Terror and Trauma: What are the effects?

Dear Readers,

I highly recommend reading Why does terrorism fascinate me? Because of the terror in my past. by Jessica Stern in its entirety.

It's an extremely powerful piece, where this expert on terrorism examines the trauma effect of her rape as a child and how that lead to her being emotionally numb enough to examine terrorism. She has an important moment of self-realization, that her childhood experience is something she must examine and understand, otherwise she will suffer from numbness and disconnectedness to the terror part of terrorism.

She also begins to examine the relationship between childhood trauma and adult violence and terrorism. Her rapist had been abused by a priest as a boy, and his own trauma led to a lifetime of destroying the lives of others.

She links that to potential childhood trauma among extremists and wonders at what young experience terrorists or other violent people may have had that lead to their current existence.

I think it is extremely important to examine the human explanations, and to bravely examine our own lives, much like this author. I think we also greatly underestimate the fact that in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc, we're dealing with people who have led traumatized existences, and therefore they will behave in ways we don't expect. Iraqis have lived through 3 wars in their lifetimes. Afghanistan has lived under war and the Taliban. Poverty does not necessarily mean crime, but extreme poverty can lead to a difficulty in developing healthy emotional responses.

Some choice quotes:

"I wasn't aware that I was afraid. After a series of traumas, one can lose the capacity to feel fear appropriately."

"She (the psychologist) suggested that I might have post-traumatic stress disorder. I did not believe it."

"I felt compelled to answer questions I had spent my professional life asking about terrorists: What happened to the boy who grew up to become my rapist? Was there anything in his life story that might explain, at least in part, why he would want or need to hurt us? What happened to him afterward?"

"Is there a link between possible abuse and alienation and vulnerability to terrorist recruitment? Could terrorism sometimes reflect a kind of perverse post-traumatic evolution?"

A very interesting and powerful article. I recommend reading it. I would like to hear your thoughts.

Best,
Alena

Counterterrorism: Communities and Terror

Dear readers,

There are many ways to approach counter-terrorism. The challenge is like that of David and Golliath--or Odysseus and the Cyclops. The terrorists are small, careful, smart, desperate and creative. Governments are large, lumbering, filled with internal bureaucratic issues. And, you might note, Golliath and Odysseus did not fare well--mostly due to my lack of good imagination to come up with a better parallel. :)

Two striking stories about extremist terrorist groups with ties to Islam.

Technology versus good old-fashioned spying: Europe's antiterrorism agencies favor human intelligence over technology

My favorite paragraph from this article is this one:
"You have to have people who go into a specific community, an ethnic group, religious group, a sectarian group, get acquainted with their people, their leaders, and get to know their community," Hamilton said in an interview. "Those communities know, usually, the people within the community that are disaffected, mad, angry, maybe even threatening."

Partially, because it deals with an understanding that terrorists, or people who become terrorists are an anomaly, not the mainstream. Also, if you build networks within a group, you can quickly find those anomalies...everyone knows the local weirdo, right?

The other story deals with the trickier aspect of the causes of terrorism--anger, frustration, the fact that the US is still killing people in 'Muslim lands' and how disconnected I think most Americans are from the reality of other people's fear--not just ours.

Just how deeply unpopular the United States is in the Muslim world?

My favorite paragraphs in this one are those that quote George Orwell:

Their violence, our violence

The palatable and politically safe answers – for conservatives, that Muslims are inherently violent, and for left-liberals, that only a small minority is violent – have always skirted around one important detail: our own violence.

This is no surprise. The notion that our violence motivates terrorism has always lost out to the notion that terror is absent from our violence. It was George Orwell who observed in 1945 that “the nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them”.

But this “remarkable capacity” is not shared by everyone. Civilian deaths and accounts of torture from Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine have fueled the radicalization of a minority of Muslims abroad, and it was only a matter of time before it produced the same effect on a minority of Muslims here, too.

It is only now, amid this growing domestic radicalization, that we are seeing some willingness to cure the deafness Orwell once wrote about.

Hope you enjoyed these stories.

Best,
Alena

The 3Ds, challenges in language and culture

Dear All,

Hope this finds you well, sorry for the delay in posting--its been a busy month or two. I'm headed to the Niger Delta in May to do a six-month consultancy and I've been accepted in the 'pre-employment phase' at USAID to be a 'crisis, stabilization and governance officer', which means i don't have a job, but I do have paperwork. :) More on that later.

The 3 Ds (Diplomacy, Defense and Development)

At first, i thought it was just my mother. That my mother and I couldn't communicate about my newfound understanding of war and how that impacted my wish to work and create value within the security world. After 2+ years of back and forth, we've managed to communicate with each other and she is supportive of my goals and context (she always was, in a sense, but associated security with guns and death, not the ability to protect and transform).

Now, what about with everyone else?

I find myself struggling with a new identity

I am not a classic security person, but i have learned a new language and have trouble going back to who I was before. I need to find new ways to communicate with the people who resemble who I was, while appreciating their perspective.

How should I start? Should I start with an agreement on terms? Perspective?

I've been trying to find a place in the development world that can utilize my new security perspective, my diplomatic upbringing and my desire to create long-term, effective improvements in the lives of humanity.

However, when I found myself in an job interview for a position that I thought epitomized this (a development job in Afghanistan), I found myself repeatedly making a cultural mistake: I assumed we were speaking the same language.

I asked a seemingly innocent question: So, what is your security perspective for your work in Afghanistan?
A: Well, we have a security team that makes sure we stay alive...they're very good.

I tried again...no, no, how does the context the context of war affect your work?

A: Well, we try to stay away from the more volatile areas and conduct risk analysis, etc.

This was not the answer I was looking for--I wanted to know, how does the context affect your work? What about the trauma of the population with whom you are working? What about the trust and legitimacy issues?

Frustrated, I finally tried a direct approach, even though I was beginning to realize that I was just not speaking the same language...

I asked: But you're in a counter-insurgency, you have funding because development work is part of the war effort, how is that not part of your planning?

You could have heard a pin drop, they looked like I had slapped them. THEM, part of the WAR? Never!

One tried to argue with me and it was clear the others were angry..."But, we're doing the hearts and minds stuff...long term goals'...'we don't get funding from DOD'....'We don't deal with guns'

It was clear that one, they didn't realize that 'winning hearts and minds' IS a military strategy, and that COIN is political, more than about guns.

So, what am I to do? How do I use the things I've learned to work with the people who do the work I want to do, without upsetting them (but using the things I've learned to bridge this gap in communication?).

I'm open to your thoughts!
Best,
Alena

The Problem in Pakistan

Pakistan is in the news a lot today. The voices and advice are wide-ranging. From VP Biden saying early on that Afghanistan depends on what happens in India and Pakistan, to cries that 'Pakistan is not doing enough for us.'

I agree that, as one article from the Brookings Institute states Lashkar-e-Taiba is an important threat, and that the prevented attack in Dhaka, Bangladesh would have unleashed many negative repercussions on the already strained South Asian security situation. It would make U.S. calls on Pakistan to 'crack down' even more strident--which I think would be the wrong reaction.

I agree much more with another Brookings Institute article, which I referenced in my last post about how China and the US can work together with Pakistan.

The part I really want people to think on, is not so much how much pressure the US or China should put on Pakistan (I think Pakistan gets plenty of pressure, in the midst of troubled government, corruption, regular suicide bomb attacks of the Pakistani military itself, and its ongoing conflict with both India AND Afghanistan), but what can be done to help Pakistan move forward. In fact, I'd say taking a step back and letting Pakistan run its country might be a start. They're probably freaking out more than we (the US), and have plenty of problems to deal with. Considering that the US can't stop a terrorist attack when the father of the terrorist tries to turn him in and tells us directly about him, I don't think we should be casting the Pakistanis in such an ill light.

The first paragraph of the second Brookings article summarizes the problem.

Sorry I didn't copy/paste--the blog tool gave an error, I'm going to try and copy/paste the quote in a reply comment. It is important to realize that things aren't as simple as 'pressuring' or 'not pressuring.' Especially with our complicated history of funding islamic extremism (to counter Arab nationalism and Communism, respectively), we have to find ways to help without making things worse.

I look forward to your thoughts. Unfortunately, I only outlined a problem and didn't give you solutions.

Best,
Alena

The Chinese Finger trap

Hi all,

Sorry, went with a sort of cheesy title. I have a few different stories about China that I'd like to share and thought I'd put them together. I often lament my sense that Americans are a little complacent about their place in the world. China is rapidly modernizing, so are several other countries. I don't want this to be taken as a reason to 'attack China' (which, would be almost impossible, since who would pay for it--the Chinese have already lent us trillions of dollars for our two wars, they're not going to lend us any to attack them. By the same token, China is not interested in attacking us, since they really just want us to stay an open market and to pay them back their money some day.)

1. China has declared the economic crisis over as far as they are concerned. What this meant for them was single-digit (8.7%) growth instead of double digit (originally projected at 10+%). It's tough to get jobs in some sectors there, but as we see in following stories, they're creating jobs at an amazing rate.

2. Despite difficulties at Copenhagen, China is moving forward with clean energy technology--soon to eclipse Western countries as the single largest producer. They are also moving aggressively to find ways to finance the expensive conversion, provide incentives, and as a result, solar panels are popping up all over the place. Obviously, they could improve their environmental standards, but I'm glad they're making progress--when will we???

3. This was just an interesting piece by Brookings about where US and Chinese interests meet in Pakistan. A really useful insight into the dynamics of the AF-PAK challenge.

Enjoy your reading!
Best,
Alena

Leave your trauma at home!

The other thing I've been wanting to discuss is PTSD and war trauma. I was reading a series of articles in the Foreign Service Journal from 2008. Civilians, soldiers, and most directly, regular citizens in situations of war experience shock, trauma and loss.

In conversations with military friends, they admitted to something of a double-standard. Yes, the military encourages those with problems, but as commanders, they'd be nervous about soldiers who have problems and might not be in top shape. The Foreign Service Journal described similar double standards and experiences where they were encouraged to keep a 'stiff upper lip' about their issues.

I'm not a therapist, psychologist or even well read on this subject, but I am very frustrated with US institutional and social treatment of war trauma. Also, this trauma extends to the host population. One of the reasons the Afghan and Iraqi people speak a different language than their American counterparts is that they've lived in three decades of war, sanctions and extremely difficult life-conditions. Counter that with refugees, IDPS, and multiple-tour soldiers and you have many groups of people, whom, if not engaged properly, their issues will spill over into greater problems. A great example of this is the relationship between soldiers, chemical dependency and homelessness.

The only real advice I can give is to ask people about their experiences, help them talk about things--because as we've seen in numerous situations, such as the shooting at Fort Hood, and the recent young Nigerian man in Detroit, mental fears, trauma and instability can be dangerous.

If you have thoughts, I'd love to hear them!

Send in the drones! Happy 2010!

Well, I was advised to write a new years blog, and here it is:

First, some issues I've been wanting to tackle, at least initially. I'm assuming most of you read the articles showing that AQ and insurgents in both Iraq and Afghanistan have tapped our unmanned spy drones that we use to spy on them. DoD has known about this weakness for a decade, but did nothing about it because they 'assumed adversaries would not be able to exploit it.' Wrong, obviously. But what is worse, is the assumption.

The 'enemy' is smart. Terrorists are smart. Criminals are smart. Sure, one side of terrorist groups and criminal organizations is just the 'grunts' and may not have a lot of sophisticated training, but assuming your enemy is not as smart as yourself is...less than smart. Terrorists have proven over and over that they are adaptive and proactive. In fact, we're almost always at a disadvantage, because the government is big, slow, bad at sharing information and so we are always reactive.

I'm going to continue in another blog post, just to keep things simple.

Best,
Alena