By enhancing risk identification, beneficiary monitoring, and practitioner interventions, AI can help at several stages of the radicalization and disengagement process. Although it can aid in preventing violent engagement or re-engagement, it must continue to be a supportive tool rather than a stand-alone remedy. In delicate rehabilitation settings, conversational systems run the risk of causing the “ELIZA effect,” in which users mistakenly believe that AI has human empathy and may form an unhealthy bond. There are still issues with evaluation: people may hide their beliefs, terrorist recidivism is uncommon, and some ideological contexts promote strategic compliance rather than real change. Data security threats are further increased by digital monitoring, necessitating robust governance and breach prevention measures. To comprehend actual effects, a long-term, independent assessment is necessary. Human-driven social reaffiliation—reestablishing connections, reestablishing trust, and reintegrating people into networks of support—is ultimately what prevents disengagement. While AI can improve analysis and direction, it is unable to mimic the interpersonal interactions that allow for long-term disengagement.
