Reframing Muslim 'Radicalism'

本研究旨在评估西方对全球圣战意识形态威胁的政策反应，并制定适当的方法，使其更加有效。 自9/11以来，全球圣战主义的意识形态威胁被广泛解释为“思想之战”，促使人们采取措施，防止弱势群体接受基地组织的暴力极端主义思想。西方政府致力于这场意识形态之战，同时也出现了一系列民间社会倡议，这些倡议基于对威胁性质的各种看法，有时甚至是相互冲突的看法。总的来说，它们反映了过去十年中出现和加强的“反意识形态”的离散全球话语和实践的多种方式，这些话语和实践越来越多地被称为“打击暴力极端主义”。全球圣战主义构成的意识形态威胁的相对新颖的宗教层面也引发了西方长期以来关于公共领域世俗和宗教实践之间关系的更广泛辩论;语言和暴力;以及安全和自由，特别是与西方少数穆斯林社区有关的问题。 尽管为此目的部署了资源，但反意识形态战略仍然相对不发达。一个直接的限制是，在公共和官方话语中，对被认为是全球圣战意识形态的性质的初步描述。这部分是由于传统的安全研究方法和“激进化”研究的新兴子领域的政策圈的主导地位，以及相关的缺乏任何持续的努力，以整合圣战思想的知识，目前解决他们的学术学科范围。这也与某些民间社会行为体和智囊团在制定反意识形态政策反应过程中的意识形态影响力过大有关。此外，这导致未能将打击暴力极端主义的理论和实践置于历史背景中，或借鉴西方以外的当代相似之处。因此，忽视了需要更深入地了解全球圣战思想的传播以及反意识形态倡议本身的扩散，正在催化国家与社会关系的结构性转变，其中有大量的穆斯林社区。它采用创新的跨学科方法来挑战传统的全球圣战主义观点，旨在开辟被忽视的研究领域，加深学术理解，并帮助改善政策实践。这项研究将借鉴被忽视的学术研究领域的见解和方法-包括历史、政治理论、人类学、社会学、伊斯兰研究和区域研究-以扩大政策制定者和从业者可用的知识基础，提醒他们注意全球圣战意识形态的多样性和影响，并加深他们对这种意识形态在不同地理背景下形成的方式的认识。它还将利用对英国，美国和欧洲的主要专家，政策制定者和从业者的实地采访。这项研究将提出将其见解纳入政策制定的具体方法，并探讨如何根据全球圣战现象的多变和复杂性质及其各种影响，更有效地衡量反意识形态干预措施的影响。

This study aims to assess Western policy responses to the threat of global jihadi ideology, and to develop a suitable methodology for making them more effective. Since 9/11, the ideological threat from global jihadism has been widely interpreted as a 'battle of ideas', prompting responses that aim at preventing vulnerable individuals from adopting the violent extremist ideas of Al Qaeda. Western governments are committed to this ideological battle, and a host of civil society initiatives have also arisen in parallel, based on various and sometimes conflicting perceptions of the nature of the threat. Collectively, they reflect the multiple ways in which a discrete global discourse and practice of 'counter ideology', increasingly labelled 'countering violent extremism', has emerged and intensified over the past decade. The relatively novel religious dimension of the ideological threat posed by global jihadism has also fed into long-standing wider debates in the West on issues such as the relationship between: secular and religious practice in the public sphere; language and violence; and security and liberty, particularly in relation to minority Muslim communities in the West. Counter-ideological strategies remain relatively under-developed despite the resources deployed for the purpose. An immediate limitation is the rudimentary characterisation in public and official discourses of the nature of what is deemed to be global jihadi ideology. This is partly due to the dominance in policy circles of traditional security studies approaches and the burgeoning sub-field of 'radicalisation' studies, and the related absence of any sustained effort to integrate knowledge of jihadi ideas across the range of academic disciplines that currently address them. It is also related to the disproportionate ideological influence of certain civil society actors and think tanks on the process of shaping counter-ideological policy responses. This has moreover resulted in a failure to place the theory and practice of countering violent extremism in historical context, or to draw on contemporary parallels from outside the West. Overlooked, as a consequence, is the need for greater insight into the ways that the dissemination of global jihadi ideas and, paradoxically, the proliferation of counter-ideological initiatives themselves, are catalysing structural shifts in state-society relations where there are substantial Muslim communities.This study proposes ways of addressing these gaps. It adopts an innovative, inter-disciplinary approach to challenge conventional ways of viewing global jihadism, with the aim of opening up neglected areas of research, deepening academic understanding, and helping to improve policy practice. The study will draw on insights and methods from neglected areas of academic study - including history, political theory, anthropology, sociology, Islamic studies and area studies - in order to expand the knowledge base available to policymakers and practitioners, alert them to the variegated nature and impacts of global jihadi ideology, and deepen their awareness of the ways in which this ideology is shaped in different geographical contexts. It will also draw on field interviews with key experts, policymakers and practitioners in the UK, US and Europe. The study will suggest concrete ways of incorporating its insights into the formulation of policy, and explore ways of measuring the impact of counter-ideological interventions more effectively in light of the fluid and complex nature and varied effects of the global jihadi phenomenon.