Safe and far away from living in conflict zones, many privileged people criticize the stark options taken by displaced people in their efforts to find solace.
To migrate, to become radicalized or to starve to death, are choices those unfamiliar with conflict and suffering view as far fetched realities. But inside conflict zones, these options become forced realities for millions of people. Many must accept one of these options as they are faced with the acute horror of their dire current affairs.
For many victims of conflict and bad governance, the choice of fate will always be limited. The poorest will starve to death, the economically viable will migrate, while nationalists and those not having any other choices will become radicalized. This reality is true from Syria, to Iraq, to Libya, to North Africa, to Ukraine and beyond.
In conflict, there is no sociological survey that determines who survives or not. That fate is apparently bestowed by a victim's environment, standing, will and ability to survive. In Yemen, a home could be mistakenly bombed; in Syria, the Assad regime or the Islamic State(IS) could elect to starve a particular town; in Iraq, the government could ignore the basic needs of a town; and in Libya, revenge could force a victim into the camp of extremists.
Therefore, as conflicts continue to rage and as the rolls of the hungry and the starving bulge, more and more people will become victims having limited choices to migrate, to starve or to become radicalized. Moreover, if historical places of havens are closed to the persecuted and those displaced, then greater radicalization could be expected over time.