research was prompted by reports from scholars and activists claiming that counter-radicalisation policy contributes to racism against Muslims. “My research began with the question of whether, if this is indeed the case, such racialised effects are rooted in the policy itself and whether they become apparent in how the policy framework is translated into everyday practice,” Groothuis explains.
In-depth interviews
For her research, Groothuis analysed 135 policy documents and conducted in-depth interviews with 17 policymakers, supplemented by conversations with professionals and experts in the field of counter-radicalisation.
Not black and white
The findings are not black and white. “Policy documents generally do not contain explicit racial assumptions,” says Groothuis. “At the same time, interviews with policymakers reveal that societal and institutional frameworks influence how risks and radicalisation are interpreted.”
According to Groothuis, this can result in Muslims being approached in racialised ways in practice. Not because policy explicitly states that all Muslims pose a threat, but because, within that mode of thinking, an abstract image of ‘the Muslim’ as a risk bearer subtly emerges. “This means Muslims are more readily associated with radicalisation or extremism even if that is not the intention of the policy.”
Post-9/11 context
Current policies have been heavily shaped by the post-9/11 context, in which threats were often linked to Muslims. “Those historical roots are still evident today,” Groothuis notes. “While policymakers aim for balanced measures, they continue to operate within frameworks in which certain groups are more likely to be viewed as suspicious.”
A fundamentally different way of thinking
Groothuis stresses that previous efforts to improve policy such as increased transparency, accountability, and fairer implementation are valuable and necessary. At the same time, she argues for a broader reconsideration of the assumptions underpinning the policy. “A reinterpretation of what we understand by radicalisation, security, and risk can create space for fundamentally different ways of thinking and acting,” she says. “This allows us to question existing power structures and take alternative perspectives seriously.”