IF WE GO TO WAR,
THE TERRORISTS WILL HAVE WON
Diane Perlman, PhD, Clinical and Political Psychologist,
contributor to The Psychology of Terrorism

Secretary Powell predictably claimed that Osama bin Laden’s February 11 message is proof of an Iraq - Al Qaeda connection, and therefore a convincing reason to go to war. This "case for war" is psychologically unsound, illogical and dangerously playing into the hands of our archenemy.

Those who oppose war argue that there is no such connection, and therefore no reason to go to war. Both sides miss the point. Instead of a logical debate, we have a futile dualistic war of words.

Those who fear this war could make a more powerful, logical case by accepting Powell’s evidence as a compelling a case as any not to go to war. Seen rationally, Powell's would-be case for war is actually a case against it.

Instead of discrediting the evidence, it is wiser to point out that the administration is bending over backwards to find, fabricate and sell anything argument for justifying war, whether logical, true, or not. Pro-war rhetoric signals a foregone decision, uninterested in inconvenient facts.

But those facts include this obvious one: a connection between our two major enemies makes war more dangerous for us. If we believe the connection exists, it should deter us from starting a war that would unleash a widely predicted chain reaction of terrorism likely to spiral out of control.

The administration used the new bin Laden tape in conjunction with an elevated terrorism alert to amplify the war-cry. Yet contending we make ourselves safer by fomenting a war sure to inflame global tensions and provide impetus for more terror on US soil shows poor judgement bordering on loss of contact with reality. In psychology we call this "impaired reality testing" when one is gripped by emotional forces that cloud the ability to evaluate the world objectively.

A US attack on Iraq would provide an unparalleled opportunity for bin Laden to magnify his power and mobilize his base. His tape is a recruitment tool, capitalizing on the Muslim rage we inspire in our rush to war.

His methodology, as demonstrated on 9/11, is to turn our force against us. Our military buildup, threats, and domination of a Muslim country, and heavy-handed use of Muslim allies gives him all the raw materials he needs to inspire more followers and motivate more acts of terror.

Bin Laden wants this war. The Bush administration may be giving it to him. It takes a willing disregard of basic psychology and deliberate denial of the inevitable catastrophic consequences triggered by war to accommodate an enemy this way.

According to the law of opposites, you create what you resist. In the name of US security, the march towards war drastically decreases it. A war claiming to destroy the threat weapons of mass destruction; will propel their use by backing Saddam into a use-it-or-lose it corner. Foreign intelligence, Jimmy Carter and even CIA analysts agree on this. It will speed up nuclear proliferation by motivating other countries to join the nuclear weapons club. In the name of self-defense, we render ourselves more vulnerable.

It is a common mistake to confuse the physical elimination of terrorists with the psychological eradication of terrorism. as if killing more terrorists could kill the terrorism threat itself. But in a world of asymmetrical warfare and weapons of mass destruction, any amount of domination can be turned against us. The only way to kill terrorism, or any psychopathology, is to address its underlying causes. Only by redressing psychological, economic and other forces that breed terrorism, easing tension and reversing root causes, can we make ourselves safer.

War is not the last, but the worst, resort -- a solution from hell, worse than the problem it purports to solve. The alternative to war is not doing nothing, but using nonviolent forms of force to reduce tension, prevent violence and to lay foundations for enduring security.

Our task now is to turn from a primitive, reflexive groupthink of vengeance and beligerence to rational collective security, from venting feelings to doing what works, from the psychologically unformed and unconscious to clear-eyed, self-aware choices.

Carl Jung said, "Consciousness is a work against nature." Much work is needed immediately if we are to emerge from unconsciousness in time to reverse the momentum towards unthinkable disaster.