Campusalam

• Skip to main content
• Skip to main navigation
• Skip to search
• Skip to navigation for this section

It is best to have the support and co-operation of appropriate people before you need it. One of the benefits of having a support network or a well-considered partnership approach is that it extends the range of knowledge and expertise that you have available if a highly-specialised need or crisis erupts without warning.

There has been much talk, and even controversy over ‘engaging’ with the Muslim community, and non-Muslims can experience a degree of confusion over whom they should or shouldn't ’engage’ with. Looking for shortcuts, people outside the Muslim community seek guidance on which are the right groups. It has been argued that there is a fundamental division between, for example, ‘Sufis’ and ‘Islamists’; and that to counter extremism one should only ‘engage with the moderate majority’ and ignore Salafis or those sometimes labeled 'Wahhabis'. Others maintain that this strategy is misguided, as some from the Salafi tradition or with a so-called 'Islamist' engagement with political issues can have the greatest credibility with those who are attracted to extremist narratives.

Certain members of the Muslim community have, through experience, gained expertise in countering jihadi or terrorist propaganda. The most successful at doing this have certain attributes: an understanding of the ideology in question as well as the strategies typically used by the movement; specialist religious knowledge that enables the practitioner to challenge the ideology’s propaganda on its own terms; and both religious and ‘street’ credibility within the young vulnerable group. Where any of these are lacking, for example if the leader is from a different school or tradition that has been anathematized by the radical group, then their intervention is likely to be ineffective.

Constructive engagement can be found across the full range of traditions, trends and orientations in Islam. So too can ineffectual engagement. In countering extremism, an intervention made by ‘Salafis’ which meets the criteria for success will deliver more than one by ‘Sufis’ that does not. Rather than judging effectiveness by religious adherence or ideology, which an outsider would find hard to judge, there are three rules of thumb that are more useful.

Case study:
One of the community leaders who engages effectively to counter extremism vividly recalls listening to a powerful exposition of al-Qaida ideology in an indoctrination setting. Such experience is invaluable in coming to understand the pressure points – religious, cultural and psychological – employed and in helping other community leaders to assess the strengths and weaknesses of the al-Qaida narrative and the points at which to make effective interventions.

Broadly speaking this approach requires religious, community and political knowledge. This in turn points to a particular kind of understanding – an ‘insider’s view’. This perspective will be especially insightful when the intervening community representative has had a prior relationship with the al-Qaida propagandist in question. What sets this kind of understanding apart is its high level of community context and empathy. This can have enormous benefits when community groups seek to utilise it for a practical, preventative counter-terrorist purpose.