Philip Grawzis SCMT319 Progress Assignment

docx

School

American Military University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

319

Subject

Sociology

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by JusticePartridgePerson863

Countering Radicalization 1 Philip Grawzis SCMT319 Progress Assignment December 24, 2023

Countering Radicalization 2 Our country has experienced Homegrown Violent Extremism (HVE) for many decades. Depending on what timeframe we are look at there have been significant changes involving the motives behind these terrorist acts. These motives however have always seemed to involve political agendas and religious issues that arise from political parties or leftists that at the time do not agree with the way society is headed. HVE in our country would pretty much involve Americans attacking Americans with their domestic issues. But there with the tragic attack on September 11 th , there were however more attacks against our county that were inspired by foreign motives. The result of this attack forced our country to be on the defensive and begin to implement new policies, and changes government agencies that would create a lot of change within our country and way of life. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) would quickly become the agency that would run our countries security and they would be assisted with the Homeland Security Act of 2002. With an increase in boarder control and restrictions it would become even harder for terrorists to enter our country, and this would force them to come up with more creative aways to take advantage of our country. With the world evolving into the next century, terrorism would quickly follow in its footsteps. We would soon begin to see terrorist group take advantage of social media in order to recruit, conduct plans, and execute attack on our country. Groups like the Islamic State and Al Qaeda now had the ability to hurt our country without even having to enter. Through social media they now had the ability to recruit and influence American people into conducting attacks for them. Because of the attacks former President Barack Obama would have to create the Strategic Implementation Plan (SIP) which would allow local powers to stop extremism in our country. The SIP had some very great key points to it that is accredited to the prior presidency, but it could also use some adjustment into the newest generation. There could also be some adjustments to help try and create some

Countering Radicalization 3 predictions that would allow the prevention or lessen the impact terrorists have with social media. Our country is a democratic country that will instill diversity, freedom, equality, and will always pursue civil rights and free speech. Our country is aware that its citizens enjoy having the ability to always express themselves and they will continue to support everyone’s ability to do so. A statement from the Whitehouse shows that many Americans will express issues or ideologies by using violence and hatred. Along with violence, they are also known for recruiting other Americans to join their cause. With that being said, it is also the responsibility and within the governments rights to protect the innocent American civilians from any harms. (The White House, 2011b, p.1). In August 2011, former President Obama had signed the National Strategy for Empowering Local Partners to Prevent Violent Extremism and he would later sign the SIP in December of 2011. President Obama had an understanding of the threats that would come from HVE and how they would affect our country. The SIP’s main purpose was to bring together the communities that would be affected and to close any distance with the government by effectively using its programs. There were three main objectives of the SIP which included working with and supporting communities that were targeted, unify all agencies whether its local, federal, or state, and preventing violent extremist acts (The White House, 2011a, p. 7). In 2011 the SIP was a great idea and these days it still holds true in having the same ideas needed to preventing terrorism inside of our own country. With time we will always need to make some changes, but it really needs to maintain the support of DHS and the current presidency. It is still somewhat of a mystery on why so many people inside of our country transition over to extremism and terrorism. There are many of the same reason and common things that push people but not everyone shares the same exact process as the other. One thing that they all

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

Countering Radicalization 4 seem to have in common is at some point in their life they all face some sort of a rough patch that pushes them in the wrong direction. There is always something that happened to make them want a change or to turn towards extremism. People’s communities may not dictate their path, but they can and definitely do gave some sort of influence over it. We need more resilient communities in our country because this will create stronger communities within our nation. One way to do so is by having parents involved with their children in discussing these matters with them and keeping an eye on their activities (Weine, 2013, p.86). Being able to counter violent extremism can start at home with the parent or guardian. After it can push out further into the community with friends, family, and people within the neighborhood by utilizing group programs that provide support. Inside of the SIP President Obama urges all citizens to go back to the basics and become a well-rounded community that helps one another. If the community cannot accomplish this then the government would have to interject by providing aid and grants that will stabilize the community. The country is full of programs that already exist and can help communities achieve their full potential. Some of these programs that already exist are the FEMA Program which allows diverse communities to build up resiliency and increase the communities approach to national security, and the DHS Center For Faith and Opportunities (Barbari, 2018, p.38). These programs are uniquely created to tailor to the communities needs that they are involved in. A lot of the programs out their help teach people correct religious ways such as Muslim religion by helping counter the Jihad teachings. While other programs assist in stopping any racial discrimination and help bring communities closer by giving the younger generations something to look forward to in life. The result of the September 11 th attacks made the government realize that there needs to be a better partnership between local law enforcement agencies at every single echelon. They

Countering Radicalization 5 realized just how vital both sate and local law enforcement is simply because of the fact they are always down on the streets. They are out there everyday interacting with the people gaining vital intelligence while protecting the citizens. They know the area well and some of the agencies work through Community Oriented Policing (COP). Federal agencies are the bigger picture with their vast resources, but they can also learn a thing or two from local and state agencies. With the occurrence of terrorist attacks the DHS created fusion centers with states that are located in more heavily populated areas within our country. The Purpose of these centers was to close the communication gap between agencies within federal, local, and state law enforcement. These centers would also create and implement a better method for gathering and disseminating valuable information. Besides these effective fusion centers, the DHS also creates a series of Joint Terrorism Task Forces (JTTF) which would work closely with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (Pendley, 2018, p. 17). The FBI is the top agency involved with terrorism and how our country can better counter it. Most of the JTTF we see today belong to fusion centers across the country and in 2013 there was a report that their efforts had successfully prevented over 150 different violent attacks and shootings (Pendley, 2018, p. 17). Having the ability to deter extremist propaganda has proved to be a much harder issue at hand. There are a lot of legal issues that fall under this category that would affect Americans first amendment right to free speech. Another problem with creating balance to this issue is the fact that most propaganda goes through news and media outlets too. News channels have the right to report on extremists acts due to the freedom of press and news like this is how these stations make a living. There are private companies out there that create their own policies and procedures which is their right to do so as American citizens. I feel people also underestimate just how smart extremists and terrorists actually are, and we see that when they use these systems

Countering Radicalization 6 in order to push their agenda through the creation of fear in the world. The National Counter Terrorism Center (NCTC) had created a community awareness briefing which would reach out to the communities and help make them aware of groups like Al Qaeda and their goals to recruit Americans into their cause (The White House, 2011a, p. 19). The community awareness briefing is very useful due to the fact it does not interfere with any legal issues, but it just serves as an information outlet to the community. Another method that can be done is simply doing nothing to counter the propaganda. Our government puts so much effort into eliminating extremist propaganda, but sometimes that will just happen on its own. The American people all have their own narrative in life, and some are a lot stronger than others, and because of this they will see what they want to see. There are still times when people see a terrorist’s video and the become sickened by that video which will result in a stringer stance against counter terrorism which is the opposite effect that the terrorists had with that video being released (Archetti, 2015, para. 5). There are three main objectives that came with the first SIP that were very crucial in countering HVE. But it requires even more support from the Department of Homeland Security and our current presidency. A lot of their points from back in 2011 are the exact same today and this is exactly why we must continue our pursuit of that SIP. There can definitely be some changes in the technology aspect of it in the fact that terrorism is not necessarily anything physical anymore. Cyber terrorism is becoming the wave of the future with terrorist attacks and since our nations more important infrastructures operate through the cyber world, we need to pay more attention to it. We need to put in as much effort s we can to ensure extremists cannot operate within the cyber world. Another method we can use would be to conduct offensive operations towards personnel that are directly responsible for radicalizing our citizens. After September 11 th our country saw an increase of people that became radicalized through Al Qaeda

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

Countering Radicalization 7 and later on, we saw the same thing with the Islamic State. Our country cannot afford to sit around and wait until another attack like September 11 th happens again. We need to have some sort of an offensive that happens through diplomatic measures and if need be offensive measures. We are not the only country that is affected by HVE, but we still need to link in with other countries in order to make sure we can protect our own country from these attacks. Out country is one of the more stable countries and it is our responsibility to help others out in order to prevent the creation of rebel forces that can rise up against any state (Ghatak & Prins, 2017, p. 239). Terrorists and their groups are filled with adaptive and highly intelligent people that are very resilient in their particular areas of operation. Their main purpose is to create fear in the world and to change nations agendas. If they are to be successful, they must plan events which will get the attention of the media or conduct a series of deadly attacks. The media, terrorists, and the internet all have a working relationship that is give and take meaning they all take from one another but give something in return. Terrorists are known for using the internet to exploit their goals, gain attention, recruit people, and push fear among the innocent. Both the internet and the media receive kind of a gift in return because they get exposure for their network and fame for showing these terror events (Rohner & Frey, 2007, p. 130). In the 2011 SIP The National Security Strategy is attempting to reduce and eventually eliminate the effects that terrorists have on the media, but there are a lot of other issues that might make this an impossible task. The internet is a very effective tool used by terrorist groups to exploit their agenda, recruit new personnel and conduct attacks to name a few things. The internet is a source in which someone that is identified as a self-starter radicalists might try and make a connection with a terrorist group (Picart, 2015, p. 354). There isn’t a single organization or control that has control

Countering Radicalization 8 over the internet. The internet is a free domain made up of pages, forums, websites, and other materials that are accessible to anyone. There are many companies that own private domains and websites that are used to create communication platforms and create revenue. Under the first amendment our constitution protects privately owned companies under freedom of press and freedom of speech. The government may not have any control over the companies’ applications, but they can suggest types of action that they should take. It is up to the companies to go by the regulations and policies the government puts out because they do not want to be responsible for the recruitment of terrorists. For years now we have seen many companies putting in their own efforts to push back on terrorism and ensure their platforms are not used to cause harm. Social media platforms such as Twitter and Facebook have been known to delete accounts of people that show favor to radical Islamic pages. Google is even known to redirect people when they search for radical items towards anti radical propaganda on YouTube (Travers, 2019, p.7). Because we do not own anything that is on the web it is very tough to actually said what can and cannot be done. The only way we can really push back and stop extremist posts form happening is if everyone involved with the internet came together and agreed on a specific way to run the internet. This idea seems very complicated and a tough task, but we have to remember that the United States is not the only country that is affected by terrorism. If everyone can work together then terrorists cannot win the fight over the internet. The same concept of the internet also applies to media platforms that display information through websites, newspapers, or the radio. The first amendment protect media outlets and it is one of the fine pints of living in a democratic nation. With so many freedoms also come the price of being vulnerable and risking national security. News outlets across the world might have a different agenda than ours. For example, a terrorist attack that may happen in one country might

Countering Radicalization 9 not ever get aired in the United States. It seems nearly impossible to change the direction of the media and how much involvement it has with terrorism. It is their job to give us the news and create a revenue at the same time. The publicity terrorists receive through the media is how they communicate with the public so being broadcasted is a winning situation for them. Countries that receive this type of propaganda have two options, either do nothing or use this propaganda against them. People can either let this propaganda take over and live through fear or they can go against it creating their own narrative of counterterrorism. The Department of States Center for Strategic Counterterrorism Communication is given the role of fixing misinformation and focuses on pushing out a positive reinforcement against radicalization of our citizens (Winkler & Dauber, 2014, p. 106). We have seen many Americans that witness such propaganda and end up joining the cause while others will oppose it. After the events of September 11 th many Americans both older and younger immediately enlisted into the military in order to fight against terrorism. Since we cannot really control the media and what these groups put out, maybe the best thing we can do is use the propaganda against them. Conclusion The main objectives that came from the SIP were very realistic and something we could obtain. As difficult as they are to achieve, we can do so through hard work, determination, and global and local partnerships. The SIP needs to basically remain the same minus a few adjustments for the changes in technology that have been adopted by both us and terrorist groups. We need to increase the need for counterterrorism within the media, while creating and offensive against terrorist groups that are responsible for turning Americans towards terrorism. The SIP might be the only thing that has the ability to stop the next wave of terror in the world. The future presidents of our nation need to take the time to reflect on the 2011 SIP and continue to make

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

Countering Radicalization 10 adjustments as the world changes. That is how our country and have a better SIP to protect ourselves against the war on terror.

Countering Radicalization 11 References: Archetti, C. (2015). Terrorism, communication and new media: explaining radicalization in the digital age. Perspectives on terrorism, 9(1), 49–59. http://www.terrorismanalysts.com/pt/index.php/pot/article/view/401/html Barbari, N. (2018). Reconsidering CVE: the unintended consequences of countering violent extremism efforts in America. Homeland Security Affairs. https://search- proquestcom.ezproxy2.apus.edu/scholarly-journals/reconsidering-cve-unintendedconsequences/ docview/2204830543/se-2?accountid=8289 Ghatak, S., & Prins, B. C. (2017). The homegrown threat: state strength, grievance, and domestic terrorism. International interactions, 43(2), 217–247. https://doiorg.ezproxy2.apus.edu/10.1080/03050629.2016.1128431 Pendley, J. (2018). The cloudy crystal ball: detecting and disrupting homegrown violent extremism. Homeland Security Affairs. https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy1.apus.edu/scholarly-journals/cloudy-crystal-ball-detecting- disrupting/docview/2206252520/se-2?accountid= 8289 Picart, C. (2015). “Jihad Cool/Jihad Chic”: the roles of the internet and imagined relations in the self-radicalization of Colleen LaRose (Jihad Jane). Societies (Basel, Switzerland), 5(2), 354–383. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc5020354 Rohner, D., & Frey, B. (2007). Blood and ink! The common-interest-game between terrorists and the media. Public choice, 133(1/2), 129–145. https://doi- org.ezproxy2.apus.edu/10.1007/s11127-007-9182-9 The White House (2011a). Strategic implementation plan for empowering local partners to prevent violent extremism in the United States. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/sip-final.pdf The White House (2011b). Empowering local partners to prevent violent extremism in the United States. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/empowering_local_partners.pdf Travers, E. R. (2019). Counterterrorism in a world of competing priorities. U.S. national counterterrorism center.

Countering Radicalization 12 https://www.dni.gov/files/NCTC/documents/news_documents/20190305_Travers_World _CT_Congress_remarks_as_prepared.pdf Weine, S. (2013). Building community resilience to violent extremism. Georgetown journal of international affairs, 14(2), 81-89. https://search-proquest- com.ezproxy1.apus.edu/scholarly-journals/building-community-resilience-violentextremism/ docview/1462231779/se-2?accountid=8289 Winkler, C., & Dauber, C. E. (2014). Visual propaganda and extremism in the online environment . Carlisle, PA: strategic studies institute and U.S. Army war college press.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

Philip Grawzis SCMT319 Progress Assignment

Related Documents