Defining the Concept of ‘Violent Extremism’

Despite being recognized across the international community as one of the critical development challenges of our time, a uniform definition of violent extremism (VE) – one that can ensure a shared understanding of the phenomenon it represents – does not exist.
 “All-too-often, it appears that VE as a concept is framed as self-evident,” write MATHIAS BAK, KRISTOFFER NILAUS TARP and CHRISTINA SCHORI LIANG in ‘Defining the Concept of ‘Violent Extremism’, published by the Geneva Centre for Security Policy. This raises questions about whether subjective perceptions wind up influencing the responses and interventions currently designed to address the phenomenon.
 “The fact that interventions aimed at addressing VE are generally designed before the problem is actually delineated and defined is a strange anomaly,” the authors write.
The report, published as part of the Centre’s Geneva Papers Series, attempts to produce a definition that captures the most central characteristics of the types of violent extremism carried out by today’s most prominent violent extremist organizations (VEOs). “As such, it will not be an attempt to deconstruct the concept of violent extremism or deny its usefulness,” the authors state. Instead, the objective is to develop a definition which touches on key aspects of the violent extremism phenomenon, while also delineating the trend vis-à-vis other concepts such as radicalization and terrorism.
VEOs frequently undertake a mode of state-building that is based partly on a quest for legitimacy and partly on fear, coercion and extreme brutality. The report emphasizes VE partly as a political project in which state failure, the collapse of central government authority and the hardening of identity boundaries constitute opportunities for VEOs to build up their public authority and influence.
“[Violent extremism, on one hand, is exceptionally brutal and is undertaken in a deliberate attempt to spread chaos. On the other hand, it is also used as a means to foster state-building that is conducive to a specific ideology as well as to build and strengthen social boundaries,” BAK, TARP and LIANG state.
To capture the behavior of prominent VEOs, the authors assert, the following definition best exemplifies the essence of violent extremism:

Violent extremism is a violent type of mobilization that aims to elevate the status of one group, while excluding or dominating its ‘others’ based on markers, such as gender, religion, culture and ethnicity. In doing so, violent extremist organizations destroy existing political and cultural institutions, and supplant them with alternative governance structures that work according to the principles of a totalitarian and intolerant ideology.

“This definition highlights the political nature of the VE phenomenon, as well as its use of violent force to gain power. Thus, interventions against it must consider the unique regional and political forces at play, while also emphasizing the importance of strengthening social dynamics.”
VEOs use a deadly combination of local grievances and rehearsed narratives to lure its followers deeper into a complex, insular and disturbing world. It is therefore important to continue studying both the concept itself and develop a better awareness of engaging and empowering all stakeholders in the community -- be they women, youth, religious leaders, medical professionals, government and the private sector -- to push back against violent extremism.
The authors further state that violent extremism will only be challenged by designing and carrying out inclusive and effective multi-disciplinary and multi-agency approaches. Attempts to combat the totalitarian and intolerant nature of VEOs has been addressed through programming that enhance the capacity of individuals and community service organizations (CSOs) to engage in preventive dialogue. While such practices may be helpful in establishing a form of cohesion that prevents VE ideology from entering the mainstream and reducing inter-group information asymmetries that lead to group-based security dilemmas, few believe such engagements will reach the most adamant violent extremists.
“To truly put an end to the scale of VE that exists in the world today, the political project of violent extremism and the opportunity structures it exploits must be addressed.”