Abstract
The Spectacular Few by Mark S. Hamm is a beautifully written book which examines radicalization in prisons. The title is fitting, for while prisons house thousands of inmates, few go on to commit terrorist acts. Furthermore, as Hamm notes early in his introductory chapter, prisoner radicalization can produce nonviolent leaders for justice (Gandhi and Mandela) as well as those who use violence to change the social order. Using open-source materials, case studies, and interviews with personnel in prisons and some prison inmates, Hamm treats a variety of issues including paths to radicalization, pathways to terrorism, and various prison practices for incarcerating terrorists.
Prisoner radicalization is defined in the book as a process by which inmates adopt extreme views including beliefs that violent measures need to be taken for political or religious purposes (p. 43). His thesis is that mass incarceration, with its attendant overworked and understaffed institutions, and punitive versus rehabilitative approaches are the basis for mass conversions to Islam in prisons and for the emergence of both radical Islam and radical white supremacy. While he suggests that the majority of conversions to Islam in prison are helpful to prisoners as they learn to structure their time and develop meaning for their lives, for some it is the basis for radicalization.
Hamm constructed a Prisoner Radicalization Terrorism database from open sources including newspapers, prisoner memoirs, government reports, and court documents. The database consists of 51 cases of prisoners in the United States, Britain, France, and Spain who had not committed terrorist acts prior to their entrance into prison but did so following confinement. The cases, covering 43 years from 1968 to 2011 (with data fully available in an appendix), suggest that the radicalized prisoners in the United States are typically black, radicalized in their early 20s, and engaging in terrorism around age 30. Further, terrorism is linked to prisoner subcultures through religious extremes, especially Prison Islam (which he defines) and more recently Salafi-jihadist theology.
While the sources for this analysis are innovative and collecting many open-source cases in one place is helpful to the field, there are significant methodological issues which are not addressed in this volume. The sources are not described in any detail and how much of the data derives from each of the sources is not made clear. Further, the data cover a long period of time and different contexts. Data such as news sources can vary substantially over time and different contexts, yet these difficulties are not discussed. Further, the lag time between conversion or radicalization and a terrorist attack (5 or more years in a quarter of the cases, with some as long as 24 years) makes drawing conclusions problematic. It is difficult to determine that radicalization in prison is the key element to the terrorist attack, as many other life-course transitions occur following prison which lengthy time lags fail to consider. While Hamm mentions this difficulty, its implications are not substantially illuminated, and fuller description of the sources needs to be included.
Following data presented from open-source cases, the author goes on to present data from interviews of prison chaplains, gang-intelligence officers, and inmates, which he collected as principal investigator for a prisoner radicalization study sponsored by the National Institute of Justice. This research found that only a small percentage of converts turned radical beliefs into terrorist action. Further, while most conversions to new religions occur when prisoners feel there is no purpose in life, prisoners also convert through friendship networks, with radicalization linked to prison gangs. And inmate leadership was the most important factor in prisoner radicalization, with charismatic leaders drawing inmates to their cause (p. 113).
Given the importance of leadership, Hamm then presents case studies of leaders who embrace extremism and those such as Akeem, a “lifer,” who do not. Akeem, described as a charismatic genius, provides prisoners with a viable treatment program of rehabilitation, repentance, and reform. This leader becomes, in the author’s terms, the “righteous guy,” representing the effective Islamic counter-radicalization policy. This case study, as well as the data from prison chaplains, provides the basis for some of the “practice” suggestions developed so well in the final chapter.
The final chapter details three modes used for incarcerating terrorists: the total segregation model used by the United States, the partial segregation model used by Israel, and the dispersal model used by Great Britain. This very informative chapter details the total segregation, no de-radicalization program of the United States, versus the Israeli one which offers a 14-point rehabilitation program beginning with congenial (mandated) interactions between guards and prisoners, and the British model with objectives of promoting inclusiveness and rehabilitation while preventing clustering. Hamm presents a strong, compelling argument in the final pages for a de-radicalization approach in prisons. While de-radicalization may need to involve psychological intervention to heal the anger of prior victimization and meaningful educational and training programs, the key to an effective hedge against radicalization may be the prisoners themselves, especially those serving life sentences.
While the book begins with what Hamm calls the double-edged sword of prison radicalization, with some cases leading to amazing advances in social justice (like the Mandela case) and others to enormous damage and butchery (such as the Zawahiri case), the final chapter is also a double-edged sword. Prisons lead to both radicalization and to redemption. The path is impacted by prison structures but perhaps more substantially by prisoners themselves. It is the prisoners, and perhaps those in prison for life, who may create the most effective de-radicalization programs. This is Hamm’s profound and thoughtful message. Despite some methodological weaknesses, this is a must-read for those who study prisons and those who study radicalization. The book, constructed by a thoughtful author using multiple methods, may have a lasting impact on prison policies in a time of concern regarding the potential of future terrorism from prison sources.