LONDON
— Born and raised in leafy West London, Ibrahim Ahmed always supported
the local soccer club and listened to what he called “white music.” But
in school he was a “Muslim,” and he became increasingly disaffected from
British society. When recruiters approached him in a mosque 18 years
ago and told him that he could fight a holy war right here at home, he
readily agreed.
In Sweden,
Robert Orell was reading “Mein Kampf” and preparing for his own war.
The immigrants who had bullied him at his school were now, in his view,
bullying his culture as liberal politicians stood by. He fantasized
about bursting into Parliament with one of the guns that his neo-Nazi
friends had hidden in the woods.
The
ideologies that once motivated Mr. Ahmed and Mr. Orell could hardly be
more different. Yet strip away ideology and what emerges are two
strikingly similar tales of radicalization, militancy and, in the case
of these two men, deradicalization.
Both
had grievances that eroded their self-esteem and made them angry. Both
were seduced by a narrative that put them at the center of a greater
cause and offered them what they craved most: a sense of belonging and a
plan to act on their resentment.
Photo
Both
eventually walked away from violence, dissuaded not by law enforcement
officials or relatives but by former extremists like themselves.
The
parallels are instructive as Europe tries to recover from two deadly
attacks in two months, both of them committed in the name of Islam.
Religious ideology plays a central role in the radicalization of young
Muslim Europeans currently being lured to join the Islamic State or kill
in the group’s name at home. But the psychological process underlying
radicalization is remarkably universal, terrorism experts say.
“We
are so beguiled with ideology, we miss the fact that jihadis and
neo-Nazis have a lot in common,” said John Horgan, the author of “The
Psychology of Terrorism” and director of the Center for Terrorism and
Security Studies at the University of Massachusetts at Lowell. “The
similarities of how they get engaged, involved and disengaged in
terrorism by far exceed the differences.”
Europe’s
long and checkered history of far-right extremism and other varieties
of militancy, from violent Marxism to the Irish Republican Army, makes
the Continent a rich laboratory for counterextremism and
deradicalization.
Today, the recruitment success of groups like the Islamic State, also known as ISIS
or ISIL, is considered the greatest threat. But decades of researching,
infiltrating and countering other movements offer some lessons at a
time when governments are scrambling for ways to head off the threat
beyond tightening security, analysts said.
One
lesson, they said, is that former extremists have a central role to
play in the argument against radical temptations. They have a
credibility that governments lack.
“We
need to replace fantasy with reality,” said Amy Thornton of the
Department of Crime and Security Science at University College London.
“Formers play a very important role. Only they can credibly say: Syria
is not a video game, you may end up cleaning toilets, babysitting on the
front line; it’s not what you’re being promised.”
Another
lesson, experts say, is that debunking extremist propaganda alone is
not enough. Outreach efforts are most effective, they said, when they
offer a counternarrative and tangible alternatives to violence.
One
pioneering program in Denmark treats onetime fighters not as potential
terrorists but as wayward youths. Closely watched by the authorities
around Europe, the program involves counseling, help with readmission to
school and meetings with parents. Although now being applied to Islamic
radicals returning from the Middle East, it was first developed in 2007
for far-right extremists.
There
are limits to the willingness of governments to rely on such a program.
But experts in radicalization said that understanding the process by
which people fell for the medieval brutality of a religious ideology is
vital to combating it.
“We
won’t make any progress at all if we continue to obsess over the
question ‘why’ someone becomes an extremist,” Mr. Horgan said. “A better
starting point is asking ‘how.’ ”
For Mr. Orell, now 34, it started on a summer evening in Stockholm in 1995.
Then
an anxious 14-year-old with divorced parents and difficulties in
school, he suffered regular intimidation by a gang of boys from
immigrant backgrounds. The only place he felt safe was with a youth
club, where he discovered punk rock with lyrics that spoke of Viking
conquest.
That
evening, Mr. Orell wore a Viking T-shirt and a pendant of the hammer of
the Nordic god Thor. Two older boys, far-right recruiters, handed him a
sticker with a Viking wielding a sword. The caption read: “Stand up for
Sweden.”
Years
later, he drifted into a group of soccer hooligans with links to
neo-Nazis and eventually into the neo-Nazi scene itself. He dropped out
of school and moved in with other extremists. He read anti-Semitic
pamphlets and wore black outfits. Every weekend, he and his friends
would prey on nonwhite youths, badly beating them up.
“Race was my religion,” Mr. Orell said. “I was fighting a holy war.”
Holy war was also what was proposed to Mr. Ahmed in a South London mosque in 1997.
He
did not grow up religious. His parents, shop owners who had immigrated
from Pakistan and India, raised him and his two brothers in a
middle-class neighborhood where they were the only nonwhite children. At
school, white boys threw racist insults and chipped slate tiles at him.
“Often
it was 15 of them against three of us,” Mr. Ahmed said. When he joined a
Muslim gang, it was to defend himself, but also to take revenge.
At
a mosque one day, he met men who told him Britain was a Dar al-Harb, a
land of war, and that he was a soldier. Within a month, he had joined
the security wing of Hizb ut-Tahrir, an international Islamic
organization committed to establishing a caliphate in the Middle East.
For
two years he was on call as part of a secret Muslim brigade that went
after anyone reported to have “given a Muslim brother or sister grief,”
he said. He carried a gun and threw Molotov cocktails.Did he ever kill anyone?
He paused. “I honestly don’t know.”
Eventually, both men began having doubts.
Mr.
Orell, who was trying to live up to Aryan ideals by quitting alcohol
and drugs and working out daily, was put off by less disciplined
comrades. When a group of neo-Nazis was arrested in connection with the
murders of two Swedish police officers, Mr. Orell was appalled. It was
around that time that he started talking to a former militant who had
moved to the countryside with his family.
“It
was good talking to someone without being judged,” Mr. Orell said. “I
was still every bit as radical, but I was getting disillusioned with the
group.”
The
friend introduced him to Exit, a charity offering far-right extremists
support as they left the movement. Many social workers at Exit were
former extremists, too. They listened, played soccer with him and
gradually “chipped away at the black and white.”
In
Britain, Mr. Ahmed planned to fight in Bosnia. He had never paid
attention when his family said that Islam and violence were
incompatible. But when a Salafi preacher who had once been involved in
gang violence told him as much in 1999, he listened.
“He
said he shared my grievances but that violence was not the way to
address them,” said Mr. Ahmed, who asked to use the preacher’s nom de
guerre, Ibrahim, to avoid compromising his access to the radical youths
he counsels. “He said ‘I get it, I’ve been there.’”
That is the message he tries to get across to the teenagers he counsels, like a 16-year-old boy who is tempted to go to Syria.
“I don’t judge him,” Mr. Ahmed said. If he were 16 today, he added, he might be tempted to go to Syria himself.
Both
he and Mr. Orell, who now runs Exit, say counterextremism work has
become trickier over the years. The Internet has given militants direct
access to teenagers. The video-game culture glorifies extreme violence.
And radical movements have become smarter at marketing.
Mr.
Ahmed tries to channel Muslim discontents away from violence. “I ask
them: When was the last time you wrote to your M.P.?” he said, referring
to a member of Parliament. “Have you ever run a fund-raising campaign?
Written a letter to your local newspaper?”
Indeed,
the post-extremist lives of Mr. Ahmed and Mr. Orell seem to indicate
that radicalism need not be destiny. They know one another through a
network of former extremists brought together by the Institute for
Strategic Dialogue, a charity active in combating extremism.
“If we had met 15 years ago we probably would have killed each other,” Mr. Ahmed said. “Now Robert is a friend.”
No comments:
Post a Comment