The following is an archived copy of a message sent to a Discussion List run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
Views expressed in this archived message are those of the author, not of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
[Main archive index/search] [List information] [Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]
Psychological aftermath of Sept 11th and
implications for Iraq
Recent messages on
CASI referred to conference plans and sanctions changes in 2002.
But you may find that political events
go through a roller coaster of changes next year very different from those
currently planned by the US, Israeli or UK governments. We are just
three months into a potential Global Transition triggered by
the events of September 11th and the Afghan War. This may
involve widespread unrest and disruption next spring but with
potential to start moving into a very different and more stable new world order
during the summer or autumn.
The basis for this proposition is the psychological
concept of transition described
in 'Human responses to change' from the journal
Futures, Aug 1999 and how it may apply to
individuals, governments and international affairs in periods of trauma and
change. (Available on my website at http://www.eoslifework.co.uk/futures.htm ).
Early responses to trauma are shock followed by 2-3
months of practical, sometimes very resourceful coping behaviour e.g seen in
recovery operations in New York. Decisions may be instinctive
responses based on old assumptions e.g. starting military retaliation.
During this period the mind tends to shut out or postpone the deeper
implications of events.
During the second three months the new reality
begins to undermine basic assumptions or deeply held beliefs that have been
violated or rendered obsolete by the trauma. This progressively disrupts
confidence, strategic decision making and increases strain on
relationships and personal stress to crisis point.
A transition crisis may become evident about 6
months after the start of the trauma or change in strategic errors, deep
distress, breakdown or quitting and in groups by internal scapegoating
and external aggression. The crisis may be resolved in weeks or extended
for months or years. It is resolved by letting go obsolete beliefs or
allegiances and coming to terms with the new reality. This catharsis liberates
individuals to be more confident and adventurous and groups to become far more
innovative and effective sometimes within weeks, usually within 2-3 months in
supportive conditions.
How might this process work through in a global
transition and in our individual lives in coming months? It suggests
growing instability for individuals, groups and governments through the next
three months. This is likely to develop into a transition crisis
period for individuals and groups most affected during March and
April i.e. 6+ months after traumas began.
Since so many people were traumatised at much the
same time this may lead to distress or unrest of a different
order from events in the last three months except in Israel and
Palestine (in extended crisis since April), and very recently Nepal. The
risk is of a series of simultaneous political crises in most countries
deeply affected by September 11th, the Afghan War or both, interacting into a
global transition crisis. It may turn around in weeks if there is a global
will to contain it, or continue for months.
Anticipating and stabilising this period
- managing the expected Global Transition - is a crucial issue for world
peace and economic stability. Transition management principles have been
developed for individual and organisational change but the psychological
principles involved have never been applied at societal level before.
However, as in the Chinese character for
change, crises also carry the seeds of opportunity. The Global
Transition opens fascinating possibilities for social and political
change emerging from its potential crisis period. It is likely to lead to
deep questioning of our own beliefs and hence of the systems we live
in.
In political organisations this may involve
individuals reaching "defining moments" when they recognise the need
to abandon certain obsolete principles and re-assert others most relevant
to the new reality e.g. David Trimble's bold decision to work with political
opponents in November 1999 that created the breakthrough needed to reconvene the
Northern Ireland Assembly. Such decisions are potentially hazardous but
crucial to liberate groups into successfully adapting to trauma or change in the
final "recovery" phase of transition.
When the current Global Transition reaches the
turning point between crisis and recovery many issues may come up for
fundamental re-appraisal. For example the crisis phase
may dispel the widespread public apathy about (or passive
acceptance of) increasing government and commercial
power in affluent populations dominated by modern media. This might
for example lead to demands for greater
accountability of politicians and military commanders
for military action, past and present. But there likely
to be wide variations on the type of issues that come into
question in different societies, depending on how directly they have
been affected by September 11th or the Afghan War. These are best
analysed by multi-disciplinary debate within each cultural
context.
This is not just wishful thinking. Nor
does it involve subversive action. It is likely to be just a
natural, instinctive, unstoppable psychological reaction to recent
traumas and changes. It might even awaken western populations
to other atrocities committed in our names over recent years, including the
sanctions in Iraq and the aftermath of depleted uranium pollution there, in the
Balkans and almost certainly now in Afghanistan.
You can explore a current example of
the effects of national trauma by considering the massacre in Nepal in June and
apply the change cycle to subsequent events, especially the major escalation of
conflict in the last 2-3 weeks. Typically a period of transition involves
a crisis point for individuals some 6 months later.
Communities and organisations( including
governments) that are simultaneously affected by a major trauma or
change are likely to enter a collective transition crisis at much the same
time or soon after. Eventually when individuals come to terms
with the new reality we can enter an exciting recovery phase, a key phase
of personal development in our lives. This can happen within 2-3
months of the crisis but may take much longer in large groups.
In February 2001 I applied a similar analysis
anticipating a possible Intifada transition following the mass trauma of
350 dead and several thousand wounded in Palestinian communities during
October-November 2000. Stone throwing shifted to terrorist suicide bombing
as individuals went into in April as forecast.
Sadly the communities remain in an extended crisis
due to lack of committed international action to stabilise the psychological as
well as political climate in the region (see attached Israel transition updated
today from the original in the Power or Peace project). This
and several other examples of recent trauma and change cycles for
governments and communities in conflict are available at http://www.eoslifework.co.uk/Comindx.htm
The psychology of change for individuals, communities and governments is a
powerful but little researched process.
==
If you have plans for events on behalf of the
ordinary people of Iraq they may be more timely before March. They have
suffered much already - from international apathy and
hypocrisy as from military aggression and repression. But many
national and international plans and attitudes are likely to change
from March onwards - more radically than most people would imagine.
The transition cycle seems to be an inbuilt
psychological adaptation process that affects every individual affected by a
trauma or change. Someone (whether Al Qaeda or other persons unknown
but highly influential) created a global trauma on Sept 11. The US
Administration, supported by the UK and other governments, started another
trauma cycle for Muslims and other Asian communities around the world with
the new war on October 7th. Anyone can start a post-trauma
transition cycle. But no power East or West can control the individual
despair, crises, insights and transformations that will result as the
psychological aftermath of these mass traumas.
Sufficient to say that 2002 is likely
to present everyone affected by the horrors of September 11th or
the War with potential crises and opportunities. Fortunately no
military or political technology, including clandestine Psychological
Operations or political spin, will be able to rule the minds of several
billion people of scores of different cultures and religions - not
now this global transition period has begun.
Forces relying on violence started both trauma
cycles. Neither will finish them. The only given is the remarkable
human potential of individuals and communities to adapt to
trauma, loss and change. As a species this has enabled mankind
to evolve, to survive and thrive through the most dire experiences as seen
in Jewish, Japanese and German societies after World War 2.
The outcome I think we (and they) can
expect is that many fundamental assumptions from the 20th Century
will change radically next year - political, military and
economic. Few national or international institutions have shown any
substantial adaptation to the new Millennium yet. In mass
transitions individuals may come to terms with a new reality
through our personal transitions faster than organisations
or national and global institutions e.g. community peace workers in
Northern Ireland and the Middle East - catalysts for change as a new order
emerges (see Many Paths to Peace on the website).
The process of transitions works within the
minds of individuals with new insights and outcomes that no-one can
predict. This could be a threat to those who seek to dominate
the future of nations. It is an opportunity to those who anticipate a
time of change. It could be a time of liberation from forces that
are currently tightening their control over freedom, justice and
information more than most people realise using paranoia to
justify their actions. In the next three months the grim realities of
current events will begin to penetrate the deeper consciousness of
many people around the world. The contradictions between our old world and
the new may be deeply disturbing, undermining some of our most deeply
held beliefs - for example our trust in basic principles of democratic
government and a free press.
Those whose propose new military action
against Iraq, who presumably monitor this group, have just under
three months to stabilise the world again. Psychologically they must
realise they are losing control of public opinion as the phases of
transition unfold. They had 6 months to stabilise the world (especially
the deepening crisis in the Middle East) after September 11th and to
re-assert democratic principles of law and justice if they truly believe in
them. In practice they have already wasted the last two months
increasing global instability through starting a war based
on vengeance not justice.
Far from stabilising world affairs this war has
increased global tension and provided a model for extreme
aggression not wasted on men of violence in Israel, Palestine and
other countries. The Afghan bombing may have also inflicted an
even deeper atrocity on the people of Afghanistan than on civilians in
Iraq 10 years ago.
If depleted uranium has been used in the
hundreds of tons of hard target bombs and missiles dropped in Afghanistan,
as they did in Iraq, US forces may have sown the seeds of
irreversible illness, death and mutation far in excess
of the victims of the World Trade Center massacre and other crashes on
Sept 11th. Like the use of Agent Orange in Vietnam the world
will discover the truth sooner or later if DU bombs have been used.
In doing so this may disclose greater use of DU in Iraq than
previously admitted and establish beyond doubt that depleted uranium munitions
are weapons of indiscriminate effect.
Politicians in the US and UK governments may not
have realised this when they sanctioned the Afghan bombing war but they should
know the facts by now. Those who found themselves deceived by
military and scientific advisers will be going through personal and
political transitions soon.
Even without depleted uranium bombs the people of
Afghanistan were coping with multiple humanitarian disasters from a
combination of drought, poverty and Taliban oppression. The last two
months were a vital time for building up aid to survive the winter.
Lost time may cost many more lives.
==
Outside Afghanistan the military response to
September the 11th has diverted immense resources away from combating global
economic recession with cycles of its own, apart from a boost to the arms
industry. Business confidence and strategic decisions may also suffer
as individuals in organisations affected by September 11th or the War
become more stressed during the second three months of the global
transition.
This is a time of flux: in Dylan's words like
a game of roulette "the wheel's still in spin". If the US, other
Governments or violent political groups risk ANY fresh conflicts in the next
3-6 months they are likely to reap a whirlwind they do not
expect and cannot control. It is not military or terrorist firepower
that they have to fear, but an international wave of outrage as
people wake up to the realities of current events and strategic errors made
by those we have trusted to run our countries.
These delayed psychological reactions are likely to
start first in the society most traumatised on September 11th - i.e. within
the USA. This is not a political or religious proposition - just an
extrapolation of the natural psychological process of transition that seems
to be part of our evolutionary heritage in every individual and every
society.
The traumatised communities of New York and
Washington, including Government and Pentagon staff and their
families, appear to be side-lined by the war but will need
increasingly psychological support over the next 3-6
months.
It is vital that the US Administration can
give time and priority to manage these internal transitions. From Idi Amin
to Tony Blair a classic reaction of governments in crisis is
start external conflicts to divert attention from domestic
problems.
So if a global transition is underway then the
highest priority in the next three months must be peace, humanitarian
aid and atonement - in every country and community destabilised by recent
events. This is a message to governments, captains of business
and masters of war. But it applies equally to ordinary people
too - all of us who until now may have too trusting and tolerant of
those who wield power in our world without accountability.
How long did it take for the Soviet Empire to
collapse after the Berlin Wall came down? What great powers will be
shaken by the aftermath September 11th and the Afghan War?
It is not terrorism that will be the major threat to national and global
institutions in 2002 but a psychological backlash at recent military
and political decisions and the 20th century values they represent. This
wave of change is likely to sweep round the world in the next 6 months as
each phase of this global transition works
through.
There could be several basic outcome scenarios from
this period of change and multiple variations for different social and cultural
contexts. These are early assessments and some of the more optimistic
outcomes. But awareness of some of the likely psychological dynamics
may add another perspective on coming events and plans, and give hope
beyond new crises. In transitions the darkest hour is often just before
dawn - important for ourselves and very important if trying to help others in
periods of trauma or crisis. Further details about transition
analysis are available in the full text of the Power or Peace project - summary
on the website. The outlook for psychological climate in many
countries through the first half of 2002 is more unstable than current
events. But from mid-year onwards 2002 may become a year of
remarkably powerful and positive change. The global transition
has potential for transformation of many of the legacies of the 20th
century that must be left behind. Each of us, including our politicians
and the military, must decide what we value and respect most and wish to
preserve in the new world order, and what aspects of our society have
become obsolete and must be let go, confronted or rejected.
However unstable world events become next
spring my work gives me faith in the astonishing resilience of the human
mind to adapt creatively to trauma and change. If so world opinion
may shift faster in 2002 than the deeply
suspect systems that we trusted to protect our freedom.
This shift may also be the best opportunity I see for restoring dignity and
human rights to many oppressed populations especially in Iraq and other
parts of the Middle East. Of course I may be quite wrong and it
may be state and media control that wins like Germany in the 1930's - after
polarising societies into ethnic and religious wars. But they will need to
close down the Internet first.
Yours in concern for peace and hope in times of
change.
Dai Williams
|