The way our media and politicians address extremism is neither helpful nor productive. There is an exoticised and sensationalised portrayal of terror, with an emphasis on the monstrosity, the violence, and concepts of good vs evil. This, likely is by design, to illicit fear and serve in the interests of the military-industrial complex. What is missing, however, is an empathetic and nuanced approach that explores the humanity, motivations, and complexities behind extremism. Yes, I say this to be provocative - by no means am I a terrorist sympathiser - but there is often little context provided about the socio-economic and political conditions that drive humans to commit acts of terror. There is little interest in understanding the alienation and disenfranchisement that leave young men vulnerable to be radicalised and recruited as mercenaries for terrorist organisations in the first place. Our current system fails to address globalisation, neo-colonial relationships between nations, and a legacy of imperialism. Yet these are the nuances that give rise to the disillusionment which create a fertile breeding ground for radicalisation. What drives people to commit acts of terror? Terrorism is bad, terrorism is a global threat. Yeah – no shit. This black-and-white frame of thinking is reductionist because it diverts attention away from the economic and environmental exploitation that often drive terror in the first place. Most people don’t wake up one day deciding to embrace violence; many experience a gradual disillusionment that make them vulnerable to radicalisation, eventually culminating in a desire for 'retribution' against nations perceived as oppressors. These feelings of resentment don’t just come from nowhere but are often born from legitimate grievances. One major source of these grievances is the exploitation of land and resources by powerful corporations and geopolitical interests. In many regions, particularly in the Global South, multinational corporations—often Western—extract valuable resources like oil, minerals, and timber, generating massive profits. Yet, the local populations, whose lands are stripped and whose environments are degraded, see little to no benefit. Instead, they are often left with polluted water, ruined ecosystems, and a decline in health and quality of life. This kind of environmental and economic exploitation breeds resentment, especially when locals see foreign entities reaping the rewards of their homeland's wealth while they remain stuck in poverty. Niger as a case study If we use Niger as a case study, we can easily see how this unfolds. French corporations like AREVA have extracted uranium from Niger for decades, fuelling France's nuclear power industry and driving 70% of France’s electricity. Despite the billions AREVA has made from Niger’s uranium, Niger is still internationally known as one of the world’s poorest countries. Chronic hunger and malnutrition afflict the nation, leaving many people indigent. France’s uranium mining has had severe effects on the local people of Arlit in Niger. The environmental and human costs are devastating—radioactive waste contaminates the land, water, and air, leading to deformities, stillbirths, cancer, and death. Radiation has devastated local agriculture and industry leaving many locals jobless. Despite these hardships, locals were offered no medical help, with no accountability from AREVA or the state. When Arlit locals sought jobs in the mines, they were denied work. Desperate, many were recruited by Gaddafi to fight as mercenaries in the Libyan war, while others, resentful and frustrated, turned to the Tuareg rebels. These groups began terrorist revolts, kidnapping French nationals and demanding job opportunities, an end to environmental pollution, and for 20-30% of uranium profits to be distributed across the local population. It was not long before Al-Qaeda and its affiliates offered to champion Niger, kidnapping Western hostages for ransom, further destabilising the region. What makes extremist ideology and rhetoric appealing? What the media fails to address when reporting on the proliferation of terrorism is why Al-Qaeda’s and other extremist rhetoric is so appealing to a vulnerable population of disenfranchised, jobless, and desperate individuals. Al-Qaeda's message resonates with locals who feel abandoned by the state, as it addresses the continuation of colonial exploitation in Niger and demands accountability for the local people. Al-Qaeda's message highlights that Western ideas of progress and their promises of development are driven by self-interest and ongoing resource theft from African nations. This likely resonates with locals who have faced decades of exploitation. For marginalised communities, this ideology provides a compelling explanation for their plight and serves as a call to action. Feelings of marginalisation and disillusionment create a fertile breeding ground for radicalisation and recruitment by extremist groups. Unfortunately, when the local state government fails to protect its people, terrorist revolts often occur in response. Extremists of any form thrive in vacuums. Groups like Hamas and Hezbollah present themselves as saviours and liberators in environments where social services, healthcare, and education are lacking. By filling political, psychological, social, and economic voids, these groups gain trust and recruit mercenaries, deliberately preying upon the vulnerabilities of young men. Their ability to do so reflects more on societal failures than on the indoctrinated individuals themselves. Unfortunately, the grievances and alienation that drive individuals toward extremist ideology are legitimate, and we, as a society have failed to address these issues. Furthermore, it is crucial to recognise that these individuals are not just drawn to extremism; they are manipulated and used as pawns to serve an ideological agenda. Recruits manipulate young men by preying on their vulnerabilities. Many men may feel inadequate, insignificant, and unable to provide for their families. Young men searching for meaning, belonging, and a sense of purpose are often drawn to extremist groups that offer a sense of masculinity, brotherhood, and camaraderie. Feeling powerless and having little control over one’s life and well-being can be deeply painful. The allure of a movement that promises to restore pride, agency, and revenge against perceived oppressors becomes compelling. Additionally, humans are inherently tribal creatures who often find it easier to blame others—whether a different racial group or external systems—rather than critically dissecting current systems. Extremist groups exploit this innate tribal mentality to further their agendas. Globalisation Globalisation in huge part contributes to the alienation experienced by communities in the global south. In the west, there is a failure to address globalisation and how our economic systems are structured in ways that are detrimental to many, benefiting only a minority of people in our societies. While globalisation benefits multinational corporations, wealthy investors, and consumers in developed countries by offering cheaper products and outsourcing, it harms low-wage workers in developing countries, contributing to slave labor and exploitative labor practices in several ways. This includes an increased demand for cheap labor, weaker labor regulations, and conditions that allow human trafficking to thrive. This further contributes to the disillusionment and frustration that can push vulnerable populations into the arms of extremist groups. Globalisation allows companies to exploit cheap labour in developing countries, cut costs and avoid stringent regulations. Using Niger as a case study, globalisation has allowed France’s AREVA to recruit 98% of its workers from Northern Niger to work in the Arlit mines. Employing locals instead of French workers is cheaper, reduces legal liabilities, and makes it easier to sidestep human rights and health regulations. By hiring local workers, AREVA avoids the higher costs and potential lawsuits associated with employing French nationals, who would demand better safety measures and higher wages. This theme is not exclusive to Niger; financially motivated resource extraction is bolstered and enabled by globalisation in many contexts. The lives of miners in Niger were undervalued as they suffered the health consequences of radiation and died in an atmosphere of total indifference, with zero accountability from AREVA or France. This prompts us to question whether corporate and state enterprises, through the harm they cause—particularly to resource-rich African nations—are equally culpable as the rebel groups they combat. I am not saying globalisation is bad per se, and we cannot discount the many benefits that it has had for the working class in consumer nations. However, the lack of accountability by corporate conglomerates and the disregard for the lives and rights of workers in third world nations underscore the urgent need for accountability mechanisms, fair trade, ethical investment and international scrutiny to ensure justice and protection for affected communities. However, under current financial systems, it seems highly unlikely that we will see any change as maximised corporate and financial growth is dependent on the very systems that perpetuate environmental and humanitarian exploitation. Military-Industrial Complex Political, financial, and ideological biases shape media coverage, often reflecting the agendas of governments and influential financial groups. This leads to the prioritisation of narratives that support specific policies and viewpoints, as seen in partisan media outlets like Fox News or CNN. Sensationalism is often used to further skew public perceptions. Sensationalism often comes at the expense of deeper analysis, creating a “smoke and mirrors” effect. Much like a magician, the media narrative distracts and deflects attention from the root causes of terrorism. This achieves several outcomes. By stereotyping extremists as a monolithic, inherently evil group, they are dehumanised and stripped of their humanity. This reduces the issue to a more palatable and convenient black-and-white narrative of good versus evil. Such an approach ignores the complexities of their motivations and obscures the underlying causes of extremism, which often involve uncomfortable and confronting truths about Western geopolitical interests, resource exploitation, and occupation. Furthermore, through sensationalism, the media create a climate of fear and anxiety among the public. This fear reinforces the belief that military intervention is necessary, sidelining diplomatic, developmental, or humanitarian approaches. This, in fact, is the very thinking that seeks to justify and push military intervention or economic sanction under the guise of counter-terrorism, thereby serving the interests of the military-industrial complex. War is an economy. The global "war on terror" narrative justifies increased defence spending and arms sales. Consistently portraying terrorism without context or nuance can foster public fear and support for aggressive counter-terrorism measures. This was demonstrated by the 2003 invasion of Iraq, where the “war on terror” was used to mask Western geopolitical interests in oil. We have also seen this more recently in Israel's attacks on Gaza, which were framed as counter-terrorism measures in response to the attacks on October 7th. There are a minority of elites who profit from war. This disincentivises the pursuit of genuine solutions that address the underlying grievances that fuel extremism, creating a perpetuating cycle of conflict and instability. On a Final Note Demonising terrorism does not seek to solve it. The common narrative perpetuated by the mainstream media—"terrorism is bad" and "Western and secular values are under attack"—is reductionist because it fails to address the legitimate grievances and root socio-economic conditions that make extremist rhetoric appealing. Groups like Al-Qaueda exploit psychological voids in alienated individuals, presenting themselves as liberators crusading against colonial and imperialist oppression. It is crucial to observe how such ideologies take root in environments of profound injustice and economic disparity if we want to truly understand war. Why are our current systems not addressing the economic and social grievances that our young people have? Mainstream media reports on terror continue to shape our superficial understanding of extremism and fail to offer contextualised approaches. Financial agendas seep into mainstream narratives, benefiting a minority of elites who profit from war and serving the interests of the military-industrial complex. This disincentivizes the pursuit of genuine solutions that address the underlying grievances fuelling extremism, thereby creating a perpetual cycle of conflict and instability. In reality, corporate and government enterprises can be just as complicit in perpetuating violence as the terrorists they condemn. The Solution? Solving such complex issues would mean addressing the underclass of society who are overlooked and confronting the current systems that enable corporations to prioritise economic interests over ethical, environmental, and socio-economic considerations for local populations. There is also a need to address the continued influence of former colonial powers over resource-rich nations in Africa and the shortcomings of our current financial systems. Globalisation enables terrible, dehumanising working conditions in the Global South, contributing to the further alienation of populations. Solving this would require addressing low wages, poor working conditions, and the lack of workers' rights. The alternative must involve job creation, fair trade practices, implementing stringent workers' rights, and the elimination of exploitation and slave labor, along with improved access to social support and education. Whilst nothing can excuse extremism, many individuals are robbed at the chance of a dignified life, long before they become radicalised. There is an urgency to confront the feelings of shame, humiliation, and powerlessness that so many people experience before they become ideological instruments for extremist organisations. If we do not, we are essentially handing these people over to the Osama bin Ladens of the world. If we systematically treat people as primitive and subhuman, we shouldn’t be surprised if they start acting in ways that reflect this. Perhaps the solution is compassion—by locating the humanity in others before it is too late. By ensuring that everyone has equal access to a dignified life, where they are not stripped of their humanity, perhaps acts of terror and violence would become less common.
