Governments and communities worldwide are now grappling with what to do when citizens who participated in violent extremist conflicts return home. Though the violent radicalization process is complex, it is inherently social in nature—and disengagement efforts will need to address those social factors too. Many returning persons will face prosecution, while others will reintegrate directly into local communities. But once the justice systems mete out their sentences, returnees need processes that enable them to abandon their violent attitudes and behaviors, and communities need approaches that can create social cohesion to avoid further violence, revenge, and future radicalization.

 Frydenlund, a middle-class residential area on the outskirts of Aarhus, Denmark, home to a number of men who fought for the Islamic State group in Syria, Dec. 8, 2014. In much of Europe, radicals who return home from the Middle East are often locked up, but Denmark has shunned punishment in favor of rehabilitation. So far, none of the 16 have caused problems. (Jan Grarup/The New York Times)
Aarhus, Denmark, home to a number of men who fought for the Islamic State group in Syria. Radicals who return home from the Middle East are often locked up, but Denmark has shunned punishment in favor of rehabilitation. (Jan Grarup/The New York Times)

Join USIP as we kick off our VEDR initiative to progress past conventional notions of deradicalization—which generally focus on transforming a person’s beliefs about ideologies—and instead develop a systemic approach that simultaneously encourages disengagement and builds social cohesion and community resilience to prevent the reoccurrence of violence.

This panel will explore the cognitive, social, and structural factors involved in the disengagement, reintegration, and reconciliation of violent extremists within local communities. The premise of the panel is that sustained, positive, inclusive engagement with local communities is critical for building bonds, generating a sense of belonging, and fostering a cognitive opening to disengage from violent extremism.

Join the conversation on Twitter with #ReintegratingExtremists.

Panelists

Dr. David Yang, opening remarks
Vice President, Applied Conflict Transformation, U.S. Institute of Peace

Dr. Laura G. E. Smith
Senior Lecturer, University of Bath

Dr. Mary Beth Altier
Clinical Associate Professor, New York University

Dr. B. Heidi Ellis
Director, Refugee Trauma and Resilience Center, Boston Children’s Hospital

Dr. Rebecca J. Wolfe
Lecturer, University of Chicago

Dr. Stevan M. Weine
Professor of Psychiatry, University of Illinois at Chicago

Mr. Chris Bosley, moderator
Senior Program Officer, Countering Violent Extremism, U.S. Institute of Peace

Registration Type
Your Information
Work Information
How did you hear about this event?

Latest Publications

Where Public Health and Peacebuilding Converge

Where Public Health and Peacebuilding Converge

Thursday, January 16, 2020

By: Fouad Pervez; Chris Bosley

In many ways, peacebuilding and public health are kindred disciplines in that they both require whole-of-society approaches to succeed. But while both disciplines share similar traits, the relationship between peacebuilding and public health is often overlooked. In any country, public health services such as healthcare facilities, water sanitation, and accessible medicine are critical for citizens’ welfare. But in fragile or conflict-affected states, these services become even more important—serving as a foundation for healing and stability throughout a peace process. To examine this important dynamic, USIP’s Fouad Pervez and Chris Bosley look at three situations where the goals of peacebuilding and public health are intertwined.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Human Rights; Violent Extremism

The Latest on Iran’s Evolving Protests

The Latest on Iran’s Evolving Protests

Thursday, January 16, 2020

By: Garrett Nada; Maria J. Stephan

Iran has been rocked by a series of developments in recent months, from the mass protests over raised fuel prices to the killing of powerful Iranian commander Qassem Soleimani. Over the weekend, protesters returned to the streets, spurred by the military’s mistaken downing of a Ukrainian passenger jet. As in past protests, like 2009, the government has met demonstrators with a draconian and violent response. USIP’s Garrett Nada and Maria Stephan explain how the protests have evolved over time and how demonstrators could use nonviolent tactics against the repressive regime.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Democracy & Governance; Nonviolent Action

The Global Fragility Act: A New U.S. Approach

The Global Fragility Act: A New U.S. Approach

Wednesday, January 15, 2020

By: USIP Staff

After several years of efforts by a bipartisan group of members of Congress and outside groups, Congress last month took legislative aim at a threat behind many of the world’s most pressing problems: fragile states. On December 20, as part of an appropriations package, President Donald Trump signed into law the Global Fragility Act, marking a new—if largely unnoticed— U.S. approach to conflict-prone states that can be vectors of violent extremism, uncontrolled migration, and extreme poverty.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Fragility & Resilience; Violent Extremism

The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict in 2020: What are the Possible Paths Ahead?

The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict in 2020: What are the Possible Paths Ahead?

Tuesday, January 14, 2020

By: Ambassador Hesham Youssef

Despite tremendous effort exerted since the 1991 Madrid Peace Conference to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through a two-state solution, peace has been elusive. Today, there is a growing feeling among Palestinians, Israelis and the international community that the two-state paradigm may no longer be viable. USIP’s Ambassador Hesham Youssef examines the potential scenarios facing Israelis, Palestinians and the region as the stalemated conflict continues without progress toward two states.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Peace Processes

View All Publications