the repatriation and reintegration of Foreign Terrorist Fighters (FTFs) and their family members. The literature is dominated by descriptive studies of state policies that tend to explain states' failure to repatriate and reintegrate citizens as the result of deference to governments' national security decisions. Our study builds on these foundations to offer the scholarly and policy fields both a framework to explain why governments adopt distinct policy postures, and a means to enable these same actors to engage in more systematic analysis and development of repatriation and reintegration policy. This study argues that a balance of four considerations are crucial for explaining state behavior in this policy context: (i.) the scope of the issue, including the number of citizens considered FTFs or affiliated persons, geographic proximity, and access to the conflict, (ii.) existing legal basis for repatriation and reintegration, (iii.) instrumentalization for institution building, and (iv.) programming strategy for repatriation and reintegration. As a pilot study, this paper applies the framework to assess cases of the United States, the Netherlands, Kosovo, and Iraq. As FTF management issues are not a relic of the recent past but a persistent policy concern that warrants more nuanced and forward-looking attention, this study also considers the continued application of the framework to explore the different ways in which states may balance these four considerations in policy design and practice in the future.</p>","PeriodicalId":36560,"journal":{"name":"Journal for Deradicalization","volume":"Summer 2022 31","pages":"119-163"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10698679/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138810414","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The amount of uploaded extremist propaganda on the internet is increasing. In particular, right-wing extremist as well as Islamic extremist groups take advantage of the opportunities presented by the internet to spread their ideas to worldwide masses. Both tackle in-group specific topics and address their audiences in their respective political, national or religious identities. Several factors, such as higher levels of authoritarian value orientations and threatening life situations (such as existential threats or psychological uncertainty) have been found to shape people’s reactions towards radical groups as well as to propaganda. The current study investigated whether the response to extremist propaganda videos (namely, aversion felt for the video and the perceived persuasiveness of the video) is shaped by an individual’s authoritarian attitudes and psychological uncertainty and whether this is a global process or in-group specific. Further, it considered the effects of exposure to extremist propaganda on the identification with one’s in-group. In a laboratory experiment, German students were confronted with a right-wing extremist and an Islamic extremist video after manipulating their level of uncertainty (high vs. low levels of psychological uncertainty). The results confirmed that the interaction between authoritarianism and psychological uncertainty affected the evaluation of right-wing extremist videos addressing participants’ national in-group. Under conditions of uncertainty, authoritarianism predicted less aversion and a higher persuasiveness of these videos. Further, psychological uncertainty increased the identification with participants’ German nationality, irrespective of authoritarian attitudes. Notably, the effect was in-group bound: The same effect was not found for Islamic extremist propaganda referring to a religious out-group. The results are discussed regarding the potential of propaganda to foster behavioral intentions and engagement in extremist groups in specific threatening situations.
{"title":"Propaganda in an insecure, unstructured world: How psychological uncertainty and authoritarian attitudes shape the evaluation of right-wing extremist internet propaganda","authors":"Diana Rieger, L. Frischlich, G. Bente","doi":"10.5282/UBM/EPUB.68786","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5282/UBM/EPUB.68786","url":null,"abstract":"The amount of uploaded extremist propaganda on the internet is increasing. In particular, right-wing extremist as well as Islamic extremist groups take advantage of the opportunities presented by the internet to spread their ideas to worldwide masses. Both tackle in-group specific topics and address their audiences in their respective political, national or religious identities. Several factors, such as higher levels of authoritarian value orientations and threatening life situations (such as existential threats or psychological uncertainty) have been found to shape people’s reactions towards radical groups as well as to propaganda. The current study investigated whether the response to extremist propaganda videos (namely, aversion felt for the video and the perceived persuasiveness of the video) is shaped by an individual’s authoritarian attitudes and psychological uncertainty and whether this is a global process or in-group specific. Further, it considered the effects of exposure to extremist propaganda on the identification with one’s in-group. In a laboratory experiment, German students were confronted with a right-wing extremist and an Islamic extremist video after manipulating their level of uncertainty (high vs. low levels of psychological uncertainty). The results confirmed that the interaction between authoritarianism and psychological uncertainty affected the evaluation of right-wing extremist videos addressing participants’ national in-group. Under conditions of uncertainty, authoritarianism predicted less aversion and a higher persuasiveness of these videos. Further, psychological uncertainty increased the identification with participants’ German nationality, irrespective of authoritarian attitudes. Notably, the effect was in-group bound: The same effect was not found for Islamic extremist propaganda referring to a religious out-group. The results are discussed regarding the potential of propaganda to foster behavioral intentions and engagement in extremist groups in specific threatening situations.","PeriodicalId":36560,"journal":{"name":"Journal for Deradicalization","volume":"1 1","pages":"203-229"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47404683","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号