Author
Threat assessments in the field of counter-terrorism policy have common weaknesses: a judgement formed at one moment in time is recorded, and then persists long after change has taken place. Threat assessments tend to fix an individual’s or group’s ideological profile at the point of designation and claims of moderation are read from outward-facing statements rather than tested against harder-to-revise evidence. Likewise, disengagement is judged from a single rebrand rather than from a pattern sustained over time. This policy brief addresses national governments and civil society/practitioners and recommends that threat assessments needs to be designed more flexibly as revisable judgements rather than settled facts.
Read the full policy brief here: