Two years since the start of the Arab Uprisings, we now face a Middle East where politics have been dramatically transformed. Much to the surprise of the rest of the world, democracy has brought about the transition of mainstream Islamist groups from their historic position of opposition to that of official power. Tunisia and Egypt – the first countries to overthrow their autocratic governments in the Arab Uprisings – are now governed by Hizb al-Nahda and the Muslim Brotherhood respectively, both of which despite being Islamist groups have been elected into power democratically. With such an unforeseeable political shift emerging and the fates of many post “Arab Spring” countries yet to be decided, it is important to ask how this transition in Tunisia and Egypt transpired in the first place and whether it is likely to have negative implications on the rest of the world.

Quilliam’s first strategic assessment, “The Middle East’s Changing Political Landscape”, provides an insight into Hizb al-Nahda and the Muslim Brotherhood so that we can begin to understand how and why they were able to gain public support and come into power democratically and more importantly, what this shift in power implies for the Middle East’s relations with the international community.

Noman Benotman, President of Quilliam, says:

“With many other Middle Eastern countries still undergoing their transition to democracy, it is critical that we are able to comprehend the reasons for the increase in popularity of mainstream Islamist groups as legitimate political powers.  This strategic assessment provides such understanding of Hizb al-Nahda and the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood and serves as a critical analysis of how both these groups may steer their future relations with the international community.”

Download the full strategic assessment here.

]]> http://www.quilliamfoundation.org/press-releases/the-middle-easts-changing-political-landscape-a-new-quilliam-strategic-assessment-of-the-positional-evolution-of-hizb-al-nahda-and-the-muslim-brotherhood-2/feed/ 0 http://www.quilliamfoundation.org/uncategorized/the-middle-easts-changing-political-landscape-a-new-quilliam-strategic-assessment-of-the-positional-evolution-of-hizb-al-nahda-and-the-muslim-brotherhood/ http://www.quilliamfoundation.org/uncategorized/the-middle-easts-changing-political-landscape-a-new-quilliam-strategic-assessment-of-the-positional-evolution-of-hizb-al-nahda-and-the-muslim-brotherhood/#comments Wed, 15 May 2013 16:29:39 +0000 milly http://www.quilliamfoundation.org/?p=3264 Continue Reading]]> here.  ]]> http://www.quilliamfoundation.org/uncategorized/the-middle-easts-changing-political-landscape-a-new-quilliam-strategic-assessment-of-the-positional-evolution-of-hizb-al-nahda-and-the-muslim-brotherhood/feed/ 0 http://www.quilliamfoundation.org/press-releases/quilliam-memo-the-need-for-a-21st-century-attitude-towards-and-agenda-for-countering-terrorism/ http://www.quilliamfoundation.org/press-releases/quilliam-memo-the-need-for-a-21st-century-attitude-towards-and-agenda-for-countering-terrorism/#comments Fri, 10 May 2013 20:12:01 +0000 milly http://www.quilliamfoundation.org/?p=3245 Continue Reading]]>

One of the biggest problems faced by the international policy community in countering violent extremism is the lack of consistency in the understanding of the issue and approach to addressing it. This lack of consistency is clearly evident in many definitions of ‘terrorism’ and ‘violent extremism’ used across the world and the differing criteria allocated to labelling groups and individuals as ‘terrorists’ or ‘extremists’. Added to this, the numerous government departments and the individual counter extremism strategies they respectively employ further complicates the picture, making the global fight against violent extremism one which is fragmented and ineffective. It is safe to say that this is an on-going and global battle which will last for generations to come, but without a universal understanding of the threat and challenges faced, do we know what exactly what our policies are battling against? And are we sure that they are doing it in the right way?

In this memo, we would like to share with you our thoughts on the key challenges faced by the international community in countering terrorism and violent extremism and why we think a new 21^st century agenda is needed to ensure that future efforts are successful.

Challenge 1: Lack of universally accepted definitions of ‘terrorism’ and ‘violent extremism’

The first hurdle faced by the international community is knowing exactly what it is trying to counter in the first place. In this, there needs to be globally accepted definitions of the terms ‘terrorism’ and ‘violent extremism’, which are currently far from precise. Both terms can mean exactly the same or two very different things. Their essence can be tactical in nature (seeking to enable terrorist/violent extremist groups or persons to engage with their enemy to make them aware of their continued presence), or strategic (seeking to bring about political and international change in the interest of the terrorist/violent extremist groups or persons). However, neither term has, to date, been defined in a way which is universally accepted. In fact there are over 300 existing definitions for ‘terrorism’ alone and numerous ongoing debates about how any, all or none of these definitions differ from those related to ‘violent extremism’. Likewise there is no consensus about the relationship between religion and violence or indication as to how much of a part religion plays in terrorist or violently extremist acts. To add to the confusion, it can be argued that the numerous definitions of ‘terrorism’ and ‘extremism’ circulating the globe have led to the international community failing to accurately conceptualise infamous ‘terrorist’ groups, such as Al Qaeda. Without an accurate picture of such groups’ motives and actions, the international community stands no chance in being able to successfully challenge their threats.

Challenge 2:  Lack of clarity around labelling groups and individuals as ‘terrorists’ or ‘violent extremists’

Apart from misunderstanding of the so-called ‘enemy’, this lack of consistency among the international community can pose problems when it comes to differentiating between the terrorist and/or extremist groups and individuals it fights against and those it tolerates. And in fact, following the Arab Uprisings such problems are increasingly occurring. For instance, many groups and individuals previously classified as ‘international terrorists’ are now being praised as ‘leaders’ of the Middle Eastern uprisings and in some cases are even being supported by western governments. A recent example of this is Syria, where the international community is rightly supporting rebel groups opposing dictator Bashar al-Assad’s regime. With a lack of control over the final recipients of this support, however, some of it is unintentionally aiding Salafi-Jihadist rebel groups which have dangerous long term goals for the country and region.

Challenge 3: Understanding our own failings

Before we can start to understand who should be and who shouldn’t be supported, however, we need to understand why there has been such a rapid rise in terrorism and violent extremism over the years and why we are in this position in the first place. Key to this is identifying where we, the international community, have gone wrong and understanding how we can learn from the mistakes made when we waged the ‘War on Terror’ in 2001. Perhaps the most obvious error lies in calling it a ‘war’ in the first instance, as the scale of the problem is far from that and the term is not only highly inappropriate but also extremely provocative. Rather than reducing the threat from terrorism and/or violent extremism, it is clear that the ‘war’ unintentionally promoted generalisations of  and marginalised whole Muslim populations,  declaring them  the enemy without any regard for the vast majority of them who have no radical or violent extremist beliefs.  In effect, what the ‘war’ has done is spread the perception that the enemy of the ‘West’ is Islam as a religion and anyone who follows it rather than just the ‘terrorists’ or ‘violent extremists’ who use their own interpretation of Islam to justify jihad. This in turn has served to increase the threat of terrorism or violent extremism across the globe.

Language aside, it is also important to note that the tactics used by the international community underline the sense that its struggle against terrorism and violent extremism is in fact a ‘war’. For instance, the drone policy of the USA – a military tactic – is increasingly being used in ‘terror hotspots’ across the world. USA initiated drones have killed a large number of innocent civilians, as well as claiming to have killed only a handful of ‘terrorists’. But to date, no concrete evidence exists of the drones’ ability to bring about victory for the international community nor is there any established methodology by which to measure such perceived victory.

Towards a new 21^st century attitude towards and agenda for countering terrorism

With such pressing challenges being faced by the international community, there is a clear need for a new attitude and agenda towards countering terrorism and violent extremism.

To be successful in its objective, this agenda must be:

1. Be developed by a coalition of governmental and non-governmental stakeholders from across the international community and be inclusive of the invaluable role of society in countering terrorism and violent extremism at the grass-roots level.

2. Able to reflect the critical link between the development and success of the strategy itself and the creation and existence of a robust structure to execute it at the domestic and international levels.

3. Be implemented consistently by governmental, non-governmental and civil society stakeholders across the world and minimise the use of provocative language and military tactics.

4. Focus not only on countering terrorism and extremism through anti-terrorism and anti-extremism strategies but also on those numerous socio-economic factors which influence the rise of extremism and lead to terrorism.

5. Be accompanied by a global shift in attitude so that instead of seeing it as a ‘war’ or a ‘fight’, we can start to understand the real issues underpinning the rapid rise of terrorism and violent extremism across the world.

Such agenda is critical to the international community’s struggle against terrorism and violent extremism and must be developed to ensure that any strategies put in play in the future do not have negative effects amongst already vulnerable populations and do not manage to increase the number of terrorist recruits, as policies and practices of the past have done.

We are grateful to Your Excellencies for taking the time to read our memo – your views will be most welcome and much appreciated.

With highest regards,

Quilliam

]]> http://www.quilliamfoundation.org/press-releases/quilliam-memo-the-need-for-a-21st-century-attitude-towards-and-agenda-for-countering-terrorism/feed/ 0 http://www.quilliamfoundation.org/blog/nick-jode-ex-edl-sympathiser-speaks-out-against-hate-from-all-sides/ http://www.quilliamfoundation.org/blog/nick-jode-ex-edl-sympathiser-speaks-out-against-hate-from-all-sides/#comments Thu, 09 May 2013 14:22:55 +0000 admin http://www.quilliamfoundation.org/?p=3241 Continue Reading]]> We within TELL MAMA acknowledge that there is hate from numerous corners in our country today. This includes from those on the Far Right, including the English Defence League and those from groups like Al Muhajiroun, as well as smaller groups like the Birmingham sixwho were imprisoned about a week ago. This is why, when people make the courageous decision to leave such hate behind, we need to acknowledge and listen to their stories about why they changed their life course. We also need to make others aware that there is hope and a future beyond the friendships they may have developed within such groups.

We are therefore honoured to place the following statement from Nick Jode, an ex-EDL supporter on our site. This is his statement:

“For 3 years I was a supporter of the English Defence League until 2012. I was not a ”member” as there is no membership and I decided to stop supporting the EDL in late 2012 as I felt their agenda was different from mine. A few days ago six men pleaded guilty to charges of having the intention of blowing up an EDL march in Dewsbury which would have resorted to the murder and maiming of many people in attendance. I condemn any such violence towards anyone and these men should be sentenced within our law. But I feel it is also important to point out that the time has now come for all sides to put down their hate they have within themselves. The people who were to carry out this crime were Islamic jihadists who do not speak for every Muslim in the UK and beyond and it is now time to stop the hate. I hope someone takes notice of this as the only thing that may happen is the death of someone which I do not want to see.”

Nick can also be found on Twitter (@nickjode73).

Read the original article here:
http://tellmamauk.org/nick-jode-ex-edl-sympathiser-speaks-out-against-hate-from-all-sides/

Born and raised in Essex, Maajid Nawaz was recruited into politicised Islam as a teenager. Abandoning his love of hip hop music, graffiti and girls, he was recruited into Hizb ut-Tahrir (the Liberation Party) where he played a leading and international role in the shaping and dissemination of an aggressive anti-West narrative. While studying for his Arabic and law degree, he travelled around the UK and to Denmark and Pakistan, setting up new cells.

Arriving in Egypt the day before 9/11 his views soon led to his arrest, imprisonment and mental torture, before being thrown into solitary confinement in a Cairo jail reserved for political prisoners. There, while mixing with everyone from the assassins of Egypt’s president to Liberal reformists, he underwent an intellectual transformation and on his release after four years, he publically renounced the Islamist ideology that had defined his life. This move would cost him his marriage, his family and his friends as well as his own personal security.

Six years after his release, Maajid now works all over the world to counter Islamism and to promote democratic ideals through his organisation, The Quilliam Foundation, which he co-founded with former Islamist and bestselling author Ed Husain.

Following in the wake of the extraordinary democratic change in the Arab world, that few would have foretold, Radical is Maajid’s intensely personal account of life inside and out of Islamic extremism. It also highlights one man’s quest to inspire change and challenge extremism in all its forms.

Praise for Radical:

‘Maajid Nawaz was thirty years my junior when I first encountered him in the Torah Prison. His story saddened but inspired me. His innocence and idealism sharply contrasted with the corruption and despotism of his captors. Through Maajid, my faith was renewed that a spring of freedom was bound to happen eventually, and so it did.” – Dr Sa’ad al-Dine Ibrahim, Leading Egyptian political reformer and Mubarak-era political prisoner

“Imagine Homeland crossed with Skins, and you will get some idea of what a gripping, revelatory book this is. Unputdownable.” – Tom Holland, In The Shadow of the Sword, and the best-selling Rubicon: The Triumph and Tragedy of the Roman Republic

‘This book is the account of his redemptive journey – through innocence , biogotry, hardline radicalism and beyond – to a passionate advocacy of human rights and all that this can mean…I am moved beyond measure to read of the transformative effect…on Maajid.’ – Kate Allen, Director, Amnesty International UK

Order your copy of RADICAL today:

Maajid Nawaz’s critically acclaimed autobiography is now available to pre- order as an electronic book. Click image to order.

Radical is the intensely personal account of a journey into – and out of – religious extremism. ‘The UK’s answer to the autobiography of Malcolm X…An engrossing, explosive memoir’ Riz Ahmed, actor, Four Lions

‘This book is the account of a redemptive journey through innocence, bigotry, hardline radicalism and beyond to a passionate advocacy of human rights and all that this can mean… I was moved beyond measure’ Kate Allen, Director, Amnesty International UK

Order RADICAL now

Contact: Twitter: @maajidnawaz www.maajidnawaz.com The Quilliam Foundation 020 7182 7280 http://www.ted.com/talks/maajid_nawaz_a_global_culture_to_fight_extremism.html

The launch title from WH Allen: Published in paperback on 2nd May 2013 Published by Ebury Publishing, represented by The Blair Partnership

Watch the full video here.

Reformist Islamist Maajid Nawaz explains the true motives of the bomber brothers – and what the west must do to stop similar atrocities.

It is becoming increasingly difficult to deny that the Tsarnaev brothers’ attack on the Boston marathon was an ideologically motivated act of terror. It seems these two Chechens turned against their adopted homeland and decided to kill their fellow citizens en masse. But America is not Chechnya’s enemy — Russia is. So why attack America? To understand that, it is necessary to look at how the global jihadist threat has mutated over the past 10 years.

Relentlessly pursued, detained and assassinated, “al-Qaeda Central” is operationally much weaker now than it was in September 2001. But after the assassination of Osama bin Laden the US administration — and much of the world — made the fatal mistake of assuming their target was the men who organised 9/11, not the cause they espoused.

As al-Qaeda Central grew weaker, its jihadist ideology gained strength and spread across the world. These days al-Qaeda is a brand, one that thousands of young Muslims are prepared to sign up to without ever having come into operational contact with the al-Qaeda leadership. Bin Laden may be dead, but the ideological brand he created has gone on to inspire a fully fledged global jihadist insurgency.

A territory the size of France came under jihadist control in sub-Saharan Mali. Jihadists are resurgent in Libya and other north African countries. In Yemen the Abyan province, as well as chunks of land in the southwest of the country, came under direct jihadist rule.

In Syria the uprising to remove the country’s brutal dictator has been all but hijacked by Jabhat al-Nusra, formed by jihadist veterans from Iraq, next door. All this points to an alarming conclusion: al-Qaeda’s brand of jihadism threatens to mutate from the credo of a group to the inspiration for a loose network to the mission of an insurgency able — in some places — to rally a level of popular support. Its ideas are even garnering acceptance in civilian society in some parts. As a result, many more will follow the path of self-radicalisation to action. For this we must be prepared.

In 2002-6 I was imprisoned in Egypt for my own — since disavowed — political Islamist beliefs. I was incarcerated with a north Caucasian from Dagestan, a professional bomb maker who had travelled via Afghanistan to Egypt to train Palestinians in Gaza in how to make bombs to strike at Israel. Here was a global jihadist at his peak. I believe his journey is the key to explaining the thinking behind the actions of the Boston bombers — also from Dagestan.

Jihadists who strike in America believe that by attacking the “far enemy” — that is, the United States — they can weaken American resolve for supporting the “near enemy”, the rulers who stand in the way of a Middle Eastern jidahist superstate.

To achieve this vision al-Qaeda needed to globalise what had been local nationalistic conflicts so that recruits from these conflicts would be prepared to attack American interests in unrelated countries. In other words, Muslims from the north Caucusus — or anywhere else — needed to believe their battlefield was not just Russia (the obvious immediate enemy), but wherever would best serve the interests of establishing the jihadist superstate.

This shift from a local to a global struggle is possible only after the adoption of the jihadist ideological framework. The central tenet of this is that the jihadist’s “people” stop being those of his original nation and become instead “Muslims”. Thus the enemy become “non- Muslims” and there is only one war — that of Islam versus kuffar (non- Muslims). If you accept that, it makes sense for global jihadists to be sending Chechens — whose enemy is not America — to strike at America and not Russia. The aims are to repel American “interference” in those countries where jihadists are deemed to be on the brink of creating their state: the Middle East. But these are not the aims of the Chechen struggle.

This is why the younger brother, Dzhokhar, felt justified, in interviews with federal law enforcers, to give the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq as reasons for attacking his home country of America. All this despite his maintaining no ties to the greater Middle East and probably never having visited the region.

The entry point into jihadist ideology for the brothers was probably a rediscovery of their Chechen Muslim identity, which at some stage mutated into the global jihadist brand that has come to dominate the political discourse of so many angry young Muslims.

When jihadist ideas, stripped in some cases of the al-Qaeda name, can be found floating around Muslim discourse in everyday conversation, it is easy for seemingly integrated young western Muslims to become atttracted to it. Last week the European Union anti-terrorism co-ordinator estimated that 500 European Muslims had travelled to Syria to join jihadist groups there. As David Cameron said after the jihadist attacks on the Algerian gas facility in January, this struggle will take generations.

The only solution is to undermine the global jihadist brand by making its ideology as unpopular as communism has become today. Grassroots democratic alternatives must be supported. Counter-narratives must be disseminated and key facts — for instance, that more Muslims have died in Pakistan as a result of Taliban actions than American drones or that the Taliban were behind those who attacked the schoolgirl Malala Yousafzai for wanting an education — must be widely publicised.

My organisation, Quilliam, has made a start by founding a youth movement called Khudi in Pakistan to challenge extremist ideas, but we are latecomers to this fight.

Only once this counter-ideology has been popularised will we cease to see young, homegrown western Muslims jumping on this bandwagon. Frustratingly, Barack Obama’s administration is ignoring the war of ideas in favour of surgical strikes. Unfortunately, ideas are bulletproof.

Maajid Nawaz is chairman of Quilliam. His autobiography, Radical, is published this week by WH Allen at £8.99

This article was published in the ‘Sunday Times’ newspaper on 28th April 2013.

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/newsreview/features/article1251416.ece