| Since the bombing of the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, there
has been much curiosity about the make-up of a suicide bomber or terrorist.
Until recently there has been virtually no interest in Middle Eastern
psychology except by international scholars, sociologists, psychoanalysts,
psychohistorians, and others studying the region. Suddenly, everyone is
obsessed. Americans want to understand the dark and mysterious enigma behind
the September 11th suicide missions and are desperately trying to make sense
of what Westerners typically perceive as "a twisted mind." Bookstores and
newspaper and magazine stands can hardly keep Islamic material on their
shelves, especially the Koran or anything having to do with the Middle East.
What type of person wants to commit suicide for a cause? Do Muslims really
believe they will die heroes and be greeted in Paradise by 72 virgins? What
group fantasies surround their hallucinatory ties to Allah? What is it in
their childrearing practices that link aggressive leaders to cruelty,
sadism, and paranoia? People are asking questions such as: "If martyrdom is
so glorious, why is bin Laden in hiding?" or "Why isn't there a ‘fatwa’
against Osama bin Laden for blasphemy against Islam?” (Los Angeles Times,
October 4, 2001). Because there are no simple answers, we must go beyond the
conventional, the obvious, and the observable to explain the motivational
forces in history. Psychohistory ventures further into the political,
social, and psychocultural aspects of history and reviews such intrapsychic
unconscious motivations as primitive defenses, unresolved oedipal conflicts,
and other psychodynamics. In the massive media coverage following the
killing of more than 3,000 people, there was little mention of why the
terrorists felt compelled to kill Americans. That the terrorists were
"evil," as characterized by President Bush, seemed insufficient to satisfy
our curiosity as to their motives. If we are to end terrorism, it would be
useful to delve into what makes a terrorist and what developmental life
histories terrorists share. This can help us gain a sense of why Islamic
terrorists see American civilians as "Satans," and praise their sons for
becoming suicide bombers.
Since the WTC attack, I have been overwhelmed with material from people,
offering psychoanalytic interpretations. Are we witnessing the obsessive
re-staging of the death of Osama bin Laden’s father, who was killed in the
United States when Osama was ten years old? Is bin Laden avenging the death
of his father? Does he identify with those he sends to their death as a way
of recovering the lost object? Is the crashing into the World Trade Center
symbolic of killing off the “needy” and materialistic split-off, repressed
part of the terrorists? Is crashing into the skyscraper a symbol of the
penis penetrating and destroying the symbolic “America” for its sexual
freedom?
Like many psychohistorians, Jay Lifton (Los Angeles Times, 12 September
2001) is still trying to figure out how a group can be taken over by a cause
and pulled into an "all or nothing commitment." Alluding to his theory of
Totalism, he likens the terrorists to adolescents who are prone to find
altruism through rigid fanaticism, often guided by a strong leader. Robins
and Post in Political Paranoia (1997) view terrorist acts as a perverse way
of connecting to the world. They maintain that people are fueled by paranoid
delusional leaders and glom onto a piece of reality to “justify” their
causes — e.g., the enviable or “evil” American. Paranoids have enemies; they
do not have rivals or adversaries. Enemies are not to be defeated or
compromised, but destroyed. People who are paranoid tend to project their
hatred and hostility onto others. In the case of Osama bin Laden, one might
rephrase this distorted thinking to: "My father was killed in an airplane
crash in the United States when I was ten years old; therefore the United
States is evil, and I must destroy her.” What could constitute a more
omnipotent fantasy than crashing into the World Trade Center?
Adam Robinson has written the best psychologically oriented biography to
date called Bin Laden: Behind the Mask of the Terrorist and he says OBL
was10 years olds when his father died in a helicopter crash in the desert
(54). OBL's eldest half brother also died in a plane crash, I believe though
it was an ultralight type plane, San Antonio, later on in his teens.
Not all members of a given group—in this case, followers of Islam and those
who live in the Middle East—behave in a manner consistent with that of
suicide bombers. Still, one can speculate and make some broad
generalizations while remaining keenly aware of their limitations. This
paper discusses the suicide bomber from a mythological, psychohistorical,
and psychoanalytic perspective as an extension of an age-old conflict.
Expressions of interlocking dynamics and configurations are communicated
through such primitive defenses as shame, fear of dependency, unresolved
oedipal issues, omnipotent denial, and magical thinking. I attribute the
underlying conflicts in Islam as having their origins in identification with
the absent father, a syndrome compatible with the collective borderline
personality.
Psychohistory and the Borderline Personality
Psychohistory offers two important venues to explore as we delve further
into the mind of the suicide bomber and its linkage to terrorism. First is
the role psychohistory plays in helping us understand cultural patterns
handed down from generation to generation, embedded in the very core of the
group’s identity as expressed through mythology, ideology, religion,
childrearing practices, the treatment of women—ongoing behaviors and
characteristics strikingly similar to borderline organization. Second is the
exploration of the role that group-fantasies play and the way they are
enacted through identification with group leaders who best play out the
group’s myths, ideology, and omnipotent fantasies. These venues can best be
understood by describing the borderline personality, not so much to assign a
“diagnosis” but to understand how the architecture of a culture can shape
certain personality types. If we are to comprehend the mind of a suicide
bomber and terrorism as a whole we must start with a well-founded basic
premise, in this case shared traits of the suicide bomber and the borderline
personality.
I first ventured into psychohistory by delving into the historical,
mythological, psychological, and religious past of the Middle East,
observing the political interaction between the Arabs and the Jews as a
"dance." I felt compelled to understand what it is that bonds/binds
individuals or groups in ongoing, circular, never-ending battles whereby
conflict resolution becomes virtually impossible. There are two recurring
myths in the Bible and the Koran that have significance in fueling the
Arab–Israeli conflict. The first myth is the belief that Jews are God's
"chosen people" (a narcissistic diagnosis), and the second that the Arabs
are an "orphan" society, the "abandoned" children of God (a borderline
diagnosis). The latter can be viewed as a reenactment of the Biblical
experience of abandonment—Ishmael abandoned in the desert—indicating a
borderline condition with its shame components. From these mythic origins,
age-old sentiments and passions have persisted and continually resurface,
giving rise to many shared collective group-fantasies.
The Arab–Israeli conflict also has striking similarities to marital
discord between narcissistic and borderline personalities that I have
observed in my clinical practice. This confluence of psychoanalysis and
psychohistory is treated in "The Arab-Israeli Conflict: A Psychoanalytic
Study" (Lachkar, 1983); The Narcissistic/Borderline Couple: A Psychoanalytic
Perspective on Marital Treatment (Lachkar, 1992); and The Many Faces of
Abuse: Treating the Emotional Abuse of High-Functioning Women (Lachkar,
1998).
Where do culture and pathology lie? Where do the boundaries between
aggression, cruelty, and cultural tradition interface? What are the forces
mutual to individual psychopathology and political relationships (Lachkar,
1993)? Psychohistorians cannot ignore the psychodynamic aspects of character
and culture.
The salient characteristics of a terrorist or a suicide bomber can best
be examined within the matrix of the borderline personality. Societies that
are obsessed with religion, death, threat of annihilation, or the means to
ensure afterlife cannot tolerate the uniqueness or difference of others and
share common emotional traits with borderline personalities. More
specifically, one must explain the on-going, painful, never-ending
destructive behaviors that persist without ever reaching any conflict
resolution. Islam and Islamic childrearing attempts to repudiate all aspects
of dependency and perceives all personal desires, needs, and wishes as
tantamount to weakness and failure. This is akin to borderline patients who
grow up believing their needs are dangerous and resort to acting them out
impulsively and irrationally. Because borderlines are so far removed from
their real needs, they lack the impulse control and self-regulatory
mechanisms to observe situations and make rational judgments.
Borderlines are dominated by shame/blame defenses, have defective bonding
and dependency needs, are extremely envious, and will retaliate at any cost.
They are lacking in impulse control, have poor reality testing, and impaired
judgments. Because of their impaired ego structure, they fail to learn from
experience and will repeat the same mistakes again and again. The borderline
suffers from profound fears of abandonment and annihilation, as well as
persecutory anxieties. They do not have a sense of a real self, are heavily
invested and fused with their objects, and have never reached the
developmental stage of separation–individuation. Because they have never
separated from mother’s body, they remain forever attached to the
allegorical world of lost mothers, lost fathers, and abandoned babies. When
their emotional world is threatened or when they feel betrayed, they will
respond with retaliatory responses, even at the expense of others or by the
sacrifice of the self.
One of the most striking features is the borderline’s tendency to
distort, manipulate, and misperceive reality. When they do something “bad,”
they claim that something bad was done to them. When they lie, they claim
others have lied to them, consistently believing their lies are the truth
and forever perceiving themselves as victims. Borderlines have developed a
magnificent false self that belies or veils the true self. Because they lack
a real self, they must insert an imaginary one in order to prevent the
sensation of emptiness. Their splitting mechanism and tendency to project
blame keep them trapped in a state of victimization (all good is kept
within, all bad projected without).
These notions are essential to the arguments in this paper, because the
ties between shame and dependency are at variance with issues around the
Oedipal level of development (Levi, 2001). Let us take a look a few of these
dynamics.
Envy is one of the most dominant features of the borderline personality. It
is destructive in nature and is considered to be the most primitive and
fundamental emotion. Its most glaring characteristic is the intent to
destroy that which is envied and therefore is needed and missed (unlike
jealousy). Another dominant dynamic is shame. Shame is a matter between the
person and the group. It is the pre-occupation with what others think, while
guilt is primarily a matter between a person and his conscience. Many
scholars have referred to Asian and Middle Eastern societies as shame
cultures. Those who fail to comply with the group’s ideologies are ousted
from the group as “infidels.” In shame societies there is an exaggerated
tendency for people to experience others as deliberately inflicting
punishment on them. Shame is persecutory in nature and is associated with
isolation and being abandoned or annihilated by the group, tribe, or
society.
Finally, the discussion of omnipotence and dependency is important in
this analysis. Children whose formative years are deficient in maternal
care-taking grow up never learning how to develop healthy dependency needs.
Omnipotence is the flip side of dependency. To ward off intolerable feelings
of smallness and helplessness, one develops a grandiose, omnipotent self. It
is often the needy, neglected dependent child who grows up with an
omnipotent self and projects the needy self onto others, making them the
scapegoats. “It is you that is the needy one, not me!” This is most
confusing, but most relevant to our topic. The bitter paradox is that the
more one “needs,” the more one desires to destroy the needed object.
“My needs are disgusting so I will project them onto you and then destroy
you!” In understanding the tensions in the Middle East within this context,
the object of desire also becomes the object of frustration and hatred.
Since the early mind cannot absorb the state of ambivalence, the child
splits and projects the hatred part. For instance, father becomes both the
object of love and hatred. All children “love” and have need for the father,
but when he is unavailable as a defense he becomes the object of
frustration.
This paper holds the position that both parents are responsible for the
child’s development. One cannot solely blame women for all the abuse and
wrongdoing toward children and perpetuation of violence from generation to
generation. It also holds that the Oedipus complex is universal and that all
children go through the similar states of development as prescribed by
Western psychologists. Ideally, the mother provides the nurturing and
protective capacity while the father helps the child separate and
individuate. In the Winnicottian sense, it is the father who provides the
“holding environment” and the “transitional space” to help wean the child
away from mother to the outer world (Winnicott (1965). But if the father is
absent, or if the holding environment is damaged or defected, the child’s
momentum to drive forward during crucial phases of the separation process
becomes thwarted. In addition, the proclivity toward borderline organization
is greatly increased. It is noteworthy that children raised in neglectful,
abusive, traumatic environments grow up with defective bonding relations and
stay forever connected to the “Mother of Pain,” forming relational bonds
that are destructive and painful (traumatic bonding). This takes us to the
heart of the matter. As horrific as the pain is, it is preferable to a black
hole (Grotstein, 1990). The emptiness is the black hole, the epicenter of
the conflict. Individuals who grow up never having a sense of identity turn
to an idea, an ideology, or a belief — anything that gives them some
semblance of belonging. “At least I know I am alive. I feel excited. I have
meaning and purpose to my life. Better to be an addict, a killer, a rapist,
a terrorist, than to vanish into the abyss!”
In an interview, a suicide bomber was asked what his attraction to
martyrdom was:
Someone bent on martyrdom becomes immune to the material pull. We get to
meet the Prophet and his companions, Inshallah! We were floating, swimming
in the feeling that we were about to enter eternity. We had no doubts. We
made an oath on the Koran, in the presence of Allah—a pledge not to waiver .
. . . it’s done for “Allah’s sake, hurts less than a gnat’s bite!” (Nasra
Hassan, 2001)
In terrorist cults, it is considered a great honor not only to destroy
the enemy but to make him fearful. These regressed groups share one thing in
common: they all need a scapegoat, someone to project their hatred and rage
onto, someone to blame for all their shortcomings. Just as borderline male
patients cannot “love” and use sex as the replacement for love, terrorists
use fear as the replacement for human bonding. In essence, both the
borderline and the terrorist think they have separated from mother’s body,
but they are forever stuck living emotionally in utero.
The Role of Men and Women in the Islamic World
The patriarchal perspective of Arab society means that females are
relegated to a low position in all aspects of their existence, including
their private lives.
Women in fundamentalist Islam societies have no rights, no vote, and very
low self-esteem. Fidelity is expected of the woman but not of the man. She
learns to tolerate her lot in painful silence, and when she does not obey
she runs the risk of her husband divorcing her or taking on a second wife (Altorki,
1986, pg. 63). Under the guise of religion or traditionalism, aggressive
group leaders can play out the group’s most heinous crimes and vicious
fantasies against women. The Koran supports women being submissive to men.
Religion and culture provide permission for men to act out their cruelest
and most vicious fantasies against women.
Women are given no respect by men, who encourage their sons to have the
same low opinion of women. Men, ostensibly at least, are given the job of
guiding the future participants in society—their sons. While women actually
have most of the responsibility for raising both male and female children,
they are accorded no respect or gratitude for taking on this role. Rather,
they are blamed for the ills of society because of what men regard as their
inherently evil nature. The 1996 will of Mohammed Atta, the apparent
ringleader of the terrorists of the World Trade Center bombings, stipulated
that he did not want any pregnant women or unclean people at his funeral,
and sternly warned against women being present at his graveside. In
addition, he wrote that that he did not want to be buried next to a woman.
Atta's will directly reflects the deep-rooted misogyny within Islam, and all
the contempt and rage embodied within the society (Glazov, CNN, September
2001). Women in Arab fundamentalist societies have little hope of proving
themselves worthy of respect and admiration by their own actions. Thus, a
suicide bomber offspring becomes the perfect instrument to redeem women’s
status in society.
According to Lloyd deMause (this issue), the roots of terrorism are
inextricably linked to childrearing practices. DeMause offers a chilling
account of life in Islamic fundamentalist societies filled with violence,
cruelty, and sexual exploitation of children. These are familiar themes in
countries that do not stress the importance of healthy child development.
Osama bin Laden has himself made reference to much obvious sex abuse
language. In a propaganda video, he states, "To all the mujahedin, your
brothers in Palestine are waiting for you; it's time to penetrate America
and Israel and hit them where it hurts most" (CNN, Sept. 28, 2001).
According to Altorki (1986, p. 61), girls and boys are separated before
puberty. Boys supposedly fall under their father’s supervision after they
are seven years of age. However, since fathers generally are absent for long
periods, both male and female children are actually brought up in the
women’s living quarters, which men visit only rarely. Because day-to-day
supervision of sons falls to the mother, the father becomes a nominal
figure. Not only are they absent a great deal, they are basically
emotionally unavailable because of the polygamist structure of Islamic
society in which a man has several wives and many children (like Bin
Landen’s father). Neglect by the father and the limited ability of the
mother to do much more than carry out the father’s edicts contribute to the
child’s inability to master and triumph over oedipal rivals. If one cannot
“master the rival,” the alternative is to comply and submit or compete and
destroy. Unleashed aggression at early ages arouses conflicts between
omnipotence and self-subjugation—unremitting compliance with and submission
to Allah.
DeMause concludes it is not surprising that mentally and physically
mutilated women make less than ideal mothers and inflict their own miseries
upon their children. This helps perpetuate the circle of violence and
cruelty around which the society functions. The girl's sexuality is so hated
that when she is five or so the women grab her, pin her down, and chop off
her clitoris and often her labia with a razor blade or piece of glass,
ignoring her agony and her screams for help. This is done because her
clitoris is considered "dirty, ugly, and poisonous..." It is written in the
Koran that the evil clitoris will grow and hang, making men impotent and
killing children (Burstyn, 1995, p.12). Men grow up unable to cope with
their own sexuality. For example, one Taliban prisoner drew a picture of a
beautiful woman on a tropical beach and then shortly after used a black pen
to strike hundreds of angry Xs through her face (Los Angeles Times, November
18, 2001, p. A15) |
One might conclude that violence toward women is rooted in
repressed envy — emanating from feeling threatened and persecuted — enacted by
adult men deprived of maternal affection, fueling sadistic ties with
victimized women. No wonder American and Israeli women must be destroyed.
And no wonder that the West becomes the “clitorisland” of self-indulgence
and pleasure, a lifestyle highly objectionable to the Arab world. Most of
the Taliban, who, like bin Laden, are wealthy enough to have had contact
with the West, were shocked by the personal freedoms, the promiscuity, and
the affluence of the average American citizen. As deMause points out, Osama
bin Laden himself "while in college frequented flashy nightclubs, casinos
and bars [and] was a drinker and womanizer." However, he soon felt severe
guilt for his sins, and joined the extreme fundamentalist movement, calling
for the killing Westerners for their freedoms and their sinful enticements
of Muslims. DeMause confirms that turning to terrorism has nothing to do
with gaining wealth, but stems from a childhood which sees personal needs
and pleasures as all sinful.
Much to their surprise, on November 16, 2001, the American people
witnessed the first stirrings of freedom and liberty among the men and women
in Afghanistan. Men waited in line to shave their beards and woman
frantically ripped off their burkas and put on make-up after the Northern
Alliance conquered and took over Kabul (Los Angeles Times, 17 November
2001). The beginnings of a restoration of national pride and self-identity
started to emerge as women were released from repression and given back some
of their personal freedom.
Group Psychology and Group Leaders
Individuals dominated by primitive defenses often form a trance
relationship or an intense identification with a charismatic leader who best
offers the promise to: (1) play out the group’s mythological fantasies, and
(2) play out the group’s aggression. Aggression is addictive, exciting, and
people get hooked (Gay, 1986). Aggression and cruelty reinforce the
libidinal ties in groups, as long as there are outsiders
(enemies/scapegoats) to blame and onto whom to project. When one is
vulnerable, one is more inclined to identify with a leader who offers any
semblance of bonding (Lachkar, 1993)
Often these charismatic leaders are paranoid, schizophrenic, and
pathologically disturbed. Osama bin Laden, for example, is a pathological
borderline in complicity with the group's dysfunctionality. That one part of
the mind completely escapes reality accounts for how nations choose violent
leaders who take young men to suicidal wars. Although many have referred to
Islamic leaders as narcissistic, I propose that the borderline personality
is more suitable for understanding Islamic cultural patterns. In The
Emotional Life of Nations (2002), deMause refers to “macho politicians” as
“Phallic Leaders” such as those with dominant narcissistic personalities
characterized by intense self-involvement and grandiosity. Richard Nixon,
Lyndon Johnson, John F. Kennedy all shared the desire for admiration and
shrank in the face of humiliation, shame, and defeat. There was a concern
for what others think. Hitler and Napoleon were flaming narcissists, driven
by a passion to conquer and be admired. At least the narcissist knows he’s
lying, whereas the borderline lives and becomes the lie since he is
convinced that what he is saying is the truth.
Unlike American and European narcissistic leaders, borderline Arab
leaders assert their powers not to win adulation or admiration but to
destroy the infidels. How many narcissists wear live in a cave with four
wives and fifteen children and no running water like Osama bin Laden, who
certainly does not dress to impress? His real mission is to wage a holy war,
a jihad to keep infidels in check and ensure they do not infect or
contaminate others with spillage from their toxic pleasures and freedom.
Groups form identification with leaders who know how to play out the
group’s ideologies, mythologies, and collective group-fantasies. Themes such
as “Drive the Jews into the Sea,” “Return to the Land of Milk and Honey,”
Land for Peace,” and “Destroy America” are all too familiar. When tensions
surge, members resort to shame/blame, fight/flight, and scapegoating. The
group searches for an enemy and a messiah who will save the group from
calamity. Leaders who are sadistic and cruel can at times appear benevolent
and kind. Bin Laden, for example, offers the hope and promise that if
Muslims remain faithful to their prayers, they will rise, overcome, and be
rewarded in heaven. Osama bin Laden is considered the world’s foremost
terrorist. For many abandoned “orphans” he has become the envoy, the “chosen
one,” the one who best meets and matches the group’s delusional fantasies:
“Our terrorism is good and yours is bad” (Osama bin laden, CNN News, 14
November 2001). Considering the abandoned “orphan” theme, one might suggest
that Arabs turn to borderline paranoid leaders who play out and concretize
the group’s mythology and collective delusional fantasies, giving meaning to
the "meaninglessness.” These leaders form a powerful and intimate connection
with the group's most passionate archaic sentiments and beliefs — i.e., "If
I pray five times a day, kill myself, sacrifice my needs/desires, I will be
loved by Allah."
I have elsewhere discussed Islam as being an “orphan,” “fatherless”
society (Lachkar, 1983, 1993, 1994 ), and the Koran makes many references to
orphans. To escape the abandoned orphan syndrome, the only solution is to
become a Shahid, a martyr, a terrorist, or a suicide bomber—one who dies in
the holy war against the infidels. Even in this desire, the father is
all-important. Devote Muslims speak of Allah in their prayers as they
hallucinate the resurrection of the absent father. Piven (2001, p. 143)
summarizes the linkage between religion and societies that experience trauma
and discord originating in unresolved oedipal strivings. This concept can be
very puzzling. How can one idealize and love Allah and want to destroy him
at the same time? Bin Laden is a good example. He both loves and hates his
father, but because his father was not there when he needed him, the love
was transferred onto an idealized father, Allah, and the hatred projected
onto the Americans. “I love Allah. It is not I who hate him; it is the
Americans, the infidels.” In this way he protects himself from the repressed
hatred and becomes the fanatic defender of the faith. The psychohistorical
explanation lies within the concept of projective identification, and here
it is in its finest form. To maintain idealized love, one must eradicate
one’s most unwanted parts. Women, children, and America become obvious
targets. In the final analysis we might conclude that terrorists are looking
for one thing: love from Allah to redeem them from their own needy and
shameful selves.
It is not just a coincidence that many leaders in the Muslim world have
been orphaned (Lachkar, 1983, 1993). It is not surprising to see how many
impoverished Moslems are inclined to over-identify with Islamic “orphan”
leaders, those who are best able to play out their collectively shared
group-fantasies. Muhammad, the Prophet, was himself an orphan, as are such
imperious leaders as Saddam Hussein, Yasir Arafat, and bin Laden. Certainly
not all Arabs and Jews adhere to these myths, but the ones who do are more
likely to form identification with the leaders who concretize their
mythology. Group members perceive their leaders as being omnipotent,
all-powerful, idealistic, messianic saviors, and themselves as inadequate
and undeserving.
Terrorists such as those involved in the WTC bombing form emotional bonds
generated by certain group myths—that by surrendering and giving their lives
to a cause they will be saved by a newly-found "messianic daddy." These
regressive groups fuse with their leaders and display many collective
defensive operations (shame, blame, magical thinking, splitting, omnipotent
denial, projection, and projective identification) peculiar to the
borderline personality disorder. Typically, these defenses serve to distort
one's perspective of reality, and generate feelings and passions that are in
continual conflict and opposition. This has a parallel in gang mentality,
whereby gang leaders crystallize into paternal leaders who give meaning to
the gang's existence though violence, killing, and other acts of aggression.
Martyrdom and the Search for Love
The suicide bomber is a synthesized version of a fanatic leader. They are
walking time bombs, symbols of an entire sexually repressed society that
repudiates women and any semblance of freedom, which is felt to be a
national threat. The suicide bomber yearns to return to the fertile breast,
the land where mommy and baby were once one, a revisit to the lost Biblical
maternal figures.
The conflicts that occur in Islamic societies arise from the absence of
the father. Because he is both inhibiting and unavailable, the child becomes
over-stimulated by the presence of the mother. The more loving she is, the
harder it is for the child to inhibit his sexual drives. According to Lakov
Levi (personal communication, October 2001), an Israeli archeologist and
psychohistorian, when a child is injured or rejected at the oedipal level he
feels guilty and interprets the injury or the abandonment as a punishment
for his own sexuality. All his life he will feel compelled to punish and
blame others for his unconfined impulses. Americans, because of their
culture of sexual freedom and permissiveness, become the perfect targets for
the acting out of the punishment. The woman, who in the biblical Eden had
been the target of man’s lust, is now seen as the main culprit and the
object of hatred for his own repressed drives and burning desires.
DeMause examines Palestinian terrorist acts as having their underlying
motivation on the lifelong search for love. The pushing of the button brings
ecstatic thoughts and smiles to the faces of suicide bombers and their proud
families. Regardless, they all share one thing in common, the desire to die,
to join with Allah, and get the love they never had.
These horrifying suicide bombing attacks continue to mount. A strong
current of encouragement for suicidal killings runs throughout areas of the
Middle East and in other countries where Islam is practiced. Children learn
at a very young age that to die a martyr and a hero is the highest honor:
“It is in the terror-filled homes—not just later in the terrorist training
camps—that they first learn to be martyrs and to die for Allah” (deMause,
this issue). As early as kindergarten, children in Gaza and the West Bank
prance around in suicide bomber garb. Pictures of suicide bombers are
proudly displayed on walls, and school textbooks at every level praise young
men who elect to become a “shahid,” a martyr for the cause of Palestine and
Islam. A current hit movie in Cairo that is receiving enthusiastic applause
from audiences, "Friends or Business," offers a sympathetic portrayal of a
Palestinian suicide bomber. The plot revolves around the intentional murder
of innocent Palestinian children by brutal Israel soldiers. This inspires
the young Egyptian hero of the film to decide he must make the ultimate
sacrifice. In the end, he blows himself up and also kills the Israeli
soldiers—to the wild cheers of the crowds who are seeing the film (Nasra
Hassan, 2001). Hassan also describes the effect of one well-known suicide
bomber on his young peers:
On the evening of June 1, the town of Kalkilya was celebrating a wedding.
Among the well-wishers was a shy looking young man, dressed in black: Sayeed
Hotari. A few hours after the wedding, Hotari strapped a belt of dynamite to
his waist. He walked up to a crowded Tel Aviv disco, and blew himself up. It
was the worst terrorist attack in Israel in more than five years. Twenty-one
Israelis, most of them teenagers, were killed. The next day, Hotari's family
received congratulations from the residents of Kalkilya. "I feel no regret
for my son's death," his father said. "I hope all Palestinian men will do
the same." Today, a Hero in Death in Kalkilya, Sayeed Hotari is a legend.
His young picture is everywhere and every young boy knows what he did. Asked
whether he wanted to be like Hotari, one boy in the market replied, "Yes,
because he's a hero."
To die a martyr is the highest form of achievement in Islamic countries.
Osama bin Laden is the idealized leader of a borderline society, and the
suicide bomber is his messenger. This is a regression to a borderline state;
because the borderlines never had the "real" father, only the absent one,
they conjure up an imaginary companion or “idealized” father like Allah to
pray with five times per day.
From childhood, Islamic terrorists have been taught that to kill
themselves —and others — is a worthy goal and that personal pleasures and
freedoms are selfish. They learn to be martyrs and want to die for Allah:
“’I'm going to meet the Lord of the universe.” All imagine they would still
be around to watch their parents be sorry they had killed themselves. “Every
time my father sees my photo, he'll cry.” This is an obvious dialogue with
the long-lost father object, a severe yearning for contact. The cries are
for the love they had missed all their lives.
Suicide bombers are not always lonely and depressed, as might be
imagined, but are indoctrinated in their cause (Goode, 12 September 2001).
Neither are they always naïve and innocent (Trousan, 20 September 2001). The
recent WTC attacks indicate there are no clear rules or stereotypical
patterns. The men who executed these attacks were skilled, highly trained,
educated, and sophisticated. In a September 27 interview, CBS correspondent
Bob Simon talked with a psychologist and a psychiatrist from Israel and
Palestine who were experienced with terrorists. They reported that rather
than being psychotic, terrorists are rather shy, introverted people who want
to be idols and heroes—martyrs to religion and cause. As Kenneth Adams
reports (23 September 2001), "the fear of sex in the here and now, with
visions of sugar plums dancing in Paradise, is no doubt instilled by the
rule of the gynarchy during childhood.”
A Cult-Like Mentality
The events of September 11 upset the conventional wisdom on suicide
bombing and martyrdom. "Having analyzed the phenomenon in the Middle East,
the intelligence community had decided that suicide attacks were a form of
terrorism that could not easily be exported from Palestine," says Brian
Jenkins, former member of the Presidential Commission on Airline Safety and
senior analyst at the Rand Institute. As investigators learn more about Al
Qaeda’s operations on U.S. soil, a perplexing question remains: How could
terrorists on a suicide mission live among us for so long and not abandon
their resolve? The answer, some experts say, is that Al Qaeda is not a
militant religious group but a cult. “Of course, Al Qaeda has no more to do
with Islam than Jim Jones had to do with Christianity. And it is no more a
bona fide terrorist organization than was Charles Manson’s family. It’s a
charismatic psychopath’s bid for immortality via a macabre enactment of his
paranoid fantasies” (Los Angeles Times, 29 November 2001).
The Al Qaeda Handbook (2001) may provide clues to the migration of suicide
terrorism to America. A how-to manual for members of the terrorist
organization, the book sheds light on the psyche of the Al Qaeda terrorist,
and paints a picture of a religious cult headed by charismatic leader Osama
bin Laden.
"The manual outlines how to perform a variety of terrorist acts,
including assassination, poisoning, and torture," explains Jerrold Post, a
professor of political psychology at George Washington University. "But
above all, I would say that the manual is a good example of how a cult
mentality can hijack and manipulate legitimate religious beliefs and turn
them into fanatical tenets. The text reveals an organization that follows a
very peculiar and extreme kind of Islam and that does not hesitate one bit
to depart from Islamic teachings to pursue its own interests" (Pyschohistory
Internet Discussion Group, October 2001).
Post testified as an expert witness in the New York City terrorist trial
surrounding the first round of bombings at the World Trade Center several
years ago and has compiled detailed psychological profiles of dozens of
jailed terrorists in the Middle East. "It's the fitting of the fragmented
persona of a true believer into a group identity that benefits the
organization. Once that's in place, the terrorist can be aimed like a
missile," Post says.
Paulo Pontoniere (2001), a correspondent for Italy's leading news weekly,
L'Espresso, outlined “practical” terms in the Al Qaeda manual on terrorism
that repeatedly provide religious and ideological justification for actions
taken by suicide bombers—actions that many Muslims would find profane. For
example, lesson eight in the manual directs the Al Qaeda member operating
undercover to go to great lengths to avoid an Islamic appearance. Lesson 11
exempts him from having to fulfill his Muslim duties, such as praying,
fasting, and doing good deeds. "The text implies that if these violations
are carried out for the greatness of Allah, they are then permitted," Post
says. Acts such as torture, mass murder, and killing one's fellow
members—which are all specifically and explicitly forbidden by the Koran—are
explained in practical terms, but paradoxically the handbook identifies
sacred readings to refer to during each heinous activity. "Of course, very
few Muslims would agree with this zealous interpretation of Islam," Post
says. "Jihad is a word which literally means to struggle for the cause of
religion. For a Muslim, the struggle means striving to be a better person,
donating money to the poor, fulfilling obligations toward the faith and, in
extreme cases, fighting in defense of Islam." According to the standards of
an Al Qaeda militant, a Muslim must never be the aggressor; a Muslim must
fight only those who fight him, and women, children and the elderly should
be spared the duress of war. Ultimately, the handbook shows that Al Qaeda
could pose a threat to Islam itself if it prevails.
The most disturbing aspect about suicide bombers is how innocent they
look, and how calm the terrorists in Al Queda appear. With their compliance,
they fit the profile of the “'true believer,' an individual whose low
self-esteem and confusion push him to seek refuge within a charismatic mass
movement." Post reminds us that the role of Al Qaeda members is to brainwash
and encourage members to subordinate their individual wills to the
charismatic power of the group's leader, someone like Osama bin Laden.
Young or old, naïve or experienced, Islamic terrorists share a common
trait: the utter conviction that their acts will be rewarded and not
regarded as evil but heroic. They are convinced that America is a "cancer"
metastasizing in the body of Islam. The only cure is eradication. A typical
comment: "We will destroy American cities piece by piece because your
lifestyle is so objectionable to us.” Palestinian television openly urges
children to become a shahid, a martyr for the cause of Palestine and Islam (Nirenstein,
2001).
Suicide bombers share many of the group dynamics of gang members. They
are highly traumatized children who have been abandoned, have had severe
losses, have been betrayed, and have been raised by unavailable or absent
caretakers (alcoholic, abusive or violent parents). They grow up with
endless, relentless rage, shame, and humiliation. Their most dominant
feature is the desire to retaliate, get even, find a scapegoat (the police,
a school principal, a teacher, a vulnerable new kid in the block, a victim
on whom to project their most vulnerable parts.
Suicide bombers are not a far cry from gang members who turn to others to
project their anger, rage, and pain into hostile aggression. This inability
to developmentally evolve, to mourn, to come to terms with guilt, or to make
reparations compels them to continually search for external enemies on which
to project their hatred. |
