Suspect community or suspect category? The impact of counter-terrorism as ‘policed multiculturalism’

Abstract

How to think about the impact of counter-terrorism and counterradicalisation on ethnic and religious accommodation? Much of the literature draws on the concept of 'suspect community', suggesting it has primarily alienated the Muslim community, favouring an assimilationist model of 'muscular liberalism'. In this article, while I consider the merits of the 'suspect community' hypothesis, I argue that it only partially accounts for the effects of counter-terrorism and counter-radicalisation on multicultural societies. I contend that much of the literature has focused too narrowly on the discriminatory effects of counter-terrorist policies and has been unable to grasp the more insidious political effects of counter-terrorism policies based on the active participation and involvement of Muslims in their own policing. The main hypothesis of this paper is that rather than promoting 'assimilation', as the government would expect, or alienation, as the advocates of the 'suspect community' hypothesis would contend, counter-terrorist policies produce and reinforce a government of society in discrete and divided ethno-religious groups. Such 'policed multiculturalism'-understood as the recognition and the management of diversity through a security perspective-has an important consequence in that it removes fundamental questions about pluralism from political debate, casting them instead in a depoliticised language of security.

Subjectivity in detection of radicalisation and violent extremism: a youth worker's perspective

“…This means that local professionals' task to detect instances of radical or extreme ideas are not clearly defined and that the criteria for information-gathering and monitoring are non-existent (Ragazzi, 2016). It is this lack of definitional clarity which leaves practitioners unsure of how exactly to perceive the potential violent or risky behaviour we want to be forethoughtful of.…”

Part of the problem or of the solution? The involvement of religious associations in immigrant integration policy

“…Religious authorities as role models and the training of multipliers within FBOs make use of the perceived moral authority of religious leaders (Aslan/ Windisch 2012). Authors observe "governing through communities" especially in terms of security politics (Ragazzi 2016). Religious infrastructures are also frequently involved in general integration policy implementation.…”

“…Austria involves its recognized Islamic religious community mainly as a religious representative, German Islamic associations are most broadly involved and fulfil multiple roles, while Swiss Islamic associations are hardly involved at all. This can be understood by looking at the governmentality of religion in the context of immigrant integration: The notion of government through suspicion and trust (see Ragazzi 2016), which is linked to discourses on Islam and migration, enables to understand different outcomes in three similar cases.…”

The Prevent paradox: destroying liberalism in order to protect it

“…introduces a clash of values that alienates Muslim youths and renders them subject to surveillance [17,69,82,85]; and polices multiculturalism by construing the 'Muslim' as a suspect category and by entangling British Muslims in its promotion and its resistance [71]. 1 These accounts offer powerful expositions of the persistently discriminatory, stigmatising and alienating effects of Prevent, and important insights into the fabrication of suspect categories.…”