The
success of a terrorist act depends on the reaction of the society
towards it. As one commentator has remarked, terrorist violence is
always 'propaganda of the deed.' Paul Wilkinson notes that "Political terrorism
is thus, par excellence, a weapon of psychological
warfare
and the terrorists judge their own 'success' or 'failure'
primarily in terms of political, psychological and propaganda impact
rather than purely by traditional military criteria of death and damage
caused."
In addition
to the immediate victims of terrorist violence, the target society
of such acts of psychological warfare can be divided into three layers:
those in the immediate vicinity, the country as a whole and the world
at large. Terrorists seek support from the people among whom they
live and act. Even the states strategies to counter terrorism
fail when the public opposes such initiatives and aligns itself with
the terrorists' goals. Terrorism also offers a variety of opportunities
for building a positive image in the minds of the common people who
may come to consider the terrorist as the poor mans friend,
or as a rebel against the oppression of the state. Such images, however,
tend to be transient and vary according to the alignment of forces
on the ground. Indeed, terrorism itself is perceived and explained
in a different manner with every mile one moves away from a given
region.
Existing
attitudes and opinions among the victims, common people, various professionals,
including the media and members of the criminal justice system, have
strong determining influences on the states' counter terrorist policies
and initiatives. The identity, goals and modus
operandi of the terrorists adds a final dimension to these perceptions
and pressures.
In recent
decades, the escalation of global terrorism has drawn a sharp focus
on the needs of the victims, the risks they undergo and the trauma
that continues to torment them as an after-effect of their experience.
Whether the terrorist himself can be thought of as a victim of economic
deprivation, social injustice and discrimination is itself an issue,
and this is the image that many apologists have sought to promote,
even within the context of liberal democracies. It is, indeed, "easy
to stereotype as brutal colonial oppressors a liberal democratic government
which in fact enjoys wide support and electoral endorsement, in some
cases including the backing of a larger number of their own minority
group than they (the terrorists) themselves can command!" This issue, however, must be debated separately.
This paper focuses only on those who are hurt, injured, displaced,
dispossessed, and those who absorb the brunt of terrorist attacks
without any active participation or choice in the matter.
Such
victims of terrorism experience a reaction that is unique and differs
significantly from victims of any other circumstances to the extent
that terrorism is itself a phenomenon that defies comparison, and
by definition, implies the use of brutal and extreme methods. Its
victims are, consequently, a group set apart from others. Critically,
they are ordinarily unprepared for the shock of terror to which they
are subjected, and are not mentally equipped to adopt any strategy
before, during and after the incident, or to develop adequate mechanisms
of psychological defence against its impact. Moreover, the wider the
gulf between the public conception of morality and that of the terrorist
organisation, the less likely is it that the public will understand
how the terrorist organisation justifies its actions, not only to
the world at large but also to its own members and supporters. In
a sense, terrorism is a test of the moral fabric of the afflicted
society. All individuals who are vulnerable to the risk of terrorist
attacks need to prepare themselves both physically & psychologically.
The Mind of the Terrorist
Anyone
who has to live with terrorism and to protect himself against it also
needs to understand the character and motivation of the terrorist.
Evidence world-wide has repeatedly suggested that the terrorists
mind operates within the bounds of moral psychology rather than displaying
signs of mental illness. Terrorists are intelligent, fit, usually well
trained and highly motivated individuals.
There is no standard personality which can be labelled as a
terrorist personality type. "It is impossible to provide a psychogram
or an Identikit (composite) picture of the typical
terrorist, because there never was such a person." Nevertheless, if a generalisation is possible,
it would appear that terrorists are primarily people with disorders
of affect (feeling towards others in particular), but are far from the stereotypes of mental instability
common to popular literature. Writing in a Western context, Paul Wilkinson
draws up a profile that appears to place the terrorist among highly
motivated, trained and committed individuals, and not the aimlessly
violent: "The typical terrorist tends to be of above average
intelligence and education, is highly resourceful, and is trained
in weaponry and explosives. It is a serious error to underrate the
terrorists' will to succeed and their destructive capabilities." While Laqueur does identify certain patterns of
abnormality that recur, he argues that it could easily be demonstrated
that "most terrorists of the past were perfectly normal men and
women and that their opting for terrorism was a rational choice rather
than a mental aberration". Moreover, their patterns of deviance are not unique:
"One typical feature of most, if not all, such groups is a strong
paranoid streak and the belief in omnipresent conspiracies. This they
have in common with fascism, communism, and other extreme movements." They are alienated individuals, drawn to a group
that gives them their identity. Such group membership is fraught with
overwhelming tensions, and the terrorist is expected to show absolute
loyalty and submission to the group, which he learns to fear even
more than he does the state's forces, since any deviation from group
norms would lead to swift, harsh and arbitrary reprisals, even death.
The
roots of terrorism can thus be discovered, not in any unique pattern
of abnormality, but in man's innate propensity to violence, his propensity
to war, to aggression and to brutality, the 'instinct' for destructiveness
that Freud categorised under his notion of 'Thanatos'. There is no
evidence of such an inherent tendency in the animal kingdom. Man,
it appears, is the only species that kills its own kind in such numbers,
with such cruelty and with such abandon.
Victim Profile
The
traumas that a victim of terrorism undergoes are more painful, long
lasting and detrimental than most other situations of violence. There
is a substantial literature that suggests that victims of violent
crime fit a certain narrow personality profile, but labelling a group
as 'terrorism-prone' would require a gigantic exercise of assessing
the factors that lead to such victimisation. The probabilities of
any such consistent profile, moreover, are diminished by the very
nature of terrorist crimes. Ordinarily, the probable victims of terrorism
- such as minority groups in an area affected by religious terrorism
- are better protected by the state's security forces, and often cordoned
off, making attacks on them difficult and fraught with greater risk.
Moreover, terrorists, in most of their actions, do not choose their
victims, but rather their targets.
They identify the situations that would allow their acts of violence
to secure the greatest psychological, propaganda and political impact,
and the potential targets that can most conveniently be hit under
prevailing ground conditions. The specific identity of the victims,
beyond a general profile of community / occupation etc. that may be
part of the terrorists' secondary criteria, is often irrelevant. Ordinarily,
the character of the act, the situation, location and time are chosen
to maximise the intended damage in terms of lives or property, and
specific individuals simply become the unwilling and unlucky victims
of the incident. It is in the volume of damage and the number of deaths
inflicted that the aim of the terrorist is realised, not, ordinarily,
in the identity of the victims - though a high profile victim, naturally,
has greater propaganda value, and certain categories of victims -
women and children - may, at times, though not always, undermine the
intended propaganda impact.
There
is, of course, the distinct set of cases where an individual is specifically
targeted because of his affiliations with a particular community,
institutional mechanism, the government or security forces, or political
parties and activities. Then again, a terrorist, may also be killed,
tortured, or otherwise punished or victimised by his own or rival
groups, as members of his family. However, there is a single common
dynamic that unites all these victims, despite these very significant
differences. At the time when he is transformed by the act of terror
into a victim, there is, on the psychological plane, a sense of absolute
defencelessness, of a loss of control, and of complete domination
by the inimical other - that is, the will of the terrorist.
The Impact of Terror
Situations
of severe stress and catastrophic experiences create abiding psychological
trauma. Death, injury and destruction, situations of extreme physical
and psychological threat, displacement, social chaos, separation and
loss are the realities of war, and have created immense devastation
and human misery. Studies of the psychological consequences of war,
of extreme devastation, as in the case of Hiroshima, and of concentration
camp survivors has made it clear that the consequences of such circumstances,
i.e. the 'Survivor Syndrome' comprises chronic anxiety, depression,
social withdrawal, nightmares, sleep disturbances, psychosomatic disorders,
chronic fatigue, emotional liability, loss of initiative and general,
personal and sexual and social mal-adaptation. A study of concentration
camp survivors revealed that 83 per cent of the cases suffered from
combinations of these symptoms. A sense of pervasive terror is also the experience
of each of these situations, with a corresponding disruption of social,
economic, cultural and personal relationships at their very foundations.
It would be expected that similar symptoms would characterise victims
of terrorism, which is, in its essence, a campaign of psychological
warfare with the civilian population as its primary victim. Studies
carried out in areas of civilian violence, riots and civil wars, such
as in Belfast, Northern Ireland, Malaysia, Cambodia and Lebanon indicated
high levels of psychological morbidity among the victims. Psychosomatic
complaints, fear, insomnia and other manifestations of anxiety and
depression were common.
Another
set of typical stresses characterises the terrorist-engineered hostage
situation. From the enforcement perspective, these stresses vary from
the first stage of defining institutional goals. If apprehending the
offender is deemed more important than saving the hostage, demands
for safe passage or other compromises may be ignored, and the emphasis
may squarely be placed on resolution by force. If the release of the
hostage is given priority, and the terrorist-demands are unacceptable,
then all the actors in the conflict - police, the terrorists and the
hostages - are often placed under extraordinary tension for extended
periods of time. Such situations often end in the killing of all or
some of the hostages, creating deep psychological scars in the survivors.
Three
categories of hostages can be distinguished for the convenience of
analysis. First, there is the person of special value who becomes
the target of a particular terrorist group because of his identity,
importance or affiliations, and to secure particular concessions,
or in an act of vengeance - personal or institutional. In some cases
such victims have been murdered in the very early stages of the hostage
situation. Others may be released, sometimes after long periods of
incarceration in highly unsettling circumstances. The second type
of victim is himself of little value to the terrorist, except that
he becomes a human asset in order to secure a terrorist goal. He is
caught in a planned situation and is taken as an expedient hostage. In a third type of incident, an expedient hostage may be taken in an unplanned situation. This last pattern
usually occurs in common criminal incidents, and is not a very frequent
feature of terrorist operations. Research indicates that the trauma of hostages tends to
follow common patterns, except where the hostage situation arises
unexpectedly. In this eventuality, the attitudes of the hostage takers
tend to be more uncaring of consequences, and they appear to act in
a state of 'emotional erection' - they are frightened, tense and excited,
like animals cornered into a fight to death. The state is usually
very transient, and the incidents ordinarily brief, resulting either
in the release or the death of the victims.
The
impact of all forms of terrorism on the victim tends to create subsequent
psychological problems in adjusting to normalcy. The essence of an
experience or threat of terrorist actions, whether bullet, bomb or
kidnapping, is that it creates extreme apprehensions of indiscriminate
and sudden brutality, and these apprehensions tend to persist well
after the actual danger is past. This is the essential element of
the tactic of terror, and a skill that terrorist groups have progressively
sharpened.
Chronic Anxieties in
Kashmir
The
State of Jammu & Kashmir (J&K) has been experiencing terrorism
for over a decade now. More than 25,000 persons have lost their lives
in the strife over this period, and hundreds of thousands have been displaced.
With 63,387 terrorist incidents recorded in the State through the
1990s, terror has become an everyday experience in the
lives of its people. A report on the impact of this protracted crisis states
that major social changes have resulted from the persistent stresses
and strains of the war-strife environment. A large proportion of the
patients treated in hospitals exhibit symptoms of a fear-psychoses.
Doctors indicate that the tensions have had deeply disturbing effects
on the people, especially the elderly. Heart ailments are becoming
increasingly common. The report quoted Dr. Tariq Ahmed, a cardiac
specialist, who indicated that psychological pressures had increased
the incidence of stomach disorders and diseases in the State. The
impact on children has also been immense, as they witness scenes of
frequent bloodshed, high levels of anxiety, and the constant presence
of armed forces around them. The popular media has frozen many images
of children playing with guns, and even their favourite toys and games
today imitate the weapons and bloody rituals of war. Parents complain
increasingly of disobedience and obstinacy among their children. This
is understandable, as schools remain closed for much of the year,
and children are forced by the pervasive threat of violence to spend
most of their time confined within their homes. Boredom and a sense
of suffocation create an increasing rigidity of character. The youth
suffer equally from the impact of bloodshed, growing increasingly
cynical, hardened and potentially violent, often falling prey to militant
propaganda to join their ranks. It can be expected that, even if normalcy
is restored in the State, these youth would find it difficult to return
to the mainstream of society, and to adapt to a peacetime scenario.
Qualitative Assessment:
Responses of Kashmiri Migrants
The
present study seeks to evaluate the attitudes, perspectives and coping
strategies of one group of victims of terrorism, the Kashmiri migrants
who have fled their homes under the threat or shadow of violence.
The groups who were studied had abandoned their homes, jobs, and most
of their movable properties as well in the mass exodus of 1989-90,
and had come to settle in Delhi thereafter. The study was conducted
in five specific concentrations of Kashmir migrant settlements:
i.
Azadpur Sabzi Mandi
ii.
Mongolpuri
iii.
Lajpatnagar
iv.
Bapu Dham
v.
Loni
No prior
calculation of sample size was made, because the available number
of such migrants was not certain. While substantial official documentation
existed at the time of the mass exodus, there has been a great deal
of subsequent dispersal, and tracing out the addresses of the migrants
was itself a challenge.
It was
expected that, given the circumstances of their flight, and the hardships
they have suffered in resettlement and adapting to a vastly different
climate and culture, the migrants would uniformly express extreme
hostility towards the terrorists and their activities, and that they
would demand severe punishment for those who had destroyed the tranquillity
of their lives. An attitudinal scale was administered to measure these
reactions. A qualitative or descriptive analysis of the responses
provides surprising insights.
Azadpur Sabzi Mandi: Only seven people could be traced to respond to the
questionnaire, as the others had all changed their addresses. All
the subjects were successful businessmen involved in the export of
apples to various States. They responded with warmth to the proposal
of a study to assess the stress they had faced, and their attitudes
towards those who were responsible for their predicament. There was
a surprising sense of bitterness towards the use of the word 'terrorism',
which they did not wish to relate with their homeland. One of the
respondents expressed an opinion which translated to the idea that
"a great curse has fallen on my beloved Kashmir". While
they all agreed that terrorism could not be justified, whatever the
proclaimed reasons of those who resort to violence, there was an unexpected
softness towards the idea of punishing the terrorists. The respondents
expressed an opinion that terrorists were misguided and unemployed
youth, who should be dealt with sympathetically rather than punished
harshly. When confronted with the magnitude of damage inflicted by
the terrorists, and the enormous suffering they had caused, the respondents
said that the terrorists were themselves victims - indeed, doubly
so, first, of Pakistan's nefarious designs, and then of the security
forces who treated them as criminals. There was also significant criticism
of the government and the forces' inability to prevent infiltration
across the border, and of the state's counter-terrorism policy.
Mongolpuri: The second group to be interviewed resided in makeshift
'refugee camps' constructed to provide shelter to the families fleeing
from Kashmir. There were two camps in Mongolpuri, situated at a distance
of five kilometres. Despite initial apprehensions, both men and women
joined in once the purpose of the study was explained. In contrast
to the first group, the people at the camps were poorer and living
in conditions that were far from acceptable. It was more than evident
that the migrants were not happy with each family - a couple, their
children, and often their aged parents as well - living in the 10'x10'
rooms provided by the government, and the middle-aged and elderly
people expressed their desire to return to their homes. However, returning
to J&K made no sense unless a proper environment was restored
there, and the threat to their lives and security was neutralised.
The younger generation thought differently, dismissing Kashmir as
a closed chapter. They had decided to settle permanently in Delhi,
and many had set up small businesses, married, and got on with their
new lives.
The
attitudes of the people in Mongolpuri Camp I - in contrast to the
businessmen at Azadpur - were absolutely hostile and bitter towards
the terrorists. They felt that terrorism should be crushed through
strong measures, and that the terrorists ought to be punished severely.
They reacted sharply to the suggestion that the terrorists were unemployed
or 'misguided' youth, and demanded to know what was happening to the
innocent boys and girls who were equally poor or unemployed, and who
became the victims of terrorist violence. Scathing references were
also made to the government's 'soft' attitude toward the terrorists,
and the release of hardcore terrorists from custody. Such actions,
they felt, worsened the prevailing situation. The media also came
in for significant criticism for giving an excessive and exaggerated
coverage to the activities and leadership of the terrorists, even
as their victims suffered in silence and anonymity.
At Mongolpuri
Camp II, the situation was different. The group was large, and as
many as 40 respondents to the questionnaire were selected, including
30 men and 10 women. There were 33 families residing in a small building.
There was no electricity in the camp, and men, women and children
were moving about restlessly. There was a sense of desperation and
helplessness regarding the living conditions. However, the families
assembled and were willing to talk about the situation in Kashmir.
The use of the word 'migrant' to refer to them was strongly objected
to. According to them, 'to call a person a migrant in his or her own
country was wrong. They were not migrants just because they had been
uprooted under the threat of terror'. There was, again, bitterness
against the government's 'soft' policies, and the release of hardcore
terrorists, as well as against the lack or inadequacy of relief to
the victims of terrorism. All those present rejected any possible
justification of terrorism, or the idea that no revolutionary change
was possible without violence. The consensus was that all political
violence was to be severely condemned, and that terrorists should
be given death penalty. The media and the National Human Rights Commission
(NHRC) came in for criticism for their biases that worked in favour
of the terrorists, and their apathy towards victims of terrorism.
Lajpat Nagar: Although a
significant number of Kashmiri migrants reside in this locality, they
are not huddled together in a 'camp', but scattered in private residences
throughout this large colony. With a few exceptions, most of those
who were traced out were willing to participate in the study. A well-to-do
carpet exporter refused to speak but gave clear and written answers
to the questionnaire. His responses reflected an unambiguous condemnation
of terrorism and political violence. A young boy who answered the
questionnaire, disclosed that he was unhappy in Delhi, but that his
father had sent him here for his safety. They boy had been studying
at a college, but had to leave when violence broke out. There were
many like him who had come away, but they were considered to be sympathetic
to the terrorists and harassed by the security forces. He spoke of
the time when all the communities resided in peace in J&K. He
said that, while terrorism could never be justified, it was necessary
to assess the reasons why these incidents were taking place. Once
again, the idea of terrorists as misguided and frustrated youth was
articulated. A total of seven respondents in Lajpat Nagar answered
the questionnaire.
Bapu Dham: The President of the Kashmiri Pandits Association
was present at the Bapu Dham camp, and the residents were very co-operative.
The general idea expressed was that, while terrorism in all its manifestations
was to be condemned, the government needed to adopt a diagnostic approach
to its causes, and to understand the social fabric of the State in
order to effectively combat the scourge. Hanging the terrorists, or
other harsh punishments could not be a permanent solution to the prolonged
tribulations of the State. There was
deep-rooted hostility towards certain corrupt, nepotistic and
fanatical groups and individuals who had collaborated with Pakistan's
covert agencies to plunge the entire State into violence. There was
an enormous sense of hurt among the migrants at the losses that had
been inflicted on them, and the conditions in which they were presently
forced to live. They expressed the hope that peace would soon return
to their Valley, and that they would then be able to return. Twenty
persons from these groups responded to the questionnaire.
Loni: This was a poor and congested settlement,
and there was a heavy sense of apprehension, despair and bitterness
among the residents. They complained that they were not even able
to express their views regarding the conditions of the resettlement
colony in which they were forced to live. They were extremely critical
of the government's policy of releasing terrorists and seeking a negotiated
settlement with them. They also stated that, if the government gave
them jobs, rather than a financial dole, that would give them something
to do, and would help cope with their circumstances. The term 'migrant'
again drew sharp reactions. One of them vehemently stated that they
were forced to leave their own land because they were a minority community,
and here, at Delhi, they were called migrants. They expressed themselves
to be uniformly in favour of a hardline against, and harsh punishment
for, the terrorists. None of them accepted the notion that terrorists
were 'misguided youth' who needed to be treated sympathetically. There
were significant indicators of aggression and loss of identity here,
far in excess of the situation in the other camps.
Qualitative Assessment: Responses of Kashmiri
Migrants
A total
of 50 samples were generated in the study, and the resultant clusters
of responses were tabulated and their relationships analysed. The
questionnaire contained 44 items, of which the most significant are
discussed below:
Description of Items, Table I:
Item 13: Every
terrorist, irrespective of his/her offence, should be punished.
Item 14: Terrorists
are social misfits and are dangerous to the society, and it is best
to execute them.
Item 16: Any
person, young or old, who threatens the integrity of the country,
should be punished.
Item 27: Rather
than punishing them, they should be helped through sympathetic treatment.
Table I: Attitudes towards the punishment of terrorists
Item No.
|
SA
|
A
|
DK
|
D
|
SDA
|
Total
|
No.
|
%
|
No.
|
%
|
No.
|
%
|
No.
|
%
|
No.
|
%
|
13
|
26
|
52
|
18
|
36
|
0
|
|
6
|
12
|
0
|
|
50
|
14
|
19
|
38
|
18
|
36
|
4
|
8
|
9
|
18
|
0
|
|
50
|
16
|
23
|
46
|
16
|
32
|
0
|
|
7
|
14
|
4
|
8
|
50
|
27
|
5
|
10
|
21
|
42
|
0
|
|
14
|
28
|
10
|
20
|
50
|
45
|
18
|
36
|
23
|
46
|
2
|
4
|
6
|
12
|
1
|
2
|
50
|
SA: Strongly
agree, A: Agree, DK: Don't know, D: Disagree, SDA: Strongly disagree
Table
I indicates that the majority of victims were in favour of severe
punishment to the terrorists. Terrorists were thought of as social
misfits, and as being a danger to society. However, there were dissenting
voices, and at least some people also believed that terrorists could
be changed through sympathetic treatment. Nevertheless, the general
affect of the victims was hostile and negative. A number of respondents
thought that hardcore terrorists should be executed.
Description of Items, Table II:
Item 1: Terrorism
is never justified.
Item 2: Terrorism
means a fight against tyranny, or the killing of a tyrannical person,
and so it should be supported.
Item 8: Political
violence is necessary for social change.
Item 11: Terrorism
cannot be regarded as a rational method of dealing with national problems.
Item 31: Terrorism
is the worst form of senseless violence, and must be condemned.
Item 24: Terrorism
is basically unjustified, but is necessary in the present context.
Table II: Opinions regarding violence and social change
Item No.
|
SA
|
A
|
DK
|
D
|
SDA
|
Total
|
No.
|
%
|
No.
|
%
|
No.
|
%
|
No.
|
%
|
No.
|
%
|
1
|
23
|
46
|
20
|
40
|
2
|
4
|
1
|
2
|
4
|
8
|
50
|
2
|
2
|
4
|
2
|
4
|
7
|
14
|
13
|
26
|
26
|
52
|
50
|
8
|
9
|
18
|
9
|
18
|
3
|
6
|
15
|
30
|
14
|
28
|
50
|
11
|
19
|
38
|
18
|
36
|
2
|
4
|
7
|
14
|
4
|
8
|
50
|
31
|
25
|
50
|
18
|
36
|
2
|
4
|
4
|
8
|
1
|
2
|
50
|
24
|
3
|
6
|
6
|
12
|
2
|
4
|
25
|
50
|
14
|
28
|
50
|
SA: Strongly
agree, A: Agree, DK: Don't know, D: Disagree, SDA: Strongly disagree
There
was no difference of opinion regarding the justification of violence
as a means of social change. As many as 44 of the 50 respondents condemned
terrorism as senseless and fruitless disruption of the tranquillity
of society. Even those who thought that terrorists should be treated
sympathetically agreed that there was no justification of terrorism
as a rational method of problem solving. Both the Hindus and the Muslims
who responded to the questionnaire expressed the opinion that, in
a democratic country like India, there was no space for political
violence.
Description of Items: Table III
Item 3: Terrorists
are misguided youth, and the government should consider their demands
sympathetically.
Item 5: Most
of the terrorists are hardcore criminals. They should be punished.
Item 6: Terrorists
disregard Constitutional rights. They should be treated as traitors.
Item 10: On
the whole, terrorists are honest.
Item 29: Terrorists
are separatist groups and want to weaken the unity of the country.
Item 34: The
terrorist is a frustrated man and has a right to rebel against the
state.
Table III: Idea of Terrorism
Item No.
|
SA
|
A
|
DK
|
D
|
SDA
|
Total
|
No.
|
%
|
No.
|
%
|
No.
|
%
|
No.
|
%
|
No.
|
%
|
3
|
7
|
14
|
15
|
30
|
1
|
2
|
9
|
18
|
18
|
36
|
50
|
5
|
35
|
70
|
5
|
10
|
0
|
|
9
|
18
|
1
|
2
|
50
|
6
|
22
|
44
|
20
|
40
|
3
|
6
|
5
|
10
|
0
|
|
50
|
10
|
2
|
4
|
4
|
8
|
3
|
6
|
16
|
32
|
25
|
50
|
50
|
29
|
28
|
56
|
9
|
18
|
3
|
6
|
7
|
14
|
3
|
6
|
50
|
34
|
3
|
6
|
11
|
22
|
1
|
2
|
20
|
40
|
15
|
30
|
50
|
SA: Strongly agree, A: Agree,
DK: Don't know, D: Disagree, SDA: Strongly disagree
Here
again, an overwhelming number of responses were extremely hostile.
It was obvious that victims of violence would reject the idea that
its perpetrators were honest persons, and the poor man's friends.
The victims expressed the belief that any grievances and sense of
frustration that the terrorists may have could be dissolved through
dialogue, and not by spreading violence in the State. Terrorists,
in their opinion, were men who took the law into their own hands,
and destroyed, plundered and killed innocent people. The responses
were so clearly skewed that no further explanation is required.
Description of Items, Table IV
Item 9: I have friends who adhere
to an extremist ideology.
Item 15: It would not bother me if
my friends were terrorists.
Item 22: The Herculean tasks undertaken
by the terrorists frequently attract me.
Item 32: I worry a lot about terrorist
activities.
Item 42: I feel anguish when some
people advocate the ideologies of terrorism.
Item 44: I firmly support the philosophy
of non-violence.
Table IV: Self-relation to the concept of terrorism
Item No.
|
SA
|
A
|
DK
|
D
|
SDA
|
Total
|
No.
|
%
|
No.
|
%
|
No.
|
%
|
No.
|
%
|
No.
|
%
|
9
|
1
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
6
|
25
|
50
|
20
|
40
|
50
|
15
|
3
|
6
|
8
|
16
|
2
|
4
|
17
|
34
|
20
|
40
|
50
|
22
|
15
|
30
|
4
|
8
|
4
|
8
|
15
|
30
|
12
|
24
|
50
|
32
|
10
|
20
|
6
|
12
|
3
|
6
|
20
|
40
|
11
|
22
|
50
|
12
|
23
|
40
|
20
|
40
|
2
|
4
|
5
|
10
|
0
|
0
|
50
|
13
|
27
|
54
|
17
|
34
|
0
|
|
3
|
6
|
3
|
6
|
50
|
SA: Strongly agree, A: Agree,
DK: Don't know, D: Disagree, SDA: Strongly disagree
What
the terrorists did frequently attracted the attention of the respondents,
and some appreciation existed for the courage and motivation manifested
in their struggles against the government. However, overwhelming support
was expressed for non-violence, and the fact that friends with an
extremist ideology were to be avoided. High levels of anxiety and
apprehension regarding terrorist violence were reflected in the responses.
Conclusion
The
qualitative and quantitative data gathered in this study tends to
confirm the general expectations of hostility, resentment, frustration
and fear among victims of terrorism towards its perpetrators. However,
there were significant variations. One of the important factors revealed
through the study was the linkage between the present circumstances
of the respondents and the extremity of their affective response.
The poorer respondents, living in squalour and conditions of significant
deprivation, reacted much more harshly against the terrorists, and
tended to be far more impatient with the government's counter-terrorism
policies. The relatively better-off respondents inclined towards greater
'sympathy', even as they condemned the actions of the terrorists and
terrorism as a political strategy.
One
thing that emerged forcefully through the interactions of this study
is the fact that, traumatised victims of terrorism have an urgent
need for an understanding of their physical, mental and spiritual
needs, and that counselling and family / community support is an integral
- though missing - component of their rehabilitation. In many cases,
far more serious, post-traumatic stress reactions occur, and specialised
care and prolonged therapy is necessary. It is essential that these
needs be recognised at the earliest, so that the consequences of chronic
stress and anxiety can be arrested before they develop into serious
patterns.