6
A Master Thesis
Submitted to the Faculty
of
American Public University
by
Ronald Punzalan
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
of
Master of Arts
June/2022
American Public University
Charles Town, WV
Introduction
Terrorism has become a significant issue in the United States since the 2001 attack (Wright, 2016). Terrorism and religion have been connected for as long as human history can be traced. Civilizations and empires in ancient times are perfect examples of true extremist believers who have engaged in wars to defend, promote, and spread their faith. The contemporary era has witnessed escalating religious terrorism in its frequency, the scale of violence, and global reach. Religious radicalization is the genesis of violence justification (Rink & Sharma, 2016). The choice of target is influenced by existing and loose interpretations of religious doctrine or based on defending one’s religious group. Religious radicalization is globalized, unlike ethnic radicalization, and involves sophisticated networks, making it challenging to tackle the militia groups (Rink & Sharma, 2016). The United States is not immune to terrorism resulting from religious radicalization. Some authors have found a relationship between religious radicalization and individual-level psychological trauma related to social relations and process-oriented factors (Rink & Sharma, 2016).
A report published by the Center for Strategic and International studies indicated that out of the 893 terror incidents analyzed by 1994 and 2020, 15.6% were committed by religious terrorists (Jones, 2022). The same data showed that religious terrorism significantly increased from 2015 to 2019 (Jones, 2022). Religious terrorism also results in significant fatalities across the United States (Jones, 2022). Therefore, the research will focus on domestic terrorism with particular attention to religious radicalization, which supports extreme views, that prompt people to commit terrorist activities.
Statement of the Problem
Domestic terrorism caused by religious radicalization is rising, but there is no proper intervention to handle terrorism. Domestic terrorism encompasses violence against the citizens or the national infrastructure. The primary intent of domestic terrorism is to intimidate, force, and impact the national policy to work in their favor. The critical infrastructure and national security need to conduct extensive research to Help the government in averting and alleviating terrorist activities. They can achieve this by improving disaster preparedness, recovery, and response towards domestic terrorism activities. Protecting the country from terrorist attacks is the number one priority of Homeland Security. This paper presents a research proposal on the perspectives of domestic terrorism through religious radicalization.
Purpose Statement
Domestic terrorism is partly contributed by religious radicalization. However, the existing research studies do not provide much information on why people choose to be radicalized. The purpose of this case study is to unearth the issues that compel people to radicalization and how policymakers can address them.
Research Question
1) What are the common threads/themes in the cases of domestic radicalization to terrorism?
2) Does strain theory have a significant influence on domestic terrorist radicalization?
Literature Review
Terrorism is a global problem affecting both developed and non-developing countries. European countries and the United States have been affected by terrorist activities both external and homegrown since the dawn of the 21st century (Venkatraman, 2007; Jones, 2022; Wilner & Dubouloz, 2010). The literature review aims to unearth the common themes on terrorism radicalization and the various theories and conceptual frameworks applied to explain the current trends in violence. The articles included in the literature review are peer-reviewed. The findings will form a basis for a further research study.
Most scholars associate religious terrorism with psychological trauma (Rink & Sharma, 2016). The authors conducted a qualitative study in Kenya to understand compelling reasons that pushed youth to join religious terror groups, particularly Al-Shabaab. Through interviews, they found that exposure to violence in adulthood and constrained social relationships prominently prompted them to religious radicalization. Interaction with radical groups or individuals through social media platforms or physically also contributed to participants’ joining radical groups (Rink & Sharma, 2016). Other scholars also found an association between religion, social relations theory, and rational choice theory. Religious fundamentalism also contributes to domestic terrorism (Rogers et al., 2007). In the United States, Christians are guided by a sense of patriotism and a rising immigrant population. At the same time, the Muslims are outraged by what they perceive as encroachment of their religious values by Western cultures (Rogers et al., 2007). Thus, the fundamentalism views held by each side can form a basis for religious extremism.
Scholars have also used the social learning theory to investigate the spread of religious radicalization and terrorism in the United States. (Shapiro & Maras, 2018) studied how women in the United States were radicalized and joined ISIS terror groups through the social learning theory. Data used was obtained from open-source court cases. The study involved thirty-one participants in assessing how they became radicalized and extremists. They discovered that the women joined terror groups through due social interactions with radicalized individuals (Shapiro & Maras, 2018). Most religious terrorist acts have been associated with the Islamic religion. The connection between Islamic faith and violence is due to extreme understanding of the Quran and the influence of Islamic Revivalism (Venkatraman, 2007). Consequently, intrinsic sociological and psychological factors compel the Muslim followers to violence as a form of defending their religion and extending it (Venkatraman, 2007). Geopolitical factors influence religious radicalization and the motivation to join terror groups.
Scholars have researched why most religious terrorism is associated with the Islamic religion. One of the reasons is that Muslims show high self-reported fundamentalism compared to adherents of other religions such as Christians (Wright, 2016). Religious fundamentalism is where religious followers have fundamental beliefs. Also, Muslims show a high religious commitment to protecting their religious beliefs compared to other religions. Consequently, they are ready to defend their religion, including violence. The current political landscape, driven by Western ideologies, contradicts Islamic believers’ self-concept and acts as a “push” factor to religious radicalization and terrorist (Wright, 2016). The Islamic religion is more homogenous than other religions, such as Christians, characterized by many denominations with different beliefs (Wright, 2016). Thus, religious terrorism can be understood by assessing religious-specific factors.
The behavioral change approach is also used to explain the spread of religious terrorism, and it can be addressed. The United States, like Europe, has witnessed a growing number of domestic terrorisms resulting from religious beliefs. According to the perpetrators, killing other people to defend one’s religion is (Wilner & Dubouloz, 2010). Subsequently, any religious terrorism is done with reasons, protecting or expanding religious beliefs. The perpetrators are emotionally and mentally motivated with a set of beliefs to orchestrate violence against those they believe oppose their faith. There are many varied issues for Islamic violence that can prompt them to kill other individuals (Wilner & Dubouloz, 2010). A lack of political homogeneity also catalyzes the radicalization process leading to terrorism. People unwilling to fit into the broader political society align themselves with smaller social groups and form a network that grows to homegrown terror groups in the United States (Wilner & Dubouloz, 2010).
The current studies have explored numerous issues explaining the emergence, spread, and occurrence of domestic violence resulting from religious radicalization. Psychosocial trauma and complicated interpersonal relations are some reasons that lead to religious radicalization and violence (Rink & Sharma, 2016). Another cause of violence based on the literature review is extreme interpretations of the Quran that ‘pushes” believers to become extremists. Also, the existing social media platforms act as a ground for religious radicalization and extremist influence (Venkatraman, 2007). The authors use various theories to explain the occurrence and spread of domestic violence and religious radicalization. The ideas discussed include social relations theory, social learning theory, behavioral change theory, and rational choice theory. Most of the studies are qualitative and quantitative, and thus, there is a need for policy Assessment studies to understand how they relate to terrorism. Also, none of the studies focuses on the strain theory, which can explain why terrorism occurs and the reasons for religious radicalization among various groups. Therefore, the focus of the study will be to explore the influence of strain theory on domestic terrorist radicalization.
Theoretical Framework
The study will use the strain theory. The Cambridge dictionary defines strain as a force that compels someone to do something (Cambridge Dictionary, n.d). Strain theory proponents purport that people commit crimes because they experience strain (a point) that upsets them, causing a rebellion. Agnew (1999) researched and expanded on the earlier version of the strain. He found that strain could explain the differences in severe crimes between various communities. He added to forms of strain that could culminate into rebellion or crimes. One category of strain prevents people from achieving their valued goals, while the second category takes away things people value (Agnew, 1999). Some strain causes are poor health conditions since they block individuals’ pathways towards some goals (Stogner & Gibson, 2010). Strain may result from the want of money, respect, power, and autonomy (Merton, n.d).
Existing studies have tackled the issue of domestic terrorism radicalization in many ways. Some believe that domestic terrorism results from interactions with the terrorists through various media. Terrorism also results from psychosocial trauma, and complicated social relations compel the victims to join and undertake terrorism activities. Religious radicalization is one way through which people are made to become terrorists. They believe that killing other people will be forgiven and rewarded afterlife. Islamic extremism, the most common form of religious terrorism, is influenced by Quran extreme interpretations (Venkatraman, 2007). The strain theory will help understand how various strains impact domestic terrorism in the United States. Some issues to consider are the foreign policies, government interference into internal matters in other countries, and social pressures towards specific groups, which prompt rebellion.
Research Design
The research will focus on the common themes in cases of domestic radicalization to terrorism. Further, the research will assess the influence of strain theory on domestic terrorism radicalization. The purpose of the study will be to advance knowledge on the “real” cause of terrorism and address them appropriately. The study will be a program Assessment of government interventions or policies both within the United States and outside to determine their impacts. After the 2001 attacks, the United States settled on military invasions to Muslim countries to deal with militia groups and end terrorism. However, since sending troops to Afghanistan, terrorists have formed novel militia groups and expanded to other parts of the world, including Africa, North America, and Europe. Terrorism has become more localized and domestic (Drevon & Khalifa, 2021). Because of such developments, the paper evaluates American policies and government opinions on Islamic religion to determine if these factors act as strains that prompt the emergence of more terrorism activities domestically.
Policy Assessment involves gathering data and analyses to assess policy outcomes or processes. There are various reasons for choosing policy Assessment research over other quantitative and qualitative methodologies. First, countering terrorism is an issue that involves government and its agencies and not individuals. Therefore, it is easier to assess how government policies contribute towards ending or expanding terrorism networks both within and outside the United States (My-Peer Toolkit, n.d). Some groups may perceive some policies as discriminatory or limiting some religious groups from their fundamental beliefs, which is one of the strains that lead to rebellion.
Secondly, policy Assessment promotes public accountability and learning. Terrorism causes loss of lives, permanent injuries, economic turmoil, and instability in various parts of the world. Government response to terrorism should be accurate and well-thought. Thus, by assessing the different types of terrorism-related policies, the government could be more accountable for their interventions when dealing with terrorists (My-Peer Toolkit, n.d). Thirdly, the program Assessment will bolster understanding of existing policies’ necessity, efficiency, and validity. Some governmental policies adopted to eliminate terrorism are not always practical.
Other research methods that could be applied in the study are qualitative and quantitative approaches. However, both have not been used in the study for various reasons. First, many qualitative and quantitative studies exist on terrorism and causal factors. Also, it will be challenging to track radicalized individuals to participate in the study due to the complexity and nature of the study topic. Thus, policy Assessment is the best alternative since it is easier to access government records outlining its policies.
The three major types of Assessment are process, impact, and process. The study will adopt an outcome-based Assessment approach. Outcome analysis is based on the long-term goals of the project (My-Peer Toolkit, n.d). The United States government had a long-term goal of ending terrorism by dealing with terrorists and terror groups through military invasion (Drevon & Khalifa, 2016). The reason for choosing outcome-based assessment is to determine whether the government’s long-term goals of ending terrorism have been met through its policies. The failure of these policies will show existing strains that lead to sustained terrorism that evolve to become homegrown. The reason for not using impact-based Assessment is its focus on short-term goals. Thus, while short-term objectives can point are effective, they are not always the same as the long-term goals, which are most vital. Lastly, process-based policy Assessment is not used because the focus is not on implementation procedures but outcomes (My-Peer Toolkit, n.d). These outcomes will be vital in relating strain theory and domestic terrorism.
Reference List
Agnew, R. (1999). A general strain theory of community differences in crime rates. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 36(2), 123–155. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427899036002001
Drevon, J., & Khalifa, D. (2021, June 16). They are exploiting disorder: Al-Qaeda and the Islamic state. Crisis Group. Retrieved February 24, 2022, from https://www.crisisgroup.org/global/exploiting-disorder-al-qaeda-and-islamic-state
Jones, S. G. (2022, March 7). The escalating terrorism problem in the United States. The Escalating Terrorism Problem in the United States | Center for Strategic and International Studies. Retrieved February 23, 2022, from https://www.csis.org/analysis/escalating-terrorism-problem-united-states
Merton, R. K. (n.d.). Crime causation: Sociological theories – strain theory. Strain Theory – Delinquency, People, Money, and Engage – JRank Articles. Retrieved February 24, 2022, from https://law.jrank.org/pages/814/Crime-Causation-Sociological-Theories-Strain-theory.html
My-Peer Toolkit. MyPeer Toolkit RSS2. (n.d.). Retrieved February 24, 2022, from https://mypeer.org.au/monitoring-Assessment/types-of-Assessment/
Rink, A., & Sharma, K. (2016). The determinants of religious radicalization. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 62(6), 1229–1261. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002716678986
Rogers, M. B., Loewenthal, K. M., Lewis, C. A., Amlôt, R., Cinnirella, M., & Ansari, H. (2007). The role of religious fundamentalism in terrorist violence: A Social Psychological Analysis. International Review of Psychiatry, 19(3), 253–262. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540260701349399
Shapiro, L. R., & Maras, M.-H. (2018). Women’s radicalization to religious terrorism: An examination of isis cases in the United States. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 42(1-2), 88–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/1057610x.2018.1513694
Stogner, J., & Gibson, C. L. (2010). Healthy, wealthy, and wise: Incorporating health issues as a source of strain in Agnew’s general strain theory. Journal of Criminal Justice, 38(6), 1150–1159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2010.09.003
Strain. Cambridge Dictionary. (n.d.). Retrieved February 24, 2022, from https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/strain
Venkatraman, A. (2007). Religious basis for Islamic terrorism: The Quran and its interpretations. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 30(3), 229–248. https://doi.org/10.1080/10576100600781612
Wilner, A. S., & Dubouloz, C.-J. (2010). Homegrown terrorism and transformative learning: An interdisciplinary approach to understanding radicalization. Global Change, Peace & Security, 22(1), 33–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/14781150903487956
Wright, J. D. (2016). Why is Contemporary Religious Terrorism Predominantly Linked to Islam? Four Possible Psychosocial Factors. Perspectives on Terrorism, 10(1), 19–31
