Sarah has worked in international development for over 30 years. In 2005 and the London 7/7 bombings, she was asked to carry out studies more specifically on the issues around radicalisation, extremism, terrorism etc. Sarah explained at the outset that her methods were very much based on the personal testimonies of individuals, rather than as Jane described in her work on the ageing brain where she used statistically significant trial results.

Sarah’s work has focused on testing the UK government’s “theories” on radicalisation with people in communities where jihadi groups are recruiting (including the Taliban in Afghanistan, al-Shabaab in Somalia and Kenya, Boko Haram in Nigeria and a range of groups in Pakistan and Bangladesh). Questions tested include: is western foreign policy the problem? Do very religious people hold the most extreme views? Do madrassahs (religious schools) radicalise pupils? And are women involved or are they just there because they are married to fighters? To help everyone’s understanding, Sarah went on to define terms such as “radicalisation” which she saw as “a process of influencing others into a system of ideas that advocates fundamental political or social change”. She noted that since 9/11 the term has been ‘Islamised’, so it now means anyone who is inculcated into the ideology of a militant Islamic group. The concept of “jihad” was also discussed. Originally this meant the internal spiritual struggle to understand the will of god. It implied a physical struggle only if Muslims were persecuted. However, as used by jihadi groups today this term has come to mean a violent war against any ‘enemy’ identified by the group in question, including fellow Muslims, usually with a view to establishing a Caliphate and ruling through the group’s own interpretation of Shari’a (Islamic law).

Sarah then went on to describe two case studies in radicalisation, one from a farmer in a rural area of the Punjab, and another a woman in Nigeria who had been kidnapped by Boko Haram. She said that there tend to be some common features amongst the individuals. For example, nearly all of them are radicalised only after they joined a group; only in the case of Islamic State does the internet allow for radicalisation before individuals ‘join up’. Whichever group the men and women belong to, a number of them want “out” at a certain point, for example because they lose respect of their leaders and/or the brutality becomes too much. Women and girls generally get involved either as family members of fighters or, in the case of Boko Haram in Nigeria, because they are abducted and forced into marriage with a fighter. In either case, it can be difficult to find a way back unless they escape, and even if they do escape they may well be ostracised within their communities back at home.

Some of the main differences between individuals radicalised in different countries is that there is no common background – many are not very religious when recruited, some are poor and rural and others are wealthy and highly educated. Further, some governments have been complicit in some way and even if not, due to the geopolitics, there are many ways that governments can support jihadi groups even if not directly. Thus there is no one overarching sense of commitment globally to stamp out this form of “war” because no-one can agree a joint strategy.

Sarah then considered the response of the UK government, such as not condemning those governments supporting jihadi groups, or the US drone strikes. This led to an interesting discussion about the way to deal with jihadis who wish to return. There is no offer of amnesty to those who have gone to join IS, even when they realise they have made a horrible mistake. Presumably this is because they are considered a risk to the UK, but given they themselves have wanted to return, are there ways for the potential risk to be assessed?   And what role is the media playing in the views of those who feel threatened by those who wish to return.

This final point lead to ideas about a further topic in respect of the role and power of the media, which we hope to return to on a future date.  (Summary: Caroline Fisher)