Self-radicalisation is a phenomenon whereby an individual having no or limited physical contact with another individual or a group gets influenced through indirect means to commit violent acts. In other words, when social externalities become strong enough to control human internalities, and push an individual to take extreme steps without giving considerable importance to its consequences we can say that a person is moving on the path of self-radicalisation. An important question then arises whether radicalisation is a scientific process or not. If we dub it as a procedure based on science we can have a wide range of available room to use it as tool for changing perceptions, ideas and notions of people — a complete brainwashing and changing thought process mechanism. Such mind controlling exercise can be equated with hypnotism, which lures the mind into an ideal place with pacifying effects for a certain span of time.
There are three important factors responsible for self-radicalisation. First, it is more common in an environment where asking questions and raising queries are not normally encouraged or supported. Such conditions exist in autocratic societies where a person is subjected to strict rules and freedom of speech and action is very limited. A tribal set-up also produces conditions that lead to self-radicalisation. Even a household where one of the parents is very strict can cause permanent terror in the minds of the children, making them fearful to raise voice against their parents. Lack of independence in decision making and remaining dependent upon others can also nudge a person towards self-radicalisation.
Second, the persons living on the edge of hopefulness and despair if not effectively handled can also lose confidence in the system and move rapidly towards self-radicalisation. Such a person is most difficult to point out among hundreds and thousands of the needy. A welfare state is, therefore, ideal to retard progress of such a person towards self-radicalisation.
Third, the external environment wherein one is brought up has a considerable impact on the internal thinking processes of a person. These imprints are so perfect that no matter how much one is groomed or polished, the lurking shadows of past life subsists with him or her for a long time if not forever. The internal thinking mechanism of such persons is non-linear, and exhibits an erratic and non-uniform behaviour in public. Any incident, minor or major, can ignite the old passions, which constantly push the person to embrace self-radicalisation. Once in the process of self-radicalisation, the action taken by such an individual can be extremely lethal with massive causalities if executed with perfection.
The countries with the high percentage of young population run the risk of causing self-radicalisation at an alarming rate. Since the tender age is most impressionable, anything seen or observed remains etched in memory for a long time. When these young minds start exploring the cyber space they frequently come in contact with radical websites, especially in South Asian region where there exists no effective checks on cyber sites. With loss of control over ungoverned cyber space, the youth keep on wandering into these areas regularly, and slowly accept its effects on their minds. Websites explain different, complex problems on a variety of issues including ideology, religion and theology. The person surfing these sites accepts these explanations and believes on their authenticity with a closed mind, and hardly discusses them publically save with a close circle of friends, associates or colleagues.
Sometimes, these explanatory exercises on web magnify the latent vision or ideals in a person, which propels him or her towards self-radicalisation, and he or she commits a horrendous act of terror under the constant impression of this phenomenon. No one can say with certainty about the extent of self-radicalisation of a person; however, one can only make conjectures and talk about probabilities and percentages of an eventuality. Our model for self-radicalisation detection should therefore be based on symptoms and indications. The massive data storage capability makes it possible to devise such an arrangement.
Like all advanced countries, the United States of America has the capability to capture major active life span of each of its citizen. Each person can be allotted a unique number connected with a data bank of knowledge based upon radicalisation indicators, which triggers a signal upon receiving a positive feedback from it. Once activated the code number becomes red for active monitoring and control. Under this category a person may be detained for questioning for his or her cyber space escapades with digital eavesdropping or snooping.
Interestingly, Omar Mateen, the Orlando massacre perpetrator, was interviewed and interrogated during an oversight based on the complaints about his attitude and conversations with his colleagues. He was perhaps ignored on account of his hollow claims and empty boasting, but the system could not pick up his gun purchasing activity and disturbed family life. He was teetering on self-radicalisation when frustration and his family environ pushed him to commit the blatant act. In the case of San Bernardino shooter, Rizwan Farook, he was having major changes in his life through his marriage, and later with the birth of his child. His behavioural patterns were not probably reported to the FBI, and resultantly, no symptoms and indications were observed against his name.
Saad Aziz, one of the principal actors in the Safoora Goth incident, got self-radicalised during his short internship programme in one of the leading companies in the country. He expanded his social capital after the internship, and later joined a group that committed a number of terror incidents in Karachi. His parents were aware of his suspicious activities, but they never came forward to contact police or any other Law Enforcement Agency.
In a country like Pakistan where a weak formal system exists, and majority of work is carried out through personal contacts and informal channels it is essential that social awareness about self-radicalisation be made public through electronic and print media. Unless a mass public realisation of terror of self-radicalisation is not socially instilled, the actions of such individuals can neither be detected
nor preempted.
The writer is a senior superintendent of police