Discipline and Exclusion: Security and Gender Under Counter-Radicalization
Since the early days of the “War on Terror,” imperial projects like the invasion of Afghanistan have been justified based on “saving” Afghan women. By contrast, anti-imperial and decolonial feminists like Sunera Thobani were accused of sedition for cautioning western feminists against such a perverse pro-war logic. Gender is fully implicated in the “War on Terror.” More recently, counter-radicalization—the “soft” face of counterterrorism— has enmeshed national security priorities within social, cultural, and educational realms, resulting in widespread securitization. This paper excavates the logic of “securo-feminism” in counter-radicalization. On one hand, state-security backed counter-radicalization programs see women in the family are seen as antidotes to “radicalization.” But, as the case of Begum highlights, women can just easily be cast as being “radicalized” or “extremist.” Under counter-radicalization, state violence expands to target Muslim men and women through the coercive and hegemonic deployment of national security.
Taking critiques of anti-imperialist and decolonial feminists seriously, I argue that gender continues to be central to counter-radicalization’s managing and disciplining of the Muslim other. I illustrate this by analyzing policy documents and counter-radicalization programs in Canada. I also consider the broader political context of Canada, which has seen an uptick in deadly white supremacist violence against Muslims and where a provincial bill in Quebec has banned wearing hijabs in public sector jobs.