What should be the approach in countering violent extremism?
One of the important things for any government is to have a good healthy dialogue with actors outside of government, like civil society and non-governmental organizations, religious leaders, community leaders, below the level of the federal government, for a couple of reasons.
One, I think it allows governments to have a much better and more accurate understanding of the challenges that people are facing within that society and of the dynamics that are driving things like radicalization. That doesn’t just extend that dialogue to diagnosing the problem, but it also extends to what steps that society takes to address those problems to meet those challenges.
There I think that counter messaging and credible voices that can say what is and is not Islamic, appropriately within the Islamic tradition, need not be limited to just government, and in fact it would be more effective if there were a broader range of actors from within Bangladeshi society contributing to those thoughts and those efforts.
Do you think that the absence of freedom of expression can drive young people to radicalization?
I think what we’ve seen in places around the world is that it is certainly the lack of an ability to freely express one’s opinion that can lead to a sense of marginalization and isolation which can in turn lead to frustration, and yes, potentially radicalization.
Whether we’re talking about young people or people in different points in their lives, or those who are affiliated with different segments of society, the sense of being able to give voice to one’s concerns and one’s views and to have those heard in a very sincere way is something that is ultimately healthy. We believe very much in that principle in the United States.
What is Washington’s perspective on counter terrorism and violent extremism in Bangladesh?
From the perspective of Washington, Bangladesh obviously has had the unfortunate experience of having acts of terrorism committed here in the country, some of them recently. I think the one that grabbed everyone’s attention was the terrible attack against the Holey Artisan Bakery in 2016. In the aftermath of that attack, we saw the government take a number of steps to dismantle the network which conducted that attack.
There has been some success in getting rid of the source of that particular threat. I think there’s concern more broadly about the fact that Bangladesh is located in a region where Islamic State and other terrorist actors have shown an interest in trying to develop a capability, and perhaps even establish a presence.
Going forward, there’s going to need to remain quite a high level of attention on efforts to mitigate that threat.
Foreign terrorist fighters (FTF) are spreading all over the country, especially in South Asia after IS was defeated in Iraq. How alarming is this, especially for Bangladesh?
I think that there is a great concern about FTF who went to Syria and Iraq to fight with Islamic State (IS). Finding ways to get out of Syria and Iraq and getting to other places, some of these individuals are very dangerous people. There is concern that if they are able to get to some place that will enable them to reconstitute networks and develop capabilities, they would constitute a threat to that country. I think as we look at the region more broadly, that is South and SouthEast Asia, what we think we understand is, that is the region IS is interested in: and that is quite worrying.
How should we approach the foreign terrorist fighter returning?
Our policy is that the countries of origin of foreign terrorist fighters should repatriate those individuals, prosecute them where it’s appropriate to do so, but in any event, certainly have in place, programs that provide for the appropriate monitoring, de-radicalization, and integration of those individuals.
One of our concerns is that, leaving them where they are in northeastern Syria, maybe feasible in the short term. But in the longer term that could create problems, both for Bangladesh, but frankly for other places those individuals might travel to as well.
Online radicalization is a major threat. More and more people are radicalized online and through social media. How do you think we can stop a lone wolf or a wolf pack attack?
I wish I could give a simple answer that would involve one or two things that societies need to do to address this complicated problem. But unfortunately it is a very complex challenge. And it involves a range of efforts running parallel to and complementing each other to help change the mentality of individuals who self radicalize, but also to change the environment breeding self radicalization.
I think this is one of those things that is very important to understand, that often people go through some sort of traumatic event in their life or some sort of challenge that leaves them a little vulnerable to radicalization. Having systems and programs in place that allow people to understand what those signs of radicalization look like when someone is going through that kind of experience [is vital]. As a corollary to that, having in place systems that provide for effective intervention to steer people off the path of radicalization [is also important].
It’s a very complicated thing to do well, but it’s something that I think is really important, particularly in societies where there are people who feel marginalized for a number of reasons.
Will shutting down websites be enough to combat radicalization?
Unfortunately, again, this is an issue where there is no single solution to the problem. Shutting down websites or removing content from the internet is not sufficient to really address these issues.
The techniques that have proven to work better over time are alternative narratives or so called counter narratives. In the United States we would say the best remedy for bad speech is more speech. That right to free expression is enshrined in our constitution and that’s the way we approach the particular issue of addressing so called bad speech.
But I would say across a range of societies, one of the things that I think we have seen as a contributing factor to radicalization by IS and AQIS, and other extremist and terrorist groups, is the absence of messaging that counters what those groups are putting out. That, I think, is something that all societies need to be particularly focused on. The population that really is the most at risk to that sort of messaging if it’s not countered effectively, are young people.
That I think is something that terrorists groups have certainly figured out and they have exploited that in a very opportunistic way, trying to focus on messaging that targets those populations. Responding to, and being mindful of the challenges they are going through, as they emerge from being young people to being adults, is an effective approach.
AQIS has been silent for a long time. Do you think they pose a threat to Bangladesh as well?
With big AQ, one of the things we worry about is that while the whole world’s attention for the past several years has understandably been focused on IS, because of the terrible events in Syria and Iraq and elsewhere, Al-Qaeda which is a very opportunistic organization, has quietly taken advantage of that time to reconstitute capability and to expand it’s networks. We are quite concerned that they are poised to do something to try to reassert their position as the vanguard of international and transnational terrorism. I would say AQIS very much fits in that broader trend and that’s quite worrying.
What are you doing in Bangladesh to counter violent extremism?
We are engaged in a range of programs that we are partnering in, with the government of Bangladesh. Those are carried out and implemented in different parts of the country and target a range of different audiences that are considered to be at risk. Those include, but aren’t limited to, women and young people in particular.
