5. ANÁLISIS
5.7. Dos roles que se asumen en la práctica
A 2011 UK Rapid Evidence Assessment (REA) of vulnerability and resilience to al-Qa’ida-inspired violent extremism (Munton et al., 2011) reports that most of the literature on resilience and CVE focuses on ‘who is drawn into violent extremism and why, rather than why people choose not to participate in this activity’ (Munton et al., 2011: 24). The issue of what prevents individuals from violent extremism, especially in Western societies, is ‘poorly researched’ (Munton et al., 2011: 25) with only limited findings and conclusions available. These limitations persist in the current review period, with only a handful of empirically based studies exploring how resilience to violent extremism can
54
be mobilised in terms of prevention and protection, or on the relationship between general community resilience and resilience specifically to violent extremism (Weine and Ahmed, 2012; Grossman, 2014a; Grossman et al., 2014; Munton et al., 2011). Schmid (2013: 37, n.179) concurs, noting that there is ‘too little awareness about what civil society can do to counter terrorism and build up resilience’ but offering no further discussion other than suggesting that ‘governments should … make certain subcultures in society more resilient to the allure of terrorism’ (Schmid, 2013: 57). A more nuanced approach is taken by Weine and Ahmed (2012) based on their study of resilience and CVE in a Minnesota Somali community (see also Project Review below). They pose four questions that any meaningful investigation of community resilience to violent extremism should address:
• When politicians and policymakers speak of enhancing resilience, is this more than good public relations?
• What do resilience-focused counterterrorism initiatives hope to achieve?
• Is it possible for those from government, non- governmental organisations and academia to change a community based on outsiders’ ideas and actions?
• Do the national security priorities of governments include the most pressing priorities of families and communities? (Weine and Ahmed, 2012: 66) Their findings (Weine, 2012; Weine and Ahmed, 2012) suggest, in line with other research (Schmid, 2013; Walker, 2011; Grossman et al., 2014), that answering these questions relies significantly on developing and maintaining
meaningful cooperation and partnerships
between researchers, government agencies and communities; grounding community resilience policies in ‘sound theory and scientific evidence… based on an accurate assessment of strengths, vulnerabilities and risks’ in a given community context; understanding resilience as a property of local families and communities; and addressing broader adversities faced by communities
rather than focusing narrowly or exclusively on the adversities created by violent extremism (Weine and Ahmed, 2012: 66). This is especially important given the tendency of violent extremist
recruitment narratives to play on the hardships and marginalisation experienced by disaffected and disengaged individuals and communities, who may invest considerably in a shared history of more generalised adversity and challenge (Tsolma and Zevallos 2009: 11, cited in Grossman et al., 2014). It is also salient given that the experience of social alienation builds up in response to a variety of pressures and adversities related to the broader community environment (Walker, 2011).
In a related vein, Grossman et al.’s (2014) study on resilience to violent extremism in four
Australian ethno-cultural communities pinpointed both culturally specific and also cross-cutting
cultural assets in community resilience to violent extremism that can be harnessed through community programs, strategies and interventions. These include building on existing community values and structures of sociality, care and support; reducing disabling aspects of shame and strengthening dialogue on sensitive issues in culturally appropriate and meaningful ways; engaging families, women, and young people as well as male community leaders and elders; challenging community tolerance for self-expression and conflict resolution through violence amongst young people; and strengthening community trust and linkage relations with services and authorities while retaining cultural pride and integrity (Grossman et al., 2014: 128). Protective factors tied to culturally specific community features are readily available to work with. These include approaching dispute resolution through mediation and dialogue using cultural structures and values within a community; partnering not only with key community influencers but also expanding the range of potential influencers who may be emerging as a result of cultural and generational transitions within a community; and mobilising key values and frameworks such as reciprocity and protective dimensions of shame.
Gender-based dimensions of community resilience and the need to reposition understanding and analysis of the role of women’s interventions in building culturally embedded resilience to violent extremism inform work by Rashid (2014). Her study critically examines Prevent program efforts in the UK to empower Muslim women by giving them a ‘voice’ in the struggle against terrorism. Many of the 25 Muslim women in her study felt that
55
Prevent’s approach was highly problematic because it assumed the silence of Muslim women; ignored women’s voices already active within communities, and constructed Muslim women globally as subject to forms of male oppression that are related to specific cultural than religious contexts. While the research found that Muslim women were indeed partially ‘absent from the government’s processes of engagement’ through historical exclusion by their own communities (Rashid, 2014: 595) they also felt silenced by those outside the community, ‘evidenced in the way that [government and local authorities] replicated and perpetuated stereotypes about Muslim women’ (Rashid, 2014: 596). The gendered nature of such exclusions points to a failure to recognise not only the resilience capacity of Muslim women to negotiate complex social and policy territory, but also limits understanding how women can contribute innovatively to community- resilience building initiatives focused on resisting terrorism.