Skip to main content
Home
Subscribe
 
 

Main navigation

  • Projects
  • Publications Publications
    • Browse all
    • What We're Reading
  • Events
  • Network Network
    • Member Organizations
    • The Board
    • Research Advisory Council
  • About Us About Us
    • Updates

Enter the terms you wish to search for.
English French
  • event
    Online

    /

    Conflict and Violent Extremism in Southeast Asia: Examining Trends in Malaysia and the Philippines
    Friday, February 11, 2022, 9:00am - 10:30am  EST Over the past few years, terrorist activity has declined in Southeast Asia, including in both Malaysia and the Philippines. However, despite this decline, many of the same dynamics that have historically given rise to terrorism and violent extremism remain the same. What does this mean for the evolution of violent extremism and conflict in Southeast Asia? As part of RESOLVE’s sixth annual Global Forum Series, join the RESOLVE Network for a conversation about recent trends related to regional and local violent extremism and conflict in Southeast Asia. Focusing on Malaysia and the Philippines, this conversation will bring together the experts behind two RESOLVE publications to explore historical ties, ongoing developments, cross-border dynamics and their implications for our understanding of current and future manifestations of violent extremism and conflict in the region.  Stay tuned for more on the 2021-2022 RESOLVE Global Forum Series by following us on Twitter at @resolvenet and joining the conversation with #RESOLVEForum. Convened virtually, the Global Forum Series brings together leading experts and researchers for thought-provoking fireside conversations on evolving trends and dynamics in the violent extremist landscape.  Speakers Dr. Alastair Reed, opening remarks Senior Expert and Executive Director, RESOLVE Network, U.S. Institute of Peace Brian Harding, opening remarks  Senior Expert, Southeast Asia, U.S. Institute of Peace Dr. Samuel D. Henkin  Researcher, Geospatial Research Unit, START at University of Maryland Joseph Franco Research Fellow, Centre of Excellence for National Security, S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies Amina Rasul-Bernardo  President, Philippine Center for Islam and Democracy 
    Register Here
  • article

    27 January 2022 / Charlie Winter, Abdul Sayed, and Abdullah Alrhmoun

    A “New” Islamic Emirate? The Taliban’s Outreach Strategy in the Aftermath of Kabul
    As the Taliban’s forces swept across Afghanistan in July and August, their triumphalist—and fundamentally revolutionary—discourse became exponentially more pronounced. The moment it seized Kabul, however, the Taliban had to reorder its communications priorities. As Afghanistan’s new de facto government, it needed to expand on what its outreach strategists had been doing to date, i.e., setting out political aspirations, emphasizing military capabilities, and attacking the legitimacy of adversaries. Now, it had to take on a more complex strategic communications task: demonstrating that its new state would be able to follow through on what as a movement it had been promising for decades. Drawing on tens of thousands of data points ingested by ExTrac’s automated crawlers from the Taliban’s online networks on Telegram and Twitter as well as an array of pro-Taliban static websites, this report examines how the fall of Kabul impacted the Taliban’s outreach strategy.    Suggested citation:  Winter, Charlie, Abdul Sayed, and Abdullah Alrhmoun. A “New” Islamic Emirate? The Taliban’s Outreach Strategy in the Aftermath of Kabul. Washington, D.C.: RESOLVE Network, 2022. https://10.37805/ogrr2022.1.afg. 
  • article

    13 December 2021 / Samuel Henkin

    Dynamic Dimensions of Radicalization and Violent Extremism in Sabah, Malaysia
    Malaysia offers a unique lens to evaluate the changing dynamics of radicalization and extremism in Southeast Asia, as the threat of both home-grown and external extremism grows. The country’s geographic location, bordering multiple active centers of violent extremism (the southern Philippines, southern Thailand, and Indonesia), makes it particularly vulnerable to further threats from violent extremism and terrorism, as regional and local violent extremist organizations (VEOs) exploit Malaysian geohistorical contexts and growing grievances related to social and political instability.  Threats and risks of violent extremism are especially pronounced and manifest with severe consequences in the Malaysian state of Sabah.  This policy note advances a granular review of the dynamics underlying radicalization risk in Sabah, Malaysia, in order to extrapolate an analysis of emerging areas of threat and risk of violent extremism facing Southeast Asia. It offers an opportunity to better understand current and future threats and risks of violent extremism facing Southeast Asia and identifies important trends and recommendations for policymakers and practitioners in mitigating the spread of violent extremism and radicalization to violence in Sabah. The policy note also considers how building local preventing and countering violent extremism (P/CVE) capacity can mitigate Malaysia’s role as a staging area, transit hub, and conduit for the transportation of weapons, operatives, finances, and supporters to other regional and global terrorist organizations.    Suggested citation:  Henkin, Samuel. Dynamic Dimensions of Radicalization and Violent Extremism in Sabah, Malaysia. Washington, D.C.: RESOLVE Network, 2021. https://doi.org/10.37805/pn2021.25.sea. 
  • article

    10 December 2021 / Jason M. Blazakis and Colin P. Clarke

    From Paramilitaries to Parliamentarians: Disaggregating Radical Right Wing Extremist Movements
    The global far right is extremely broad in nature and far from monolithic. While the “far right” is often used as an umbrella term, using the term runs the risk of over-simplifying the differences and linkages between white supremacist, anti-immigration, nativist, and other motivating ideologies. These beliefs and political platforms fall within the far-right rubric, and too often the phrase presents a more unified image of the phenomena than is really the case. In truth, the “far right” and the individual movements that comprise it are fragmented, consisting of a number of groups that lack established leadership and cohesion. Indeed, these movements include chauvinist religious organizations, neo-fascist street gangs, and paramilitary organs of established political parties. Although such movements largely lack the mass appeal of the interwar European radical right-wing extreme, they nevertheless can inspire both premeditated and spontaneous acts of violence against perceived enemies. This report is intended to provide policymakers, practitioners, and the academic community with a roadmap of ongoing shifts in the organizational structures and ideological currents of radical right-wing extremist movements, detailing the difference between distinct, yet often connected and interlaced echelons of the far right. In particular, the report identifies and analyzes various aspects of the broader far right and the assorted grievances it leverages to recruit, which is critical to gaining a more nuanced understanding of the potential future trajectory of these movements.   Suggested citation:  Blazakis, Jason M., and Colin P. Clarke. From Paramilitaries to Parliamentarians: Disaggregating Radical Right Wing Extremist Movements. Washington, D.C.: RESOLVE Network, 2021. https://doi.org/10.37805/remve2021.2. 
Tweets by resolvenet
  • Research Report
    William Maley
    |
    17 December 2021
    Research as an Outsider: Positionality, Ethics, and Risk
    Outsiders—or “foreigners”—who study violent extremism in affected countries can have multiple identities as students of violent extremism, as students of the countries in question, and as “foreigners” to the contexts they study. They often have long-standing personal relationships with local community members and in some cases they have spent more time living in the countries they study than in their countries of nationality. Yet they inhabit an ambiguous space, being “insiders” in the eyes of some, and “outsiders” in the eyes of others. This ambiguity gives rise to both practical and ethical challenges in undertaking fieldwork. The following reflections draw on the author’s own experiences to illustrate some of the complexities associated with positionality, ethics, and risk as well as important considerations that all researchers should take into account when undertaking fieldwork in a country other than their own.   Suggested citation:  Maley, William. Research as an Outsider: Positionality, Ethics, and Risk. Washington, D.C.: RESOLVE Network, 2021. https://doi.org/10.37805/rve2021.7. 
              
  • Research Report
    Marina Lažetić
    |
    01 November 2021
    Migration, Extremism, & Dangerous Blame Games: Developments & Dynamics in Serbia
    The rapid arrival of hundreds of thousands of migrants into the European Union (EU) from the Middle East, South Asia, and Africa beginning in 2015 coincided with an increase in support for anti-immigrant rhetoric and the far-right in many European countries. A substantial number of these migrants came to the EU through what became known as the “Balkan Route” a major transit land route cutting through the Western Balkans. In 2016, however, the Route officially “closed,” leaving many of those people attempting to reach Europe effectively stranded within the Balkans. In 2020, for example, approximately 7,000 migrants and refugees were present within the borders of Serbia at any given time. This presence of migrants within the Balkans did not go unnoticed and, in some cases, even spurred increased activity within and mobilization among far-right actors opposed to their presence in the region. Exploring this phenomenon, this report focuses on dynamics surrounding migration and responses to it from the far-right in Serbia, one of the countries on the Balkan Route.   Suggested citation:  Lažetić, Marina. Migration, Extremism, & Dangerous Blame Games: Developments & Dynamics in Serbia. Washington, D.C.: RESOLVE Network, 2021. https://doi.org/10.37805/wb2021.1.   Updated November 3, 2021
              
  • Policy Notes
    Emmaculate Asige Liaga
    |
    26 October 2021
    Towards Local Approaches and Inclusive Peacebuilding in South Sudan
    The post-liberation peacebuilding in South Sudan, which largely drew from liberal peace theory, was employed between 2005 (after the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) and before the referendum, secession, and independence in 2011) and December 2013 (when it imploded into a civil conflict) and proved insufficient to sustain the fragile peace that briefly existed after the country’s secession from Sudan. After a protracted conflict lasting almost half a decade and the presence of multiple peace actors, the lack of a comprehensive and coordinated peacebuilding strategy proved detrimental. This failure is partly due to poor coordination between stakeholders and lack of local/domestic legitimacy, leading to insufficient peacebuilding and an aggravation of the 2013 conflict.   Over the years, liberal peacebuilding strategies, which emphasize formal institution-building and statebuilding in fragile and conflict-affected environments, continue to produce mixed to poor results and fragile peace. This decline has resulted in the shifting of discourses and operations within peacebuilding, a paradigm shift that pays greater attention to localization and the local context in the conceptualization of peacebuilding objectives and strategies. This transformation promotes local ownership and inclusivity in peace processes and their dividends. The dialogue on inclusive peace has thus gained momentum, bearing a need to fully engage both states and societies in this process. The “local” in peacebuilding forms an important resource when solving root causes of conflicts, as in South Sudan, by improving awareness of the cultural and historical diversity in a given context.     Suggested citation:  Liaga, Emmaculate Asige. Towards Local Approaches and Inclusive Peacebuilding in South Sudan. Washington, D.C.: RESOLVE Network, 2021. https://doi.org/10.37805/pn2021.23.lpbi. 
              

Welcome to the Resolve Network

LEARN MORE ABOUT US
Better research. Informed practice. Improved policy on violent extrimism.
Resolve Network Map
Publication Categories
VIEW ALL PUBLICATIONS
Research Reports
Research Briefs
Factsheets
Compendiums
Policy Notes
WHAT WE'RE READING

RESOLVE Network

ISSN 2766-9955

RESOLVE is housed at the U.S. Institute of Peace, building upon the Institute’s decades-long legacy of deep engagement in conflict-affected societies.

United States Institute of Peace

2301 Constitution Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20037
Tel: +1.202.457.1700

  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Newsletter Archive
 
 

          

© RESOLVE Network 2021. All Rights Reserved | Terms and Conditions