|
Steven Emerson,
Executive Director
|
October 28, 2016
|
|
France's
De-radicalization Program Deemed a Failure
by Patrick Dunleavy
IPT News
October 28, 2016
|
|
|
Share:
|
Be the
first of your friends to like this.
The latest attempt
by Western democracies to deal with the ever-growing threat of Islamic
radicalization in the prison system has been deemed an utter failure.
French officials announced Tuesday that they would no longer isolate
inmates with jihadists tendencies from other inmates, or offer therapeutic
services or specialized counseling aimed at de-radicalizing Islamic
terrorists already in prison.
They found that the program actually increased the threat of radicalizing inmates into
terrorists rather than diminishing it.
Following a series of terrorist attacks in France, counterterrorism
investigators found that a large number of the jihadists had previously spent
time in prison for petty crimes. It was there, in the fertile soil of
prison, where they were influenced by the radical Islamic teachings of
incarcerated members of groups like al-Qaida, the GIA (Armed Islamic Group
of Algeria) and ISIS.
In announcing the suspension of the program Justice Minister Jean
Jacques Urvoas admitted the failure: "I don't use the term
de-radicalization. I don't think we can invent a vaccine against this
temptation" (Islamism).
France has produced more soldiers for ISIS than any other Western
country.
But France is not the only country that has attempted to come up with an
program to prevent Islamic radicalization in prison and help rehabilitate
those terrorists who have been successfully prosecuted and sent to prison.
The United Kingdom previously announced plans to form "specialized isolation
units" within its prison system to deal with convicted Islamic
terrorists, like Anjem Choudary, who were seen as a danger to the other
inmates.
The United States also sought to establish a de-radicalization program
for potential jihadists. Minnesota U.S. District Court Judge Michael Davis
devised a de-radicalization program that included hiring researcher Daniel
Koehler, who has dealt with the neo-Nazi movement in Germany, to provide
counseling and training for both inmates and staff.
The first inmate placed in the program, Abdullahi Yusuf, was an example
of the program's potential for failure.
Yusuf was arrested in 2014 when he attempted to board a flight to
Turkey to join ISIS and fight in Syria. While awaiting trial, he was
admitted to the program for de-radicalization counseling and was allowed to
stay in a halfway house instead of in jail. Less than four months later he
was removed from the program after he was found with a box cutter.
Further resistance to the U.S. de-radicalization program came from the
defense attorney appointed to represent Adan Abdihamid Farah. Farah was arrested last year as he tried to travel to Syria and
fight alongside other Islamic State jihadists. "If the
de-radicalization is for him (Farah) to moderate his religious beliefs, I
can't do that," defense attorney Kenneth Udoibok told the Wall Street Journal.
Some saw the program as a direct violation of the Religious
Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).
And now, faced with the possibility that as many as 100 inmates
convicted of terrorism crimes in the United States will be paroled in the
next five years, authorities have had to admit that there is no effective
re-radicalization program in place to deal with the very really potential
for recidivism. The Justice Department acknowledged we are not prepared to
release them.
"There are [rehabilitation] programs for drug addicts and gang
members [in prison]. There is not one [program] with a proven track record
of success for terrorism," Assistant Attorney General for National
Security John Carlin said earlier this year.
The situation appears hopeless without changes in our approach to
radical Islamism. To effectively deal with the threat of terrorists coming
out of prison and committing more heinous acts, or others being radicalized
by their influences while they are incarcerated, officials must commit to
long range counter terrorism initiatives that do not end when the terrorist
is captured.
These inmates' access to Islamic extremist literature should be limited.
Their visitors and the volunteers at correctional facilities need to be
monitored, and a standardized vetting process for chaplains needs to be
instituted.
The Justice Department Inspector General's office strongly recommended
these reforms12 years ago, but they have not been implemented.
Finally, there must be coordination between intelligence agencies, law
enforcement, and correctional officials. Courts have reasoned that inmates
have a lesser expectation of privacy and corrections administrators can
more closely monitor their phone calls, correspondence and financial
transactions.
Information gleaned from that data would immensely help in the fight
against Islamic terrorism.
Seeking a simple inoculation vaccine like the French does not work.
IPT Senior Fellow Patrick Dunleavy is the former Deputy Inspector
General for New York State Department of Corrections and author of The Fertile Soil of Jihad. He currently
teaches a class on terrorism for the United States Military Special
Operations School.
Related Topics: Patrick
Dunleavy, prison
radicalization, ISIS,
terror
support, Anjem
Coudary, France,
Jean
Jacques Urvoas, prosecutions,
Daniel
Koehler, Abdullahi
Yusuf, Adan
Abdihamid Farah, Kenneth
Udoibok, Religious
Freedom Restoration Act
|
The IPT accepts no funding from
outside the United States, or from any governmental agency or political or
religious institutions. Your support of The Investigative Project on
Terrorism is critical in winning a battle we cannot afford to lose. All
donations are tax-deductible. Click here to donate online. The
Investigative Project on Terrorism Foundation is a recognized 501(c)3
organization.
202-363-8602
- main
202-966-5191
- fax
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment