‘Terrorists are not born that way. They learn to hate’

The barbaric terror attack by Hamas on October 7th caused deep trauma, fear and anger within Israel. What do we know about the impact of that level of trauma and mental distress on decision-making? And what can psychology teach us about the prospects for peaceful resolution?

“In an emergency situation, the amygdala in the centre of the brain serves as an alarm system and sends messages to activate anything in the brain that could be instrumental to save yourself,” says Trinity College Dublin psychologist Dr Jan De Vries.

However, “if that alarm system goes on too strong” it can leave people traumatised. “It will be hard for them to see beyond the situation, and to make rational decisions around, for instance, when to stop fighting.”

De Vries, who has engaged in post-conflict dialogue in Northern Ireland, specialises in research on cognitive dissonance. This is the mental conflict that occurs when someone’s beliefs don’t match their actions. Such dissonance is rife in war zones where horror is a daily occurrence.

‘No Irish, No Blacks, No Dogs’: How common were such notices in Britain?

---

Politics is all about managing the present. What people need is a story of the future

---

How to end the culture wars: Stop looking for people to blame

---

A question for Willie O’Dea and Sharon Keogan: What exactly do you mean by ‘woke’?

---

Once people chose the pathway of violence “they have to defend to themselves as to why they do this, and that perpetuates the violence. I see that in the Israeli-Palestine conflict. The people who are in charge of that have to reduce the huge dissonance that they will internally experience about engaging in this violence while having to maintain for themselves ‘I am a good person’.”

“Arguments that help to reduce people’s dissonance are passed on from one person to another” and “form part of the propaganda around violence”.

Such insight from psychology has been noticeably absent from public debate on the current conflict. Listening to experts such as de Vries could be key to leading us away from the abyss.

Asked how to approach someone sympathetically who is experiencing trauma or cognitive dissonance, he says the two need to be separated. While “trauma” calls for therapy, he says, the term is used “more loosely than I would use it. Events in themselves may be traumatic for one person but not for another”. As for reducing dissonance around violent conflict, it “often takes time”.

In the case of Northern Ireland, it required combatants “to revise their understanding of their own actions” and to “come to terms with what they’ve done”. Before getting to that point, however, you need conditions for honest discussion. “A cooling off period should normally precede dialogue.”

[ Israel-Hamas war: Men with Irish links from both sides of divide discuss the conflict ]

These are not the only lessons from psychology to have a bearing on the war. Hamas is following a playbook used by other terrorist organisations. The strategy is to “do something so profoundly shocking and humiliating that it leads to anger, widespread retaliation and, ultimately, an over-reaction,” says Prof John G Horgan, one of the world’s leading experts on terrorist psychology. “This is exactly what terrorists have done for thousands of years, and responding states cannot but fall into a trap each and every time.”

The Kerry native, who did his PhD at UCC and is now based at Georgia State University in the United States, strongly advocates incorporating psychology in conflict resolution. “The big social and political forces that cause conflict affect entire communities – sometimes millions of people – yet a much smaller subset of those communities will get involved in terrorism. The research that I and people like me try to do is to address why so few; what is it that separates the sympathiser from the actual terrorist?

“We used to think that terrorists were mad. We were wrong. Then we used to think that there was some special set of personality factors that explained why they do what they do. We were wrong about that too. Fifty years of research has not produced a ‘terrorist personality’. That’s not a failure of research, rather it’s the outcome of it… To an extent, of course, they [terrorists] are all united by a sense of common purpose – whether it’s say, achieving a united Ireland, or global caliphate – but it’s an activity that attracts a lot of different types of people.”

What about the common claim that psychopaths are particularly drawn to terrorism? “Some terrorists are unquestionably psychopathic, but by and large, most are not. People believe them to be psychopathic because of what they do, and also because we assume they have no conscience... but the evidence suggests something else,” Horgan says.

“Terrorists are not born that way. They learn to hate, they learn to demonise the other side, and they relish the chance to prove themselves in battle against the enemy. It’s a gradual process of socialisation. A thousand little steps. You don’t have to be psychopathic to do terrible things. It happens in war all the time.” Listening to such experts calls for humility. Real friends of Israel and Palestine should quit the flag-waving and take note.