Radicalization in prison has long been a critical issue in the West (and beyond), where prisons have sometimes been turned in recruitment and proselytization hubs by different kinds of extremists, including jihadists. As is well known, one of the main concerns is that radicalized subjects may indoctrinate other common detainees. Italy has also been affected by this phenomenon and jihadist radicalization in prison represents a concrete threat.
A new group paper published by the Brookings Institution explains how the United States can reinvigorate its engagement with the reconstruction of Libya by pursuing a city-centered approach that empowers local governments and actors. It explains the various incentives that can be used to bring local militias and political actors under greater control and how rejuvenated cities can eventually be stitched together into national institutions.
The conference on Libya held in Palermo, Italy last November saw neither the rising of a new dawn in terms of security and political consensus nor the development of a strong agreement around a well-defined plan. Instead, what emerged was the reiteration by all the Libyan and European delegations of their support for the actions of the United Nations Special Mission In Libya (UNSMIL) and a vague definition of a roadmap to a solution to the country’s crisis. In other words, there were minimum results but results nonetheless.
In the past years, expulsions on the grounds of extremism have acquired a key role in the Italian strategy to counter the jihadist threat.1 2015 in particular, marked an important change in the use of this tool.
Italian legislation features different types of expulsions that can be used in the fight on extremism:
Negli ultimi anni le espulsioni per motivi legati all’estremismo hanno assunto un ruolo fondamentale nella strategia italiana del contrasto alla minaccia jihadista.1 Il 2015 in particolare, ha segnato una svolta nell’utilizzo di questo strumento.
The collapse of state authority across the Arab world and the devolution of power to local security actors have overturned long-held norms of sovereignty and civil-military relations. While non-state actors have long been a feature of the Arab system, what distinguishes contemporary conflict and post-conflict states like Libya, Syria, Iraq and Yemen is the profusion of sub-state security actors receiving varying degrees of support from weak or fractured central authorities, as well as from foreign patrons.
In President Donald Trump’s first year in office, U.S. policy relating to supporting democracy abroad became starkly divided. At the level of “high policy”—direct engagement and messaging by President Trump and his principal foreign policy advisers—the United States sharply downgraded its global pro-democratic posture. Trump’s praise of dictators, criticism of democratic allies, and anti-democratic actions at home recast the United States as at best an ambivalent actor on the global democratic stage. Yet at the same time, pro-democratic “low policy”—quiet but serious engagement by U.S.
Africa is a fast-changing continent and an area of rising global relevance, where major transformation processes are currently underway, from demographic expansion to economic development, from social progress to environmental challenges, from technological innovation to continental integration, from political change to migratory pressures. How will these complex transformations shape the Africa of tomorrow?
The "Indo-Pacific" is a strategic construct that arose at a time of a potential transition in the Asian security order.