Remembering September 11th

Remembering September 11th: The Prevailing Memories of 9/11

Remembering September 11th

“The Black Swan Theory”, coined by Nassim Nicholas Caleb, describes sporadic, unforeseen, and highly significant events. These events are challenging to predict in the normal course of business and are unthinkable. The September 11th attacks portray the Black Swan theory. The tragic event was unexpected to the world, and its implications continue to affect the world 21 years later.

On September 11, 2001, a black swan event occurred when the deadliest terrorist strikes in American history resulted in 2,977 fatalities. On that Tuesday morning, 19 Al-Qaeda terrorists deliberately crashed four American passenger airlines headed for the West Coast.

Both the North and South Towers of the World Trade Center collapsed as a result of the collision between American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175, which took off from Boston. Flight 11 hit the North Tower of the World Trade Center at 8:46 a.m. and Flight 175 hit the South Tower at 9:03 a.m.

After passengers stormed the cockpit and attempted to subdue the hijackers, United Airlines Flight 93, leaving from Newark, New Jersey, crashed into a field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, at 10:03 a.m. American Airlines Flight 77, departing from Dulles International Airport in Virginia, crashed into the Pentagon at 9:37 a.m.

The attacks redefined how the United States views counterterrorism and national security. They also reinforced patriotic values, along with other defining principles of the United States. Furthermore, the aftermath saw a change in U.S. immigration laws and gave rise to an increase in discriminatory practices, prejudice, and hate crimes. All of this comes down to complex issues like economic reprisals, political and international tensions, abuses of human rights, and the escalation of unwarranted conflicts.

The Beginning of Everything

Sandra Crosby, a Boston University School of Medicine professor stated that the ongoing consequences of the US’s decisions to torture terror suspects have been profound – at their worst, inhumane.

Joseph Wippl, a Pardee School professor of the practice of international relations and a former Central Intelligence Agency officer expressed that beginning with 9/11, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) became more than ever a covert action agency.

Sarah Sherman-Stokes, a Boston University School of Law professor and associate director of LAW’s Immigrants’ Rights and Human Trafficking Program, has shared her perspective that the horrific events of September 11, 2001, forever altered the framework of United States immigration law and policy.

People may or may not have similar sentiments. The best and worst of what America had to showcase were in evidence as a result of the attacks, notwithstanding the wide range of emotions that have arisen since then; outrage, devastation, and hope. However, “the psychology of grieving” and the drumbeat of war soon overshadowed this opportunity for Americans to be drawn into the heart of mankind as a whole and experience the anguish of loss in locations far removed from their sensibilities yet within their military aircraft capability.

How Will This Be Remembered?

What would be the last remnant of 9/11 on its anniversary? Will this be depicted as a picturesque but consequentially irrelevant tragedy or as a pivotal juncture that fundamentally shaped the development of American and global politics? Will future generations view this day as a telling indicator of emerging themes, a politics of playing chess, the starting point for a string of disastrous foreign policy errors, or just a singular incident with only significant long-term effects?

Of course, it is difficult to predict with absolute certainty how 9/11 will be remembered as the years progressed; perhaps all we can say with certainty is that the interpretations made of it will differ depending on who is doing the interpreting. Moreover, the 9/11 attack may be a sentimental tragedy to remember, but this tragedy may also be considered a triumph to some. Americans will view 9/11 differently than Afghans, Iraqis, Saudis, Asians, or Europeans, and it is likely to be little more than a historical footnote for many people all across the world.

When time passes and more recent affairs take the stage, what is prominent in our minds today is frequently unimportant to others. Especially at a time when other societal challenges have surfaced, such as COVID-19, these are questions that will seem to arise. Will 9/11 still be remembered?

Furthermore, one of the most crucial lessons I’ve learned over the years as a Filipino counterterrorism practitioner is that the United States’ decisions and actions have a great impact on how the rest of the world views them: a powerhouse ally or an enemy. Furthermore, I observed a great deal of unity in the wake of 9/11, which shows that the bonds that unite Americans are stronger than any efforts to sever them.

May We Never Forget

Personally, I have worked with and for America. I was a counter-terrorism intern at American Counterterrorism Targeting & Resilience Institute, a qualifier at Terrorism Research and Analysis Consortium, and am now a fellow at Rise to Peace, Middle East Forum, and Pacific Forum. During the 9/11 attacks, I was still a year-old baby and had absolutely nothing to do in these fields.

But today, as a third-year political science student in the Philippines, I am one of the few Filipinos who devote their time to studying, writing, and researching global terrorism. I’m not doing this because I have a thorough understanding of what happened on September 11, 2001, but rather because I genuinely believe that we can contribute significantly to the development of a better and wiser counterterrorism response, even in the smallest way, through constructive and research-based discussion and a productive and exchange of conversations.

Although we are aware of the lapses and loopholes in the aftermath of 9/11, we should be proud of the significant steps we have taken together, particularly in the fields of research, counterterrorism, law enforcement, and intelligence. Moving forward, I hope that the lessons learned during 9/11 will serve as a wake-up call to the United States about its decisions and their global consequences as a hegemonic actor in global politics. As we mourn the victims of the 9/11 terrorist attacks and mark their 21st anniversary, may we always be reminded to never forget.

Kristian Rivera, Counter-Terrorism Fellow

January 6

The Role of the Proud Boys in the January 6th Attack

Proud Boy national chairman Henry “Enrique” Tarrio of Miami, Florida; former Proud Boy national chairman Ethan Nordean (“Rufio Panman”) of Auburn, Washington; Joseph Biggs (“Sergeant Biggs”) of Ormond Beach, Florida; Zachary Rehl of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; and Dominic Pezzola (“Spaz,” “Spazzola”) of Rochester, New York have all been charged with seditious conspiracy for their actions before and during the Capitol Breach on January 6, 2021. Their actions disrupted a joint session of the U.S. Congress convened to ascertain and count the electoral votes related to the 2020 presidential election.

All defendants now face a total of nine charges, and Pezzola faces an additional robbery charge.

Planning and Preparation 

In December 2020, Proud Boys’ leadership made a private, encrypted messaging channel known as the Ministry of Self-Defense (MOSD). This private channel was allegedly restricted to several core members and members of the Proud Boys’ leadership, including Enrique Tarrio, Ethan Nordean, Joseph Biggs, Zachary Rehl, and Charles Donohoe. Tarrio explained that MOSD was a “national rallying planning committee.” After forming MOSD, Tarrio and the other leaders immediately began preparations for January 6, 2021.

On December 30, 2020, an individual sent Tarrio a document titled “1776 Returns.” This document outlined a plan to occupy a few “crucial buildings” in Washington, D.C., including the House and Senate Office buildings around the Capitol, with “as many people as possible” to “show our politicians We the People are in charge.”

January 6th Proud Boys Timeline

Timeline of the storming of the U.S. Capitol. (Source: Republican American/ AP)

On the morning of the insurrection, the Proud Boys gathered by the Washington Monument. Around 10:00 am, notable members such as Rehl, Biggs, and Nordean gathered near the Washington Monument and then walked to a lawn in an unrestricted area east of the Capitol.

Around 11:30 am, the Proud Boys recongregated on the east lawn of the Capitol with an estimated 100 members.

By 12:45 pm, around the time former President Trump finished his address, the Proud Boys reached a point northwest of the Capitol known as the Peace Monument, where Pennsylvania Avenue intersects the Capitol grounds. The walkway led straight to the steps of the Capitol.

At 12:53 pm,  seven minutes before the Joint Session of Congress would be gaveled into session, a man in the crowd known as Ryan Samsel had a conversation with Biggs. Following that conversation, Samsel and a second man identified as Grant James ventured into the restricted area of Capitol Hill, striding up to the outmanned line of five or six Capitol Police officers. They confronted these officers belligerently, then shook and lifted the barrier, toppling it over on top of the officers. A female officer fell back and struck her head on the concrete.

With the first barricade toppled, more than a dozen Proud Boys streamed across it and past the officers, making their way toward the west Capitol steps. Closer to the Capitol, the mob encountered a second barrier. Nordean and Biggs played direct physical roles in tearing down the barrier.

At 1:00 pm, former Vice President Pence tweeted that he viewed his role that day as “ceremonial.” Former Vice President Pence would not unilaterally reject the results of the swing states’ popular elections. Around the same time, former President Trump was nearing the end of his speech at the Ellipse, stating, “if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore. We are going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue—I love Pennsylvania Avenue—and we are going to the Capitol.”

Around 1:37 pm, there was a breakthrough at an impasse at the western base of the Capitol. Proud Boy Dan “Milkshake” Scott was apparently “one of the first, or perhaps the first,” rioter to “initiate contact with law enforcement at this location.” Allegedly, Scott pushed two officers backward, up the Capitol steps, and pulled an officer into the mob.

At 2:13 pm, Pezzola had stolen a police officer’s riot shield, using it to smash out a Capitol window pane as another rioter shattered the adjoining pane with a wooden plank. Pezzola climbed through one of the broken windows.

Each Leader’s Role  

These subsequent sections will describe the role each Proud Boys leader played before and during the January 6 attack. Nonetheless, please note that this section is a synopsis and does not include all the evidence against each individual. For complete details, reference the court document and transcript from the January 6 Committee Hearing.

Enrique Tarrio 

On November 7, 2020, news networks projected that former Vice President Joe Biden had won the 2020 presidential election. This had immediate implications for the Proud Boys. The same day, Tarrio posted onto the social media platform Parler stating the “standby order has been rescinded,” in reference to the legitimizing event that former President Trump had conferred upon the Proud Boys in late September during a Presidential debate. When former President Trump was asked if he would disavow “white supremacists and right-wing militia,” such as the Proud Boys, Trump responded, “the Proud Boys, stand back, and stand by. But I’ll tell you what. I’ll tell you what — somebody’s got to do something about antifa and the left because this is not a right-wing problem.” After the debate, Tarrio posted, “Standing by, Sir.”

On December 29, 2020, Tarrio posted another message on Parler calling the Proud Boys members to “turn out on record numbers” on January 6, but this time “with a twist.” Tarrio wrote, “we will not be wearing our traditional Black and Yellow. We will be incognito and we will be spread across downtown DC in smaller teams.”

Before Tarrio could join the march to the Capitol, he was arrested on January 4th on charges stemming from violence after a “Stop the Steal” rally one month earlier. He was found to be in felony possession of two high-capacity magazines compatible with AR-15 or M4 assault rifles. Tarrio was released on January 5th and met with the founder and leader of the Oath Keepers, Elmer Stewart Rhodes III.

Ethan Nordean 

On November 7, 2020, Nordean posted, “we tried playing nice and by the rules, now you will deal with the monster you created. The spirit of 1776 has resurfaced and has created groups like the Proudboys and we will not be extinguished. We will grow like the flame that fuels us and spread like love that guides us. We are unstoppable, unrelenting and now … unforgiving. Good luck to all you traitors of this county we so deeply love … you’re going to need it.” Earlier that month, Nordean solicited militia groups in the Pacific Northwest to contact him on an encrypted social media application.

On November 27, 2020, Nordean created an online crowdfunding campaign that solicited donations for “protective gear and communications” to be used by the Proud Boys. Nordean shared this crowdsourcing campaign on his social media page and encouraged others to share it.

Joseph Biggs

On December 29, 2020, Biggs posted, “you won’t see us. We are going to smell like you, move like you, and look like you. The only thing we’ll do that’s us is think like us! Jan 6th is gonna be epic.”

On January 5th, the Proud Boys created another encrypted messaging channel on Telegram called “Boots on the Grounds.” Biggs used this channel to urge the Proud Boys to stay out of trouble the day before the insurrection. “Tomorrow’s the day. . . Just trying to get our numbers. So we can plan accordingly for tonight and tomorrow’s plan.” Later, he wrote, “We have a plan.”

Caroline Edwards, a witness in the January 6 Committee Hearing, confirmed Biggs led the crowd. When Biggs began to speak to the crowd, it became more emotionally charged and started to chant statements against Antifa. Biggs then turned his attention towards the Capitol Police and started questioning them, slowly turning the crowd’s attention onto the officers. Caroline Edwards also identified Ryan Samsel talking to Biggs. Once the conversation was over, Biggs and Samsel approached the first barricade, ripped it down, and approached officers.

Zachary Rehl 

On November 27, 2020, Rehl posted, “hopefully the firing squads are for the traitors that are trying to steal the election from the American people. Some people at the highest levels need to be made an example of with an execution or two or three.”

On December 30, 2020, Tarrio convened a video call for prospective members of MOSD. MOSD leadership emphasized that members were to follow the commands of leadership. Rehl warned prospective members that January 6 was going to be a “completely different operation” and the Proud Boys would not be conducting a night march.

On December 30, 2020, Rehl posted a link to an online fundraiser with the campaign name “Travel Expenses for upcoming Patriot Events.” This campaign generated over $5,500 in donations between December 30, 2020, and January 4, 2021.

Dominic Pezzola  

On December 31, 2020, Tarrio posted a photo of Pezzola from the Stop the Steal protest on December 12 in Washington D.C. Along with the photo, Tarrio posted, “Lords of War. #J6 #J20” in reference to January 6 and January 20, President Joe Biden’s inauguration date.

According to an affidavit, the FBI has spoken to an affiant known as “W-1,” who spoke with Pezzola along with other individuals. In this conversation, Pezzola bragged about breaking the windows to the Capitol by using a Capitol Police shield. “W-1” also detailed conversations with other members who admitted to their acts on January 6 and what they would have liked to accomplish, including killing Nancy Pelosi and former Vice President Mike Pence if given the chance.

The Impact of the Proud Boys in the U.S. 

Professor Rober A. Page,with his colleagues in the Project on Security and Threats from the University of Chicago, has been tracking insurrectionist sentiments in U.S. adults since June 2021. They found that 47 million U.S. adults agreed with the statement that “the 2020 election was stolen from Donald Trump and Joe Biden is an illegitimate president.” Of those 47 million, 21 million agreed with the statement that “use of force is justified to restore Donald Trump to the presidency.” Many of these 21 million survey participants with insurrectionist sentiments have the capacity for violent mobilization. Of the 21 million, 6 million stated they supported right-wing militias and extremist groups, and one million stated they are themselves or personally know someone to be a member of a group, such as the Proud Boys or the Oath Keepers.

Although a small percentage of people who hold extremist views commit an act of violence, the findings in this survey reveal how many Americans hold certain perspectives which can lead toward insurrection.

A 2021 report published by the Southern Poverty Law Center found that while the number of active hate groups in the U.S. has declined, the Proud Boys’ membership has increased. The Proud Boys gained 29 chapters in one year and now have 72 chapters nationwide.

The growth in membership may suggest that the current political and social climate in the U.S. have become a fertile ground for the Proud Boys’ brands of authoritarian politics.

The Proud Boys became something few have expected, a hegemonic force for the far-right who are able to appeal to mainstream conservatives, carving out a space for white nationalists and fascists. Their moderate strategies have won them greater appeal by foregrounding ultranationalism and a vicious opposition to left-leaning politics. Inching closer and closer to American mainstream conservatism has made the Proud Boys a dangerous force as they have garnered sympathetic media coverage. It is not a coincidence that the Proud Boys’ uniform  features black and yellow shirts from Fred Perry, a favored skinhead brand.

What Can Be Done?

According to the 2021 Southern Poverty Law Center report, the criminal legal system solely cannot address the spread of far-right extremism. Since a majority of groups concentrate on influencing mainstream politics, diverse communities must work together to help build resiliency through prevention, organization, and education.

With a group such as the Proud Boys who, over time, have become hardened and have lost their empathy, these suggestions may not be received well by members with violent tendencies. It takes time and adjustment to unravel all the hate, apathy, and anger cultivated by their initiation rituals. Psychologists and experts in sociology, criminology, and political science have identified deradicalization and disengagement strategies. The German non-profit, the Violence Prevention Network has begun to work in Pittsburgh to launch operations for more intervention programs in the U.S.

Christian Picciolini is a former neo-Nazi turned activist who, for two decades, helped individuals leave extremism through his disengagement work and organization, the Free Radical Project. Picciolini states that people join extremist groups because of life’s “potholes,” incidents of trauma or neglect which affect people and lead them to join extremist groups as they search for an identity, community, and purpose.

“So when I engage with people to help them to leave these movements, I never debate them ideologically,” said Christian Picciolini, “I don’t tell them that their ideas are wrong, even though of course, I know that they are. But what I do is I listen, and I listen for those potholes so that I can find ways to fill them in.”

It is never an easy task to convince someone why their beliefs are wrong and to not hate them for it, but taking the time to realize they are still human and have universal needs to be recognized as such is the first step. At times, it’s necessary to show someone humanity when they may not recognize your own.

 

Camille Amberger, Counter-Terrorism Research Fellow

Proud Boys

Who are the Proud Boys?

On Monday, June 6, 2022, Proud Boys leaders Henry “Enrique” Tarrio (38), Ethan Nordean (31), Joseph Biggs (38), Zachary Rehl (37), and Dominic Pezzola (44) were charged with seditious conspiracy along with other charges for their actions leading up to and during the January 6th attack on the U.S. Capitol.  The Proud Boys have been active since 2016 and were labeled as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center.  The Proud Boys often identify themselves by wearing black and yellow polo shirts with logos and slogans.

Profile of the Proud Boys

Far-right American-Canadian commentator Gavin McInnes founded the Proud Boys in New York City in 2016. McInnes claimed it to be a fraternal drinking club and its existence was argued as necessary due to the inability for society to let men be proud of Western culture. McInnes has also endorsed the “Great Replacement” conspiracy theory, which argues that white populations are being purposely displaced by people of color, particularly immigrants in Western countries. He carved out a specific ideological space for frustrated men to claim that Western Culture is superior to all others, racism is a myth formed by guilty white liberals, Islam is a culture of violence, and feminism “is about de-masculizing men.”

Current leader Enrique Tarrio was appointed in November 2018 and has admitted that the Proud Boys attract those with white supremacist views.

The Proud Boys have described themselves as a pro-Western fraternal organization for men who refuse to apologize for creating the modern world; also known as Western Chauvinists. Though they officially reject racism and tout the multiracial backgrounds of some of their members, they hold the belief that Western European culture is superior to all others. The Proud Boys show up to events and protests and are sometimes used as private security, looking for any reason to incite violence.

Dangerous Narratives

“Western Chauvinism”  can be interpreted as a thinly veiled code for white supremacy and patriarchal misogyny. It is often employed to make the motives of the Proud Boys appear more palatable to mainstream audiences and deflect any charges of racism. Using coded language such as substituting “Western Civilization” for the racial category of whiteness gives a wink and a nod to white supremacy while having the ability to maintain some degree of plausible deniability that they are a racist group.

The Proud Boys have also glorified the use of violence to achieve their goals. They have a history of inciting, supporting, and praising violence under the guise of self-defense. Proud Boys often declare, “we don’t start fights, we finish them.”

Ethan Nordean gained prominence within the Proud Boys due to a video depicting him fending off a baton from a counter-protester and then flattening his assailant. Nordean earned the accolade “Proud Boy of the Week” in the Proud Boys magazine. In an interview with conspiracy website Infowars’ Alex Jones questioning Nordean about the incident, Nordrean responded, “like Gavin McInnes says, violence isn’t great, but justified violence is amazing.”

The Proud Boys also advocate for “traditional” gender roles. One of the beliefs is to “venerate the housewife.” They glorify the traditional notions of womanhood while denigrating women who do not fit into those notions. The Proud Boys may claim they support the choice of some women being “housewives,” however, the reality is that they perceive women the same way as white supremacists and elements of the online manosphere do. Women are perceived as under-deserving of the same status as men, worthy of ridicule for deviating from traditional gender roles, objectifiable in some instances to serve men, and worthy of protection in others as long as they fulfill antiquated roles in the service of preserving “Western” society.

These narratives are dangerous as they help the Proud Boys’ beliefs be more palatable to a broader audience. The Proud Boys consistently attempt to present themselves as “patriots” and defenders of “conservative” values by being able to sidestep any branding of having an extremist label.

Initiation 

Four “rituals” must be performed to gain membership and rank. This hierarchical system promotes adherence to the Proud Boys´ identity and is a focal point for the radicalization of violence within the group.

First, to be initiated, the individual must publicly declare his desire to be a Proud Boy and Western Chauvinist. They must repeat the phrase “I’m a Proud Boy. I’m a Western chauvinist. I refuse to apologize for creating the modern world.” This is meant to instill pride in the Proud Boys and Western culture.

For the individual to ascend to the second rank, they must submit to a ritualistic assault from at least five other members. Five members encircle the initiate and continuously punch them. This will only end when the initiate names five different types of breakfast cereals. Should the initiate succeed, they can become an official member. According to McInnes, this ritual is meant to weed out initiates deemed unfit and to mentally harden members in preparation for future fights.

Rank three is achieved by tattooing “Proud Boy” on their body. The final rank is achieved by the initiate intentionally engaging in violence on behalf of the Proud Boys. The journey to the final rank diminishes all initiates’ natural ability to have empathy towards others, instead replacing it with the belief that violence is the only solution to effecting political change.

The initiation process demonstrates how political violence is an inherent characteristic to the identity of the Proud Boys. Each step to reach the final rank is associated with socio-political views that justify the need for physical defense against degenerate forces. The initiation phases serve as a pro-social radicalization mechanism that justifies the need for commitment to increase, willingness, and the necessity of members to integrate the Proud Boys into their identity and the use of violence against those perceived as adversaries.

Organization and Operations

The goals of the Proud Boys’ engagement style appear to be designed to draw media attention, frame media perception, generate recruitment, manifest narratives, initiate members into higher ranks, and ensure their beliefs are perceived as palatable to the American political discourse.

All across the U.S., the Proud Boys are organized into local chapters that operate on a semi-autonomous level. The relationship between the national leadership and local chapters is depicted as dynamic and decentralized. This gives members latitude in determining the activities of their local factions, which can facilitate the creation of offshoot or splinter groups. In more recent years, the level of involvement from national leadership in local chapters’ jurisdictions has depended on the location and focal point of a certain campaign or activity.

The three most active regions are the Pacific Northwest, Miami, and New York. These focal points for the most activity involve street fighting and political activism. With the lack of oversight and individual chapter autonomy, members have experienced varying degrees of radicalization and commitment to violence.

Members operate under the belief that “The West is the Best.” They welcome non-white members as long as these members acknowledge that Western civilization is superior to all others. By sidestepping the question of race, they can make their proto-fascist appeal in the language of patriotic individualism: pro-America, pro-capitalism, and pro-Trump, allowing access into the Republican mainstream.

One strategy to legitimize their relationship with Republican politicians and Republican mainstream politics, is to have photos taken of Proud Boys members with Republican actors. Proud Boys members have been seen in photos with Donald Trump Jr., U.S. Senator Ted Cruz, former-Florida Governor Rick Scott, and U.S. Representatives Mario Diaz-Balart and Devin Nunes. Additionally, Senator Ted Cruz supported a non-binding resolution to define anti-fascist activists as domestic terrorists after Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio launched a petition in favor of the bill.

Memes and jokes are made to make light of the hateful beliefs of their members or try to brush off these jokes as pushing boundaries and that those who criticize their beliefs and comments “just don’t get it.” Far-right extremists often use irony as a cover to communicate their beliefs without having to face any real and legitimate consequences.

Typically wherever the Proud Boys are present, violence ensues. Their offline tactics have shown a pattern of staging multiple rallies in different cities to maintain the illusion of a larger presence. Their tactical engagements rely on physical intimidation and brawling to assert their political agendas.

Protesting is also a key component of their overall strategy of gathering more supporters. Six months after the January 6th attack, their attention shifted to the local level. “I’ve always said my goal for this year was simple,” Tarrio said; “start getting more involved in local politics, running our guys for office from local seats, whether it’s a simple GOP seat or a city council seat.”

The Proud Boys have appeared at small-town council gatherings and school board presentations with the intention of bringing their brand of intimidating politics to the local level. At some meetings, they threaten local community leaders, while at others, they stand silently and menacingly, watching the events.

Why the Seditious Conspiracy Charges Matter

A study conducted by Leonard Burstyn of the University of Chicago found that the concept of Trumpism has not created more racists in the U.S., but rather emboldened those with extremist views to feel more comfortable expressing those views in public.

It is important these prosecutions surrounding the January 6th attack go forward, since the Proud Boys have engaged in violent street activity without any real legal consequences for years. Accountability needs to be demonstrated as more Americans may be inclined to believe that violence is the only way to accept and express their political differences. When beliefs such as those of the Proud Boys become more accepted into the mainstream, it becomes harder to monitor and prevent domestic violence, as there is a larger set of diffuse actors. This can already be observed with the recent shooting in Buffalo.

 

Camille Amberger, Counter-Terrorism Research Fellow

FTO

The U.S. Removed Five Extremist Organizations From Its Terrorism Blacklist

The U.S. is expected to remove five extremist groups from its Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) blacklist, all of which are thought to be defunct, including several that formerly represented substantial risks, killing hundreds, if not thousands, of people across Eurasia and the Middle East. Although terrorists have different reasons for being inoperative in these circumstances, patterns emerge in why they decide to abandon the terrorist or extremist organization. Some members have left after growing disillusioned with the organization’s planning and strategy. Aside from that, the group is undeterred because it lacks strong leaders or is unable to make a public impression, which makes them undaunted in civil society.

Despite the fact that the five organizations are no longer functioning, the judgment is politically controversial for President Biden’s administration and the nations in which they operate. This is because many of their victims are still plagued by the attacks they perpetrated, and it could lead to backlash from casualties and their families who have lost loved ones. However, the decision has come under speculation as to understand why these groups are now no longer considered a threat.

The State Department said in special notices to Congress that the five groups’ terrorism classifications will be legally withdrawn when the conclusions are released in the Federal Register, which is likely to occur this week. According to Secretary of State Blinken, the common motivation for the revocation is the same in each case: they were constituted based on a five-year administrative review of the designations, as required by law. On Sunday, the State Department said that revoking FTO designations ensures that the terrorism prohibitions are current and credible. It does not reflect any change in policy toward any of these organizations’ previous activities.

Removing the organizations from the FTO list immediately lifts a slew of restrictions that had been imposed as a result of the designations. Asset freezes and travel bans are among them, as is a prohibition on any American supplying material aid to the groups or their members. All but one of the five organizations were recognized as FTOs for the first time in 1997 and have opted to stay on the list for the past 25 years. Officials familiar with the case said the choices were made after lawmakers were consulted some months ago about whether the latest five-year reviews should go forward.

Only the classified parts that prompted the notifications, which are not classified on their own, provide the particular reasons for each of the removals. These portions are marked “SECRET/NOFORN,” indicating that U.S. officials can only disclose their information with appropriate security clearances, not by foreign governments. The Basque separatist group ETA, the Japanese cult Aum Shinrikyo, the radical Jewish group Kahane Kach, and two Islamic groups active in Israel, the Palestinian territories, and Egypt are among those being removed from the list.

Final Thoughts: Classification Over Emotions

It is critical to remember that a terrorist organization has always had the option of deterring, surrendering, and redeeming itself. When the government continues to subjugate these groups, it encourages these organizations and individuals to grieve and retaliate with additional attacks, even if they lack resources. One essential counterterrorism lesson learned is that terrorists, no matter their ideology or objectives against the government and society, still have weak points. Their inactivity could indicate that the government’s counterterrorism actions are effective and efficient.

 

Kristian N. Rivera, Counter-Terrorism Research Fellow

Ukraine

How the U.S. is Assisting Ukraine Against Russia’s Attacks

Russian-Ukrainian tensions have persisted since February 2014 and have now escalated to war. Currently, U.S. troops located in Europe are on high alert as Russia moves further into Ukraine. Since the first day of attacks, Russian missiles have bombarded Ukrainian cities and military sites.

While attacks erupted in Kyiv, crowds of people flocked into trains and fled in their cars. President Biden has issued new sanctions towards Russia stating that President Putin has imposed this war and has set a dangerous precedent that nations can take what they want by force.

U.S Troops and NATO’s Mission

U.S. troops have several missions, but the primary message sent to Russia is to not attack NATO and their members, particularly those abutting Russia’s eastern border.  Some NATO members stated that they have a bad history with Russia and wanted reassurances.

The U.S. and other members of NATO have sent forces, troops, helicopters and equipment to the Baltics, Poland, Romania, and many other eastern European members of the NATO alliance.

Some U.S. troops in Poland may help with the refugees migrating from Ukraine into Poland. Recently, NATO had an urgent meeting to organize forces in eastern Europe to prevent Russia from trying to move beyond Ukraine. There is also an appeal from the Baltics’ government to help arm Ukrainian forces so they can defend themselves.

President Biden’s Decision

President Biden concluded that the U.S. is not going to engage in war with Russia or place military troops on the ground in Ukraine. Ukraine is in a very challenging situation, given that their military is smaller than Russia’s and that currently the U.S. and NATO members are not planning on sending military forces to assist.

Ultimately, the conflict has persisted and continues to escalate. However, it is possible that Ukraine could efficiently combat Russia, depending on where Russia deploys military troops and how much territory it attempts to control. Currently, it is unclear if Russia could successfully occupy or control large amounts of the Ukrainian population and territory without significant retaliation.

The Impact of Russia’s Invasion

One of the largest attacks by Russia thus far has left at least nine people dead and dozens of children injured after a Ukrainian school was destroyed. Missile fragments left at the scene of the attack left a clear mark that Russia was behind the senseless attack.  Even worse, after further analysis it was discovered that the attack was actually the result of a cluster munition, which is a banned weapon by 110 countries.

Russian forces have intentionally targeted civilians all the while negotiating peace talks. Ultimately, this conflict is leaving Ukraine on the verge of a significant humanitarian crisis.

The Ukrainian Military

The Ukrainian Army and Air Force have put up a strong resistance and continue to slow down Russia’s advances. The U.S. has indicated that the Russian government is growing increasingly frustrated by their lack of progress.  The Ukrainian military has demonstrated that it will not backdown without a fight and can be effective against Russian troops.

Ultimately, Ukrainians have demonstrated their courage by calling up their military reserves and citizens volunteering to take up arms in the fight against Russia. Ukrainian citizens have displayed a unified and brave front as they fervently defend their homeland.

 

Mildred Miranda, Counter-Terrorism Research Fellow