Table of Contents
The Syrian civil war started in 2011 and was, according to (Sari, A., 2017), a result of long-standing tensions between the government of Syria and the Syrian people when local parents were insulted by local officials in a matter relating to their kinds misdemeanor actions. In much the same way mass demonstrations and riots in America erupted after George Floyd was killed while being restrained by police officers. Although these two events may be seen as vastly different, there is the element of a breaking point or definitive point of transition. This is the point that differentiates between passive beliefs and the solidification of these beliefs demanding fundamental change through extreme actions.
I argue in favor of the position that, even if this point is crossed, the person or persons who have made this transition should be provided with the opportunity for rehabilitation and re-socialized back into civil society on a case by case basis. To understand my position on this matter it is important to understand how the prevailing environmental impact shapes the passive, yet foundational, beliefs through which one or more events lead to the point of an individuals transition between the passive and active extremist; characterized by overt hostility, violence and a disregard for life. Furthermore, it may be necessary to understood what internal factors contribute to the buildup and active expression of extremist beliefs.
Once these aspects have been addressed, the question of how the individuals can be safely reformed, for the benefit of themselves and society, can be tackled.
127 our experts are availableright now
While there are different policies, procedures and programs depending on the country into which the combatants would return, it should be noted that the likelihood of the successful reformation of combatants, who participate in the programs, is highly dependent on the processes and their relative context-specific implementation (Bos, W., van Ginkel, B., & Mehra, T., 2018). Moreover, since the processes of deradicalization, disengagement and reintegration are highly complex, it is even more important to conduct further trials and research into the short- and long-term success of programs given that extremism and radicalization is an ongoing problem across the world.
The last component needing recognition at this point is that the area of deradicalization, reformation and reintegration in this context is still in its infancy, in terms of the long-term studies and evidence necessary to deem any given program or system used to be successful. This area needs to be addressed due to its far-reaching implications for societies around the world; since, it is not only applicable to the ISIS ideology, but also all forms of ideological extremism and its consequences. Furthermore, there are fundamental questions which arise from the study of this subject matter. The potential benefits and implications of being able to understand and create successful working processes and structures that can effectively reshape individuals’ ideologies towards socially positive ideals is revolutionary at the least.
No Going Back
A counter argument to my thesis is, the seemingly favorable approach by a number of EU states (Scherrer, A., 2018), to leave those individuals in Iraq and Syria for prosecution. The decision made by those individuals to join ISIS and fight as declared terrorists was made with great conviction and intentionality. In order to join ISIS in Syria, unless already in Syria, meant that a great deal of planning and effort was needed to join the fight. It can be argued that, due to this difficulty, there should be no sympathy or considerations made to provide those individuals a way or chance to rejoin their home countries societies.
They made the decision to join a terrorist organization a known terrorist group. The burden of responsibility, to ensure the safe deradicalization and reintegration of these extremist ex-militia fighters, would not be placed upon the citizens of their home country. Moreover, this would introduce too great a risk that upon the fighters returning to their home countries they could carrying out attacks in the more familiar surroundings, making it a significant social and political concern (Scherrer, A., 2018). To take such a chance cannot be taken lightly as the consequences could be devastating. Another issue, which promotes the idea of leaving the fighters to be prosecuted in Iraq and Syria, is that of the jurisdiction.
Since, the crimes and atrocities committed where carried out in the jurisdiction of Iraq and Syria, it can be assumed that in terms of justice the respective governments could gain favor from their people for carrying out the prosecution of the fights themselves. This would make it hard for the EU member state to retrieve the fighters without significant efforts, which also mean additional costs and potentially more.
An additional element, favoring the member states approach of leaving the fights to be prosecuted and effectively dealt with by the local Iraqi or Syrian authorities, is that of the significant lack of effective programs which have been created, and tested to be successful approaches to deal with returning terrorist fighters. The relative benefit which could be gained by allowing the terrorist fighters back into the country, irrespective of whether they would be put into a prison or reintegration facility program, does not outweigh or even balance the risk, and subsequent potential consequences, of what might mean if the reintegration does not work.
The Need for Progress
My supporting arguments for this thesis start with the absolute need for progress to be made in the area of deradicalization. Radicalization can take place through all forms of ideological belief structures which are exclusive, and which have the components supportive of extremist viewpoints that people can use to build upon. There is a need to identify with one’s peer group in order to have a sense of belonging in the world, or at least the part of the world which one finds oneself closes to (Maslow, 1943). The only way to effectively deal with radicalization, deradicalization and reintegration of individuals; who have made a succession of choices which have lead them to form such strong beliefs that they are willing to kill and be killed for no matter the impact on the rest of humanity; is to take one step at a time, one individual at a time, case by case.
A further supporting argument is that, even though there are only a few existing programs which focus specifically on radicalized terrorist fighters and their deradicalization and reintegration into their home societies, there are such programs and for this fact alone I argue that they should be made use of and further developed. There is a Danish model called “The Aarhus Model” which is based on integrating the principles of Life Psychology (Bertelsen, P., 2015). This model identifies foundational causes of radicalization and their effects on an individual or group.
These are then used to differentiate between types of radicalization and more specifically point out that while radicalization is a relatively natural phenomenon, and can cause minor result in relatively minor issues in society, for example illegal activism, there is are distinct additional elements which need be present in those individuals at risk of violent expression (Bertelsen, P., 2015). It should not be forgotten that no matter who you are or where you come from, everyone should have the right to a fair trial and the opportunity to make amends to society. The fact that there are some individuals who made the decision to commit acts of terror, under the assumption that the decisions they made where justified, should only determine the degree to which intervention and rehumanization should take place.
Conclusion
In this thesis, i have given a brief introduction to the issue of deradicalization and reintegration of former members of ISIS, as well as highlighted the necessity of contextualizing the actual problem. Since human beings are complex organisms with the extraordinary ability to be shaped and reshaped by the environment and inner dialogue, it should not be underestimated how close to many issues that of choosing violence over peace is.
This means that by putting the appropriate attention on using this situation, of returning extremists back into moderate societies, to conduct fundamental testing in human behaviors and conflict resolution tactics for the collective betterment of society. For this reason, I am in favor of allowing the fighters to return to their home countries by providing them with the opportunity to give back to their home societies and potentially even the world at large.
