Young People Aged 0-17: Neuroscience and Cognition to Break Cycles of Radicalization

Author: Nicholas Wright (Intelligent Biology)

This publication was released as part of the SMA project, “CENTCOM Regional and Population Dynamics in the Central Region.”  For more information regarding this project, please click here.

Executive Summary

[B1] How do we break the cycle of radicalization, particularly with children who know no other social system/model of governance? Are there possible graduated steps to deradicalization, i.e., judicial efforts, penal efforts, religious efforts, familial efforts, treatment efforts, that can be applied?

Cycles of radicalization and violent behaviour have a fundamentally cognitive dimension. What happens inside the minds of vulnerable young people aged 0 to 17 years – and how can we help such young people amongst the millions of Syrian refugees and Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) in order to break these cycles?

Here I apply insights from cognition and neuroscience. The report has two parts.

Part I examines the “brain terrain” created by the developing human brain, in which planners must operate, and that brings both challenges and opportunities.

Human brains develop from 0-25 years, during which distinct growth phases occur – and these require different policies. Policymakers can break this process down using three factors: human biology, culture, and political/legal distinctions.

Recommendation One: CENTCOM should focus policies on each of three distinct periods: 0-4 earliest years, 5-12 younger children, and 13-17 adolescents.

Young people can be very resilient – and they benefit from help. Psychiatric evidence and historical cases (e.g., Germany or South Korea after devastating prolonged wars) illustrate this resilience. Afford young people opportunities.

Recommendation Two: CENTCOM should see the opportunity new generations present – and afford them opportunities for plausible non-radical or violent futures, by helping build environments with basic education and social support.

Part II examines specific interventions. Limited direct evidence evaluates interventions for young refugees or IDPs in the developing world (e.g., much conflates work in rich/developing world settings, or with child soldiers/terrorists/radical groups). Thus, I provide convergent evidence from related fields like mental health and criminology – and I stress dual use aspects, e.g. providing routine is foundational in mental health everywhere, and also in deradicalization programmes in Pakistan.

For many of these interventions CENTCOM can provide security, funding and leadership, but success requires internal (e.g. USAID) and external (e.g. allies, charities, local) partners.

Recommendation Three: A hierarchy of interventions should be used – first build the foundations! E.g. giving young people in camps places to go and routine likely matters more than giving them wafer-thin versions of rich world deradicalization programmes, but still leaving them with few routines or safe places. Dual-use education or mental health programmes likely help break cycles of radicalization.

Recommendation Four: Cost effective interventions – use, develop and evaluate affordable and scalable interventions.Global mental health provides practical developing world templates, e.g. not using expensive doctors but training alternative practitioners, and there may be roles for digital aides. 

Recommendation Five: Enhance the information environment. E.g. research young target audiences’ viewing and develop Arabic resources for each age.

Download Publication

This publication was released as part of the SMA project, “CENTCOM Regional and Population Dynamics in the Central Region.”  For more information regarding this project, please click here.