British terrorism preemption : subjectivity and disjuncture in Channel "de-radicalization" interventions

This article examines Channel “de‐radicalization” interventions, which take place on individuals suspected of having the potential to commit terrorist crimes. Situated within critical security studies, the article explores the British Prevent programme by utilizing primary interviews with hard‐to‐reach Channel mentors and senior Prevent officials. Following the work of anticipatory risk‐governance scholarship, this research illuminates the three processes of risk‐visibilization (how an individual becomes sufficiently “seen” as harbouring risk that they are offered Channel mentorship), risk‐calculation (how practitioners negotiate supposed riskiness), and risk‐knowing (how practitioners “know” risks they observe). It demonstrates how the practice of preemptive counter‐terrorism is subsumed inherently by—even relies upon—subjectivity and human prejudice, and fundamental disagreements between practitioners. Through substantial empirical contribution on the phenomenon of Channel interventions, the discussion highlights ultimately that the algorithmic rationale of preemptive risk‐spotting normalizes the suspicion of banal and everyday behaviors, precisely because such interventions are ultimately deployed through worst‐case imaginations

De-radicalization and Counter-radicalization: Valuable Tools Combating Violent Extremism, or Harmful Methods of Subjugation?

This article debates the justifications behind the practice of counter-radicalization and de-radicalization. It emphasizes the concepts as shrouded in confusion, and highlights that the practices continue to develop and expand despite claims of counter-productiveness, wholly subjective evaluation, and significant doubt around their premises. The aim of this article is to encourage a greater awareness of the potential costs to society of promoting policy with no rigorous basis of evidence. Focussing on both (rehabilitative) prison counter-radicalization schemes and (preventative) non-prison based de-radicalization, the discussion explores the evaluative methods that remain chaotic despite a growing need for ‘evidence-based’ public policy-making, examines the tenuous link between terrorism and ideology which upholds the principles behind attempts to combat radicalization, and then analyses the possible outcomes for society of relying on these schemes to minimize extremist violence. It concludes that taking the link between terrorism and ideology as causal is deeply flawed, and that by persisting with no systematic method of evaluation combating radicalization in these ways will continue to fail. Indeed, in prisons, they have been found to be distrusted, ineffective and even detrimental. Outside of prisons, where preventative counter-radicalization programmes exist, these will continue to divide societies among the lines where suspect communities are drawn. It takes the view that whilst we continue to elevate de-radicalization as a ‘useful tool’ in combating terrorism, we will also continue to associate certain people groups with terrorism and only add to grievances that exist in our societies

Embodying the inquiry : disaster, affectivity, and the localized politics of security

The responsibilizing of civil society for security has been well analysed in recent years, but the place of the public inquiry as an important site of negotiations over affectivity has been largely under- acknowledged. This article investigates the scope, recommendations, and forensic investigation of the Manchester Arena Inquiry, an inquiry established in the wake of the 2017 bombing and which prefigures the gaze of the UK’s forthcoming ‘Protect Duty’. Once formalized, this Duty will situate venue workers as crucial embodiments of national counter-terrorism priorities. The discussion shows how contestations over affective productivity are navigated across the Inquiry, with national security articulated as being generated exclusively through local spaces, and through a body divorced from its experience via sophisticated management techniques. We find how security is imagined through local workers becoming ‘watchfully-anxious’, with routinized procedures deployed to generate this necessary destabilization. Bodies of venue staff must be displaced and moved around, opening space for racialized encounters rendered necessarily productive of security. Workers are required to confess, defending their role in security failure and situating them within national priorities. Through close analysis of the Inquiry’s reports, and drawing from interviews with UK disaster management experts, the discussion reveals how the Manchester Arena Inquiry positions national security as produced through low-paid workers defending the minutiae of their jobs in the context of the local venue. Through its forensic and detail-oriented analysis, the public inquiry is revealed as an important technology in the (re)production of localized forms of security knowledge, which in turn delegitimizes knowledge of disaster as structural or political

The subjugated knowledge of Prevent: UK terrorism pre-emption and the disruptive history of Northern Ireland

This thesis explores the relationship between Britain's counter-radicalization programme Prevent and the testimony of those convicted of terrorism offences in Northern Ireland. The research explores the striking contradiction whereby Northern Ireland does not implement radicalization pre-emption despite its active dissident groups and notorious history of conflict, yet the rest of the UK does. Utilizing primary interviews with 17 Prevent officials (including Channel's hard-to-reach ‘de-radicalization’ mentors) and over 30 Northern Irish former combatants, the thesis performs a discourse analysis to expose the two fundamentally different ways of knowing terrorism risk in the UK. It undertakes a critical exposition of Prevent's construction and navigation of risk, asking how ‘pre-crime risk’ is observed and intervened upon only on one side of the border, when a fragile ceasefire best describes post-conflict reality on the other. How does the discourse of radicalization subjugate the history of political insurgency in Northern Ireland, rendering it invisible, and what reality is constructed through these silences? Through substantial empirical investigation, the thesis explores how pre-emptive security closes down space for political contestation – ultimately inventing the ‘(de)radicalizable subject’ though a rationality infused with insecurity. To construct this subject, the discourse of ‘risk’ and ‘pre-emption’ has to silence the history of insurgency in Northern Ireland and the voices of its perpetrators. These militants staunchly rebut any narrative that they were ‘vulnerable’ to radicalization, but rather were heroes who actively chose armed rebellion. This thesis brings the disjuncture of UK terrorism knowledge to the forefront, exposing how the discourse of risk, vulnerability, and pre-emption necessarily silences militant testimonies – inventing a world without referring to its inhabitants

Scoping potential routes to UK civil unrest via the food system: Results of a structured expert elicitation

We report the results of a structured expert elicitation to identify the most likely typesof potential food system disruption scenarios for the UK, focusing on routes to civil unrest. Wetake a backcasting approach by defining as an end-point a societal event in which 1 in 2000 peoplehave been injured in the UK, which 40% of experts rated as “Possible (20–50%)”, “More likely thannot (50–80%)” or “Very likely (>80%)” over the coming decade. Over a timeframe of 50 years, thisincreased to 80% of experts. The experts considered two food system scenarios and ranked theirplausibility of contributing to the given societal scenario. For a timescale of 10 years, the majorityidentified a food distribution problem as the most likely. Over a timescale of 50 years, the expertswere more evenly split between the two scenarios, but over half thought the most likely route tocivil unrest would be a lack of total food in the UK. However, the experts stressed that the variouscauses of food system disruption are interconnected and can create cascading risks, highlighting theimportance of a systems approach. We encourage food system stakeholders to use these results intheir risk planning and recommend future work to support prevention, preparedness, response andrecovery planning

Loci influencing blood pressure identified using a cardiovascular gene-centric array

Blood pressure (BP) is a heritable determinant of risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD). To investigate genetic associations with systolic BP (SBP), diastolic BP (DBP), mean arterial pressure (MAP) and pulse pressure (PP), we genotyped 50 000 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that capture variation in 2100 candidate genes for cardiovascular phenotypes in 61 619 individuals of European ancestry from cohort studies in the USA and Europe. We identified novel associations between rs347591 and SBP (chromosome 3p25.3, in an intron of HRH1) and between rs2169137 and DBP (chromosome1q32.1 in an intron of MDM4) and between rs2014408 and SBP (chromosome 11p15 in an intron of SOX6), previously reported to be associated with MAP. We also confirmed 10 previously known loci associated with SBP, DBP, MAP or PP (ADRB1, ATP2B1, SH2B3/ATXN2, CSK, CYP17A1, FURIN, HFE, LSP1, MTHFR, SOX6) at array-wide significance (P 2.4 10(6)). We then replicated these associations in an independent set of 65 886 individuals of European ancestry. The findings from expression QTL (eQTL) analysis showed associations of SNPs in the MDM4 region with MDM4 expression. We did not find any evidence of association of the two novel SNPs in MDM4 and HRH1 with sequelae of high BP including coronary artery disease (CAD), left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) or stroke. In summary, we identified two novel loci associated with BP and confirmed multiple previously reported associations. Our findings extend our understanding of genes involved in BP regulation, some of which may eventually provide new targets for therapeutic intervention.</p

Large-Scale Gene-Centric Meta-Analysis across 39 Studies Identifies Type 2 Diabetes Loci

To identify genetic factors contributing to type 2 diabetes (T2D), we performed large-scale meta-analyses by using a custom similar to 50,000 SNP genotyping array (the ITMAT-Broad-CARe array) with similar to 2000 candidate genes in 39 multiethnic population-based studies, case-control studies, and clinical trials totaling 17,418 cases and 70,298 controls. First, meta-analysis of 25 studies comprising 14,073 cases and 57,489 controls of European descent confirmed eight established T2D loci at genome-wide significance. In silico follow-up analysis of putative association signals found in independent genome-wide association studies (including 8,130 cases and 38,987 controls) performed by the DIAGRAM consortium identified a T2D locus at genome-wide significance (GATAD2A/CILP2/PBX4; p = 5.7 x 10(-9)) and two loci exceeding study-wide significance (SREBF1, and TH/INS; p <2.4 x 10(-6)). Second, meta-analyses of 1,986 cases and 7,695 controls from eight African-American studies identified study-wide-significant (p = 2.4 x 10(-7)) variants in HMGA2 and replicated variants in TCF7L2 (p = 5.1 x 10(-15)). Third, conditional analysis revealed multiple known and novel independent signals within five T2D-associated genes in samples of European ancestry and within HMGA2 in African-American samples. Fourth, a multiethnic meta-analysis of all 39 studies identified T2D-associated variants in BCL2 (p = 2.1 x 10(-8)). Finally, a composite genetic score of SNPs from new and established T2D signals was significantly associated with increased risk of diabetes in African-American, Hispanic, and Asian populations. In summary, large-scale meta-analysis involving a dense gene-centric approach has uncovered additional loci and variants that contribute to T2D risk and suggests substantial overlap of T2D association signals across multiple ethnic groups

CTS and normativity : the essentials of preemptive counter-terrorism interventions

This article critically assesses calls for ‘normativity’ in counter-radicalisation and counter-extremism, and suggests that aligning with hegemonic narratives about securing the ‘pre-crime’ space is problematic in a context of emancipation. Utilising interviews with a number of Prevent officials (including Channel ‘de-radicalisation’ mentors), the paper argues that when any counter-radicalization regime is implemented, two traits are necessarily inherent: identity construction, and ‘concerned concern’, both of which are based on subjective speculation about an individual’s future intent. Identity construction in preemptive counter-terrorism works through prejudiced human imagination in order to normalise perceived and ‘risky’ divergence, but which is mired in contradictions precisely because practitioners interpret risk (and therefore divergence) differently. Concerned concern is a paradoxical constitution both of support for and protection against individuals. Ultimately, in exploring these two concepts, the paper critically engages with the notion that Prevent is ‘just another safeguarding duty’. Building on earlier critical terrorism scholarship, this discussion shows how worst case logics apparent in national discourse are largely absent at the point of implementation, yet pejorative identity-construction and some suspicion (no matter how banalised) are implicit in any risk-managing scheme in a counter-terrorism context. These qualities are incompatible with an emancipatory agenda

What is the Impact of Foreign Military Intervention on Radicalization?

In an era where the use of military intervention is being debated by governments and societies all around the globe, the potentially radicalizing impact of the specific form of intervention has remained chronically underexplored. The article addresses this lack of research, by examining the radicalizing effects of full-scale military engagement and the consequences of more limited, aerial intervention. In an effort to inform the contentious discussion around foreign military intervention, it draws examples from the ‘War on Terror’ in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as the more recent airstrikes employed through the US drone programme against Al-Qaeda and coalition strikes against the so-called Islamic State, illustrating the risks and outcomes of ‘boots on the ground’ versus engaging in more ‘distant’ warfare. It concludes that whilst other factors clearly play a role in an individual’s journey towards extremism, intervention by a foreign power can encourage the process of radicalization, or ‘de-pluralization’ - the developing perception that there exists only one solution, extreme violence - to take place. However, it finds that the type of intervention plays a critical role in determining how individuals experience this process of de-pluralization; full-scale intervention can result in a lack of monitoring alongside frustrations (about lost sovereignty for example), a combination which paves the way for radical ideology. Conversely, airstrikes present those underneath with unequal and unassailable power that cannot be fairly fought, fuelling interest in exporting terrorism back to the intervening countries