Aaron Beck on The Mind of a Terrorist

THE MIND OF THE TERRORISTS

AARON T. BECK, M.D.

University Professor of Psychiatry
University of Pennsylvania

The deadly attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 11, 2001 constitutes one of the most dramatic and tragic events of the new millennium. The terrifying image of the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center exploding after being struck by hijacked airliners left much of the country in a state of shock. This unprecedented disaster calls for an analysis of the mind of the terrorists.

To start with, it is important to recognize that terrorists who execute well-planned acts of destruction are not deranged. Disciplined terrorists such as those who assaulted the structures in New York and Washington are likely possessed by a cool hatred toward the designated enemy. They are cold and calculating in carrying out their grand design. Their mission to destroy the enemy transcends any concern about the victims. For them, the end justifies the means. In fact, it is likely that, as in conventional war, success is measured partly in terms of the body count. In a sense, they share the same psychology as Timothy McVeigh, responsible for bombing the Federal Building in Oklahoma City in 1995.

What then is the psychology of the terrorist? It is crucial to understand that their ideology concentrates their thinking and controls their actions. Somewhat like the domestic Communist spies in the United States and Britain during World War II and the Cold War, the Islamic terrorists are able to assume a dual identity. Outwardly they may appear like everybody else (several are said to have gambled at Las Vegas - even though this was contrary to the Muslim faith). The action manual used by bin Laden terrorists in previous bombings specifically ordered them to blend into the country which was targeted for attack. However, their core identity remained dedicated to destructive acts programmed by their ideology of hate.

Driving violent acts of this type is the perpetrators' view of the victim: the image of the Enemy. In this instance, the Enemy was America, the arch villain on the world stage. The image of the United States as a hostile superpower, armed with weapons of mass destruction, was seen as a threat to the existence of Islam and, more specifically, the Islamic states. The American penetration into Saudi Arabia and the Gulf War attack on Iraq, in addition to America's support of the "oppression" of Palestinians by the "murderous" state of Israel, inflicted a deep wound, also calling for revenge. Further, the continuing sanctions imposed on Iraq signaled to the terrorists our own indifference to the suffering of the innocent civilians. Like aggressors and perpetrators throughout history, the terrorists regarded themselves as the victims and the Enemy as the victimizers.

The terrorists' leaders depicted Western Culture, especially that of the United States, as repugnant to everything dear to Islam. The perceived materialism, liberation of women, secularism and so on represented a threat to their highly invested values derived from their interpretation of the Qur'an. Their presumption of malevolent motives driving America's intervention, oppression, and corruption of values in the pro-Western Islamic states helped to crystallize their mental representations: America became a screen onto which was projected the image of the Enemy; vicious, corrupting, dangerous.

As this image of the Enemy takes form, the terrorists' own collective self-image is enhanced - holy, righteous, and courageous. Moral and religious symbols permeate their apocalyptic images; the forces of Evil versus the forces of Good; Satan versus Allah. It is necessary to counterattack in order to preserve and protect Islam. For those who die in this struggle the reward is eternal bliss in Paradise. The ideologies legitimize mass murder, and suspend traditional moral deterrents to human destruction. Homicide no longer warrants the status of murder but instead is glossed over as essential for preservation and purification of the religious/political order.

Islamic radicals who become obsessed with these polarized images become prime candidates for recruitment for assignments of assault on the Enemy. Of course, what they are attacking is the image of the Enemy that is projected onto the innocent civilians. They have demonized their antagonists and dehumanized its people. The foot soldiers, the actual terrorists, have become the tools of their fanatic leaders, who use them to execute their own grand strategies.

The thinking of the terrorist evidently shows the same kind of cognitive distortions observed in others who engage in violent acts, either solely as individuals or as members of a group. These include overgeneralization - that is, the supposed sins of the Enemy may spread to encompass the entire population. Also, they show dichotomous thinking - a people are either totally good or totally bad. Finally, they demonstrate tunnel vision - once they are engaged in their holy mission (e.g., jihad), their thinking, and consequently their actions, focuses exclusively on the destruction of the target. They behave like robots programmed for demolition with no attention to the value of the human lives that are destroyed. In fact, like the Japanese Kamikaze pilots of World War II, they are gratified by the heroic role that destiny has accorded them. Bin Laden, himself, stated in an interview that he would be happy to die as a martyr.

The masterminds of the violent attacks - wherever they may be - had their own geopolitical aspirations in mind; possibly to evoke a retaliatory strike by the United States that would mobilize the Muslim world to a jihad against this evil Superpower. Perhaps they simply aspired to destabilize the government and harm the economy. Although we can't read the minds of the extremist leaders, it is plausible that their ultimate targets were several of the pro-Western or secular Muslim states, especially Saudi Arabia (location of the holy Islamic sites), Egypt and the smaller Gulf states. Having pressed for the mass movement of the fundamentalists against these states, they may have opted for an added strategy. For the leaders, terrorism (to paraphrase Clausewitz) is a continuation of politics by other means. By attacking the United States, they may have believed that they would undermine its support of the governments of these Muslim states.

In any event, the executors of the plan - the hijackers - did not need to know the ultimate goal. What was required was that they see themselves as part of a grand design that was more important than themselves and that they intensify their image of America as the Enemy. By manipulating these images, the leaders like bin Laden were empowered to neutralize the technological and economic superiority of the Superpower and (hopefully) to weaken and humiliate it.

The perspective of the psychology of the terrorist needs to be extended to the polarized thinking of the militant fundamentalist groups that is the substrate of the violent behavior of the terrorists. In addition to our national policy of punishing and containing terrorists, it is important to consider the impact of the West's immediate and long range strategies on the thinking, beliefs and goals of the militant groups. Perhaps, as some observers have argued, more attention needs to be paid to the discontent of the population of the Arab countries, a likely catalyst for the polarized thinking. In this way it may be possible to anticipate the terrorists' reactions to the West's response to their violent actions.

For more on related topics see: Beck, A.T., (1999). Prisoners of Hate: The Cognitive Basis of Anger, Hostility and Violence. Harper Collins.

Replies:

There are no replies to this message.

| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |

Copyright © 1996-2004 Behavior OnLine, Inc. All rights reserved.