Months of reporting went into this @frontlinepbs piece but didn't make it in. Experts worry most about national security risks foreign fighters pose.

But there's more. Women, the majority of those in Northeastern camps, play a massive role. A thread. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/repatriating-isis-foreign-fighters-key-to-stemming-radicalization-experts-say-but-many-countries-dont-want-citizens-back/

Gender plays a massive role. Women are mainly portrayed as victims/coerced into joining ISIS. While true to an extent, this framework excludes the role women played in building the so-called state.

Administration, judiciary systems, education, and culture = the work of women.

Foreign women in ISIS are forced into extremes: naive victim vs. monster. Both deny women agency, and both undermine the role of gender and foreign nationalities of building the state.

“Terrorist groups can't operate without their enablers,” @NaureenCFink told me.

In reality, foreign women who travelled to ISIS reflected the party line of the group in many cases.

They were motivated by the privileges they would enjoy by joining and that were offered to them as foreigners rather than locals, according to @GinaAVale’s research.

By leaving women and children, the majority of the 43,000 in northeast Syria’s camps, the risk of further radicalization is ripe, and happening.

Repatriation, I am told, is not only accountability for crimes committed, but prevention of further radicalization - @fdelond

One expert told me they would be the foundation of ISIS 2.0, 3.0, or 4.0.

What does that say to victims and communities that suffered? The ideology will just continue to ebb, flow, and rebuild, according to @ColinPClarke. Neglect and outright rejection from home countries will fuel this.

End.