Sobering questions on terrorism

Discussion was proceeding smoothly and all seemed to concur on the overriding importance of tackling terrorism through deradicalisation programmes, amnesties, and rehabilitation of youth who have been under the sway of violent extremist groups and ideologies. 

That was until the Egyptian Ambassador Mahmoud Ali Talaat Mahmoud brought a dose of reality to proceedings at the iconic hut-shaped amphitheatre of the Kenyatta International Convention Centre.

“Does it mean that if the Egyptian army captures the ISIS terrorists who beheaded Ethiopian Christians in Libya or the Kenyan security forces capture the terrorists who perpetrated the Garissa University massacre they should forgive and try to rehabilitate them rather than subject them to the laws?”

That intervention from the floor on the first day of the Regional Conference on Countering Violent Extremism introduced an element that had hardly been mentioned during proceedings.

The conference had been dominated by idealistic academic discourse that probably did not take into account some harsh realities of the actual situation on the ground when confronting Al Shabaab in Kenya and Somalia, Boko Haram in Nigeria, and ISIS and Al Qaeda across North Africa and the Middle East from Libya onwards to Syria and Iraq.

Panelists at the session quickly intervened in response to the Egyptian ambassador. Tana River County Governor Hussein Dado was quick to clarify that amnesty and rehabilitation is not aimed at those who have already committed violent acts, but at recruits who want to escape the clutches of Al Shabaab and are ready to confess and cooperate with the authorities.

Mr Dado governs one of the coastal counties seriously affected by both local sectional and religious conflicts, and infiltration by Al Shabaab extremists. He has been a key player in fledgling government efforts to craft new strategy in the fight against terrorism, chairing a task force charged with designing the deradicalisation programme.

From the same panel, Prof Roman Gunaratna of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies in Singapore, reminded the Egyptian envoy that his own country has pursued a successful campaign to counter the extremist message of the Muslim Brotherhood.

He pointed out that in Egypt, those who sought amnesty were forgiven, rehabilitated and reintegrated into society. But the hardcore, those who had killed and were intent on continuing the campaign of violence, were pursued relentlessly, tried and even sentenced to hang. “Rehabilitation is not for everybody”, he clarified, “we must still use our security forces to hunt down and bring to justice the murderers and terrorists.”

BRIEF EXCHANGE

That brief exchange captured for many the unspoken sub-theme of the landmark conference that is intended to set the stage for a major shift in government strategy in the war on terrorism.

The new strategy that was signalled a month ago and is still in the planning stages is acknowledgement that force of arms alone will not work in an environment where there seems to be an endless supply of youth falling for the violent extremist Islamic ideology that feeds terrorism.

The Nairobi conference, that was officially closed by President Uhuru Kenyatta yesterday but carries on with training programmes for the groups that will drive the deradicalisation campaign, is itself a follow up of the White House Summit on Countering Violent Extremism convened in February by US President Barrack Obama. It will lead up to Heads of State Summit at the United Nations General Assembly in New York in September.

Thus the international nature of the conference that brought together security chiefs, government administrators, scholars and researchers, religious leaders, and civil society organisations not just from the East Africa region, but further afield.

The conference dwelt at length on ways on the factors that provide fertile ground for radicalisation, and how the trend can be halted and reversed.

There was unanimity that urgent action is required to tackle the social and economic factors, including youth unemployment, disenfranchisement, alienation and marginalisation of regions or religious groups, unequal and skewed development, and heavy - handed security responses that serve only to breed more anger.

Specifically cited was the suspected police assassinations of extremist preachers in Mombasa, crackdowns targeting the Somalia community on Nairobi, and general mistreatment of civilians during security operations in Garissa and other parts of the  north eastern region.

For the programme to succeed, then, it will take not just the launch of a deradicalisation campaign that aims at countering the violent extremist message ideology, but also a sea of change in the way security forces respond to threats. 

That all the key security organs including the military, the police, and the Intelligence services were well represented at the conference might be an indicator that there is general buy-in.

However, there is still need to assuage fears that the government is going soft on terrorism. When President Kenyatta first mentioned the new approach about a month ago, there were fears expressed from both in and out of government that Kenya intended to pardon terrorists in the wake of the Garissa University massacre. The conference also brought out that it is still unclear how the deradicalisation message will be driven. The basic idea is to promote the idea of a peaceful Islam as opposed to the  violent theology that is capturing the youth.

However, the government as messenger faces a major credibility gap. Mainstream Islam leaders from the Supreme Council of Kenya Muslims, the Council of Imams Preachers and other such bodies,  as well as political leaders from the Coast and North Eastern, will thus be key to any such campaign, but at the risk of being rejected as government agents.

While the programme calls for in involvement of community organisations,  the government well known antipathy towards civil society might lock out the groups that would be most useful.

Another problem flagged was the programme might be seen to promote one version of Islam over another. Two of the participants from the Arab world with extensive first hand experience countering radicalisation — Imam Muhammed Al-Yagubi from Syria, whose paper was read by a representative, and Mr El-Ghissassi Hakim of the Ministry of Endowment and Islamic Affairs in Morocco — had detailed presentations on the rival Islamic denominations that have often been in conflict in the Middle East.

Those who have studied the situation in Kenya trace the beginning of radicalisation to the influx of well funded expatriate preachers at the turn of the century quickly took over mosques and madrassas in Mombasa and Garissa. The preachers from Pakistan, Yemen and other countries were funded by Saudi Arabia and introduced a virulent form of Islam that rejected recognition and co-existence not just with other faiths, but also with other Islamic beliefs.

The deradicalisation campaign must therefore seek to counter that movement by presenting the accommodative and pluralistic version of Islam, while avoiding the risk of getting entangled in feuds between competing interpretations of the Koran.