April 9, 2019 | By Katelyn Jones

Women, Peace, and Security: How Gender Bias Hampers Counter-Terrorism

This is part of Katelyn Jones' "What’s Up With WPS?" series about the UN’s Women, Peace, and Security agenda. Links to other parts of the series may be found at the bottom of the page. 

Hoda Muthana’s and Shamima Begum’s requests to return to their home countries after joining ISIS have put women’s roles in terrorism at the center of popular news and conversations about violent extremism. Stereotypical images of ISIS fighters being men, and the women involved in ISIS being passive victims of the organization, have shattered.

In this third installment of the “What’s Up with WPS?” series, I consider these women’s cases in light of the UN Security Council’s February 2019 report, Gender Dimensions of the Response to Returning Foreign Terrorist Fighters. The report brings together evidence from academic scholarship and policy research to highlight the complex reasons women and men join terrorist groups and challenges biased assumptions about women and men terrorists. Considering Muthana’s and Begum’s experiences alongside the report’s findings amplifies the need to remove gender stereotypes from counter-terrorism policies and research. It also emphasizes that each identified terrorist must be treated individually and with especial attention to their unique situation and context to ensure peace and security.

Challenging Stereotypes: The Stories of Hoda Muthana and Shamima Begum

Muthana left college in Alabama to join ISIS four years ago. She married an ISIS fighter and ran a recruitment Twitter account to attract other foreign fighters. Now 24 years old and with an 18-month old son, Muthana seeks to return to the United States. Her claim to citizenship remains to be determined in court, and President Trump and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo have called Muthana a foreign terrorist and declared her ineligible to return to the United States. She remains in al-Hawl refugee camp in Syria with her child as she awaits a decision in her case.

Begum, now 19 years old, left East London at the age of 15 to marry an ISIS fighter. After giving birth to a son in February, she sought to return to the United Kingdom to provide him the care he needed (Begum’s newborn son has since died, and she previously lost two children to illness and malnutrition). Unlike Muthana, Begum claims to have never played any part in ISIS activities beyond taking care of her husband and son. Like Muthana, Begum is in the al-Hawl refugee camp in northeastern Syria. Begum’s family is appealing the home secretary’s decision to strip her of her citizenship, a decision made because Begum’s ISIS affiliation means she is considered a threat to British security.

Muthana’s and Begum’s stories have not only challenged stereotypes about terrorists, but also raised broader questions about how to respond to foreign terrorist fighters as they try to return to their home countries. What is the best way to respond to returning terrorists? And do women require different responses than men?

Gender Bias and Countering Terrorism and Violent Extremism

The UN report calls on member states to recognize the different roles women play, analyze the drivers of women’s radicalization, and devise gender-sensitive responses to counter terrorism and violent extremism. It focuses especially on the ways that gender stereotypes hamper counter-terrorism efforts and inhibit justice.

While it is often assumed that women travelers were passive victims of men terrorists, information about women’s different roles in ISIS has contributed to frequent criminal investigations and prosecutions of women. In 2016, women constituted 26% of those arrested on terrorism charges in Europe—an 8% increase from 2015. Nonetheless, there remains gender bias in sentencing practices, and nations struggle with the investigation and prosecution of women associated with ISIS. Women receive comparatively lenient sentences, based on the assumption that women were “duped” into joining ISIS under false pretenses. And women often receive limited rehabilitation and reintegration support compared to men terrorists, putting them at increased risk of re-radicalization and recidivism.

To remedy these problems and create more effective counter-terrorism strategies, the UN report calls on policymakers and researchers to dismiss gender stereotypes and recognize the plurality of women’s experiences in ISIS. While it was once assumed that women who joined ISIS were young, unwed, and less educated, we now know that there is a wide age spread, different marital statuses, and different levels of education among them. Hoda Muthana, who was in college when she joined ISIS, is just one example of a woman terrorist whose characteristics diverge from the expected norm. Given this information, the report underlines that it is necessary to recognize and study the diversity of women’s backgrounds to effect policies that combat women’s radicalization and ensure that security is not compromised.

Moreover, the report stresses women’s reasons for radicalization are usually the same as those that drive men. If policymakers allow gender biases to prevail and assume that women only join ISIS because they are tricked into doing so, the factors that most often drive them to join will go unaddressed, and efforts to prevent and counter violent extremism will fall short.

What’s next for Muthana, Begum, and Counter-Terrorism?

In the cases of Muthana and Begum, it is difficult determine what will happen next. History would suggest that both women would be treated leniently, but media coverage and hardline responses from the US and UK governments indicate that is not the case, at least for the time being. Evidence from the UN report suggests that everyone involved in determining these women’s fates needs to carefully consider the women’s contexts and involvement in ISIS, not base decisions on gender stereotypes or perceived victimhood.

Whether they return home or not, both women will require substantial rehabilitation and reintegration support to ensure their individual security and protect international security interests. And those responsible for this reintegration would do well to invest more in these efforts than normally allotted to prevent recidivism.

More broadly, we need more research to determine the best policy responses to returning women terrorists. It is important for policymakers and observers alike to keep in mind that women are not all tricked or duped into joining ISIS. Many women knowingly participate in the group’s activities. It is also important to note men do not all join ISIS knowingly. Men, too, can be duped.

Evidence shows that stereotypical understandings of terrorists fall short, and it would be dangerous to allow these stereotypes to continue to dominate decision-making. The more researchers and policymakers can do to challenge these conventional narratives and recognize the unique situation of each identified terrorist, man or woman, the better able they will be to seek justice, ensure national security, and uphold accused persons' human rights.

This is part of Katelyn Jones' "What’s Up With WPS?" series about the UN’s Women, Peace, and Security agenda:


The Chicago Council on Global Affairs is an independent, nonpartisan organization that provides insight – and influences the public discourse – on critical global issues. We convene leading global voices and conduct independent research to bring clarity and offer solutions to challenges and opportunities across the globe. The Council is committed to engaging the public and raising global awareness of issues that transcend borders and transform how people, business, and governments engage the world.

The Chicago Council on Global Affairs is an independent, nonpartisan organization. All statements of fact and expressions of opinion in blog posts are the sole responsibility of the individual author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Council.


| By Laurence Ralph, Thomas Abt, Brian Hanson

Deep Dish: Police Reform Lessons from Around the World

Princeton University’s Laurence Ralph and the Council on Criminal Justice’s Thomas Abt join Deep Dish to explain why police brutality is not a uniquely American phenomenon and argue the strongest examples of successful police reform come from outside the United States.

| By Pavin Chachavalpongpun, Brian Hanson

Deep Dish: Thailand’s Youth Demand Democratic Reforms

Political scientist Pavin Chachavalpongpun joins Deep Dish to explain how social media makes these Thailand's pro-democracy protests different than past movements and why the United States should see Thailand as a foreign policy priority when negotiating a rising China.

| By Maha Yahya, Emile Hokayem, Brian Hanson

Deep Dish: Can Lebanon Overcome Corruption and Crisis?

Carnegie Middle East Center Director Maha Yahya and the International Institute for Strategic Studies’ Emile Hokayem join Deep Dish to examine the ongoing protest movement in Lebanon, Hezbollah’s role in the crisis, and how a system built on sectarian politics could be rebuilt.

| By Laura Rosenberger, Jacob Helberg, Brian Hanson

Deep Dish: Making Cyberspace Safe for Democracy

The Alliance for Security Democracy’s Laura Rosenberger and Stanford University’s Jacob Helberg join Deep Dish to discuss digital interference, misinformation, and data privacy within the lens of geopolitics. 

| By Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall, Scott Sagan, Brian Hanson

Deep Dish: Nuclear Threats 75 Years After Hiroshima

Seventy-five years after Hiroshima, former deputy secretary of energy Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall and Stanford University’s Scott Sagan join Deep Dish to examine the threat of nuclear weapons today.

| By Mira Rapp-Hooper, Brian Hanson

Deep Dish: Why Allies are Key for US Security Today

The Council on Foreign Relations’ Mira Rapp-Hooper joins Deep Dish to explain why the alliance system is still essential for America’s global leadership – but must be remade to meet the challenges of the 21st century. 

| By Adam Segal, Brian Hanson

Deep Dish: Who’s Winning the US-China Tech War?

The Council on Foreign Relations’ Adam Segal joins Deep Dish to explain the battles between China and the US over products like Huawei and TikTok, their role in US foreign policy, and why US allies are choosing sides. 

| By Judd Devermont, Neil Munshi, Brian Hanson

Deep Dish: Mali’s Instability Threatens the Sahel

This week on Deep Dish, the Center for Strategic and International Studies’ Judd Devermont and the Financial Times’ Neil Munshi explain why Mali’s instability is a threat to Africa’s Sahel region — soon to be the West’s largest conflict zone.