The Biden administration is tackling
“domestic terrorism”
.
In a 32-page document released on June 15, the US government lays the foundation for a strategy against what it describes as "
the most pressing threat facing the United States today
."
Read also: Capture of the Capitol: the day the American democracy fractured
The text makes no secret of its two main targets: white supremacism and “
anti-government
”
militias
. During a speech on Tuesday, the American Attorney General Merrick Garland (equivalent to the Minister of Justice) directly referred to the invasion of the Capitol by supporters of Donald Trump on January 6 as a trigger. The document was requested by Joe Biden in the wake, from the first days of taking office. "
In the view of the FBI, the main domestic violent extremist threat comes from racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists, especially those who have advocated for the superiority of the white race,
" the attorney general said.
According to the document, potential terrorists in the United States "
espouse a series of violent ideological motivations
," including "
bigotry and racial or ethnic hatred, as well as anti-government or anti-authority sentiments
."
These terrorists “
take many forms
”, from the lone wolf and small groups “
urging and targeting violence against specific communities
” to self-proclaimed and violent militias.
Read also: Who are the “Proud Boys”, the pro-Trump militia advocating the use of violence?
Get out of the all-safe
The strategy implemented is based on four pillars.
The sharing of information between government agencies, the prevention of recruitment, the disruption of terrorist activities, the confrontation of "long-term contributors" ie the fight against disinformation and hate speech.
Read also: Trump's social media ban opens debate on the power of Gafa
The document is presented more as a manifesto than as a precise roadmap.
In a speech on Tuesday, US Attorney General Merrick Garland announced he would convene an interagency task force dedicated to combating domestic terrorism in the "
days and months to come
."
This strategy is accompanied by new resources: 77 million dollars will thus be allocated to States and local communities as part of the fight against this internal terrorism.
An amount that must be added to the $ 100 million already requested by the Biden administration in its budget proposal to train and hire analysts and prosecutors.
“
The threat is high
, justified the Attorney General.
Tackling it means making sure we have the resources and personnel to deal with this high threat.
"
This approach significantly innovates by broadening the American approach beyond risk, to also focus on resilience.
Cynthia Miller-Idriss
The government intends to put in place measures to detect as soon as possible a possible radicalization, in particular within the army, considered as an important breeding ground for supremacists. The strategy also focuses on public health and the social environment to prevent the process of radicalization. The document poses the need for closer collaboration with schools, parents and mental health providers while stressing the need for media and internet education. For Cynthia Miller-Idriss, researcher and author of
Hate in the Homeland: The New Global Far Right
. This approach “
innovates significantly by broadening the American approach beyond risk,to also focus on resilience
".
The fourth pillar of the strategy, which intends to tackle the “
long-term contributors to domestic terrorism
”, also proposes a significant change of course.
Its objective is defined as the fight against “
racial, ethnic and religious hatred
”, as well as closer monitoring of “
flows of firearms
”.
This aspect is again coupled with an effort to combat disinformation and conspiracy theories. This profession of faith is accompanied by a promise: that of protecting "
with vigilance the peaceful expression of a wide range of opinions and the freedom of political association
". However, in a fractured country, the fight against hate speech or disinformation, especially online, has sometimes been equated with censorship. "
If the administration agrees with Big Tech for reasons of
"
national security
"
to control all content it wrong judge, silence dissent in the digital sphere could become a fait accompli. It would be a national disaster
», Wrote Ben Weingarten, researcher at the
London Center for Policy Research,
in the columns of
Newsweek
.