Countering Counterterrorism

Governments are increasingly turning to citizenship revocation as a counterterrorism measure. However, expelling individuals from their former country of citizenship is not always feasible. What are the implications of citizenship revocation when the former citizen cannot be removed, particularly for national security? Drawing on a case study of the Netherlands, this article presents empirical insights based on in-depth interviews with 28 professionals involved in counterterrorism and the resocialization of terrorist offenders. It contributes to the debate on the pertinence and consequences of citizenship revocation as a response to terrorism. The findings suggest that citizenship revocation disrupts a counterterrorism infrastructure otherwise aligned with principles of effective resocialization. Many respondents expressed concern about the different ways in which citizenship revocation works against counterterrorism efforts and can increase threats to national security. Individuals stripped of Dutch citizenship who remain in the country are excluded from state support, leaving their criminogenic needs and risk factors for re-engagement unaddressed. This limits the state’s ability to monitor, assess and mitigate potential threats. Moreover, these individuals face increased marginalization, which can fuel frustration and distrust toward authorities. While evidence of re-engagement among this group remains limited, security services are concerned about future risks, particularly as new categories of offenders are released

Citizenship · Distrust · Good citizenship · National security · Revocation · State (computer science · Terrorism · Global Security and Public Health · Migration, Refugees, and Integration · Terrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence