20 years after the Madrid attacks, violent extremism is far from over

20 years after the Madrid attacks, violent extremism is far from over

Post By World Al-Qaeda, euroviews, extremism, Houthis, Madrid, Terrorist attack

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not represent in any way the editorial position of Euronews.

As we reflect on the lessons learned in the past two decades, it is clear that there are no easy solutions or quick fixes to the threat posed by Islamist terrorism, Dr Hans-Jakob Schindler writes.

Two decades ago, on March 11, 2004, Europe was shaken by what is still one of the deadliest terror attacks on its soil.

The Madrid train bombings, which claimed the lives of 191 people and injured over 2,000 others, left an indelible mark on Spain and the global community.

As we mark the anniversary of this tragic event, it is evident that despite significant advances in counter-terrorism capabilities, the challenges posed by Islamist extremism and terrorism remain as complex and formidable as ever.

The intervening years have seen a string of horrific attacks hit Europe, from the 7/7 Underground attacks in London, to the Manchester Arena bombing and the attacks on the offices of Charlie Hebdo and the Bataclan theatre in Paris, as well as the attack on a Christmas Market in Berlin, along with countless smaller incidents that have claimed the lives of innocent civilians and sowed fear and division in communities across Europe and beyond.

While many more attacks have been prevented in time, the inability of security services to stop them entirely underscores the complexity and persistence of the threat.

A rapidly moving target

One of the central challenges faced by counter-terrorism practitioners is the dynamic and adaptive nature of Islamist terrorist groups.

Despite concerted efforts to degrade their capabilities and disrupt their networks, groups such as al-Qaeda and ISIS as well as their various branches continue to demonstrate resilience and an appetite to carry out or inspire attacks.

Their ability to adapt to changing geopolitical dynamics, exploit technological advancements, and capitalise on local grievances makes them formidable adversaries.

The ongoing conflict in Gaza has provided an apparent impetus for these groups to stay relevant. In the immediate aftermath of Hamas’ attack on 7 October last year, both the so-called ISIS and al-Qaeda called on their followers to carry out strikes against the West and Jews in particular.

Hamas itself has been revealed to rely on worrying levels of support in the West, and it is a question of when, and not if its sympathisers will be inspired to more violence on our streets.

The phenomenon of returning foreign fighters further compounds the challenge of countering Islamist terrorism.

In recent years, Europe has struggled to address the influx of battle-hardened individuals with the potential to carry out attacks here.

Repeated arrests of cells loyal to ISKP, the ISIS affiliate in Afghanistan, in several countries in Europe since 2020 demonstrate that organised attacks of trained fighters also remain a clear threat.

The scale and scope of this challenge are daunting, requiring robust border security measures, effective intelligence-sharing mechanisms, and comprehensive strategies for rehabilitation and reintegration.

Putting a stop to it online

Over the past decade, the proliferation of online radicalisation represented a real paradigm shift in the threat landscape.

While online radicalisation is itself not new, the COVID-19 pandemic turbo-charged the dissemination of terrorist and extremist propaganda and increased online recruitment and incitement on a global scale.

The anonymity and accessibility afforded by online platforms have facilitated the radicalisation of individuals who may never have come into contact with extremists or terrorists and their ideologies in the physical world.

In the last few years, we have increasingly seen young people in particular prosecuted for planning such attacks inspired by online content. These solitary online radicalisations pose a significant challenge for law enforcement and intelligence agencies.

Despite recent legislation at EU and national level, addressing this challenge in practice is remarkably difficult.

Most social media platforms and online fora have struggled to prevent extremist and terrorist content from being shared and promoted, while others simply still do not invest sufficient resources.

Beyond removing such content, the focus of the authorities and counter-extremism organisations must also be on countering these messages through education and de-radicalisation.

The fact that a group as brutal as the Houthis, previously unknown to most of those who now champion them, has been able to stylise itself successfully as a liberation movement online, shows just how serious the information vacuum is and how weak the defensive mechanisms of online platforms are, some of which are among the most profitable business entities in human history.

No easy solutions, no quick fixes

Recent events underscore the need not only for proper targeting of extremism prevention, but also for greater vigilance and cooperation among international partners.

The transnational nature of the Islamist terrorism threat necessitates a coordinated and collaborative response that transcends borders and bureaucratic silos.

Intelligence-sharing, capacity-building, and diplomatic engagement are essential components of a holistic approach to countering violent extremism.

Similar to the financial industry, online service providers must finally become fully part of the first line of defence.

Treating them primarily as outside partners, with only general regulatory guidelines and fines not commensurate with their immense profit margins, is a gap in the system protecting our societies that should be eliminated.

As we reflect on the lessons learned in the past two decades, it is clear that there are no easy solutions or quick fixes to the threat posed by Islamist terrorism.

We must remain vigilant and proactive in our efforts to confront the poison of violent extremism if we want to minimise the recurrence of further tragedies like the Madrid train bombings.

The 20th anniversary serves as a poignant reminder of the enduring nature of the threat and the imperative of collective action to address it.

Dr Hans-Jakob Schindler is Senior Director at the Counter Extremism Project.

At Euronews, we believe all views matter. Contact us at [email protected] to send pitches or submissions and be part of the conversation.

Source link

#years #Madrid #attacks #violent #extremism

The UNRWA case reveals a much larger problem with humanitarian aid

Post By World euroviews, extremism, Humanitarian aid, Israel Hamas war, The Gaza Strip, UNRWA

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not represent in any way the editorial position of Euronews.

The global consensus that humanitarian work is essential too easily surrenders the moral high ground, often with devastating consequences. It is time to recover that ground, Ambassador Mark Wallace and Dr Hans-Jakob Schindler write.

Evidence implicating UNRWA employees in the 7 October terrorist attacks should come as no surprise to anyone who has followed the activities of the UN’s agency for Palestinian refugees closely.

Allegations that some UNRWA workers were in fact Hamas operatives are merely the latest iteration of a much larger problem plaguing the international aid sector.

A stunning lack of oversight and regulation of humanitarian funds over the past several decades has allowed untold billions in taxpayer money to make their way into terrorists’ coffers.

While aid agencies may baulk at what they perceive as burdensome “red tape”, strict oversight and transparency are in fact fundamental to humanitarian work: they ensure that aid is delivered to those who need it, not diverted to extremist and terrorist groups.

Claims of no knowledge increasingly strain credulity

For years, UNRWA has played host to bad actors uninterested in a peaceful resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

According to a dossier presented by Israeli intelligence, one in ten staff are terrorist “operatives”.

Some 23% of male UNRWA workers in Gaza have ties to Hamas or Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), compared to 15% of male Gazans as a whole. And 49% are alleged to have “close relatives” also tied to either Hamas or PIJ.

Claims by UNRWA that it had no knowledge of the vast network of Hamas tunnels under schools and hospitals, funded by billions of dollars of diverted aid, increasingly strain credulity.

Several UNRWA personnel over the years have been discovered to be terrorists or officials of terrorist organisations, including PIJ rocket-maker Awad al-Qiq, former Hamas interior minister Said Siam, and Humam Khalil Abu-Mulal al-Balawi, a suicide bomber who killed seven CIA employees in Afghanistan in 2009.

On 7 October, 12 UNRWA personnel helped Hamas execute the massacre, or aided the group in the wake of the attack.

According to the dossier, one of the agency staffers took a woman hostage, another dispensed ammunition, and a third took part in mass murder at an Israeli kibbutz.

This case is no exception

How did humanitarian workers come to play a role in the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust?

The reality is that UNRWA is by no means the exception when it comes to humanitarian terror financing. In the world of international aid, it’s an occupational hazard.

Throughout the 1990s, the Taliban regularly harassed and robbed aid agencies. The current Taliban regime likewise uses a network of sham local organisations to divert aid money.

In the early 2000s, reports emerged that in Somalia, the al-Qaida affiliate al-Shabaab had siphoned off so much international aid that it established a “Humanitarian Coordination Office”, charging aid groups to “register”.

Several years later, al-Shabaab continued to extort aid deliveries via roadblocks and so-called “taxes”.

In 2018, a partial audit of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) found that some $700 million (€649m) of US taxpayer-funded programming in Iraq and Syria had been improperly vetted.

That same year, several dozen individuals and organisations who had received USAID funding in the region were blacklisted, and over $200m (€185.5m) in funds were frozen.

The Houthi rebel group in Yemen stifles almost all movement of international aid through the areas they control; they have set up a “humanitarian” agency, the Supreme Council for the Management and Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs and International Cooperation (SCMCHA), for the express purpose of re-directing aid toward their own militant ends. The results have been catastrophic for the Yemeni people.

Decisions that didn’t age well

Regulating aid is not simply about alleviating security concerns. On the ground, any dime relinquished to a militant group is unlikely to achieve its stated aims and, as in the case of UNRWA, in fact, exacerbates the conflict it is trying to alleviate.

Just two years ago, the Biden administration began funding UNRWA again on the basis that the organisation had made commitments to “transparency, accountability, and neutrality”.

Several European governments, including Germany, even increased UNRWA funding in the wake of the October attacks.

Those decisions have obviously not aged well. But they are the result of a steady flow of arguments from humanitarian workers and aid groups who claim that regulations and sanctions, even with humanitarian exemptions, do little more than hamper their work.

This attitude is dangerously dismissive, as former UNRWA General Counsel James Lindsay wrote in a 2009 report: “UNRWA has taken very few steps to detect and eliminate terrorists from [its] ranks…and no steps at all to prevent members of terrorist organisations, such as Hamas, from joining.”

We can’t keep surrendering the moral high ground

Brutal terror groups and extremist regimes will always see humanitarian funds as quasi-piggy banks for enhancing their own power.

Effective oversight, budget transparency, complete reporting requirements, as well as internal and external controls are indispensable elements to ensure that any developing problems are caught early, aid diversion is mitigated, and guardrails are in place to prevent international aid workers from being involved in terror groups or attacks.

Despite criticism from the EU’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs, several European countries, in addition to the US, have now suspended payments to UNRWA. This is a step in the right direction.

The global consensus that humanitarian work is essential too easily surrenders the moral high ground, often with devastating consequences.

It is time to recover that ground, which has for too long provided cover for the worst acts of terrorism.

Ambassador Mark Wallace serves as CEO and Dr Hans-Jakob Schindler is Senior Director at the Counter Extremism Project.

At Euronews, we believe all views matter. Contact us at [email protected] to send pitches or submissions and be part of the conversation.

Source link

#UNRWA #case #reveals #larger #problem #humanitarian #aid

Islamophobia is surging throughout Europe. Here’s how we stop it

Post By World euroviews, extremism, Islam, Islamophobia, Muslim, United Kingdom

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not represent in any way the editorial position of Euronews.

It’s crucial for leaders and everyday people to unite in a remarkable effort to confront the pervasive hatred in our communities. It’s not just minorities that are at risk, it’s the Western world too, and our shared values of freedom, justice and equality, Naz Shah writes.

Earlier this month, a plot between AfD party officials and neo-Nazis to deport millions of ethnic minorities from Germany was uncovered.

But this conspiracy is part of a sinister undercurrent sweeping Europe and the wider Western world – one that goes hand-in-hand with a relentless surge in Islamophobia.

Since the atrocities of 7 October and the ongoing onslaught against the people of Gaza, Islamophobia in the UK has surged 600%.

Yet the British government has responded by inflaming rhetoric rather than promoting messages of unity.

Recently, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak used an Islamophobic trope as a response to another Muslim MP, which I was forced to call out on the floor of the Commons.

Meanwhile, the Conservative government has spent their time and effort – not healing worsening social ties or resolving the conflict in the Middle East – but forcing through the controversial Rwanda asylum plan that is the epitome of institutionalised xenophobia.

But xenophobia is becoming more than normalised in the echelons of political power – it is becoming key to winning elections across Europe, and beyond.

It’s all down to the power of fear

From Sweden to Greece, far-right groups and populist leaders are not just participating in elections; they are winning, often in record numbers.

Geert Wilders’ ascent in the Netherlands, fueled by decades-worth of anti-Muslim rhetoric, including the promise to ban mosques and the Qur’an, exemplifies how Europe is faced with a political trend not towards integration and acceptance, but hate and exclusion.

And it could get a lot worse.

Should Donald Trump be elected US President this November, the Western world will have turned a new disturbing corner, where minorities become scapegoats for the ills of Western society.

For example, Trump recently said immigrants were “poisoning the blood [of America]” to raucous applause from crowds.

There is no doubt that his ascent to the White House would herald an even stronger far-right revival, emboldening new populists to emerge from other EU nations.

But why is this divisive rhetoric, key to electoral success, resonating with so many? The answer lies in the power of fear.

Working tirelessly to humanise the other

For example, the great replacement theory that so many far-right populists exhort asserts Western civilization is facing an existential threat in a culture war against Western values.

That narrative, of the West fighting for survival against an imagined onslaught of Islamization, is designed to tap into deep-seated existential fears.

And to some degree, it’s working.

Europe is being pulled towards far-right ideologies at a scale reminiscent of the preludes to World War II.

It isn’t just a political trend; it’s a dangerous slide towards an era of division and hostility, one that will challenge the very foundations of our democratic values.

How then, do we address a trend that threatens to engulf Western Muslims, other minorities, and core Western values of empathy, tolerance, and mutual respect?

Well, for one, we must work tirelessly to humanise the other. History shows that escalating persecution and violence against minorities is always paired with their dehumanization.

A set of values against the far right’s divisive rhetoric

This is why education must play a pivotal role. Schools must incorporate curricula that foster a better understanding of Islamic culture through exposure and knowledge of those with different backgrounds.

But education in schools must complement wider education in society.

That’s why my participation in the Conference of European and British Muslim Leaders this past year was a pivotal moment for the British Muslim community.

This gathering, orchestrated by the Muslim World League in London convened hundreds of the most influential Muslim figures in Britain. At the centre of the conference was the Charter of Makkah, a sweeping bill of Islamic rights and values backed by over 1,200 scholars from 139 countries which testifies to Islam’s commitment to modern ideals.

For example, the charter emphasizes environmental stewardship, religious tolerance, and women’s rights.

But these values are more than abstract ideals; they are integral to the daily lives of British Muslims. Importantly, they go directly against the divisive rhetoric of far-right extremists.

It’s time to put out the fires of extremist ideologies

This matters immensely. Recognising the shared values between British Muslims and the wider society strikes at the root of extremism. And such appreciation strengthens the fabric of our society, bolstering its resilience against divisive forces.

But resilience cannot only come from us. The media, society, and government also have important roles to play.

For example, policy interventions remain crucial. The political obsession with Islamophobia is distracting policymakers from addressing the increase in white nationalist terrorism, which has risen at least 320% in the past decade and increasingly targeting the young.

Ironically, the narratives that far-right parties are spewing against Muslims are precisely the fuel that this extremist ideology depends upon.

This is why governments should develop information campaigns about the dangers of the far-right alongside legislation that protects communities from hate crimes and hate speech.

This is particularly relevant to social media and the online world, where the far-right feels they have a free pass to spread hatred.

It is also time for the UK government to adopt the All-Party Parliamentary Group on British Muslims’ definition of Islamophobia. After all, how can you tackle something you cannot define or understand?

Ultimately, it’s crucial for leaders and everyday people to unite in a remarkable effort to confront the pervasive hatred in our communities.

Because it’s not just minorities that are at risk, it’s the Western world too, and our shared values of freedom, justice and equality.

Naz Shah is a Member of the UK Parliament for Bradford West, serving as Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Muslim Women, and Vice Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Groups on Race and Community, British Muslims, and others. Shah has also served as Shadow Minister for Crime Reduction, Shadow Minister for Community Cohesion and Shadow Minister for Women and Equalities.

At Euronews, we believe all views matter. Contact us at [email protected] to send pitches or submissions and be part of the conversation.

Source link

#Islamophobia #surging #Europe #Heres #stop

Europe confronts an increasingly transnational far-right threat

Post By World extremism, Far right, France, Germany, Ireland, twitter

Movements that could once be tackled one government at a time are more and more able to connect with each other across borders – and Elon Musk’s Twitter has given them a gift.

Since the outbreak of the current war in Israel and Palestine, numerous European governments have warned of an uptick in two violent threats: Islamist extremism and antisemitism. Authorities in Germany, for instance, say that the threat of a jihadist attack is “higher than it has been for a long time”.

But in terms of what’s playing out on European streets and online, the threat of an organised, sometimes violent and increasingly transnational far right is becoming impossible to ignore.

Britain last month saw far-right counterprotesters attempt to disrupt a peaceful pro-Palestinian march in central London. Recent protests in Spain against an amnesty extended to Catalonian independence leaders attracted far-right elements.

And in France, the recent stabbing of a young boy in a southeastern village sparked days of protest, many of which featured out-and-out far right groups, including some from the notoriously extreme “Identitarian” movement.

The presence of extremists at the marches has been alarming enough that French Interior Minister Gérald Darmanin is seeking to ban three specific far-right groups, some of whose members are on a government extremism watchlist.

Announcing the crackdown, he cited the example of Ireland, where a mob recently ran riot in the centre of Dublin after several children were stabbed outside a school in broad daylight. Warning that “there is a mobilisation on the ultra-right that wants to tip us into civil war,” he praised the authorities for helping avoid “an Irish-style scenario”.

That scenario extends beyond the violence in Dublin itself and includes a wider, long-brewing movement with international reach.

While some commentators attributed the violence in Ireland to anger among working-class people suffering in a housing crisis while immigrants and asylum seekers are provided with accommodation and welfare benefits, others dismissed that argument as an excuse for something far more sinister.

Close observers of the Irish far right insist that the roots of the violence run deep, warning that openly racist and fascist groups are galvanising their supporters using increasingly violent rhetoric directed squarely at asylum seekers and immigrants of all kinds, especially those who are not white.

The incident followed a pattern that has played out in many European countries, as ostensibly grassroots far-right movements latch onto assorted issues – transgender rights, immigration, the place of Muslims in society, or Covid control measures and vaccination – and put pressure on democratic political systems with increasingly angry rhetoric and organised, sometimes violent protests.

While they often rail against their national governments’ policies, these movements have an increasingly transnational character. And across Europe and beyond, these factions now have a newly hospitable environment in which to communicate: the platform formerly known as Twitter.

Planet Musk

Since he took over the platform last year, Tesla and SpaceX founder Elon Musk has become increasingly erratic and politically extreme, routinely engaging positively with racist and antisemitic users. According to Heidi Beirich, co-founder of the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism, the renaissance of Twitter/X as a haven for the far right is a major development.

“Every form of far-right extremist is using the platform now in ways that they only could before on unregulated sites like Telegram,” she told Euronews.

“Musk has allowed prominent neo-Nazis and other white supremacists back on the platform, including very extreme people like Andrew Anglin of Daily Stormer, and they are pushing their ideas out there. The site is also monetising extremist material.

“This is true internationally as well. Our recent report on Generation Identity accounts on Twitter, which were pulled and then reinstated, shows the transnational reach of the problem.

“Twitter is an essential part of the far-right online ecosystem now, for raising money, recruiting and propagandising. It may well be the largest hate site on the internet at this point.”

The events on the streets of Dublin, which saw a tram and a bus attacked and many businesses looted, were heavily amplified online by local influencers with large followings on Twitter/X and international figures in the far-right ecosystem in the US and the UK.

But also getting involved was Musk himself, who engaged with extreme users trying to call attention tweeted that Irish Taoiseach Leo Varadkar “Hates Irish people” and complained that “The current Irish government clearly cares more about praise from woke media than their own people”.

Into the mainstream

While its value has plummeted and advertisers are leaving, taking crucial revenue with them, the platform’s moderation policies have a huge impact on European countries.

Unlike Telegram or other encrypted messaging apps, Twitter/X’s open nature means images, footage, false and misleading claims and hate speech can far more easily leach into public conversation – including via pickup from populist politicians and parties trying to appeal to receptive audiences.

And while none of Ireland’s very small far-right political parties have any hope of entering government any time soon, other countries have already seen their established ones embrace and fuel the anger on the far right, bringing outlandish and extreme ideas into the centre of electoral politics.

As for the future, Beirich warns that there are frightening scenarios in the offing – and that in many European countries, things are already well advanced down a dark path.

“What was fringe not too long ago has now breached the cordon sanitaire, especially when talking about immigration and Muslims,” she told Euronews. “We’ve just seen this in the Netherlands as well. The biggest tragedy would be if the AfD makes huge gains in the upcoming German elections.

“At this point, there is little to distinguish say [French extremist politician Éric] Zemmour’s politics from the white supremacists in the Identitarian movement and many elements in Marine Le Pen’s party. I would argue the Finns Party, who are in coalition in Helsinki, are extremists that are already in power, meaning they have breached the mainstream. And Viktor Orbán’s government in Hungary is much the same.

“Unfortunately, the failure to take action against the far right online and off has now left us with extremism in the mainstream.”

Source link

#Europe #confronts #increasingly #transnational #farright #threat

Should Germany ban AfD? What impact could this have?

Post By World AfD Alternative für Deutschland, ban, democracy, extremism, Far right, Germany

Last year a German court ruled the far-right party was a threat to democracy, allowing it to be monitored by the country’s security services.

A recent study by Germany’s Institute for Human Rights exploring the possibility of banning the Alternative for Germany (AfD) has put the far-right political party under the spotlight.

Published on 7 June, the study says the AfD now poses such a danger to the country’s democratic order “it could be banned by the Federal Constitutional Court.”

AfD can be legally banned because its explicit goals are “to eliminate the free democratic basic order” and “abolish the guarantee of human dignity” enshrined in Germany’s constitution, claims the institute.

Set up in 2013, the AfD has been accused of harbouring anti-democratic tendencies, though it officially supports democracy in Germany.

Euronews has approached the party for comment.

Banning the AfD has been floated in Germany before. A court last year ruled the party should be considered a potential threat to democracy, paving the way for it to be put under surveillance by national security services.

Earlier this year, Germany decided to label AfD’s youth wing, the Young Alternative for Germany, as an extremist group. The formal accusation of extremism is as far as the country can go without issuing an outright ban.

Domestic intelligence services have also labelled the Thuringia state chapter of the party a right-wing extremist group. Earlier this week, its leader Björn Höcke was accused of purposefully using a Nazi slogan at a May 2021 campaign event.

But while the Germany Institute for Human Rights’ study reignited a debate around banning the party in Germany, AfD took advantage of the situation, turning their condemnation into a call to arms for supporters.

The far-right party – which opposes Islam, immigration and the EU – is worrying Germany’s political class, with support climbing from 10% last June to 18% now, according to Politico’s Poll of Polls.

A major backfire

The proposal to ban AfD has “backfired massively because the AfD took it upon themselves to paint a different picture in the media,” according to Una Ivona Titz, a journalist and researcher at the Amadeu Antonio Foundation, a group focused on extremism and the far-right.

“Right now, they’re garnering a lot of support on Telegram because they’re rallying their supporters and they’re painting themselves as a persecuted party within an unjust system which they’re fighting from within,” she told Euronews.

While the study aimed to increase awareness over the threats posed by AfD, “what we’re seeing is that it has emboldened them and actually helped them bolster the image of AfD,” Titz explained.

“Germany has upcoming elections in Saxony, and right now the AfD is somewhere around 30%,” she added. “We’re fearing that it will further embolden or that it might lead to people who are sceptical or withholding their votes to actually go vote for the AfD because they perceive them as the sort of underdog who is treated unjustly.”

In the latest district elections in Sonneberg, southern Thuringia, last weekend, AfD’s Robert Stuhlmann received 46.7% of the votes, ahead of any other candidate but not quite enough to avoid a runoff, which has been scheduled for June 25.

Previous attempts at banning an elected party in Germany have failed and backfired against its organisers — with a tentative ban on far-right party NPD in 2017 being rejected by the second Senate of the Federal Constitutional Court.

Politicians also appear to be cautious about suggesting to ban AfD.

“The study has gained traction as an online debate and has then subsequently been picked up by politicians from the entire political spectrum,” Titz said. “So you had politicians from the CDU, from SBT, and from the left boycotting the proposal of a ban or being sceptical towards the ban because they saw it as a misplaced attempt.”

“For example, Sebastian Hoffmann [from SPD] talked about the AfD as an anti-constitutional party, but, on the other hand, he sees the primary goal of politics as putting the AfD in a sort of political limbo where it becomes no longer electable and thus avoiding a ban.”

An impossible dilemma

The idea of banning a party is not only politically fraught, but also poses a moral dilemma for many. As Princeton professor Jan-Werner Mueller put it in a 2013 article, democracies are “damned if they do, damned if they don’t” ban extremist parties.

While forbidding a popular party can undermine the pillars of democracy, he says leaving a country exposed to the threat of extremism can be dangerous and “ultimately leave no democracy to defend.”

That’s why countries have generally avoided banning extremist parties, and have explored different approaches.

“There’s a spectrum of how deep the state can go to act against extremist groups,” Lorenzo Vidino, Director of the Program on Extremism at George Washington University, told Euronews. “And that is based on different histories, different constitutional, different social and cultural approaches.”

“There’s no right or wrong way.”

On one end of the spectrum, Vidino pointed to the US approach, which is based “on an extreme tolerance of the intolerant”, meaning domestic groups that are considered extremist can be tolerated.

“The Ku Klux Klan is legal in America,” he said. “They can hold rallies, burn crosses – they occasionally do that. That’s for a variety of reasons based on the Constitution and freedom of speech.”

These groups are still monitored by the state, “but it’s basically impossible to ban a domestic extremist group in America,” Vidino said.

At the other end of the spectrum, he points to countries like Germany. “There’s very low tolerance of extremist groups, even if not directly violent.”

“That of course stems from German recent history.”

Even in countries where extremist parties can be banned, the decision “is never one that’s taken lightly, for a variety of reasons,” Vidino said.

“First of all, there’s a complicated legal process. But there’s also a political side to it, that leads to the question of whether we would also then ban extremist groups on the left, like environmental ones.”

There’s also a practical issue, Vidino said. “If you ban a group, it doesn’t just disappear. AfD has millions of supporters – the problem it poses isn’t solved after you ban the party. In fact, you might lose the control you have over it by dissolving the party.”

What to do then?

Vidino said the best tool to counter extremist parties is monitoring.

But there are others.

According to Titz, one solution that has proven effective in weakening the appeal of extremist far-right parties like AfD is to strengthen media literacy towards democracy, especially in areas like the former DDR, in eastern Germany.

“You have a high level of scepticism towards democracy as a whole, and what really helps, statistically, is to invest in programmes right there, and keep them [AfD] on their toes with regard to their rhetoric,” she said.

“Everything that the AfD puts out has to be documented and monitored and counterbalanced.”

Source link

#Germany #ban #AfD #impact

Zittrex Store

Cart

Cart

Tag: extremism