Considering strategies designed to counter radicalisation: Comparative reflections on approaches in the United Kingdom and Belgium
Keywords:
Counter Radicalisation Strategy, Extremism, Terrorism, PreventAbstract
This article focuses on the issue of counter radicalisation strategy, examining the efficacy and the weaknesses of policy initiatives designed to prevent violent extremism. In order to scrutinize various approaches toward combatting the problem of “radicalisation”, we compare and contrast policy and practices in the United Kingdom with counter measures adopted in Belgium. Drawing on a range of examples from these two countries, it is argued that context sensitive and situated multi-agency approaches to counter radicalization are more likely to engage individuals at risk of being drawn into violent extremism and are also less likely to (re)produce iatrogenic effects. Our analysis suggests that, in order to fully understanding what may ostensibly be perceived as individual proclivities toward violence, the role of structural, institutional and environmental factors is significant. We posit that these factors need to be given greater credence in both explanations for “extremism” and processes and practices implemented to reduce the risk of harm.
Este artículo se centra en la estrategia contra la radicalización, examinando la eficacia y los puntos débiles de las iniciativas políticas diseñadas para prevenir el extremismo violento. A fin de analizar varios abordajes para combatir el problema de la “radicalización”, comparamos y contrastamos políticas y prácticas del Reino Unido con contramedidas adoptadas en Bélgica. Utilizando ejemplos de ambos países, argumentamos que, para contrarrestar la radicalización, los abordajes de multiagencia adaptados al contexto tienen mayores probabilidades de atraer personas en riesgo de ser atraídas por el extremismo violento, y también tienen menores probabilidades de (re)producir efectos iatrogénicos. Nuestro análisis insinúa que, para comprender totalmente lo que puede ser percibido como proclividades individuales hacia la violencia, es significativo el papel de factores estructurales, institucionales y ambientales. Aducimos que se debería dar más peso a esos factores a la hora de explicar el “extremismo” y los procesos y prácticas aplicados para reducir el riesgo de daños.
Available from: https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl/0000-0000-0000-1197
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Gabriel Gray Mythen, Evelyne Baillergeau

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
OSLS strictly respects intellectual property rights and it is our policy that the author retains copyright, and articles are made available under a Creative Commons licence. The Creative Commons Non-Commercial Attribution No-Derivatives licence is our default licence, further details available at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 If this is not acceptable to you, please contact us.
The non-exclusive permission you grant to us includes the rights to disseminate the bibliographic details of the article, including the abstract supplied by you, and to authorise others, including bibliographic databases, indexing and contents alerting services, to copy and communicate these details.
For information on how to share and store your own article at each stage of production from submission to final publication, please read our Self-Archiving and Sharing policy.
The Copyright Notice showing the author and co-authors, and the Creative Commons license will be displayed on the article, and you must agree to this as part of the submission process. Please ensure that all co-authors are properly attributed and that they understand and accept these terms.