Search

In 2015, the large-scale influx of refugees to Europe became known as ‘the refugee crisis’, a term adopted by media, politicians, scholars and the public alike. Over a million people arrived in 2015 alone, mainly as a result of the Syrian civil war and the rise of Islamic State (IS). Through a critical qualitative analysis of Dutch counterterrorism and migration policies, this paper argues that a link between migration and terrorism exists. Using the framework of securitization theory, the relationship between these two phenomena can be localized in a process characterized by polarization. Marked by different perspectives on immigration, the Netherlands has witnessed growing tensions between its Muslim minorities on the one hand and its ‘regular’ Dutch population on the other hand. Since the turn of the millennium, (Muslim) migrants have increasingly been constructed as ‘Others’ because these new, unknown people were considered to pose a threat to Dutch society, economy, culture, religion and security. Consequently, the Dutch government adopted an approach that dealt with this problem from a security perspective. A similar, securitizing approach was adopted in the domain of counterterrorism. However, the government overlooked the fact that at the root of both problems was the ‘othering’ of migrants and, by extension, of Muslim minorities in the Netherlands who considered themselves to belong to the same collective identity (e.g. Moroccan Dutch people identify with asylum seekers from North Africa or refugees with an Islamic background). Its securitizing policies not only maintained this image of Muslims as ‘the other’, but only reinforced the perceived threats between these two distanced collectives. Thus, when it did not address this fundamental issue, polarization increased and reached its peak when the Netherlands was confronted with the refugee crisis of 2015. Afterwards, polarization turned into radicalization. Dutch people acted on the threat they had ‘foresee

In 2015, the large-scale influx of refugees to Europe became known as ‘the refugee crisis’, a term adopted by media, politicians, scholars and the public alike. Over a million people arrived in 2015 alone, mainly as a result of the Syrian civil war and the rise of Islamic State (IS). Through a critical qualitative analysis of Dutch counterterrorism and migration policies, this paper argues that a link between migration and terrorism exists. Using the framework of securitization theory, the relationship between these two phenomena can be localized in a process characterized by polarization. Marked by different perspectives on immigration, the Netherlands has witnessed growing tensions between its Muslim minorities on the one hand and its ‘regular’ Dutch population on the other hand. Since the turn of the millennium, (Muslim) migrants have increasingly been constructed as ‘Others’ because these new, unknown people were considered to pose a threat to Dutch society, economy, culture, religion and security. Consequently, the Dutch government adopted an approach that dealt with this problem from a security perspective. A similar, securitizing approach was adopted in the domain of counterterrorism. However, the government overlooked the fact that at the root of both problems was the ‘othering’ of migrants and, by extension, of Muslim minorities in the Netherlands who considered themselves to belong to the same collective identity (e.g. Moroccan Dutch people identify with asylum seekers from North Africa or refugees with an Islamic background). Its securitizing policies not only maintained this image of Muslims as ‘the other’, but only reinforced the perceived threats between these two distanced collectives. Thus, when it did not address this fundamental issue, polarization increased and reached its peak when the Netherlands was confronted with the refugee crisis of 2015. Afterwards, polarization turned into radicalization. Dutch people acted on the threat they had ‘foresee

In 2015, the large-scale influx of refugees to Europe became known as ‘the refugee crisis’, a term adopted by media, politicians, scholars and the public alike. Over a million people arrived in 2015 alone, mainly as a result of the Syrian civil war and the rise of Islamic State (IS). Through a critical qualitative analysis of Dutch counterterrorism and migration policies, this paper argues that a link between migration and terrorism exists. Using the framework of securitization theory, the relationship between these two phenomena can be localized in a process characterized by polarization. Marked by different perspectives on immigration, the Netherlands has witnessed growing tensions between its Muslim minorities on the one hand and its ‘regular’ Dutch population on the other hand. Since the turn of the millennium, (Muslim) migrants have increasingly been constructed as ‘Others’ because these new, unknown people were considered to pose a threat to Dutch society, economy, culture, religion and security. Consequently, the Dutch government adopted an approach that dealt with this problem from a security perspective. A similar, securitizing approach was adopted in the domain of counterterrorism. However, the government overlooked the fact that at the root of both problems was the ‘othering’ of migrants and, by extension, of Muslim minorities in the Netherlands who considered themselves to belong to the same collective identity (e.g. Moroccan Dutch people identify with asylum seekers from North Africa or refugees with an Islamic background). Its securitizing policies not only maintained this image of Muslims as ‘the other’, but only reinforced the perceived threats between these two distanced collectives. Thus, when it did not address this fundamental issue, polarization increased and reached its peak when the Netherlands was confronted with the refugee crisis of 2015. Afterwards, polarization turned into radicalization. Dutch people acted on the threat they had ‘foresee

In 2015, the large-scale influx of refugees to Europe became known as ‘the refugee crisis’, a term adopted by media, politicians, scholars and the public alike. Over a million people arrived in 2015 alone, mainly as a result of the Syrian civil war and the rise of Islamic State (IS). Through a critical qualitative analysis of Dutch counterterrorism and migration policies, this paper argues that a link between migration and terrorism exists. Using the framework of securitization theory, the relationship between these two phenomena can be localized in a process characterized by polarization. Marked by different perspectives on immigration, the Netherlands has witnessed growing tensions between its Muslim minorities on the one hand and its ‘regular’ Dutch population on the other hand. Since the turn of the millennium, (Muslim) migrants have increasingly been constructed as ‘Others’ because these new, unknown people were considered to pose a threat to Dutch society, economy, culture, religion and security. Consequently, the Dutch government adopted an approach that dealt with this problem from a security perspective. A similar, securitizing approach was adopted in the domain of counterterrorism. However, the government overlooked the fact that at the root of both problems was the ‘othering’ of migrants and, by extension, of Muslim minorities in the Netherlands who considered themselves to belong to the same collective identity (e.g. Moroccan Dutch people identify with asylum seekers from North Africa or refugees with an Islamic background). Its securitizing policies not only maintained this image of Muslims as ‘the other’, but only reinforced the perceived threats between these two distanced collectives. Thus, when it did not address this fundamental issue, polarization increased and reached its peak when the Netherlands was confronted with the refugee crisis of 2015. Afterwards, polarization turned into radicalization. Dutch people acted on the threat they had ‘foresee

This paper aims to gain an understanding of the role of religion in conflict. Specifically, religion plays a key role in legitimizing actions and gaining supporters for a particular movement. Therefore, the question ‘How do Islamic State and the Muslim Brotherhood use religion to legitimize their actions and how can we understand this legitimization?’ will be central to this paper. Two cases will be examined throughout this paper, namely the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic state. Their conflicts with, respectively, the governments of Hafiz and Bashar al-Assad were (and are) clearly religiously oriented. Using speeches and documents issued by both movements as well as relevant literature, an analysis of the use of religion by the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic State will be made. Taking a particularizing perspective, religion will be treated as an isolated phenomenon to enable the analysis of the frames used by both movements. Framing is a conscious and strategic act, and helps to give meaning to events, actions and other phenomena. Dividing the framing process in certain ‘framing tasks’ each chapter examines the use of religion in a particular framing task. These framing tasks are diagnostic framing, prognostic framing, and motivational framing. In the end, this paper shows that both movements make extensive use of religion to legitimize actions and gain supporters; they do so by publicizing a frame of injustice, for which they then provide a solution, and then motivate people to do something about.

This paper aims to gain an understanding of the role of religion in conflict. Specifically, religion plays a key role in legitimizing actions and gaining supporters for a particular movement. Therefore, the question ‘How do Islamic State and the Muslim Brotherhood use religion to legitimize their actions and how can we understand this legitimization?’ will be central to this paper. Two cases will be examined throughout this paper, namely the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic state. Their conflicts with, respectively, the governments of Hafiz and Bashar al-Assad were (and are) clearly religiously oriented. Using speeches and documents issued by both movements as well as relevant literature, an analysis of the use of religion by the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic State will be made. Taking a particularizing perspective, religion will be treated as an isolated phenomenon to enable the analysis of the frames used by both movements. Framing is a conscious and strategic act, and helps to give meaning to events, actions and other phenomena. Dividing the framing process in certain ‘framing tasks’ each chapter examines the use of religion in a particular framing task. These framing tasks are diagnostic framing, prognostic framing, and motivational framing. In the end, this paper shows that both movements make extensive use of religion to legitimize actions and gain supporters; they do so by publicizing a frame of injustice, for which they then provide a solution, and then motivate people to do something about.