Power and Vulnerability. The susceptibility nexus for the engagement of vulnerable young people in extremism.

The NSW ESP team are at the forefront of CVE practice. The challenge presented by the engagement of young people in extremism is one of the most complex security problems of contemporary times. This is due, in part, to the vulnerability and susceptibility of the young people that the ESP engage with, and fast evolving nature of extremism, with individuals and movements around the world leveraging online technologies to recruit, radicalise, or manipulate young people to serve their goals.

Our work with the ESP aimed to better understand how and why young Australians were becoming involved with extremism. To do this, we united academic scholarship, interviews with practitioners, and a review of files. This allowed us to better understand the environments of young people before, and while, they were engaged with extremism. 

Young people can become involved in extremism for a number of reasons. Among the most compelling that we identified was the need for community – even if that community did not serve their needs. A substantial number of young people had endured adverse childhood experiences, including violence, experience in the criminal justice system, unstable home environments, poor relationship security. Some had been socialised into extremism, some had been subject to grooming. In some cases, we found it inappropriate to describe the young person as radicalised, as the evidence indicated that they had instead been indoctrinated by predatory adults. We describe this as indoctrination as the young people, some as young as 14, do not have the power, agency or maturity to critically assess or disagree with beliefs presented to them by authoritative adults.  

Generally, there is a stereotype about young people involved in extremism: the “good kid gone bad”. Alongside this is the idea that nobody knew, and that the young person radicalised alone in their bedroom with their happy family oblivious on the other side of the door. We found this to be a false stereotypes and gross over simplification of the factors which might make a young person more vulnerable to recruitment and more susceptible to engagement. There is no single pathway towards extremism, nor an easy checklist.

By viewing these young people as individuals, and looking beyond the stereotypes, we found that there was often a family link to extremism, where family members might have held similar views to the young person. We found stories of family violence, experiences of victimisation at school at home and in the community, instances of trauma, suicidal ideations, and of mental health comorbidities. The general picture we began to see was one of young people with unmet needs who did not have prosocial opportunities and engagement, who did not have supportive and positive environments, and who, due to these vulnerabilities, were more susceptible to recruitment an engagement in extremism. 

Vulnerability refers to an individual’s openness for engagement in extremism (and creates the overall susceptibility). Vulnerability often presents through trauma histories and poor attachments, mental illness, cognitive impairments, experiences of death or violence, or other adverse experiences. This makes them more susceptible to joining organisations in the search of belonging, validation and community, or being targeted by adults seeking to groom a young person into extremism.

The interviews with ESP case managers was essential to the study. While commentators and pundits often seek to weigh in on youth engagement with extremism, they do not have the frontline experience and expertise of the practitioners we met with. The interviews impressed on us both the delicacy and intricacy involved in managing young people engaged with extremism. Through these talks, we were able to better understand the engagement – and disengagement - of young people as young people, rather than faceless stereotypes villainised by society.  

The ESP model office a best practise framework for the management of complex cases especially those related to youth offending. They emphasised a client focused approach, with a strong focus on transparency, justice and fair treatment, and the dignity of the young person. A particular strength of the ESP model was their community engagement: not only do they manage the young person and work towards addressing unmet needs, but they liaised with family and the community to create a more informed environment. 

The community can play a role in supporting young people to leave extremism. The first step is accessing resources such as the Steptogether website to get a greater understanding of the issue. Calling the Steptogether hotline is also a useful way to get more information about how to support a young person. Calling out a young person, judging them, or otherwise condemning their engagement is more likely to solidify their engagement rather than foster disengagement. 

The community is essential to supporting young people to leave extremism. Stigma, or fear of stigma, was a reported difficulty for young people seeking to start new lives after extremism. The community can support young people by educating themselves around this particularly complex problem, providing non-judgmental atmosphere for young people to disengage, supporting young people to enter and engage with community and social activities, and assist them to reimagine a future without extremism.  

Some of the recommendations of the report include

• Legislative reform to criminalise the recruitment of young people    into extremism, in a similar way to grooming for criminal activity.
• More expansive information sharing powers to assist ESP teams to  appropriately learn about and manage a young person without having to rely on individual disclosure (which could be traumatising for the young person).
• Expansion of specialist mentoring programs as an early intervention mechanism.
• Upskilling and certification in CVE for related fields, such as mental health practitioners, education leaders, department staff, and so on.
• Greater public education initiatives, including the expansion of listing of terrorist groups, to better inform young people about which organisations might get them into trouble if they joined.