Recidivism and Released Terrorists Insights

By Michael Kraft

The knotty problem of what to do with the terrorist suspects being held in Guantanamo and whether or not they might engage in terrorist activities if they are released has prompted new looks at rehabilitation programs and recidivism rates.

In this context, a research paper by a former State Department intelligence analyst, Dennis Pluchinsky, is worth noting: 'Global Jihadist Recidivism: A Red Flag', published in Studies in Conflict & Terrorism.

For several years, some Muslim countries, notably Saudi Arabia and Indonesia, have been conducting deradicalization programs for young men who have been arrested for their involvement in terrorist activities. But most of the western experts I have heard say it is still too early to tell how effective the relatively new programs will be in the long term. The very expensive Saudi program, which includes finding jobs and even wives for young men caught up in Islamic radical militantism is too costly for most countries to imitate. And doubts arose about the effectiveness of the Saudi program after recent disclosures that at least two men had re-emerged as terrorists and the Saudis rearrested nine of its “rehabilitated” men, as reported in the New York Times.

For more details also see the Feb. 12 Counterterrorism Blog item by Evan Kohlmann on his NEFA foundation report “The Eleven: Saudi Guantanamo Veterans Returning to the Fight.”

The Washington Post Monday carried a front-page article describing four cases that illustrate the difficulties in deciding what to do about some of the Guantanamo prisoners who may be too dangerous to release and/or no country is willing to take them.

The article by Peter Finn notes that “Obama administration officials acknowledge that closing the prison is not risk-free and that some detainees may return to terrorism. But the president has concluded that Guantanamo has sapped America's moral stature abroad and mired the country in endless litigation, forestalling justice for the alleged terrorists. Of the 779 people taken to Guantanamo, only three have been convicted, and two of those have since been released.”

The Washington Times National Security Section today front-paged a long story by Rowan Scarborough headlined “Rehabilitation never tried at Guantanamo.” It noted that this contrasted to a program that the U.S. Army ran at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. A Pentagon spokesman was quoted as saying that the U.S. does not have a rehabilitation program at Guantanamo because “it was constructed to keep dangerous enemy combatants off the battlefield.”

The story by Rowan Scarborough said that according to Defense Department Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) officials, at least 61 ex-Guantanamo inmates have returned to terrorism but he noted that this may not include one or two who recently surfaced on web sites.

More is to be learned about the effectiveness of rehabilitation programs and their effectiveness – and how they compare with those for non-terrorist prisoners but Pluchinsky’s paper provides a framework.

Pluchinsky, a former State Department colleague of mine, is a retired State Department intelligence analyst with 28 years experience in terrorism analysis. He currently teaches terrorism-related courses on terrorism threats and responses at Georgetown and George Mason Universities.

In his paper, Pluchinshky says “There have not been a sufficient number of global jihadists released from prison over the past three years to deduce a trend toward recidivism or not. Many global jihadists will be released over the next 10–15 years and this is when trends will surface. However, there is enough anecdotal evidence to suggest that the trend will be toward recidivism.”

He said a possible experimental case could be the monitoring of some 2629 jihadist prisoners freed by the Algerian government between early March and September 2006. This list was shared with the French government and the French are reportedly very concerned about these releases. In his paper, published in 2008, Pluchinsky said it is unknown if anyone in France or Algeria will be studying the recidivism rate among these released jihadists (his term, not mine.)

Pluchinsky’s hypothesis suggests that there is an apparent tendency for Islamic fundamentalist terrorists to become recidivists and cited some examples in his study. He also said it is also possible that the recidivist may engage in other forms of illegal activity that further the cause of his group or movement.

Pluchinsky said “The point is that imprisoned terrorists who are released do not necessarily have to return to violence to be considered not rehabilitated and therefore a recidivist. They could also return to propaganda or logistical work, or engage in training. If they return to any duties or responsibilities that further the cause of their illegal organization or movement then they must be counted as a recidivist.”

More research needs to be done on the issue and of course, determining the number of released terrorists who revert back to some form of terrorist activity provides only part of the picture.

What may be more difficult to quantify is how many more terrorist might return to terrorism if they had not gone through a deradicalization program. The U.S. and other countries concerned about terrorism are still trying to determine what type of programs might work best in, say, countries like Yemen, that do not have the financial or social resources of Saudi Arabia and Indonesia.