Assessing the Ineffectiveness of Military Measures Against Extremism Post-January 6 Insurrection

Assessing the Ineffectiveness of Military Measures Against Extremism Post-January 6 Insurrection

The military has authorized drastic measures to counteract radicalism. Nothing has changed after two years.

An insurrection in the United States armed forces on January 6, 2016, more than two years ago, acted as the catalyst for Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin to start a comprehensive program meant to reduce the risk presented by extremism throughout the military.


The results of an analysis carried out suggest, on the other hand, that the military practically has nothing to show for its efforts as of the present day. The vast majority of the procedure’s stages have either been put on hold or are not currently being carried out, and the enhancements that experts have ranked as being of the utmost importance have not been implemented.


The following strategies were planned to be used as part of the amended policy in order to fight extremism before, during, and after service in the armed forces:


By posing more challenging questions and doing background checks to search for red flags like white nationalist tattoos, radicals may be dissuaded from going through the recruiting process.

Forming a whole new investigation squad with the objective of locating potentially dangerous extremists operating inside the ranks of the organization and expelling them from those ranks.

The purpose of the education program that is now being produced is to cut off the well-known and sometimes fatal veteran-to-extremist pipeline. The goal of the education program that is currently being developed is to build an education program that will enlighten veterans about the extremist groups that court them.


Instead, at this moment in time, the military is in the position of having practically no answers to provide on what has really taken place. Even a crucial internal evaluation on the scope of the extremism problem inside the military has never been made public, despite the fact that Austin himself commissioned the research and it was completed more than a year ago, as was disclosed.This research was financed by a commission.


According to Kathleen Belew, a historian professor of political science at Northwestern University and author of “Bring the War Home: The White Power Movement and Paramilitary America,”

“This would be “a tragic outcome.” to let it simply fall apart because there are a lot of other things to do would be a tragic misstep,” Austin’s post-January six endeavours was “an incredibly powerful lever for real change” and “letting it simply fall apart” would be a “tragic misstep.” “If this massive effort were to finish with no quantifiable influence. “to let it simply fall apart because there are a lot of other things to do would be a tragic misstep.”


Austin and the working group that he created to monitor the initiative and give comments came up with a total of twenty distinct proposals for ways in which it may be improved. Over the course of a few months, the newspaper sent queries on the implementation of changes and the current state of those adjustments to a range of various levels within the Department of Defense. The agency finally replied to a few of the questions

at the end of the month of May. Prior to this, the department had repeatedly requested further time in order to assemble a response. After that, the organization provided several responses that were unclear, in addition to the fact that they did not provide any details on the bulk of the suggested alterations.


“The Department of Defense takes extremist activity seriously and continues to make progress toward implementing the actions approved by the Secretary in December 2021,” Cmdr. Nicole Schwegman, a representative for the Department of Defense, said in a written statement. “[T]he Department of Defense takes extreme activity seriously.”


Schwegman maintains that “the overwhelming majority of service members serve with honour and integrity and do not take part in any activities associated with extremism.”


The mathematics that was used to support that assumption may or may not be accurate, but the threats presented by the radical minority have already resulted in the deaths and injuries of a significant number of individuals. Independent specialists continue to voice the alarm that extremism in the armed forces presents a substantial danger to the lives of Americans as well as the democratic system in the United States, despite the fact that the military has not yet revealed its own findings about the matter.


Co-creator of the Global Project to Counter Violent Extremism Heidi Beirich

made a comment to the effect that there is “this myopia to deal with this kind of far-right extremism in this country.” “There is this myopia to deal with it,” she added. “There is this myopia to deal with it.” “The situation can be managed in some fashion.” “There is literally no way to make sense of it. Look, individuals with prior experience in the armed forces are cropping up all too often in domestic terrorist schemes, and they are murdering people—even killing soldiers. ”


What are the early warning signals that someone is on the way to becoming an extremist, and how can you see them before it’s too late? It is sometimes referred to as “one of the single strongest predictors,” so keep this in mind.

A person’s affiliation to one of the armed forces of the United States is the “single strongest” predictor of whether or not they would participate in violent extremism in the United States.





According to the findings of research that was carried out by START, those who are now serving in the armed forces or who have been in the military in the past “are 2.41 times more likely to be classified as mass casualty offenders than individuals who did not serve,” The results of the survey indicate that the number of radicals who have links to the military has more than doubled in the most recent decade in comparison to the preceding decade. This suggests that the problem is just getting worse as time goes on.


However, in recent years there have also been high-profile examples of active-duty military being involved in extremism. These events have received a lot of media attention. Former personnel of the armed forces make up the vast majority of radicals who are linked with the military.


For example, in March, a man by the name of Ethan Melzer, who had previously served in the Army and was 25 years old at the time, was sentenced to 45 years in prison for attempting to murder members of his own regiment. Melzer’s actions were deemed to have been motivated by a desire for revenge. Melzer said that he had shared information with a Satanist neo-Nazi organization about the whereabouts and movements of his unit in advance of an operation that was scheduled to take place in Turkey.



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *