"The economic downturn: a gift for homegrown terrorists?

In many countries, unemployment is rising, especially among young people. How will this affect the trend of homegrown terrorism?

The economic downturn: a gift for homegrown terrorists?

Most researchers have concluded that the socio-economic factors - imprecise indicators of terrorism. However, factors such as poverty and education is still considered fundamental reasons for the terrorist violence in political rhetoric and practice aimed at preventing terrorism.

Now, in the midst of the economic crisis, social and economic issues came to the fore.

On the face of the global financial crisis has created special conditions, characterized by:

• widespread lack of economic growth,
• youth unemployment of more than 50 per cent in countries such as Spain and Greece,
• increasing unrest throughout Europe in connection with the protest against austerity measures
• rumors of emergency plans to restrict immigration in different countries in the event of financial collapse.

Does the current socio-economic situation of an ideal opportunity for the recruitment of homegrown terror groups in the country? Loud answer to this question: "Perhaps."

Recently, a point of view on this question varies. Who is more subtle discussion of the differences and what are similar domestic and international terrorism. It is not a question, does the socio-economic factors for participation in terrorist groups or to support these groups, and how they affect.

evidence directly refuting the alleged link between poverty and terrorism, you can find examples of specific terrorist

Take the example of poverty. Her repeatedly pointed as the main driving factor that contributes to membership in terrorist organizations. Simply put: poverty - like unemployment - often accused of that because they lose hope and a sense of despair. Because of poor economic conditions there is a deficiency of economic opportunities, resulting in employment is limited. This leads to the relationship between unemployment and the individual level of readiness to do the violent terrorist activities, but it is a complicated relationship.

Police responding to a failed attempt to make a home-grown terror attack at Glasgow airport in 2007. The attackers were a doctor and a PhD.

For example, if there is a strong likelihood that citizens of countries with a higher GDP will open several types of economic activity, and, consequently, reduce the likelihood that they will engage in terrorist activities, the high unemployment rate could enhance the terrorist organizations to recruit well-educated persons able to make more effective and brutal attacks.

Conversely, economic growth was also associated with the growth of terrorism and its support. It has been proven that economic growth contributed to political and social unrest due to shock the public unrest. As a result of these changes, the growing social inequality. This fuel resentment and frustration, leaving the door open to terrorist groups, which to control this feeling of disappointment and offer their solutions.

Moreover, the evidence directly refuting the alleged link between poverty and terrorism, you can find examples of specific terrorists.

• Bin Laden and the September 11 hijackers lived in prosperity.
• According to reports, two-thirds of Britons suspected of involvement in terrorism, are middle class.
• Claimed that Hezbollah terrorists are better educated than the group from which they are drawn.

To sum up these ambiguous and sometimes contradictory findings, but nowadays it is impossible to identify a clear link between poverty and membership in terrorist groups or the support of these groups.

In popular discussions about the ability of terrorist groups to brainwash the vulnerable and less educated citizens are also references to the "level of education". However, a growing number of evidence that it is education that makes people politically. Over the same high level of education and socio-economic status can mean a lot of support of terrorism and more involved in it. For example, people who live far below the poverty line may be too occupied with the problems of basic survival to think of terrorism, while the educated people (especially the educated unemployed) are more likely to have more time and skill to think about new ideas and solutions, as well as adapt to different conditions necessary for a successful attack, and fit in these conditions. It is because of these qualities highly faces are attractive candidates for recruitment to terrorist organizations.

Some researchers have argued that the continued emphasis on international terrorism is irrational, as acts of "internal" terrorism much more than acts of international terrorism (less than 20% of attacks that have been reported)

In light of the further deterioration of the euro crisis the social and economic conditions look bleak.

This trend can not be called an entirely new, as the evidence in favor of this argument can be found on the example of the journalist Ulrike Meinhof of the Baader-Meinhof gang. More recent examples: the man who shot soldiers at Fort Hood in 2009, was a psychiatrist in the U.S. Army and the attack on Glasgow airport in 2007 was committed physician and doctor of engineering.

A higher degree of education in conjunction with fewer economic opportunities may well make terrorist organizations more attractive to disaffected citizens. These conclusions are to some extent explain the lack of political will to ensure that completely reject the idea of ​​the relationship between socioeconomic factors and terrorism. Consequently, the constant attention of politicians, given to the social issues in order to prevent terrorism, is not without foundation.

Must be wary of these observations made by examining the data of empirical evidence with regard to homegrown terrorism, as they are built primarily on an understanding of international terrorism. Some researchers have argued that the continued emphasis on international terrorism is irrational, as acts of "internal" terrorism much more than acts of international terrorism (less than 20% of attacks that have been reported). In fact, some argue that in eight cases of domestic terrorism, there is one case of international. Others suggest that countries with more advanced economies face more attacks than countries with less developed economies.

Debate and discussion in this area should focus on domestic terrorism and, thus, homegrown terrorism, in order to truly understand the similarities and differences between these two types of terrorism. This re-focusing will certainly have long-term outlook for the national and international policies and practices and may contribute to a new understanding of the relationship between socio-economic factors and homegrown terrorism.

As will be seen the relationship between socio-economic issues such as poverty, education and terrorism in today's world prone recession? Although evidence suggests that now terrorists are unlikely to people affected by economic hardship or no education, you must still consider the extent to which economic changes could lead to political or social unrest. Whether there is greater social inequality because of shock waves of austerity, and whether they will cause an even greater disappointment with little hope of future economic options? Whether this will improve the dynamics of the ability of terrorist organizations to recruit highly educated people?

We still can not give a definitive answer to these questions. Although the current economic crisis and has not created a perfect storm, according to the evidence, he formed the "weather front", for which there is a watch.