Exclusion or culture? The rise and the ambiguity of the radicalisation debate

Abstract

The years 2005–2010 saw a sudden interest in the phenomenon of radicalisation. Terrorism was treated as the end result of a process of radicalisation and, as such, a reflection of broad social changes. In the discussion surrounding this phenomenon, radicalisation has not functioned as a homogenous analytical category. We analyse leading academic and administrative texts and identify two fundamentally different perspectives. One of these perspectives locates the causes of terrorism in alien cultures and identity clashes, while the other proceeds from socio-economic conditions and sees the threat as coming from increasing levels of social exclusion. The two perspectives are incompatible but nonetheless co-exist in practice, making terrorism a projection screen for an array of ambitions and fears. The emphasis on radicalisation has further become tied to policy preferences which have affected the Muslim community in quite different ways.

Keywords:

• radicalisation
• terrorism
• culture
• social exclusion

Acknowledgements

This study was conducted within the context of the project ‘New risks and actors. Terrorism and organized crime in the field of plural policing’, financed by the Swedish Research Council. The authors would like to thank two anonymous reviewers for useful feedback. Thanks as well to David Shannon for his translation of the text.

Notes

1. Al-Qaida Sanctions List. Established and maintained by the 1267 Committee with respect to individuals, groups, undertakings and other entities associated with Al-Qaida, http://www.un.org/sc/committees/1267/pdf/AQList.pdf. See also Office of Foreign Assets Control Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons, The Department of the Treasury; and the European Union List of Persons and Entities Subject to Financial Sanctions on 23/05/2012, http://ec.europa.eu/external_relations/cfsp/sanctions/list/version4/global/e_ctlview.html.

2. The programme was adopted during Sweden's presidency in the autumn of 2009, which accounts for the name.

3. See, for example, Change Institute; International Centre for the Study of Radicalization and Political Violence (ICSR) and the Centre for the Study of Radicalization and Contemporary Political Violence (CSRV).

4. Andrew Silke, Magnus Ranstorp, Alex Schmid and John Horgan.

5. Centre for the Study of Terrorism and Political Violence (CSTPV).

6. RAND is an American think tank with strong links to the government and the commercial sector in the United States.

7. http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2011/02/terrorism-islam-ideology 2011-02-05.