The American strategy to combat the ‘Islamic State’ rests on four pillars. The first is to conduct systematic air campaigns against the terrorists. The second involves increasing support for forces fighting the jihadists on the ground. The third is based on the strengthening of international cooperation in counter–terrorism operations. The fourth involves the provision of humanitarian aid to civilians displaced from the territories occupied by the jihadists. This article analyzes the assumptions, tactics, the most important decisions and actions of the American administration to combat the ‘Islamic State’. It is an attempt to provide answers to the questions: why has there been a growth of extremism in the Middle East? Why is the ‘Islamic State’ a new form of terrorist threat? How does it differ from other terrorist organizations? How was the ‘Islamic State’ created? What actions have been taken by the international coalition led by the United States in the fight against the jihadists in the Middle East? Is the strategy taken up by the United States effective? Does the defeat of the ‘Islamic State’ require the involvement of US ground forces in Iraq and Syria?

W 2003 r. Amerykanie wkroczyli do Iraku pod szyldem wojny z terroryzmem. Obok posiadania broni masowego rażenia Saddamowi Husajnowi zarzucano współpracę z Al-Kaidą . Plan administracji George’a W. Busha wydawał się prosty. Obalić reż im Husajna, zabezpieczyć irackie złoża ropy naft owej i rozpocząć proces przemian demokratycznych. Zasadzone w Iraku ziarno demokracji miało zostać rozsiane na całym Bliskim Wschodzie. Amerykanie popełnili w Iraku wiele błędów, które miały liczne reperkusje, nie tylko dla USA, ale całego systemu bezpieczeństwa międzynarodowego. Misja stabilizacyjna w Iraku nie tylko nie zmniejszyła terroryzmu, ale stworzyła dogodny grunt dla rozwoju ekstremizmu, doprowadzając do destabilizacji całego regionu. Dzisiaj bardziej problematyczną kwestią od poziomu demokracji w Iraku jest coraz większa aktywność terrorystyczna „państwa” islamskiego, już nie tylko na Bliskim Wschodzie, ale również w Europie.

The article presents the authors’ methods of determining teenagers’ disposition towards destructive communication, identifies the main types of destructive communication and provides their psychological characteristics. It specifies the correlation between destructive communication and certain personal qualities of teenagers. It also determines the main role of the diagnostics of teenagers’ disposition towards destructive communication as a way of youth extremism prevention in the system of correcting conditions of this type of interactions.

Extremist movements and radicalism in Australia against the background of tensions between the policy of multiculturalism and the domination of Anglo-Saxon culture

In multicultural Australia everyone, regardless of language, nationality or culture, has the right to express themselves openly. However, despite its official commitment to diversity, contemporary Australian society continues to experience tensions between multicultural politics and the domination of Anglo-Saxon cultural heritage. Right-wing politicians have described multiculturalism as a harbinger of a social conflict that would lead to an ethnically divided Australia. Following the events of September 11, 2001, some regulations were introduced to expand the catalog of tools used by the police and law enforcement agencies to effectively prevent acts of violent extremism. These restrictions on civil liberties are being used by Australian extreme-right movements as an argument to undermine confidence in the government’s “oppressive” policies. The Covid-19 pandemic and its effects has also revealed negative shifts in the landscape of brutal Australian extremism. This raises the question of how serious danger to the national security could an Australian nationalism be left unchecked, capable of transforming into racially and religiously excluding ideas of belonging to society. The paper shows that failure to react decisively to the continued undermining of trust in democratic institutions and exploiting the cracks in social cohesion may lead to Australia no longer being perceived as a defender of the principles of liberal democracy. Instead, it will come to be regarded as a „colonial bastion of white settlers,” and such a poor racial reputation of the country will undoubtedly make it difficult for Australia to navigate in an increasingly tense regional geopolitical environment in the future.