Deradicalization of Foreign Fighters and the Agency of Diaspora

There is little conversation between terrorism and diaspora literatures, that have largely developed in parallel rather than in concert with one another. This paper connects research on CVE where the role of diaspora in deradicalization has been understudied and undertheorized, with diaspora and migration literature, which emphasizes diaspora actors as having their own agency and claim-making potential within larger transnational processes. We present insights into the mobilization of Balkan foreign fighters from Austria and analyze the factors that have contributed to the emergence of jihadists from the Balkan/Bosnian diaspora. We further examine the institutional environment and understanding of deradicalization of (jihadist) extremism in Austria, exploring the potential role of diaspora communities, both in terms of individuals as well as group responses. Austria’s legal and political environment, along with its large post-conflict, post-Yugoslav diaspora community offers an important case study in terms of policy focused on the interconnections between deradicalization and diaspora. We utilized the interviews as data to talk about the institutional responses to deradicalisation and to diaspora foreign fighters. Finding: even for those institutional actors who might have diaspora background, but they are acting within institutions, whether this is the Islamic community, the policy, the city of Vienna etc., diaspora doesn’t come to the forefront of CVE. This is the case, we argue, for several reasons. First, because they are not formally included in the institutional responses, second, there is a certain level of fear, of stigmatization, because there is highly politicized environment around questions of extremism both within the diaspora itself and in the larger Austrian society and this mirrors back in the diaspora community itself. Our key takeaway: The way institutional actors come together and the institutional response itself reflects the lack of agency of diaspora within an Islamophobic and very politicized context: whether diaspora actors do not want to be agents themselves or whether they are simply not included in the ongoing debates. Thus, the agency of diaspora is undermined. We argue that it is necessary to reassess how radicalization among diaspora populations is understood and how diaspora communities in turn relate to and engage with questions of prevention and deradicalization.