« Previous |
1 - 10 of 15
|
Next »
Number of results to display per page
Search Results
2. Tackling Hate in the Homeland: US Radical Right Narratives and Counter-narratives at a Time of Renewed Threat
- Author:
- William Allchorn
- Publication Date:
- 02-2021
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Hedayah
- Abstract:
- This country report, written by Dr. William Allchorn, is one of the outputs of the CARR-Hedayah Radical Right Counter Narratives Project, a year-long project under the STRIVE Global Program at Hedayah funded by the European Union and implemented by the Centre for Analysis of the Radical Right (CARR). The overall project creates one of the first comprehensive online toolkits for practitioners and civil society engaged in radical right extremist counter narrative campaigns. It uses online research to map narratives in nine countries and regions, including Australia, Canada, Germany, Hungary, New Zealand, Norway, Ukraine, United Kingdom, and the United States. It also proposes counter narratives for these countries and regions and advises on how to conduct such campaigns in an effective manner.
- Topic:
- Radicalization, Ideology, Violence, Radical Right, and Militias
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
3. Transforming Domestic Extremism in the United States
- Author:
- Chris Bosley
- Publication Date:
- 04-2021
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Cairo Review of Global Affairs
- Institution:
- School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, American University in Cairo
- Abstract:
- In the aftermath of the Capitol insurrection, efforts to counter domestic extremism should address the social and structural dynamics that contribute to violence.
- Topic:
- Violent Extremism, Radicalization, Radical Right, Insurrection, Political Extremism, and January 6
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
4. Journal of Advanced Military Studies: Political Warfare and Propaganda
- Author:
- James J. F. Forest, Daniel De Wit, Kyleanne Hunter, Emma Jouenne, Glen Segell, Lev Topor, Alexander Tabachnik, Donald M. Bishop, Phil Zeman, Michael Cserkits, and Anthony Patrick
- Publication Date:
- 03-2021
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Journal of Advanced Military Studies
- Institution:
- Marine Corps University Press, National Defense University
- Abstract:
- The digital age has greatly expanded the terrain and opportunities for a range of foreign influence efforts. A growing number of countries have invested significantly in their capabilities to disseminate online propaganda and disinformation worldwide, while simultaneously establishing information dominance at home. Each of the contributions to this issue addresses the central theme of influencing perceptions and behavior. First, Daniel de Wit draws lessons from a historical analysis of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), America’s intelligence and special operations organization in World War II. In addition to its efforts to collect intelligence on the Axis powers and to arm and train resistance groups behind enemy lines, the OSS also served as America’s primary psychological warfare agency, using a variety of “black propaganda” methods to sow dissension and confusion in enemy ranks.82 As noted earlier, psychological warfare plays a significant role in the conduct of today’s military operations, so de Wit’s research offers important historical lessons for contemporary campaign planners. Next, Kyleanne Hunter and Emma Jouenne examine the uniquely troubling effects of spreading misogynistic views online. Their analysis of three diverse case studies—the U.S. military, the incel movement, and ISIS— reveals how unchecked online misogyny can result in physical behavior that can threaten human and national security. Glen Segell then explores how perceptions about cybersecurity operations can have positive or negative impacts on civil-military relations, drawing on a case study of the Israeli experience. Lev Topor and Alexander Tabachnik follow with a study of how Russia uses the strategies and tactics of digital influence warfare against other countries, while continually seeking to strengthen its information dominance over Russian citizens. And Donald M. Bishop reveals how other countries do this as well, including China, North Korea, Iran, Cuba, and Venezuela. Each is engaged in these same kinds of efforts to control the information that circulates within their respective societies, while using various forms of propaganda against other countries to strengthen their influence and national power. Phil Zeman’s contribution to this issue looks at how China and Russia are trying to fracture American and Western societies through information, disinformation, economic coercion, and the creation of economic dependencies— in many cases capitalizing on specific attributes and vulnerabilities of a target nation to achieve their strategic objectives. Through these efforts, he concludes, China and Russia hope to prevent the will or ability of American or Western states to respond to an aggressive act. Next, Michael Cserkits explains how a society’s perceptions about armed forces can be influenced by cinematic productions and anime, drawing on a case study comparison of Japan and the United States. And finally, Anthony Patrick examines how social media penetration and internet connectivity could impact the likelihood that parties within a conventional intrastate conflict will enter negotiations. As a collection, these articles make a significant contribution to the scholarly research literature on political warfare and propaganda. The authors shed light on the need for research-based strategies and policies that can improve our ability to identify, defend against, and mitigate the consequences of influence efforts. However, when reflecting on the compound security threats described at the beginning of this introduction—involving both cyberattacks and influence attacks—a startling contrast is revealed: we have committed serious resources toward cybersecurity but not toward addressing the influence issues examined in this issue. We routinely install firewalls and other security measures around our computer network systems, track potential intrusion attempts, test and report network vulnerabilities, hold training seminars for new employees, and take many other measures to try and mitigate cybersecurity threats. In contrast, there are no firewalls or intrusion detection efforts defending us against digital influence attacks of either foreign or domestic origin. Government sanctions and social media deplatforming efforts respond to influence attackers once they have been identified as such, but these efforts take place after attacks have already occurred, sometimes over the course of several years. The articles of this issue reflect an array of efforts to influence the perceptions, emotions, and behavior of human beings at both individual and societal levels. In the absence of comprehensive strategies to more effectively defend against these efforts, the United States risks losing much more than military advantage; we are placing at risk the perceived legitimacy of our systems and institutions of governance, as well as our economic security, our ability to resolve social disagreements peacefully, and much more.83 Further, many other nations are also facing the challenges of defending against foreign influence efforts. As such, the transnational nature of influence opportunities and capabilities in the digital age may require a multinational, coordinated response. In the years ahead, further research will be needed to uncover strategies for responding to the threat of digital influence warfare with greater sophistication and success.
- Topic:
- Security, National Security, Politics, Science and Technology, Military Affairs, Women, Radicalization, Cybersecurity, Internet, History, World War II, Propaganda, Deterrence, Disinformation, Israel Defense Forces (IDF), Digital Policy, Psychological Warfare, and Misogyny
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Japan, China, Israel, Global Focus, and United States of America
5. March 2021 Issue
- Author:
- Audrey Alexander, Kristina Hummel, Brian Michael Jenkins, Thomas Ruttig, and Douglas Weeks
- Publication Date:
- 03-2021
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- CTC Sentinel
- Institution:
- The Combating Terrorism Center at West Point
- Abstract:
- President Biden soon has to decide whether to withdraw the remaining 2,500 U.S. troops from Afghanistan to meet a May 1 deadline agreed to by the previous administration. With time ticking down, the Biden administration has launched a major diplomatic push to broker a peace settlement for Afghanistan. As noted by Thomas Ruttig in this month’s feature article, “Whether and how much the Taliban have changed since their repressive rule over Afghanistan before the fall of 2001 is key to whether a potential peace settlement can create a social and political landscape in Afghanistan that is acceptable to the people of Afghanistan, as well as the United States and NATO allies.” Ruttig assesses that “While the Taliban have softened their rhetoric on some issues (for example, on women’s rights and education) and there is evidence of real policy change in certain areas (for example, on the use of media, in the education sector, a greater acceptance of NGOs, and an acceptance that a future political system will need to accommodate at least some of their political rivals), their policy adjustments appear to have been largely driven by political imperatives rather than any fundamental changes in ideology.” He assesses that “Whether some changes in approach will be perpetuated will depend on the ability of Afghan communities and political groups to maintain pressure on the Taliban. This, in turn, depends on continued international attention toward Afghanistan.” Brian Michael Jenkins, in a feature commentary, examines several possible courses of action the Biden administration could take if the U.S. efforts to broker a peace settlement in Afghanistan do not result in a major breakthrough in the coming weeks. He writes: “What makes a decision on which path to follow so difficult is that each option carries a high risk of resulting in bad outcomes.” He notes that “Decisive action always looks good, but a turbulent world also means calculating risks, avoiding unintended consequences, and hedging bets.” This month’s interview is with Mary McCord, the executive director of the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection at the Georgetown University Law Center, whose previous service in government included working as Acting Assistant Attorney General for National Security at the U.S. Department of Justice from 2016 to 2017. She offers insights on the heightened threat of far-right extremist violence in the United States and how the country’s legal architecture could evolve to counter it. Douglas Weeks argues that there is “too much pessimism” in the United Kingdom about the possibility of deradicalizing terrorist offenders. He writes: “To address the root causes of the threat, the United Kingdom needs to learn lessons from what has worked for successful ‘deradicalization’ mentors and empower their efforts.”
- Topic:
- Terrorism, Military Affairs, Taliban, Counter-terrorism, and Radicalization
- Political Geography:
- Afghanistan, United Kingdom, and United States of America
6. Factsheet: The Radicalization Hearings
- Author:
- Bridge Initiative Team
- Publication Date:
- 04-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- The Bridge Initiative, Georgetown University
- Abstract:
- The radicalization hearings were a series of five congressional hearings held between March 2011 and June 2012 on the purported “radicalization” of American Muslims by then-Representative Peter King. Prior to the hearings, King erroneously claimed that “80-85 percent of mosques in this country are controlled by Islamic fundamentalists.” The hearings focused on radicalization and recruitment in the American Muslim community, US prison system, and US military. The hearings were dubbed “McCarthyism 2.0” by critics and were denounced by interfaith and civil rights coalitions.
- Topic:
- Radicalization, Muslims, and Congress
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
7. Western DAESH Women: Ideology, Profile and Motivation
- Author:
- Juan Carlos Antunez Moreno
- Publication Date:
- 12-2020
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Journal on International Security Studies (RESI)
- Institution:
- International Security Studies Group (GESI) at the University of Granada
- Abstract:
- The DAESH has been particularly successful in recruiting Western women. There are differences in their profile and motivation with their male counterparts. The DAESH offered an alternative to Western secularist feminism, substituting salvation for emancipation (empowerment without gender equality). DAESH´s Western women played different roles. They were wives of jihadists, mothers and educators of the next generation, recruiters and fundraisers for the organisation and workers in the segregated institutions of the Caliphate. They were also involved in violent actions when the time came, depending on the needs of the organisation. The analysis on DAESH Western women is often influenced by prejudices, stereotypes, and gender biases. Counterterrorism efforts need for the integration of the gender perspectives and needs for more women to detect radicalization as well as in prevention, de-radicalisation, and reintegration processes.
- Topic:
- Gender Issues, Terrorism, Violent Extremism, Counter-terrorism, Women, Radicalization, and Islamic State
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Middle East, and United States of America
8. Resisting the Tide of Bigotry
- Author:
- Jonathan Weisman
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Cairo Review of Global Affairs
- Institution:
- School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, American University in Cairo
- Abstract:
- American Jews are left divided and looking for new directions as Donald Trump embraces the white supremacism of the alt-right and the Zionism of Benjamin Netanyahu
- Topic:
- Religion, Radicalization, Domestic Politics, Judaism, Discrimination, and Radical Right
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Israel, North America, and United States of America
9. The World Is Watching the United States
- Author:
- Diana Bartelli Carlin
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Cairo Review of Global Affairs
- Institution:
- School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, American University in Cairo
- Abstract:
- The United States is facing a perfect storm that puts it in the headlights of its counterparts’ world views.
- Topic:
- Governance, Radicalization, Leadership, Discrimination, Violence, Public Health, Pandemic, COVID-19, and Racism
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
10. Factsheet: Peter King
- Author:
- Bridge Initiative Team
- Publication Date:
- 06-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- The Bridge Initiative, Georgetown University
- Abstract:
- Republican Representative Peter King of New York led the 2011 congressional hearings on the “radicalization” of American Muslims. The hearings added further stigmatization to the American Muslim community and were described by legal rights organizations as neo-McCarthyism. Rep. King has a history of making false accusations linking Muslims to violence and has been connected to a number of anti-Muslim organizations, including the Center for Security Policy and Act for America.
- Topic:
- Radicalization, Islamophobia, Stigmatization, Republican Party, Muslims, and Peter King
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America