February 23, 2017
CVE Was Doomed to Fail. Under Trump, It Will Get Worse
Federal countering violent extremism (CVE) programming is more likely to harm than help build trust in American communities. Though well-intentioned, the Obama administration’s CVE strategy was flawed in its conception. Continuing CVE under the Trump administration will worsen an existing problem and place a burden on local CVE partners. Absent a radical change in policy by the Trump administration, local partners ought to disassociate themselves from federal CVE programming to salvage their credibility.
In 2011, the Obama administration released a national CVE program to build a soft counterterrorism strategy. The CVE rollout called on law enforcement to work with a wide range of local partners, including educators, public health professionals, faith-based leaders, and NGO workers. Together, these actors helped law enforcement develop community activities like table-top exercises, awareness briefings, and intervention programs. Five years after the strategy’s launch, local government officials and community groups have reported increased distrust and stigmatization in several cities, including each of the CVE’s pilot cities The design of CVE strategy was doomed to fail due to three principal reasons.
First, the U.S. government lacks an interagency consensus on a definition of violent extremism and program evaluation metrics. Despite the proliferation of research on violent extremism after 9/11, the U.S. does not have a model for what causes an individual to take up violence. Moreover, CVE program design tends to draw on gang intervention studies, which offer a comparable group of individuals who may be vulnerable to violence, but also lack credible evaluation metrics. Neither CVE nor gang interventions can ensure that community partners will be able to evaluate the progress of a given participant two or three years past the program’s launch. Defining success is therefore a perennial problem for CVE programs because it is impossible to determine the point at which a potentially violent person is no longer potentially violent.
Read the full article at Small Wars Journal.
More from CNAS
-
Bloomberg Economics' Becca Wasser and Dina Esfandiary Talk Iran Conflict
Podcast
With President Trump set to meet Gulf leaders on the sidelines of this week’s UN meetings, the Iran war is likely to take center stage. Houthi attacks in Saudi Arabia and risi...
By Becca Wasser
-
Big Take: The Real Costs of the U.S. Iran Blockade
Congressional Testimony
On today's Big Take podcast, Bloomberg Global Defense Editor Gerry Doyle and Bloomberg Economics Defense Lead and adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Securi...
By Becca Wasser
-
Drones, Missiles, and the U.S. Munitions Shortage
Reports
Executive Summary Drones have exploded in popularity since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. There is a growing view that inexpensive drones—“affordable mass”—a...
By Philip Sheers & Stacie Pettyjohn
-
Rethink... Warfare
Podcast
Stacie Pettyjohn, director of the Defense Program at the Center for a New American Security, joins BBC Sounds - Rethink to discuss how recent conflicts have changed the shape ...
By Stacie Pettyjohn
