The Social, Political and Religious Conflicts - Research Paper Example

? Sociology and Psychology of Suicide Attackers Sociology and Psychology Of Suicide Attackers The social, political and religious conflicts which are revealed by the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq and the suicide attacks by the Al Qaeda against innocent citizens and military groups has led to the labeling of the suicide attackers as insane, lunatic, evil and backward. Nonetheless there are social and psychological components, influences and pulls which describe the mind and actions of the attackers that would change the general view of the society on these individuals. Through scientific investigations, a deeper understanding of the complex social and psychological drivers of suicide attacks has been attained. This literature review gives summaries, analysis and discussion of literature on the psychological and social aspects of suicide attackers. The view of the review of literature is to present scientific research on the topic so that more light would be shed on the suicidal attackers for the increased understanding of their actions and possible mitigation. The review also presents an analysis of the research papers which are reviewed in this paper with an aim of assessing their methodology, scope, credibility, content and identification of gaps which implicate on future research on the topic. Suicide in terrorism has been defined as an exit from a condition which is existential and intolerable to the suicide bomber. This reveals that the action of a suicide bomber is motivated by the inevitable need to exit from this condition (Qirko, 2009). Moreover, the action of a suicide bomber of defined by sociologist as driven by the view of the minds of the attacker that he or she is offering a sacrifice. In suicide bomb attacks, the suicidal action of the attacker is majorly used as a weapon. The modem suicide attacks have been linked to ancient methods where self destruction was viewed as a sacrificial tool for attacking the enemy. In this sense, the sacrifice is viewed by the attacker as rewarding regardless of the damage that it inflicts on others (Peterson & Park, 2006). According to the postulates of psychologist and sociologists, suicidal attack is used as one of the homicidal killing tools (Takeda, 2010). This reflects that life can become a weapon as long as there is sufficient psychological motivation within the suicide attacker. The suicide attackers are motivated by the desire for community approval (Schmidle, 2010). These individuals believe that by participating in the terrorist attack through self sacrifice, they would be approved by the community. This community could be the terrorist network or a religious community. Moreover there is a community of terrorist admirers. It is therefore argued that the social view in the mind of the terrorist attacker is more focused at attaining the approval of the community and less on the eminent damage that would result from the attack (Arena & Arrigo, 2005). The psychological perspective of the attacker explains a situation where he or she is exploited by political and religious extremists for their ill terrorist ends. The desire to achieve community approval is the angel of exploitation where the attacker seeks for the approval through the attack without realizing that masterminds of the terror attacks are exploiting his or her psychosocial needs for community approval for their needs for religious and political vengeance (Khan and Mian, 2010). Regardless of this assertion, it has been pointed out that some attackers have a conscious psychological mind and social views of the terror attacks and participate in it because of the hatred that they have against the group that they seek to attack (Takeda, 2010). Through terror attacks, the suicide bombers seek political success for their country and social group (Silke, 2004). Most of the attacks are aimed at ensuring that the society is politically liberated. The homeland of the attackers is the only social component which persists in his or her mind during the attack. These attackers have a social insecurity that the homeland is not free or liberated from the society which the attack targets (Piazza, 2008). It is therefore the need to achieve political success of one’s society through liberation of the homeland from the group which is regarded as the enemy that the attackers are driven to conduct the attacks. Suicide attacks reflect a political situation which has been connected to a social group. Such groups include the terrorist groups which would not be part of the political authorities of their homeland but believe that it needs to be liberated from the enemy (Schmidle, 2010). It is further postulated that the thoughts for political liberation by the social group of the attackers has a psychological correlation in which the homeland may be already liberated from the so considered to be the enemy but the social group of the suicide attackers believe otherwise (Qirko, 2009). Honor and personal redemption has been described by the psychological analysts and sociologists as the logical explanation of the involvement of suicide attackers in the social ill of terrorism (Takeda, 2010). It has been observed that the individuals who engage in the suicide terror are among those who have lost their honor within the religious and social society of the terror group (Kruglanski, et al, 2009). It is therefore believed that through their participation in terrorist attacks, they would regain their honor regardless of the fact that it would lead to the loss of life. Through the participation in suicidal terror, these attackers believe that they would have a psychological and social redemption of themselves from the loss of honor and the long torture that it had put them through. Nonetheless, the personal redemption and the psychosocial fulfillment which the attackers anticipate are experienced prior to the attack or jut by the thought of the attack (Peterson & Park, 2006). Terror groups refuse to agree to subjugation and as a result use suicide attackers as tools of achieving their ill ends (Silke, 2004). The suicide bombing is therefore a psychological endeavor by the masterminds of the attacks who refuse to subjugate. This is demonstrated by the psychological influence that the terror group leaders have on the suicide attackers. They achieve this through psychological brainwashing sessions in which the suicide attackers as a tool for the attacks are subject to the influence of their leaders. During such sessions, the attackers are trained on how to bid their allegiance to the group to avoid the consequences therein. Additionally, they are trained on how to communicate with the network and keep secrets. The training sessions are conducted by psychological experts within the network who evaluates the social and psychological desires of the attackers and uses these as the tool for ensuring compliance to the directions for the attack (Khan and Mian, 2010). It is therefore argued that the involvement of the attackers in the attack would be beyond their normal control and hence there are just weapons of destruction as manufactured by the mastermind led psychological brainwashing sessions. Psychological analysts of suspects of suicide attackers reveal that these individuals have a lot of anxiety which they would not bear (Piazza, 2008). It is in this regard that these individuals seek for a process through which they would escape from the anxiety which builds within. The anxiety is said to develop from the desire for social and religious freedom of a group. Additionally, this anxiety is a conduit of the expectations which the attackers have to result from the attack which there are programmed to participate in (Kruglanski, et al, 2009). Furthermore, some attackers have been explained to have developed family related anxiety. This is because of the fear of the safety of their family in relation to their suicide attack intentions. More significantly is the fact that most attackers have been demonstrated to be involved in suicide attack because they fear for the safety of their family (Schmidle, 2010). The suicide attackers are driven by the anxiety which they develop in ensuring that their family is safe from the masterminds of the attacks. This anxiety is normally developed by the fear of the consequences which would emanate from non compliance. General societal anxiety and the fear of letting down the religious and social groups within the terrorist networks is also the motivation of the attackers (Arena & Arrigo, 2005). The explanation of the suicide attacks has also been described in relation to the social deviance which some individuals develop within the larger society (Khan and Mian, 2010). Such deviance is the justification for the converts who enter the terror groups from the target community. It has been proved that the attackers are comprised of social groups from both the attacking side and the victims of the attacks. This reveals that the social deviance which an individual develops against his or her own society is the logical explanation for the attacks which are conducted by the least expected (Takeda, 2010). The social deviance develops as a result of multiple psychological influences. These include opposition to one’s own family because he or she views that he was isolate and considered insignificant. Additionally, social molestation to an individual has been described as one of the causes of the deviant behavior of suicide attackers who participate in terror against their social group or country (Qirko, 2009). Studies conducted in Afghanistan, Palestine, Iraq, Sri Lanka and Israel reveal that suicide bombing is the weapon of choice by terrorists because it is the most effective tool for causing mayhem and fear within the target society or country (Schmidle, 2010). On the other hand, the use of the suicide bombing as a tool of terror groups has been described in relation to psychopathological phenomena (Cameron, 2001). The empirical studies which were conducted in Asian countries show that the involvement of individuals in suicide attacks occurs only when a person is faced with conditions of acute adversity and hardship (Takeda, 2010). This means that there are social and psychological factors such as suicidal tendencies, subversion and violent behavior. Other investigators reveal that suicide bombing is a tool of the weak and the poor (Qirko, 2009). This is explained by the fact that the invasion of one’s homeland by a powerful country causes hardship and diversity within the weaker society which leads to the development of suicidal tendencies in attacks. The violation of the various cultural values and codes by powerful countries by lesser powerful societies such as the case of the US versus Palestine and Iraq is demonstrated as a major social concept surrounding the suicide attacks (Kruglanski, et al, 2009). The weaker society feels that they have been humiliated by the stringer power and reciprocate through extreme measures such as suicide attacks. This is one of the reasons why the suicide attacks are considered to be weapons and tools of the weak. The terror groups which form a network of suicide attackers have been said to be conservatives of social values and they feel degraded when these are degraded by the occupation of a powerful country. Therefore the drivers for social bombing include need to preserve the cultural honor. The suicide bombers are described by psychologists and sociologists as regular and normal individuals who are driven by the social humiliation that powerful forces impart on their society into suicide bombing (Takeda, 2010). Suicide bombers express their protest and anger against a state which represses against a non state (Peterson & Park, 2006). It is through the suicide bombing tool that the terrorist groups are able to demonstrate that they are not happy with the attacks and repression which a powerful nation has over a weaker society (Piazza, 2008). It is therefore been argued that unlike the thoughts of many people, suicide attacks are not acts of insanity madness (Arena & Arrigo, 2005). Instead suicide attacks are a rational action by attackers who feel that they have been oppressed to an extent that they would not help it but respond. These attackers are pushed by the social humiliation of their society through the attacks of a powerful state against non state groups who are less likely to defend themselves adequately. It is therefore the fear which the powerful attackers have for the suicide bombing tool that makes it effective in responding to the attacks that these groups are subject to. It is obvious that the non state groups such as terrorist groups and networks would not be able to stage active rebellion against their attackers (Schmidle, 2010). In this regard, suicide bombing is described as an alternative approach to the attack of powerful states as a sign of bitter protest against their actions in the less powerful society and the related humiliation of the defenseless members of the society such as women and children (Khan and Mian, 2010). The review of literature involved various scientific publications on the suicide attackers in relation to the social and psychological component. It is however notable that many theoretical frameworks have been presented through the social and psychological views but very view empirical studies have been conducted to support the psychosocial component of the suicide attacker. Additionally, the reviewed studies have failed to put account and emphasis of the fact that terrorism and suicide attacks are very heterogeneous. Most of the studies have not considered the fact that the attackers in suicide bombings emanate from diverse societies. It is therefore evident that the studies have limited scope of the terror attacks to specific societies. This observation reveals that there are gaps of knowledge on this topic which paves way for further studies and investigations. The studies which are reviewed within the literature demonstrate that none of them has been adequately tested in a scientific and systematic manner. This is because the studies are less objective and more subjective. Moreover the studies presented in the reviewed literature reveal that the investigators were very speculative. This is revealed by the use of ancient psychoanalytic theories and hypotheses in explaining the psychological and social component of the suicide attacks. The flaws within the literature are revealed through the observation of the modern global influences on social cultural affiliations and the diversity among the suicide attackers. Therefore, the ancient psychoanalytic hypothesis of the 1920 as used by some investigators may no longer be relevant or accurate in investigating the modern terrorism and the related suicide attacks. It is evident that the innate factors such as developmental psychological influences have not been pried deeply into by the reviewed literature. Psychological influences such as temperament and cognition were not adequately covered in the investigation of the psychology of suicide attacks. Moreover the social pulls such as the environment influence by others and group dynamics have not been covered effectively. Instead, the reviewed studies focused on the external social and psychological influences on the suicide attackers. The political factors of societies were also reflected upon by the studies which show a gap in the focus of the psychological aspects of suicide bombing especially the inner influences on the attackers. This implies that future research on the topic should focus on the innate factors that influence the behavior of attackers and the implications of these factors in the prevention and mitigation of these attacks. Nonetheless, it is notable that the reviewed literature has provided rich knowledge on the psychological and social motivations for suicide bombing. The literature is significant on the views of the global society on the attackers. This is due to the psychological and social understanding of the suicide terrorism which is achieved through these investigation and studies. References Arena, M. P., & Arrigo, B. A. (2005). Social psychology, terrorism, and identity: a preliminary re-examination of theory, culture, self, and society. Behavioral Sciences & The Law, 23(4), 485-506 Cameron, A. (2001). Another word for terrorist? not psychopath. Macleans, 114(39), 33 Khan, M. M., & Mian, A. I. (2010). ‘The one truly serious philosophical problem’: Ethical aspects of suicide. International Review Of Psychiatry, 22(3), 288-293 Kruglanski, A. W., Chen, X., Dechesne, M., Fishman, S., & Orehek, E. (2009). Fully Committed: Suicide Bombers' Motivation and the Quest for Personal Significance. Political Psychology, 30(3), 331-357 Peterson, C., & Park, N. (2006). A Positive Psychology Perspective on Post-9/11 Security. Basic & Applied Social Psychology, 28(4), 357-361. Piazza, J. A. (2008). A Supply-Side View of Suicide Terrorism: A Cross-National Study. Journal Of Politics, 70(1), 28-39. Qirko, H. N. (2009). Altruism In Suicide Terror Organizations. Zygon: Journal Of Religion & Science, 44(2), 289-322 Schmidle, R. E. (2010). Positioning Theory and Terrorist Networks. Journal For The Theory Of Social Behavior, 40(1), 65-78 Silke, A. (2004). Courage in dark places: Reflections on terrorist psychology. Social Research, 71(1), 177-198 Takeda, A. (2010). Suicide bombers in Western literature: demythologizing a mythic discourse. Contemporary Justice Review, 13(4), 455-475 Read More