Assessing the costs and benefits of three approaches to fighting the dissemination of terrorist propaganda.
Latest in Countering Violent Extremism
The United States needs to take the threat of prison radicalization seriously.
The United States should learn from other countries' proactive approaches to counterterrorism to meet its diverse extremist threats.
Over the past decade, foreign terrorists command and capability in the digital sphere has drastically evolved. But our responses to this have not adapted with the same efficiency.
Belgium's counterterrorism approach was once scorned. Now it should be emulated.
Despite new policies, American social media companies are still being exploited by terrorists. The Trump administration needs to do more to change that.
Social media companies can't move fast enough to take down terrorist groups' online content. But what else can they do to address the problem?
Washington should be learning from the example set by its partners in Australia and Canada.
International NGOs campaigning against preventative approaches to violent extremism should be careful what they wish for.
Over the past few years the idea of countering violent extremism (CVE) has become part of the lexicon when discussing issues related to terrorism. But contrary to popular misunderstanding, CVE is neither a replacement to counterterrorism (CT) efforts nor a way for the US government to spy on citizens. Rather, CVE is a complement to CT and has become all the more relevant in the aftermath of the Boston bombings and the Islamic State and other jihadi groups’ recruitment of unprecedented numbers of Americans to fight abroad.