Nigeria
 by Joan McDappa

History Replay: What’s Next for Nigeria?

One Nigeria, a phrase capable of setting off sparks depending on whom you address. Is Nigeria one? Or is this merely wishful thinking? Since its creation and independence, Nigeria has witnessed violence and conflicts; however, none of these threatened its existence as much as the 30-month long civil war from July 6, 1967 until January 15, 1970.

The civil war between the Nigerian-led government of General Yakubu Gowon and the Republic of Biafra, a secessionist state led by Lt. Colonel Odumegwu Ojukwu, is one that left the country more divided than ever before.

Often referred to as a genocide by the sympathizers of Biafra, the civil war saw the death of well over one million children due to starvation and diseases. It is a widely held belief that the casualties from hunger and starvation during the war were far more than those caused by combat.

Almost every ethnic group has its version of the war, blaming different individuals or citing failed strategies as the problem. However, the reality is evident in the unfortunate cruel segregation and oppression of the Igbos, which persists today.

New Agitations

Fifty years after the bloody civil war, new agitations for secession from Nigeria have rekindled, with the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) leading the charge. IBOP claims that the desire to secede from Nigeria is due to their treatment as slaves and second-class citizens in Nigeria.

The Nigerian government’s response has been to use violence to attempt to quell the agitations. As expected, the government’s response has only succeeded in spiraling things out of control, committing worse crimes and atrocities in their bid to safeguard the country’s unity.

Like most groups that adopt violent approaches, the recent agitations started peacefully. With the constant maiming and killings of members of the group by the Nigerian security forces, the group’s switch to violent means came as no surprise.

Today, the combat activities in some of the southeast states bear much resemblance to an ongoing war. The Nigerian government’s dogged approach towards quelling the agitations of Biafra in comparison to the extremism of terrorist groups in the northeast and northwest raises questions.

Python Dance II & the Dance of Peace

Operation Python Dance II was a military operation launched in late 2017 in the southeast region of Nigeria. The Nigerian Army publicly stated that this operation aims to curtail the activities of kidnapping, which have plagued the region. Consequently, operation Python Dance II began to take on a different form, looking like an attempt to suppress the agitations of Biafra.

The activities of the Nigerian Army raised fears among the people of the southeast, with several claims of indiscriminate killings of unarmed civilians and pro-Biafrans by the Nigerian Army.

Two years after operation Python Dance II, the Nigerian Army has renamed the operation Dance of Peace. Renaming the operation appears to be the most significant change since the activities of the Army largely remain the same.

Alleged killings of unarmed civilians are still highly reported; arrests and detainments of Biafra agitators are also on a steady rise. With these events, the agitations continue to intensify, with the IPOB group, now designated as a terrorist organization by the Nigerian government, launching both offensive and defensive attacks.

Secession?

Following the unrest in the southeast region, civil groups have called on international actors to intervene in the situation. While the likelihood of secession via dialogue seems slim, the agitators are also unlikely to back down due to the current administration’s opposition.

In the words of Chief Cyprian Okoye, the leader of the IPOB in Australia, “we derive strength in the fact that we are already down, and a man that is down does not need to fear nor fall. You cannot beat a baby and ask him not to cry. If they have beaten us and deny that we are not members of the same country, it is our duty to cry, and I know those who have ears will not let the tears drop from our eyes to be in vain in the end.”

The fear of another civil war is slowly building among Nigerians, with many hoping that these fears never come to pass. Sadly, it seems that history is replaying itself again; grievances are uncapping, the government’s perception of unity is still the same, and the country is in a worse state than it was over 50 years ago. Rather than wait to initiate a disaster or crisis response, a better step is to prevent a disaster and crisis altogether.

 

Joan McDappa, Counter-Terrorism Research Fellow

in Africa / Nigeria / Rise to Peace blog 0 comments
MS13
 by Rise to Peace

How to Classify MS13: Gang or Terrorist Group?

On January 14, 2021, the U.S. government accused 14 leaders of the criminal gang Mara Salvatrucha (MS13) of terrorism. The decision of the American judicial branch resembles the 2015 ruling of El Salvador’s Supreme Court, which also classified the MS13 as a terrorist group.

The decision to categorize MS13 as a terrorist organization opens the debate on how to confront these criminal organizations and what should be the means used for to confront them.

What is the Mara Salvatrucha?

The Mara Salvatrucha, also known as MS13, originated in the late 1970s and early 1980s in California, where young people and adolescents from El Salvador formed a gang. In the mid-1980s, more Salvadorans joined the gang, morphing it into a criminal organization, operating in cities such as Los Angeles and rivaling other criminal groups.

However, MS13’s biggest rival is the Latino gang Barrio 18. The war waged between MS13 and Barrio 18 has left hundreds of people dead throughout the region.

Eventually, in the 1990s, hundreds of gang members were deported to Central America. In fact, 31,000 criminals were deported, of whom 12,000 were deported to El Salvador, a country riddled with economic and social difficulties. The deported MS13 gang members took advantage of the country’s situation and recruited hundreds of young people, expanding and increasing their territorial control.

Some of the criminal activities of the MS13 include drug sales, extortion, arms sales, kidnapping, robbery, and commissioned killings. In addition, various investigations have identified links between the MS13 and Mexican drug cartels. Collaboration between these criminal structures translates into alliances facilitating drug and arms trafficking in Central America.

Is MS13 a Terrorist Group?

In 2015, El Salvador’s Supreme Court established that maras are considered terrorist groups, especially the MS13 and the Barrio 18 gang.

The court ruling established that a terrorist is defined as anyone who uses means and methods to generate collective terror, affect personal or material legal assets, and cause potential damage to the democratic system or the security of the state. Thus, the Court indicated that the MS13 meets these conditions and therefore can be considered a terrorist group.

El Salvador’s Supreme Court ruling was intended to generate greater sanctions against MS13 gang members and reduce violence in the country.

However, the court’s decision was criticized for a few shortcomings and ambiguities. Some analysts point out that gangs are not necessarily terrorist groups, but that they do use acts that generate terror. In addition, the ambiguity of the law may cause human rights violations, the penalization of social protests, and the interpretation that arbitrary acts are committed in the name of the fight against terrorism.

Years later, a similar court ruling within the United States was made. On January 14, 2021, 13 of MS13’s leaders were indicted on terrorism charges and imprisoned in El Salvador on behalf of the Eastern District of New York. After that decision, the MS13 is considered as an organization at the same threat level as the Mexican cartels or the Colombian guerrillas.

The MS13 leaders were charged with conspiracy to lend and conceal material support to terrorists, conspiracy to commit acts of terrorism that transcend national borders, conspiracy to finance terrorism, and conspiracy of narco-terrorism in El Salvador, the United States, and Mexico.

Again, the decision was made in order to use more powerful legal instruments against gangs. However, it is also noteworthy that terrorism charges have been brought against members of an organization that has not yet been classified as a terrorist group by the State Department, which can be problematic for the judicial system.

How to Classify and Deal with MS13?

To this day, the question about how MS13 should be classified and how it should be sanctioned is debated. Their classification as terrorists offers valuable legal tools for fighting these gangs. However, various analysts have pointed out the risks that this entails.

Therefore, it is important to reflect on how to combat MS13 in a comprehensive manner. It is necessary to understand the causes of the group’s birth and evolution, such as the socioeconomic context of the members they recruit and the economic, political, and social situation of the countries they operate within. With this knowledge, more effective public policy solutions can be identified to prevent new people from joining MS13, reintegrate previous and current members into society, and improve the living conditions of vulnerable children and teenagers.

 

Daniel Felipe Ruiz Rozo, Counter-Terrorism Research Fellow

in Latin America / Rise to Peace blog 0 comments
Radicalization
 by Joan McDappa

Understanding the Drivers of Radicalization in Nigeria

Violent extremism in modern-day Nigeria dates back to pre-colonial days; from the far north to the deep south, historical records show the presence of violent extremism that lingered on to the colonial era and continues to date.

A unique point to bear in mind is the multifaceted nature of violent extremism, especially in Nigeria, where multiple criteria usually form the cause of extremism. Like many other closely linked concepts, defining extremism remains somewhat difficult, mainly owing to the varying perspectives of what may or may not be considered extreme.

Regardless of the existing disagreements in conceptualizing extremism, certain key factors appear to be comparable. Extremism is an ideological phenomenon that vehemently opposes a widely accepted, usually age-long, belief or perception, conceiving the views as wrong and seeking to replace them with a preferred alternative. Violent extremism is the attempt to fulfill extremism by an intended use of violence.

After the conception of an extremist ideology and subsequent goal, furthering that goal involves a process often referred to as radicalization or also known as a violent extremist social trend.

According to a UNHCHR Report, “the notion of ‘radicalization’ is generally used [by some states] to convey the idea of a process through which an individual adopts an increasingly extremist set of beliefs and aspirations.”

Violent Extremism and Radicalization in Nigeria

While violent extremism is not a new phenomenon in Nigeria, the recent phase of extremism, religious extremism, is not specific to Nigeria. It is, in fact, a global challenge that managed to find a footing in Nigeria and continues to gain ground, threatening security while also hampering development in the country and the entire region.

In Nigeria, the goal of extremist groups is to replace the present democratic system of government, which is viewed as Westernized, and thereby infringing on and directly challenging the tenets of their Islamic faith with a Sharia style of governance. Most proponents of this extremist view have, at one time or another, attempted to impose these views on other Nigerians, radicalizing as many as possible to join in the efforts to achieve their goal.

Boko Haram, which is more or less the face of terrorism in Nigeria, was inspired by such an extremist movement and continues to grow its base throughout the region. The majority of the members of extremist groups come from youth and children, both within and outside northern Nigeria. Researchers, stakeholders, and the government of Nigeria continue to seek to understand the factors that aid radicalization in Nigeria, and as expected, there is much confusion on the possible cause.

Ahmed and Many Others

Some schools believe that poverty, unemployment, illiteracy, and weak family structures are drivers of radicalization in Nigeria. However, other schools object to this premise, as members of extremist groups also include wealthy, influential, and educated people. Besides, much of the population of Nigeria fall into these categories, yet they do not directly or indirectly support the extremist ideologies of Boko Haram.

Ahmed, an alias, is an illiterate Muslim youth from a poor background in northern Nigeria. Boko Haram had made attempts to recruit him, which he declined. During one of the many attacks and attempted forced recruitments by Boko Haram, Ahmed watched as his father was gruesomely murdered. Eventually, Ahmed found his way to the country’s capital, Abuja, where he began a new life as a bus driver, staying focused on living a peaceful and crime-free life. Like Ahmed, when many Nigerian youth face challenging conditions they continuously refuse to accept the extremist views forced upon them by extremist groups.

The Principle Driver of Radicalization in Nigeria

Regardless of the disagreements on the drivers of extremism in Nigeria, one key element that continues to resound in schools of thought is the government’s unintended role in fostering extremism. The failure of the government to execute its duties creates several conditions and grievances that enable extremist ideologies to thrive.

The government’s inappropriate response widens existing gaps, giving extremist groups a campaign tool and an added advantage to garner support from susceptible individuals. Beyond these factors is the state’s alleged role in aiding the longevity of extremist groups, like Boko Haram, by political actors, in hopes that they would garner public support.

Conclusion

Poverty, illiteracy, and a lack of religious teachings are not the cause of extremism in Nigeria, as some research claims. A survey by the Pew Research Centre showed that 94% of Nigerian Muslims hold a negative view of Boko Haram. Unfortunately, most assertions on the drivers of extremism are founded upon stereotypes fuelled by actors on and behind the scenes.

Ultimately, the principle driving force of extremism in Nigeria remains the state; and, many other push factors for individuals can be attributed to state failures.

 

Joan McDappa, Counter-Terrorism Research Fellow

in Africa / Nigeria / Rise to Peace blog 0 comments
Afghans in Turkey
 by Chris Ynclan Jr

Restless in Ankara: A Report on Conditions for Afghans

As the Taliban took over Afghanistan in August, many Afghans became fearful of what life under Taliban rule would resemble. This fear prompted a wide array of Afghans from across civil society to try and flee the country before their worst fears would actualize.

Those who could flee traveled to Kabul to evacuate Afghanistan via airlift or went into neighboring states such as Pakistan  While those who were lucky enough to make it out were spared from the Taliban’s reprisal killings, they still face many challenges in the new nations they find themselves in. One of the states which has become a top destination for Afghan refugees is Turkey.

Conditions Faced by Afghans

In 2021, over 40,000 Afghans made the dangerous trek into Turkey from Afghanistan. Afghan refugees within Turkey face a myriad of issues that present a critical threat to their security. One such threat that the refugees have faced on their journey has been their mistreatment by the Turkish police. This comes at a time when Turkey has seen an influx of Syrian migrants in recent years, which has resulted in a rise of anti-immigrant sentiments. Based upon reports by Rise to Peace founder Ahmad Mohibi’s trip to Turkey, only a small amount successfully make the crossing from Iran due to heightened security measures.

Another critical threat Afghans are presented with is the human smugglers who have taken advantage of their dire situation. The operations of these smugglers are often sophisticated in nature, using coded messages on popular messaging applications such as WhatsApp and Telegram. These operations demonstrate cyber capabilities, allowing them to stay ahead of law enforcement agencies of the states receiving Afghan refugees. More importantly, these capabilities allow them to endanger the lives of one of the world’s most vulnerable populations.

Furthermore, while the journey to Turkey is harrowing for many Afghans, it is simply a stopover for seeking asylum within member states of the European Union (EU). For some, the journey takes them by boat, which puts them in danger of becoming victims of drowning from boats capsizing, such as the unfortunate incident in the English Channel. For others, they have made dangerous treks through mountain ranges, such as the Alps, where they run the risk of freezing. Another route Afghans have chosen has been to cross the Bosnia-Croatia border, where they hope to claim asylum within Croatia since it is a member of the EU.

A Path Forward for Europe

Most importantly, it is imperative for the regional bloc to address this humanitarian disaster through policy. This can be achieved by states within the bloc implementing a uniform policy for the absorption of the Afghans claiming asylum. For this to happen, the states that do not care for international humanitarian law must be persuaded with a pragmatic argument presenting the threat to their security, should an uncoordinated response be the norm.

This disregard for humanitarian obligations by some EU nations is best represented by the likes of Hungary, which has refused to accept more migrants to embolden their base. The last instance of a migration crisis which the EU faced was exploited by members of terrorist organizations who posed as refugees. Should a response not be unified, they would be at risk of further exploitation by extremist organizations that capitalize upon a disorganized effort.

The EU has become a beacon for migrants due to its political stability and the opportunity for economic advancement which outpaces the states from which migrants arrived. So long as this is the case, the EU will face more waves of migration in the future. By refusing to address the issue of migration, it will ignore one of its most persistent issues for decades to come. While its adversaries may not recognize this fully, it provides the bloc with an opportunity to shore up one of its most salient challenges to its integrity.

Furthermore, resources should be made available to states which are facing the migrant crisis by other states within the bloc as well as international organizations like the UNHCR. The issue of migration has become a divisive issue among the EU, as other states are seen as taking the lion’s share without any help. This only serves to divide the EU politically and provides an opportunity for nefarious actors to pursue their interests at the expense of EU states.

The bloc must recognize the current geopolitical climate which it finds itself in and understand that it is another arena in which other powers will try to project their influence. Only by effectively managing the current crisis through solidarity will the EU protect its interests as well as its security.

 

Christopher Ynclan Jr., Counter-Terrorism Research Fellow

in EUROPE & CENTRAL ASIA / Rise to Peace blog 0 comments
COVID-19
 by Rise to Peace

The Perfect Storm: COVID-19 and Extremism

The COVID-19 pandemic has upended human society across the world. Over the last two years, governments have sought to control the impact of the virus by introducing a range of new laws and policies, including lockdowns, public health mandates, and restrictions on social gatherings. They have also initiated the largest global vaccine rollout in human history, pioneering a new era of mRNA vaccine technology.

Governments, researchers, and security experts have warned that the pandemic, and the various strategies implemented by governments in their efforts to contain it, is fueling extremism.

The pandemic has been a source of profound stress, instability, and disruption for individuals and communities. School closures, precarious employment, housing challenges, and the increasing cost of living have placed a heavy burden on many people.

The physical isolation imposed by lockdowns, social restrictions, and other public health measures has fueled a dramatic rise in mental health issues, and has led to a substantial increase in online engagement, producing “a perfect storm” for extremist radicalization, according to the UK’s Head of Counter Terrorism Policing.

A Gift for Extremists

A new report by the United Nations’ Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate (CTED), published on 17 December 2021, provides an overview of COVID-19’s impact on global terrorism. The report warns that violent extremists have “sought to exploit pandemic-related sociocultural restrictions that have led people around the world to spend increasing time online, by strengthening their efforts to spread propaganda, recruit, and radicalize via virtual platforms.”

The report also emphasizes that “as new pandemic-related social restrictions result in closures of educational institutions, reduced employment and entertainment opportunities, and curtailed community programs, there are concerns that resilience against violent extremism conducive to terrorism in fragile communities might be reduced, thereby making individuals more vulnerable to radicalization in such settings.”

Michelle Grossman, a researcher at the Center for Research and Evidence on Security Threats, has described how the pandemic has been weaponized by extremist actors in their efforts to “to attack and undermine democratic systems and institutions, enhance social and political polarization, destabilize truth consensus and accelerate violent civil unrest.”

Frequently, these efforts take the form of dis- and misinformation campaigns designed to promote pandemic-led conspiracy thinking. For these campaigns, “the pandemic was a gift,” according to Grossman, “swiftly weaponised and deployed by those who seek to escalate violent conflict”. The efforts of these extremist actors have “been significantly aided by the ways in which the physical social isolation imposed by public health efforts to mitigate pandemic risks has been offset by increased online social engagement, as people seek to maintain both social connection and access to sense-making information that helps organize their experience of social chaos and upheaval.”

Indeed, according to CTED’s report, “pandemic-related conspiracy theories and mis/dis-information will continue to fuel a situation that is conducive to societal divisions…terrorist groups across ideological spectrums are already seeking to exploit alienation and grievances rising from pandemic-related measures and perceived State excesses by weaponizing those divisions.”

A Catalyst for Radicalization

A recent study, published on 17 December 2021 by the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, has found that pandemic-led conspiracy theories and mis/dis-information have become central to the online recruitment efforts of the far right and other extreme right-wing communities.

“COVID-19 has served as a catalyst for radicalization,” said the study’s author, Ciaran O’Connor, an expert in disinformation and online extremism. “It allows conspiracy theorists or extremists to create simple narratives, framing it as us versus them, good versus evil.”

The study analyzed around half a million messages across more than 200 Telegram channels associated with right-wing extremism. Telegram is an online messaging service that has become a popular platform for the far-right due its limited content moderation. The researchers found that around 70% of the channels they monitored discussed COVID-19 between January 2020 and June 2021; and that 90% of the most viewed posts from far-right groups contained misinformation regarding COVID-19 vaccines or the pharmaceutical companies manufacturing them. One Telegram channel saw its subscriber count increase tenfold after it began disseminating COVID-19 conspiracy theories.

Much of the COVID-19 misinformation promoted by far-right groups was underpinned by white supremacist ideologies and other racist belief systems, including anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. Indeed, the study found consistent crossover in topic relevancy between white supremacist and conspiracy communities on Telegram when discussing the pandemic and identified two prominent far-right extremists involved in running a COVID-19 conspiracy channel. This channel, which receives around half a million daily views, was found to serve as a COVID-19 pandemic hub for other conspiracy and extremist channels, including at least three white supremacist channels.

“COVID-19 has created fertile ground for recruitment because so many people around the world feel unsettled,” said Cynthia Miller-Idress, director of the Polarization and Extremism Research and Innovation Lab at the American University. “These racist conspiracy theories give people a sense of control, a sense of power over events that make people feel powerless.”

The study’s findings are particularly concerning given the various incidents and attacks around the world that suggest some extremists are transitioning from online engagement to real-world action. Pandemic-driven social unrest has already been linked to the increased targeting of minority communities, including a surge in Asian-American hate crime and anti-Semitism. It has also provoked violent riots across the world, several of which have involved injury and even death. Misinformation and conspiracy theories have also motivated individuals to destroy vaccine vials, damage communications infrastructure, and to arm anti-vaccine and anti-government propaganda posters with hidden razor blades.

The Long-Term Effects

The concern for many security experts is whether the cessation or moderation of the pandemic will dampen the extremist threat it has fueled, and to what extent extremist groups will retain the support of those they have recruited through their propagation of pandemic-led conspiracy theories.

Moreover, the question should be asked, according to Michelle Grossman, as to whether “the longer-term social, economic and political impacts of the pandemic, which may well outlast the immediate public health crisis, [will] provide fertile ground for continuing political and social polarisation that extremists can channel toward violent action?”

CTED’s report specifically warns against “the proliferation of emergency measures and the curtailing of civil liberties” which “if left unchecked,” the report says, “has the potential to exacerbate existing grievances and may be exploited by terrorist and violent extremists.”

According to Grossman, the extension of government authority and the enforcement of public health measures throughout the pandemic “have been consistently reframed by extremists as instruments of social control, government corruption and state illegitimacy”. Indeed, the CTED report states that governments “need to ensure that pandemic-related social restrictions, including restrictions of human rights through the use of emergency powers, are strictly required by the exigencies of the situation, implemented fairly in a non-discriminatory manner and, most importantly, temporally limited.”

Conclusions

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused unparalleled social upheaval, and has subjected individuals, communities, and nations around the world to a host of new challenges and stresses. Governments, the private sector, and civil society organizations must work together to combat the virus, mitigate its consequences, and prevent its exploitation by extremist actors.

The pandemic has exacerbated social inequality and exposed a range of structural problems. These social divides are preyed on by extremist actors, who exploit fragile communities and vulnerable individuals to recruit support for their cause. Efforts must be made to remedy these divides, and to cut off support for extremist narratives rooted in the social and economic grievances fueled by the pandemic.

Efforts should also be made to maintain enlightened online discourse. Eroding trust in governments, media, and institutions fuel conspiracy thinking and empower disinformation campaigns. Restoring this trust is vital in order to combat the spread of extremist narratives online and prevent extremist recruitment strategies based on government mistrust and institutional corruption.

Governments must continue to uphold human rights in their development and implementation of pandemic-mitigation policies and must work to avoid inflaming grievances by suppressing individual liberties. To this end, states must ensure that pandemic-related restrictions and public health measures are strictly required, and that their implementation is fair and, most importantly, temporary.

 

Oliver Alexander Crisp, Counter-Terrorism Research Fellow

in Rise to Peace blog 0 comments
Bomb
 by Rise to Peace

Bomb Attacks Terrorize the Colombian-Venezuelan Border

On December 14th, two bomb explosions were registered in Colombia at the border city of Cúcuta. The explosions occurred near the Camilo Daza Airport and left two police officers and one civilian dead.

These attacks add to the wave of violence in the Norte de Santander Department, located on Colombia’s border. In recent months, the civilian population and the security forces have been victims of criminal and terrorist actions by various groups that operate on the Colombian-Venezuelan border.

Wave of Violence at the Border

The explosions at the Cúcuta Airport are just one example of the terrorist actions affecting the border area between Colombia and Venezuela. Two factors can explain the disarray of public order at the border. First, this region of the world has the highest concentration of illicit crops, according to the United Nations, such as the enormous production of cocaine in the region of Catacumbo.

Secondly, public order is affected by the presence of dissidents of the FARC and the ELN; Venezuela is a safe haven for terrorist organizations and there is a lack of presence by the Colombian State. In fact, according to the Colombian authorities, 14 criminal organizations dispute the trade in illicit drugs, human trafficking, the sale of weapons, and the smuggling of merchandise in the region.

One of the most relevant terrorist attacks in recent months in Norte de Santander was the car bomb attack against Brigade 30 of the Colombian National Army. The explosion occurred on June 15th and injured 34 soldiers and two civilians. This attack was extremely worrying for the Colombian authorities, given that the vehicle carrying the bomb easily entered the army’s facilities. Although it is not completely clear who ordered the attack, it was likely the responsibility of local ELN cells.

Additionally, another recent terrorist act was the attack against Colombian President Iván Duque Márquez. The attack occurred on June 15th in the municipality of Sardinata, Norte de Santander.

The president was attacked with rifle bursts while boarding his helicopter; however, the attack did not result in any injuries. The mastermind of the attack, a former Colombian military man who joined as a member of the 33rd Front of the FARC dissidents, was captured. In addition, the Colombian authorities indicated that the attack was planned and organized from Venezuela.

Violence and crime do not seem to end in Norte de Santander. According to Brigadier General Fabio Cancelado, there are 1,500 armed men in the department, divided into illegal groups such as the ELN, the “Gulf Clan,” the dissidents of the 33rd Front of the FARC, the “Tren de Aragua,” the “Pelusos,” and “Rastrojos.”

These organizations are financed by illegal activities, such as cocaine trafficking, and are responsible for the murder of 22 social leaders and the displacement of 448 people in 2021.

The Two Explosions 

The explosions on December 14th were attacks that once again terrorized the population at the Colombian-Venezuelan border.

The first explosion occurred when an individual attempted to jump over an airport gate. The individual fell, and the device exploded. Minutes later, a suspicious device was found near the area of the first explosion. When two police officers from the explosive’s unit examined it, the bomb exploded.

The Colombian defense minister emphasized that these terrorist attacks are being planned from Venezuela by terrorist groups. The Colombian authorities believe the ELN and the 33rd Front of the FARC dissidents are responsible for the attack.

How to Stop the Violence?

Despite the fact that the problem of crime, violence, and terrorism at the Colombian-Venezuelan border area is of immense proportions, some actions can, and must, be taken.

Due to the significant amount of illicit crops, coca production and trafficking, and the income generated from this activity, it is necessary to spray coca crops with aerial and targeted herbicides. This will reduce the crops, and subsequently the income, of the terrorist organizations that operate in Norte de Santander.

Furthermore, it is necessary to protect the social leaders who live in this area and mitigate massive forced displacements.

Finally, it is necessary for the Colombian Armed Forces and the National Police to strengthen their intelligence, counter-terrorism, and counter-narcotics capabilities. This is of the utmost importance to anticipate terrorist attacks and effectively combat illegal armed groups in the region.

 

Daniel Felipe Ruiz Rozo, Counter-Terrorism Research Fellow

in Latin America / Rise to Peace blog 0 comments
Foreign Governments
 by Rise to Peace

Fanning the Flames: How Foreign Governments Fuel Domestic Extremism

Information warfare, according to Dan Kuehl of the United States’ National Defense University, is the “conflict or struggle between two or more groups in the information environment.” The rapid expansion of the online information space has significantly bolstered the efficacy of these information warfare tactics, offering governments unfettered access to one of the most influential and all-encompassing arenas of public discourse. Increasingly, governments exploit this access to undermine rival nations, waging disinformation campaigns to exacerbate social cleavages, divide communities, and fuel discontent.

The extent to which foreign actors have permeated U.S. online society is somewhat staggering. Troll farms, professional groups that coordinate internet activity to disseminate and amplify online propaganda, reached around 140 million Americans a month in the run-up to the 2020 presidential election. As of late 2019, 15,000 Facebook pages with a majority U.S. following were being run by these troll farms, many of which are based far from American shores, in countries such as Russia, Kosovo, and Macedonia.

These pages included: the largest Christian American page on Facebook, with 20 times more followers than the next largest and reaching 75 million U.S. users per month; the largest African-American page on Facebook, reaching 30 million U.S. users per month; and the fifth-largest women’s page on Facebook, reaching 60 million U.S. users per month. Of the top 15 African-American pages, two-thirds were run by troll farms, and of the top 20 Christian pages, this figure reached 95%.

According to the reports, the target demographics of these troll farms mirror those selected by the Russia-backed Internet Research Agency in its effort to undermine U.S. political discourse during the 2016 election. Indeed, a 2018 Buzzfeed News investigation revealed that at least one member of the Internet Research Agency had visited Macedonia around the emergence of its first troll farms, and Facebook’s own cybersecurity chief has noted that Iranian troll farms have begun implementing Russian tactics. The behavior of these troll farms points to a disturbing conclusion: a well-organized and broadscale effort, orchestrated by foreign actors, to control the information ecosphere of American society.

Understanding the Threat

This effort to infiltrate the U.S. digital landscape represents a serious national security threat. Indeed, the intention of these foreign actors is to destabilize American society. This is achieved by inflaming social tensions, provoking civil unrest, and strengthening extremist narratives. One approach adopted by these foreign actors is the dissemination and amplification of conspiracy theories.

In 2019, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) labeled these theories as a domestic terrorism threat and drew attention to the radical adherents of QAnon conspiracy, who they described as “conspiracy theory-driven domestic extremists.” QAnon is a wide-ranging theory with an enormous number of offshoots and internal debates. But, at its core, is the belief that a powerful global cabal of Satan-worshippers is seeking to control society.

The FBI assessed that these theories, including QAnon, “very likely will emerge, spread, and evolve in the modern information marketplace, occasionally driving both groups and individual extremists to carry out criminal or violent acts.” In a more recent assessment from earlier this year, the FBI described how morphing attitudes within the QAnon movement will likely incline its adherents towards “real world violence–including harming perceived members of the “cabal” such as Democrats and other political opposition.” Indeed, during the January 6 Capitol insurrection, QAnon flags and signs were visible within the crowd, and more than 20 self-identified QAnon adherents have been arrested in relation to the attack.

Despite the bizarre claims of the QAnon movement, it appears to have been far more prominent than once assumed. A poll of a nationally representative sample of 9,308 U.S. adults published earlier this year found that between 20 and 23 percent of Americans self-identify as QAnon believers, a figure far higher than previous surveys indicated.

The theory’s popularity seems, at least in part, to be driven by foreign governments seeking to exploit tensions within the U.S. Indeed, a report published by the New York-based Soufan Center revealed that around 20% of all QAnon-related Facebook posts between January 2020 and February 2021 originated outside the United States, a significant proportion of which came from Russia and China. “Throughout 2020,” the report reads, “the consistent foreign amplification of QAnon narratives online illustrates that externally driven disinformation efforts have contributed to the efficient spread of conspiracy theories.”

“We are seeing common narratives that seem to be resonating with individuals who are looking for extremist ideological beliefs to serve as the justification for violence being introduced by foreign nation-states” said Department of Homeland Security Counterterrorism Coordinator John Cohen, speaking shortly after the unveiling of President Joe Biden’s new National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism earlier this year. “There are threat actors, whether it’s foreign governments like Russia or Iran or China… that are taking advantage of that anger and the polarization of our society.”

Efforts to Divide American Society

The efforts of these foreign actors stretch far beyond the QAnon movement. Russian Facebook pages and accounts have been used to plan dozens of politically divisive demonstrations across the United States. For example, in 2016, two Russian Facebook pages organized dueling rallies in front of a Houston Islamic center. One of these rallies, organized by the Heart of Texas group, announced their demonstration to “Stop Islamification of Texas,” whilst another Russian-based group organized a “Save Islamic Knowledge” rally at the same time and location.

Both left-wing and right-wing causes have been weaponized by Russian actors, who have used targeting advertising, private messaging campaigns, and even offers of reimbursement for travel expenses, to incite a range of demonstrations, from the Being Patriotic group’s “March for Trump” rally in New York to the United Muslims of America group’s “Support Hillary. Save American Muslims” rally.

More recently, Russia and China have sought to spread various coronavirus-related conspiracies, including disinformation and propaganda about the origins of COVID-19, unproven treatments for the disease, and the efficacy and risks of the vaccine rollout. Europol has already warned that the efforts to combat COVID-19 have escalated the threat of violence extremism and Michele Grossman, from the Centre for Research and Evidence on Security Threats, has described COVID-19 as a “swiftly weaponized gift,” for those “who seek to escalate violent conflict, accelerate civil unrest, and enhance social and political polarization.”

“They are constantly exploring, looking, poking, prodding,” says Matthew Masteron, former senior cyber security advisor at the Department of Homeland Security, “looking for ways to cast doubt, to divide us along racial lines, along political lines, along whatever societal divisions we already have in existence.”

Conclusions

The United States must work to counter the disruptive online influence of foreign actors in their attempts to divide American society. This challenge will require cooperation from the U.S. government, the private sector, civil society, and others in promoting a healthy, online information ecosphere. The United States must strike an important balance in this effort, ensuring that it protects public discourse from foreign subversion whilst also preserving freedom of expression.

Efforts must also be made to tackle the widespread social grievances from which extremist groups draw support, and the underlying disaffection of Americans drawn to violent political action. Indeed, the FBI have stated that “the uncovering of real conspiracies or cover-ups involving illegal, harmful, or unconstitutional activities by government officials or leading political figures” contributes to the growing intensity of the extremist threat.

As the United States continues to grow more polarized, and as more Americans are drawn to political violence, it is more urgent than ever that the U.S. address these issues. Indeed, analysis by Barbara F. Walter from the Political Instability Task Force, a CIA advisory panel, has recently warned that the U.S. is “closer to civil war than any of us would like to believe.” If the United States is to avoid this fate, it must work with intense resolve to strengthen enlightened public discourse and to rebuild the unity of its fractured society.

 

Oliver Alexander Crisp, Counter-Terrorism Research Fellow

in Rise to Peace blog / United States 0 comments
Lafiya Dole
 by Joan McDappa

Lafiya Dole: Africa’s Old Narrative

The eternally fascinating continent of Africa is home to fifty-four beautiful countries, which are rich in resources, diversity, strength, and sadly conflicts. In the words of Patricia Danzi, Regional Director for Africa for the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), “conflicts last and they don’t stop – and more are added.”

Leaders in Africa continue to make efforts to lessen the number of conflicts constantly arising and persisting. The challenge, sincerely, is a great one and one that has come to form, over time, the identity of Africa.

An Africa which is at peace with itself was the dream of Nelson Mandela and continues to be the dream of many other passionate leaders in Africa, but then, how can this be achieved? Could it be through Lafiya Dole?

Lafiya Dole

As part of the efforts to rework and add renewed vigor to the fight against terrorism and insurgency in Nigeria, especially in the Northeast, the Nigerian Army has decided to rename Operation Zaman Lafiya” to “Operation Lafiya Dole.”

Former Chief of Army Staff (COAS) Major General Tukur Yusufu Buratai addressed the 103 Battalion Nigerian Army based in Konduga, Borno State. He commended the Nigerian troops on their efforts thus far in the ongoing war against terrorism, all the while urging the army to fight harder in the pursuit and destruction of Boko Haram terrorists.

Lafiya Dole is a phrase in the Hausa dialect meaning, simply, “peace by force.” Quite a paradox, but unfortunately, acceptable not only in Nigeria but across the globe. If anything, the strategy of “peace by force” has done more harm than good.

Even with the Lafiya Dole campaign, peace, in reality, remains a mirage for the people of Nigeria. There is no peace in sight for Nigeria, not with the way it seeks to drive home its point to terrorists.

In Africa

Many African leaders hold firmly to the success of the Lafiya Dole philosophy. Similar strategies are continuously developed and implemented throughout Africa, both on state and regional levels. Silencing guns with bigger guns summarizes peace efforts in Africa. In reality, these efforts only help to further enhance resistance as the continent has seen increased activities among non-state actors, despite its efforts to cripple these activities.

Merely eliminating a leader of a violent group or members without first dealing with the conditions that allowed for such will only create a bigger problem. It is only a matter of time before another conflict arises. For a long time, this pattern has existed in Africa.

Finally

The philosophy of imposing peace rather than teaching it defeats the ideology it seeks to promote. The world seems to have lost itself in the pursuit of something it is yet to understand and fully accept. We certainly do not need to inflict more injury to heal a wound. Simply put, the antidote to these conflicts is peace.

A timeless example is Libya, where the quest and drive to save the people from oppression and Gadhafi required the use of oppressive techniques. Peace was thought to be attained through force, and now, what we have is nothing close to peace and everything far from it. Today, Libya is the source of everything that refutes peace, openly serving as the continent’s illegal arms depot for criminals and terrorists alike.

From a problem within control, it has grown to become a problem that seems like it will never end. Before Africa, or even the world, speaks of peace, justice must first be achieved, for there is never peace without justice. Currently, the tactic to achieve peace is to instill fear, however, given the right opportunity, chaos will erupt and worsen current conditions.

 

Joan McDappa, Counter-Terrorism Research Fellow

in Africa / Rise to Peace blog 0 comments
Bashar al-Assad
 by Rise to Peace

Bashar al-Assad’s Impact on Syria

Bashar al-Assad has been Syria’s president for the last 21 years, since he took power on July 17th, 2000. This year, on May 26th, Bashar Al-Assad was elected again to be Syria’s president for seven more years. He won the election with an overwhelming majority of 95.1% of the votes.

The Re-election

Bashar al-Assad assumed control after the death of his father Hafez in 2000. Over the course of 21 years, most of al-Assad’s service was associated with death and horror because of the many battles with opposition groups.

During the bloody civil war, al-Assad is blameworthy for demolishing cities and for the captures and deaths of his opponents. He created a climate of horror; if individuals wanted to survive, they needed to escape the country.  Thousands of people have died, over 5.5 million have become refugees, and approximately 6.2 million were internally exiled.

Bashar al-Assad has been re-elected a total of four times. He has been proclaimed the victor on each occasion with close to 100% of the vote. However, al-Assad has done nothing to solve Syria’s long-standing challenges, particularly the country’s dysfunctional economy and politics, which finally led to an uprising in 2011.

The earliest protests against Syria’s government in 2011 were aimed at achieving political and economic changes. Soon after, organized Islamist groups seized control. As increasingly radical groups hijacked the Syrian chapter of the Arab uprising, the people who started the Syrian revolution were left with little hope.

There is still no chance for democracy eleven years later, and no one believes the al-Assad government’s assertion that his electoral triumph reflects the desires of the Syrian people.

The Support to ISIS

Even as the al-Assad regime fought to reclaim control of Syrian territory from the various rebel groups involved in the Syrian civil war, including ISIS, Bashar al-Assad’s regime constantly supported the Islamic State, even while the group controlled substantial amounts of territory.

The regime’s plan included directing its military operations against moderate Syrian rebel organizations opposed to the al-Assad dictatorship, particularly the Free Syrian Army, rather than the Islamic State. Any important choices would almost always include al-Assad, and government officials feared the ramifications of making sensitive decisions without al-Assad’s permission.

Without previous decision-making at the highest levels of the Syrian government, it is unimaginable that Syrian intelligence could have helped, enabled, or tolerated ISIS operations. In order to portray all Syrian opposition members as “terrorists,” the Syrian regime took this deliberate choice to permit and promote the Islamic State’s prolonged survival in Syria.

The Financial Resources Syria provided to ISIS

The Syrian regime also helped ISIS financially by allowing Syrian banks to operate and provide financial services in ISIS-controlled areas. A report in February of 2015 by The Financial Action Task Force, a multinational organization that develops and promotes policies to combat illicit financial activities, found that “more than 20 Syrian financial institutions with operations in ISIS-held territory” continued to do business. Furthermore, according to the report, these bank branches were “connected to their headquarters in Damascus; and some of them may preserve linkages to the international financial system.”

Even when these unlawful terror-funding conduits were publicly disclosed, the al-Assad regime disregarded and permitted ISIS to undertake financial transactions through informal banking networks.

For example, the U.S. Treasury Department identified a number of ISIS’s financial facilitators and money service organizations in April, September, and November of 2019 for aiding ISIS activities in Syria and elsewhere. On the other hand, the Syrian government took no action against the publicly identified ISIS financial middlemen, who continued to operate unhindered.

Final Thoughts

ISIS remains an insurgency threat in Syria and an international threat as a terrorist organization. However, there is no clear global coalition, political or military, to counter the threat posed by the al-Assad dictatorship, which has murdered far more people than ISIS, enabled the terrorist group’s activities, and created massive population displacement, migratory flows, and regional instability.

The international community rose to the challenge of ISIS. However, it has failed horribly in addressing the al-Assad government’s multiple issues, much alone the tragedy that is the al-Assad dictatorship.

The U.S. must lead a renewed diplomatic attempt to deal with Syria’s current situation. Although any agreement should be consistent with the UN’s formal role, only Washington D.C. could organize the anti-Assad alliance’s various members. The U.S. should strategize to urge political compromises to achieve the safe return of refugees and ensure globally monitored resettlement efforts.

 

Katerina Rebecca Paraskeva, Counter-Terrorism Research Fellow

in Rise to Peace blog / Syria 0 comments
Wagner Group
 by Chris Ynclan Jr

The Wagner Group: How PMCs Drive Extremism

Fourteen years ago, the world became aware of the many atrocities committed by private military contractors (PMCs) when Blackwater killed Iraqi civilians. The incident strained relations with the Iraqi government and proved counterproductive to American counterinsurgency efforts. PMCs have existed in conflicts for hundreds of years, but they have been under the international community’s radar during the War on Terror. Over a decade later, the European Union has sanctioned the Wagner Group for human rights abuses.

The Wagner Group

The Wagner Group, a private military contractor, is reported to be led by Dmitry Utkin and has been present in various conflicts throughout the globe. A significant core of the group originated from another mercenary group called the Slavonic Corps, which operated in Syria to protect oil fields.

The first instance of the Wagner Group appearing in a conflict was during 2014 in eastern Ukraine, where Russian-backed separatists declared independence. Before leading the group, Utkin had worked in the Russian military intelligence service as a brigade commander. The group has also been linked to the Russian government, which they have denied. However, this contrasts reports that the Wagner Group operates in areas where the Russian government is known to also operate.

The Group’s Global Activities

In addition to Ukraine, the Wagner Group has operated in Syria, much like the mercenary group which preceded it. While in Syria, the PMCs have been accused of a wide variety of abuses which has caught the attention of international watchdog organizations. Among the most egregious was the reported torture of a Syrian man in 2017. They have also been alleged to have attacked American special forces in concert with pro-Assad forces.

An Expanding Presence

Furthermore, the group has expanded its operations within Africa to include several conflict zones. An infamous theater for its activities has been within the Central African Republic. The mercenary group was reportedly brought in at the behest of President Touadéra to help fight against rebels who opposed his rule. They, however, took liberties to the mandate given to them by their host as they were found to have committed several human rights cases of abuses. These abuses range from executions and torture to groundless imprisonment.

Another engagement of the group in Africa, which demonstrates their growing foothold in the continent, has been that of Libya. It is reported that the organization first appeared in Libya in 2019 to aid forces fighting the UN-backed government. The Wagner Group, unsurprisingly, engaged in nefarious behavior, which demonstrates a larger pattern of disregard for international law. Among such actions have included the placement of mines within noncombatant areas.

Alarmingly, there have been growing concerns of the Wagner Group continuing this disturbing pattern in a potential deployment to Mali. This comes on the heels of Mali denying the deployment of UN peacekeeping efforts to help stabilize the country. An invitation of the organization would certainly contribute to a deterioration of security for Mali’s citizens.

More alarming, it appears that governments in the region are turning away from long-established international norms for diplomacy and instead turning to mercenary groups to resolve political opposition.

Mercenaries only serve to instill a greater hatred for the governments that employ them and drive individuals to seek out organizations that oppose them. In some instances, they join extremist organizations that provide them that opportunity, as well as economic security which their governments have denied them.

Policies to Curtail Mercenary Activity in Africa

For the Wagner Group to operate within Africa, there must be an understanding of what allows them to do so. The reason stems from the political instability within the region as well as the perceived ineffectiveness of UN peacekeepers to bring stability to the states.

A critique of UN peacekeeping missions is with merit as there have been allegations of misconduct regarding different peacekeeping operations throughout Africa. One of the most recent is the allegations of abuse within the Central African Republic, which have damaged the credibility of the institution. Additionally, the procurement of mercenary groups allows these governments to not abide by international law and use whatever means are at their disposal to eliminate armed opposition.

Thus, it is necessary for nations who contribute to UN peacekeeping missions and the institution itself to implement harsher penalties on their citizens who have been found to be guilty of abuses while serving in an official capacity. Without institutional integrity and trust from fragile states, they will look for alternatives, such as mercenary groups.

Nations who comprise the UN should also consider providing more resources to peacekeeping missions. These resources may be more effective in providing credible deterrence and bringing stability to the region through tried and tested diplomacy.

Lastly, the international community must pressure nations that employ mercenary groups through sanctions and forbid their citizens from engaging in such efforts.

 

Christopher Ynclan Jr., Counter-Terrorism Research Fellow

in Africa / Rise to Peace blog 0 comments