In the wake of the Belgium terrorist attacks, the world faces the grim task of identifying the cause (or causes) and stopping them, to make sure this all-too-common occurrence never happens again. The motive is clear: ISIS’ vicious brand of radical Islam. The very same motive that caused the horrors in Paris and in San Bernardino. What is not so clear, and what we must direct our attention and efforts to, is how to snuff it out.
Radical Islam does not exist in a vacuum. It grows in certain environments, yet never takes root in others. We can identify the risk factors for radicalization by lining up what the terrorists have in common. Some were immigrants to the West, some had grown up in the West, and all were somehow radicalized. The San Bernardino attackers were husband and wife; two of the Brussels attackers were brothers; two of the Paris attackers were brothers.
Terrorism is sometimes a family affair, sometimes not, sometimes carried out by locals, but sometimes not. These data are important, yet inconclusive.
But there is another characteristic that all of these terrorists share: They were all young adults.
Of the two known Brussels attackers, the 11 Paris attackers, and the two San Bernardino attackers, only two were over the age of 30. Tashfeen Malik and Syed Farook were both in their late twenties. The same is true of the El Bakroui brothers who carried out the Brussels airport attack; little is known about their associate.
This begs the question: What is it about the current situation of young people that makes them more susceptible to ISIS’ message than, say, their parents or grandparents?
Demographics hold the key, particularly statistics about the well-being of young people. Belgium suffered from an 8.5 percent youth unemployment rate in 2014 (the last year for which Eurostat data is available). France’s situation was even bleaker, with a 10.3 percent youth unemployment rate the same year. These youth unemployment rates have likely increased since 2014, due to the influx of refugees to these countries from the Middle East.
This is not to say that all unemployed people are at a higher risk of radicalization. Other EU countries, most strikingly Greece and Spain, have higher rates of youth unemployment than either France or Belgium. But unemployment is a recurring theme in the records of the recent terrorists.
Of all the people identified and implicated in the three attacks, only one — Syed Farook — is known to have been gainfully employed in the weeks leading up to the attack. The El Bakraoui brothers had a long record of crimes in Belgium, but the New York Times found no record of employment to note. Likewise, in a report on the Paris attackers, BBC found employment history for just two of them, and neither were employed at the time of the attack.
All of this comes with the disclaimer that any student of statistics or social sciences knows by heart: “Correlation does not imply causation.” Terrorism and unemployment appear to hang together. It seems likely that one causes the other, but this cannot yet be proven. Regardless, Europe would do well to adopt pro-growth economic policies. If keeping people engaged in society through productive work is the key to stopping terrorism, one of the scariest deadly threats will be greatly reduced. But if not, the only side effect for Europe will be economic growth — and a flourishing economy that churns out innovation can only help countries become safer and more prosperous.
