By Megan K. McBride, Zack Gold, Pamela G. Faber, and Kaia Haney With contributions by William Rosenau and Alexander Powell

Concern about extremism in the military did not begin with the January 6 insurrection on the US Capitol, but media reporting on the issue increased in the wake of the attack, which ensured the kind of sustained attention that is often necessary to compel action. On February 5, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin directed a force-wide stand-down to address the problem. He also asked the Countering Extremism Working Group to update the Department of Defense (DOD) definition of extremist activities, update training modules so that transitioning servicemembers are aware that they might be targeted for recruitment by extremist organizations, and review the screening questions for new recruits in order to solicit information about extremist behavior. As part of a CNA-initiated project to examine past efforts to address extremism in the US military, we identified a number of interesting parallels between this issue and the problem of sexual harassment and sexual assault. The purpose of this paper is to describe and explain these parallels, and to identify lessons that DOD should learn from its past experiences trying to address sexual harassment and assault in the context of its current challenge with racial extremism. Critically, we are not arguing that DOD’s approach to sexual harassment and sexual assault has been successful. Nor are we arguing that sexual harassment, sexual assault, and racial extremism are equivalent or comparable violations. Our argument is more modest: DOD’s approach to sexual harassment and sexual assault contains elements that are relevant to the problem of racial extremism and could provide a foundation on which to identify both helpful and unhelpful ways of approaching this issue.

Arlington, VA: CNA, 2021. 72p.

By Pamela G. Faber, Megan K. McBride, Julia McQuaid, Emily Mushen, Alexander Powell, William G. Rosenau and Elizabeth Yang With contributions by Megan Katt and Annaleah Westerhaug

The Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations/Low Intensity Conflict – Stability and Humanitarian Affairs (OASD (SO/LIC-SHA)) asked  CNA to study the role of women and gender in both violent extremist organizations (VEOs) and US counterterrorism (CT) and counter violent extremism (CVE)  operations (hereafter CT/CVE). This request emerged from the recognition that greater understanding of the role of gender and women in CT/CVE operations is necessary as mandated in section 1047 of the 2020 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and in accordance with the Women, Peace, and Security (WPS) Act of 2017. This study addresses the following research questions: 

• What roles do women play in VEOs organizationally and operationally? 

• How have these roles shifted over time, and how might they evolve in the short and long terms?

• What are the existing Department of Defense (DOD) and Special Operations Forces (SOF) approaches and policies regarding gender and CT/CVE? 

• What opportunities are presented to DOD, and SOF in particular, through increased consideration of gender in CT/CVE? What are the risks of failing to do so? 

• How should the US factor the role of gender into future CT/CVE operations, training, and education?

To carry this out, we developed a three-part approach: 

• Identified the roles of women and gender in VEOs through nine case studies: Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia–People’s Army, Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, Kurdistan Workers’ Party, Al-Shabaab, National Socialist Underground and National Action (two white supremacist groups in Europe), Boko Haram, Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, Lord’s Resistance Army, and Abu Sayyaf Group.

• Assessed whether current US DOD CT/CVE strategy, policy, and activities incorporate gender considerations.

• Identified gaps, risks, and opportunities according to four thematic categories: strategy, policy and doctrine, internal activities,1 external activities, and conceptual understanding.

Our findings demonstrate that women play supporting, enabling, and operational roles in VEOs, and that there is no deliberate or coordinated effort to integrate these roles into CT/CVE strategy, policy, or activities.

Arlington, VA: CNA, 2021. 232p.

By William Rosenau, Megan McBride

The alleged participation of off-duty law enforcement personnel in the January 6, 2021, assault on the US Capitol has generated fresh interest in the broader issue of police participation in right-wing extremist groups and activities. Such extremism poses obvious but significant challenges for police agencies and their  communities. It can undermine the rule of law, damage police morale, compromise investigations, hinder successful prosecutions, and disrupt relationships between the police and the communities they serve (particularly communities of color). In the words of one police captain, “whenever the police department shirks its unbiased responsibility. . .the community then is in for real trouble.” Although we know that there are right-wing extremists among the nation’s 800,000 law enforcement officers, we do not know the extent of that presence or the most common ideologies. We also lack a detailed understanding of the strategies and tactics right-wing extremists use to infiltrate and recruit within police ranks and the extent to which the extremist presence may imperil investigations, including those concerning criminal extremist activities. In addition, while much has been made of the threat posed by intentional infiltrations, a potentially greater concern is the organic and gradual radicalization of those already on the force. This paper provides an overview of the current state of knowledge about police officer engagement in rightwing extremism, including the sustained use of racist, misogynistic, and homophobic language and stereotyping, both online and offline. After surveying the contemporary right-wing extremist landscape, this paper uses publicly available sources to explore in a preliminary way aspects of extremist penetration and recruitment, pre-employment screening challenges, police participation in extremist activity, and the role of social media platforms and the internet in enabling extremism. The paper concludes with a set of analytical questions that practitioners and policy-makers must answer if they hope to mitigate the rightwing extremist threat. 

Arlington, VA: CNA, 2021. 9p

By Lu Dong, Jennifer Bouey, Grace Tang, Stacey Yi, Douglas Yeung, Rafiq Dossani, June Lim, Yannan Li, Steven Zhang

Since the onset of the coronavirus pandemic, Asian American communities have faced a new wave of anti-Asian hate throughout the United States. Given diverse communication channels that are clustered by ethnicity, language preferences, and immigration generations within Asian American populations, there is a pressing need for culturally and linguistically appropriate strategies to raise awareness of available services to address anti-Asian hate. Community-based organizations (CBOs) play a crucial role in this regard, but they require tailored strategies to effectively reach and support Asian American communities. The authors conducted a community survey in Los Angeles (LA) and New York City (NYC) to provide CBOs that serve Asian and Asian American communities with important insights to enhance outreach and support strategies, ensuring that these strategies are accessible and effectively meeting the needs of community members who are affected by anti-Asian discrimination and violence.

Key Findings

• Among survey respondents, who were mostly from Chinese, Korean, and Thai ethnic groups, 37 percent of participants reported experiencing an anti-Asian hate incident; rates were similar in LA and NYC.

• English-speaking respondents, younger (18–24 years old) respondents, and respondents from higher income brackets were more likely to report experiencing an anti-Asian hate incident.

• About 61 percent of respondents indicated that they would report a hate incident to the police, and 61 percent would also seek help from CBOs that provide support services to hate-crime victims. Only 37 percent of respondents would use local community service numbers (211 or 311), and 13 percent indicated that they would not take any action. First-generation immigrants were more likely to take actions than were later generations.

• Major barriers to reporting incidents include language issues, lack of time, and lack of awareness of available resources. Approximately 45 percent of participants were unaware of community-based resources available to address anti-Asian hate; there were more-significant knowledge gaps in LA than in NYC.

• Despite most Asian Americans appreciating community-based counter-hate-incident services — such as medical support and counseling — actual use rates were low.

• Respondents from later immigrant generations (1.5, second, and third or later generations) reported more barriers and expressed more concerns about seeking support from CBOs after experiencing anti-Asian hate incidents.

Recommendations

• Strengthen services to meet the needs of members of two Asian American subgroups who might need more-tailored outreach and support: English-speaking later generations of Asian Americans who have more exposure to discrimination and older adults who might have difficulty recognizing and expressing their experiences of racism.

• Leverage close family ties and use diverse linguistic and cultural social media platforms to enhance outreach and information dissemination about anti-hate resources at CBOs.

• Empower first-generation community influencers to enhance outreach.

• Enhance CBOs' policy advocacy through strengthened data collection.

Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2024,