Group Analysis Protocol (GAP) Tool for Counterterrorism

1
Group Analysis Protocol (GAP) Tool for
Counterterrorism

• Andrew Bringuel, II
• FBI Behavioral Science Unit
• IAFIE Conf. 9 June in DC

2
Criminal radicalization Disengagement using GAP
approach
Overall theory Criminal Radicalization is an
individualized process of a persons behavior
being influenced by their acceptance of an
absolute truth and unwillingness to accept
alternative truths it allows for the
rationalization of activators for law breaking
behavior that allows for suppression of
inhibitors for law abiding behavior and is a
process not all group members realize.
 
Recruitment
Indoctrination
Initiation
Education
Rationalization (reasoning of behaviors)

• Passive Indirect
• Online, Speeches,
• Video, Books,
• Pictures
• Assertive Direct
• Family, Friend
• Conference,
• Internship,
• School, Church,
• Group meetings,
• One on one contact
• Forced Kidnapped,
• coerced, conscripted,
• birthright.

• Personal motivations
• for joining group
• (biographical triggers,
• personality, and
• biology
• Introduction to groups
• anchors, definitions, and
• narratives (truths)
• Introducing a new
• social contract
• Repetitive use of group
• pledge or oath
• Often assigning a new
• personal name
• Often assigning a
• new group name

Isolation of the new recruit in most
cases Surrendering personal identity in favor
of the groups ID may include a uniform,
tattoo, other identifier Tests for standards
of behavior/performance including physical and
mental tests of obedience Tests of conformity
and loyalty including initiation (hazing)
rites, ceremonies, or customs
the difference between activist and others is
behavior (respecting inhibitors or rationalizing
activators). Members decide whether to respect
inhibitors for law abiding behavior or
activators for law breaking behavior
Radicalization/Group Member (levels of belief)

• Studying of groups
• narrative (ideology and
• social contract) often in
• cohesive sub-group and
• in isolation to alternative
• truths.
• Testing of recruits
• knowledge regarding
• groups ideology and
• social contract

Behavior of actor is used a positive anchor
for the group and any response from government is
used as a neg anchor
Mobilization
Explanations or reasoning of behaviors law
abiding or law breaking. Some believers maybe
more influenced by the situation or groupthink .
Some become radicalize true believers (RTBs),
they are collective identifiers moved by an
absolute belief in the cause, while others are
group members moved by individual identity or
personal motive. Common factor among RTBs is
they believe in an absolute truth and are
UNWILLING to accept alternative truths in their
situational environment
Action
Behaviors (can be described as activist (legal),
non-violent criminal extremist , or terrorist
(illegal and violent against people or property))
The difference between the radical true
believer and the group member is intent (belief
state)
3
Radicalization Its a process of belief/motives
and behaviors
Key Points

• There is a distinction between belief systems
  and behavior, inhibitors and activators.
• Not all radicals are law breakers, not all
  criminal group members are radical true
  believers.
• There are distinguishing behaviors between
  activists, extremists, and terrorists
• Ultimately all members reside on a scale from
  group member high individual identity to
  radical true believers high collective
  identity, with different primary anchors that can
  be identified and exploited.
• Inter-looping relationships between groups
  people belong to influence their beliefs and
  behavior.
• Personal calculus can be identified and used to
  calculate propensities for behavior
• All humint sources come from relationships.
• Personality traits play a role in determining
  belief states and the development of trust
  relationships.

 
4
Types of groups
Current research areas for the Terrorism Research
And Analysis Project (TRAP) include Mass
movements Inclusive mass movements Requires
actions for the common good, but allow for
self-determination or self actualization (in
practical organizations) Promote
tolerance Discourage hatred Allow for violence
only in a just cause Allow for violence only
as a last resort Allow for introspection/reflect
ion and debate that leads to reform and peaceful
change Strives to be a practical
organization Operate with virtue Exclusive
mass movements Requires actions for the common
good suffer from group think and behavior Promote
intolerance Encourage hatred Advocates violence
in furtherance of a political or social objective
(end state) Not a just cause and not as a last
resort Does not allow debate or questioning of
groupthink change often comes from violence and
reform comes from splintering leading to
factions. Can never be a practical
organization Operate without virtue
 
5
GAP

• Creating a targeting tool for
• Confidential Human Sources
• that will provide a range of
• exploitability, identify anchors (incentives),
  articulate them into definitions, that can become
  a counter-narrative for development and
  recruitment purposes. Ranging level of
  radicalization based on personal identity and
  group identity based on incentives for
  membership, biographical triggers, and current
  situational environment. Individuals will be
  group member, violent group member, non-violent
  criminal group member, violent criminal group
  member, and suicidal criminal violent group
  member, or Radical true believer, violent radical
  true believer, non-violent criminal radical true
  believer, violent criminal radical true believer,
  and suicidal criminal violent radical true
  believer.

6
As a result of these differences

• The behaviors maybe the same but the rationale
  or incentives may be different
• The Group Member retains much of their individual
  identity and could be either expressive or
  instrumentally oriented, as such an
  instrumentally driven group member should be
  approached with an art of the deal bargaining
  (discussion approach) as opposed to an
  expressively driven group member who should be
  approached with a Dr. Phil, crisis intervention
  (dialogue approach).
• Most Radical True Believers assume much of the
  collectives identity (highly expressive) and as
  such an instrumentally driven approach
  (Discussion) will usually fail. The better
  approach will be a dialogue that allows the
  individual to reclaim some or all of their own
  individual identity in a non-threatening, or
  demanding way.

7
HOW???

• TRUST and RAPPORT
• Maximize the differences between the targets
  individual identity (personal sets of anchors
  (incentives), definitions (rationale), and
  narratives (truths or preferred outcomes) with
  the Groups anchors, definitions, and narratives
  while minimizing the similarities of same, and at
  the same time maximize the similarities between
  the targets anchors, definitions, and narratives
  and the collectors group identity while
  minimizing the differences between the targets
  anchors, definitions, and narratives and the
  collectors group identity. THESE ANCHORS CAN BE
  EITHER EXPRESSIVE OR INSTRUMENTAL VALUESLAST
  PIECE IS TO PAIR THE RIGHT COLLECTOR (PERSONALITY
  AND BACKGROUND) FOR THE INTENDED TARGRET!