Canadians must move beyond fear to push back against extremism
Researcher examines skepticism around rehabilitation of terrorists
Canadians must set aside a warlike mentality to decide whether jailed terrorists can ever be rehabilitated, a University of Calgary researcher said this week.
“We need to start to abandon this language of war, and this notion that this is about us versus them, because these are our citizens, and through our legislation this is our problem,” said post-doctoral fellow Ryan Williams.
The sociologist focused on the case of Omar Khadr at a Monday evening talk hosted by the university’s Chair of Christian Thought, on whether convicted terrorists can be reintegrated into society.
“There’s huge amounts of skepticism around it,” Williams admitted.
Khadr, who appeared in Calgary last week at a documentary screening, has been greeted by Canadians with both plates of cupcakes and accusations he’s waiting to commit a terrorist attack in this country.
“His case is unique and exceptional,” Williams said. “His release has marked a point of indecision among the Canadian public.”
A February poll found 82 per cent support for Anti-Terrorism Bill C-51, but when the same firm polled reactions to Khadr’s bail release in May, they found 38 per cent of respondents agreed to his release, 39 per cent disagreed, and 23 per cent were unsure.
Williams was part of an 18-month study of two maximum security prisons in England, where he interviewed Britons convicted of terrorism offences.
He said countries like Canada and Britain grapple with the issue of rehabilitating terrorists for three reasons: terrorism is framed as a war, religion is seen as dangerous, and there are few success stories.
The sociologist pointed out that media often report on the issue with words like battle, weapon, and “war on terror.”
Terrorism also falls under national security matters — a politics-driven world affiliated with foreigners, defence and control — as opposed to the criminal justice system, which is about blind justice and reintegration.
Williams says that dichotomy is further entrenched when the public sees a fellow citizen as an outsider. He noted that Canadians’ secular world views tolerate religion, but see it as a private matter.
“The high visibility of Islam, with public displays of identity and ritual, is uncomfortable for the Western, Christian observer.”
He says this perception fuels a sense of otherness toward Muslims, while our daily exposure to religion only comes from the most extreme cases.
Williams also says the lack of success stories further entrenches skepticism around terrorist rehabilitation. In his interviews, he found skeptical prison staff as well as inmates who felt it was pointless to try persuading officials they no longer wanted to harm others.
That has consequences, Williams says, noting that Bill C-51 will convict more Canadians as terrorists. He also touched on the case of a 15-year-old Montreal boy charged last December after allegedly robbing a convenience store to finance a trip to Syria.
“I think we need to question whether charging him with terrorism-related offences is really in the best interests of both the youth and of society more generally,” he said.
But more immediate questions remain.
“Omar Khadr is here to stay. We’re left to ponder how we deal with him.”