Anne Speckhard's Blog: Anne Speckhard, page 6

We Served Too: Some Thoughts After Benghazi regarding Resilience of Civilians Deployed in Conflict Zones and High Threat Security Posts

Currently thousands of civilian workers –from military contractors, to civilian and foreign service workers (representing the Departments of State, Justice, Commerce, USAID, etc.), as well as reservists and former military who return to do civilian service, bravely serve our nation—deploying into conflict zones such as Iraq and Afghanistan and into high threat security posts such as Pakistan, Libya and elsewhere.  Last year four of these civilians, U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens, information officer Sean Smith, and two embassy security personnel Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty gave the ultimate sacrifice—these four were killed in Benghazi, Libya as they served our nation.

Soldiers are well trained and prepared psychologically to face armed conflict.  Civilian contractors, government servants and diplomats—who serve alongside and in support of our military—are not as well trained, prepared or supported pre, during and post deployment as their military counterparts.  Yet in recent years we see that they are deployed by the thousands, into uncertain and anxiety-provoking environments.  And these facts have serious implications for the psycho-social resilience and physical welfare of our civilian forces deployed in high threat security environments. 

 And in light of the deaths of a U.S. Ambassador and three of his colleagues, one must ask about the high number of civilians who are crucial to U.S. diplomatic, humanitarian and military efforts around the world—how are they being treated?  Are their sacrifices recognized, honored in any way?  Are they adequately prepared and trained prior to their deployments into danger zones, supported in theater, and are their needs being met once they return home—some of them physically injured or psychologically traumatized?   Or are they our unsung heroes, an invisible but massive civilian force serving without recognition for the sacrifices that they too have made in behalf of our nation—some of them struggling to recover without help after their service to our country?

We know that civilians serving in war and high threat security posts sustain injuries and psychological trauma just as their military counterparts do.  However, unlike wounded warriors who are—at least in theory—offered healthcare, rehabilitation and support services by the U.S. military, civilians who are maimed or psychological traumatized after serving in conflict zones or high threat security posts often find that they are on their own in regard to obtaining needed services.  And some find they must battle their insurance companies to get even basic needs addressed in terms of addressing their wounds sustained in service of our nation. 

Already in 2009, according to an LA Times report, many civilian contractors who served in Iraq and Afghanistan found themselves battling their insurance companies to get prosthetic devices for blown off limbs, mental health care, basic services and the like.  Moreover, the LA Times reported that over forty percent of claims regarding serious injuries and more than half related to psychological stress by these civilian heroes were rejected by their insurance companies[i].

While recent scandals with the U.S. Veterans Administration has brought to light the problems wounded warriors face when trying to get health care for medical care from artificial limbs to psychological treatment and other basic services from wounds sustained in service of our nation—no one it seems is asking what are the needs of those on the nonmilitary side of the house—the civilian workforce who also served.  Are they being met?

In an early effort to study these unsung heroes—the invisible workforce that both sustains and supports our military while also working alongside it in promoting diplomatic and humanitarian solutions, my NATO colleagues and I put together a pilot study of psycho-social resilience to traumas encountered in Iraq which was published in 2012.  In our pilot study we found that exposure to high-threat events including mortar fire, IEDs, bombings and sniper fire resulted in endorsements by respondents—often up to twenty percent—of posttraumatic and acute stress symptoms in these civilian workers including: peritraumatic dissociation, flashbacks and traumatic re-experiencing, feeling physically nervous with reminders of the event, amnesia for parts of it, avoidance behaviors, feeling alienated and isolated, emotionally numb, uneasy about the future, feeling jumpy and agitated, sleep disturbances, having difficulty concentrating, panic and anxiety, somatization, depression and even suicidal ideation.[ii]  Clearly on the psycho-social side many of these civilians paid a high price for service under threat.

To date, very little else has been done in terms of looking at and promoting the resilience of our civilians that serve in conflict zones and high threat security environments.  Today a small group of us launched a new initiative named We Served Too (found at www.WeServedToo.org) to begin to give better care and recognition to the needs of these civilian heroes and to raise awareness to their needs.  The initiative is only beginning but we believe that civilians serving in conflict zones and high threat security environments need a forum to tell their stories, share their pictures, tell their needs and to gain the recognition they deserve.  Just as we take care with our military, we must give care and attention to them as well—to study their needs and then adequately and fully prepare them for deployments, to support them while in theater, and to serve their needs from injuries (both psychic and physical) upon their return back home. 

As a civilian who served in her own small way in Iraq (supporting the U.S. Defense Department in building the Detainee Rehabilitation Program) and as a spouse of a U.S. diplomat who served in conflict zones, I want to say in behalf of all civilians who have given years of their lives in overseas service inside conflict zones and high threat security posts—service for which they paid a dear price—that we need also to proudly proclaim—We Served Too!

Anne Speckhard, Ph.D. is Adjunct Associate Professor of Psychiatry in the Georgetown University Medical School and author of Talking to Terrorists: Understanding the Psycho-Social Motivations of Militant Jihadi Terrorists, Mass Hostage Takers, Suicide Bombers & “Martyrs” In the last decade she interviewed over four hundred terrorists, suicide bombers, terrorist supporters, family members, close associates and hostages. She also conducted psychological autopsies with a Chechen colleague on over half of the 112 Chechen suicide bombers investigating what put them on the terrorist trajectory and what motivated them to explode themselves.

[i] Miller, Christian & Smith, Doug (2009) Injured war zone contractors fight to get care.  April 17, Los Angeles Times.

[ii] Speckhard, Anne; Verleye, Gino & Jacuch, Beatrice (2012) Assessing Psycho-Social Resilience in Diplomatic, Civilian & Military Personnel Serving in a High-Threat Security Environment during Counter-Insurgency and Counter-Terrorism Operations in Iraq.  Perspectives on Terrorism Volume 6 (3) http://www.terrorismanalysts.com/pt/index.php/pot/article/view/speckhard-assessing-psycho-social/403

Post Abortion Distress—The Politically Incorrect Trauma

The recent trial and guilty verdict of Philadelphia Dr. Gosnell for murdering three children delivered alive after late term abortions has raised the controversial issue of U.S. abortion rights once again. It also reminds me of years of research I conducted documenting high stress reactions to abortion and the inability of many to discuss this issue in a rational and caring manner.  Having interviewed and treated women with high stress responses—including posttraumatic stress disorders and traumatic bereavement—as a result of abortion, I found myself deeply embroiled in the politics of abortion versus a genuine concern with whether or not all women do well with, and find abortion a useful coping mechanism for a problematic pregnancy. 

As my research carefully documented what a high stress reaction to abortion looked like, I found myself facing such career blocks thrown in my path as having the head of the National Planned Parenthood office write a letter to Harper & Row asking them to not publish my book on the subject—and to have the contract I was about to be offered suddenly rescinded—what seemed to me to be a clear violation of my First Amendment rights.  As a result, I found myself presenting my research in academic circles in a defensive manner so much so that I began to talk about post-abortion traumatic stress responses as “the politically incorrect trauma”. 

Unfortunately the politics of arguing over abortion rights has made many blind to the fact that women fall all over the spectrum of potential psychological responses to abortion—and while some find it a useful coping mechanism, experiencing it with minimal distress—others are deeply distressed by it.  And among academics and activists there are those who for decades now have refused to admit that there are a group of women who do not do well with abortion—and are even psychologically harmed by it.  Yet the fact remains that some women are harmed by the “politically incorrect trauma”.

The potential traumatic stressors involved in abortion are many.  For most they involve perceiving the pregnancy as a human being and the abortion being experienced as a traumatic death event.  This is worsened if they have formed an attachment to the embryo or fetal child in that they likewise experience a traumatic severing of the maternal attachment bond and deep questions about what severing this bond then says about them as women and mothers. 

While many women feel none of this—others are deeply disturbed by abortions that they go through for various reasons.  And let us not forget that many women—particularly young women and victims of domestic abuse (by parents or spouses) are forced into abortions they do not want.   Far more women are forced into abortions than anyone likes to admit.

Abortions are also physically intrusive and frightening for some.  The cramping and suction or viewing of fetal remains can be terrifying for some.  And in some cases the traumatic nature of abortion is a result of the doctor who performs it—his or her abusive nature or failure to perform the procedure in a medically sound manner.

While we would hope that Dr. Gosnell—if he can even properly be referred to as a doctor—is the rare case, I have unfortunately heard too many first person stories of similar although lesser horrors. 

Many women have told me of pregnancies that were not properly dated as the doctor only did their examination once they had already paid for and were fully committed to their abortions—as in up in stirrups and fully prepped for it.  And as pregnancy by physical examination and recall of last menstruation is not as accurate as ultrasound, one woman I worked with found herself with an incomplete abortion—she left the clinic thinking she had been given a first term abortion—when in fact she went home with the head and shoulder of an aborted seventeen week fetal child still left inside. Likewise a nurse told me of a hysterectomy done on a woman in which a live fetus was removed along with her uterus—the doctor never bothering to tell his patient that he had mistaken a tumor for a live fetus that he had then removed under anesthesia along with her uterus.  One abortion clinic doctor in Wisconsin admitted performing an abortion on a woman who was so distraught that she had moved into a dissociated state during her abortion and was talking baby talk during the procedure.  That doctor apparently never thought to stop the procedure and deal with the distress of her patient.

Likewise I have argued for years that most U.S. based abortion clinics fail to obtain a true informed consent.  When a distressed woman shows up at their door she is in many cases asked to fill out paper work including signing an informed consent and to pay for her procedure prior to meeting with any health care provider.  And the abortion procedure is often explained in many clinics in group settings (in a mill like format) often by a non-medically educated informant who explains the procedure without explaining all the options, nor insuring that each group member understands how pregnant she is, and what the procedure entails. 

Most women at U.S. abortion clinics only meet their doctors once they are up on the table in stirrups—hardly a time to carry out a careful informed consent procedure—to have time to respond with any careful deliberation to accurate dating of her gestational stage, etc. Women also leave such clinics often with little understanding of what to expect in terms of possible negative outcomes—particularly psychological ones such as traumatic grief, acute stress responses, overwhelming guilt, etc.  And if they do feel traumatized by their abortions they often don’t want to return to the source of the trauma and don’t know where to turn.  These issues of course are compounded for underage minors who may be acting in an acute state of fear without the protective guidance of an adult that truly cares for their well-being.

Some years ago I attended a U.S. medical panel over which Dr. Nada Stotland presided—a psychiatrist who has for years denied that women can be traumatized by the actual experience of abortion.  She and the other panelists bemoaned the fact that medical schools could no longer force unwilling doctors to learn to perform abortions, and that young American doctors were increasingly finding providing abortions unsavory and that increasingly, ill-reputed doctors who were forced out of their practices by lawsuits and the like were becoming abortion providers—with all the attendant scandals that same with them.  Apparently Dr. Gosnell was of this ilk.

Today we see a doctor convicted of murder for taking the lives of fetuses he had just taken from the womb.  I’ve always wondered about the teenagers who get similar convictions for denying to themselves or possibly even dissociating the fact of their pregnancies—until they deliver—often in inconvenient circumstances—such as at a high school dance or party.  Totally in shock at the delivery of a full term infant they toss the child aside and when the evidence of the “trash can baby” catches up to them they also receive convictions for manslaughter.  Yet if they had gone for a late term abortion and the doctor had managed to end the fetal child’s life while still inside the teen’s body it would have been a medical procedure.  There’s something highly schizophrenic about that—hardly something we can expect a young troubled teen in a high state of distress to fully comprehend.

Likewise we must admit that abortion is often also used against women.  Women all over the world have been forced into abortions they didn’t want—in China because of the one child policy.  Likewise female fetuses have been the subject of massive gendercide in both China and India.  Here in the states, some women are forced and coerced into abortions they don’t want by family members and many women feel ill equipped to stand up to a partner who believes paying for an abortion absolves him of his duty to pay child support if the woman opts to carry the pregnancy to term.  When it comes to abortion far more women than we care to admit, face choice-less choices.

The truth is every abortion represents a crisis of sorts—a failure of some kind—birth control, relationship, timing, one’s ability to provide for self and baby, etc.  And every abortion says something about the society we live in—where parents don’t have access to good day care and may not have health insurance or the wherewithal to provide for their children.  Whether one sees abortion as a life option, tragic necessity or as violence, we need as a society to find useful ways to discuss abortion, the way it’s provided and its effect on women and society. 

Dr. Gosnell was a sick doctor.  But there is also something wrong with a public health system that received numerous complaints about him and seemingly for political concerns did nothing to stop him.

Politics have also stood in the way of good research being conducted to examine psychological responses in a nationally representative sample to all pregnancy outcomes: live birth, miscarriage, induced abortion, and still birth (and perhaps even including adoption).  I offered in 1987 to our National Center for Health Statistics a simple mechanism for collecting such data via a short interview to be attached to an already existing survey—but fear of the answers—on both sides of the issue staunchly squelched the idea.

The politics of abortion and our inability to objectively seek the truth on these matters in a rational manner have for years thwarted my attempts to collect objective, nationally representative data on postpartum pregnancy outcomes.  And feminist researchers like myself—who have tried for years to painstakingly document and truthfully address the fact that not all women do well with abortion, have been all but silenced. 

The truth is not all, but some women having abortions—are traumatized, have anxiety responses, panic disorders, depression, acute and posttraumatic stress responses, psychosis, traumatic bereavement, etc.  There is an entire spectrum of psychological responses to abortion and when some women don’t do well with it, or are even abused by their provider, and become traumatized—that trauma should not be one more statistic under the rubric of  “the politically incorrect trauma” just because we wish to keep all options open for all women.  We must be able to talk rationally about these issues and to conduct good research on the subject.

And we must acknowledge that some women don’t do well with abortion—and sometimes—rarely so—but sometimes—it’s because the person who provided it was a butcher.

Anne Speckhard, Ph.D. is Adjunct Associate Professor of Psychiatry in the Georgetown University Medical School and author of Fetal Abduction: The True Story of Multiple Personalities and Murder and Talking to Terrorists: Understanding the Psycho-Social Motivations of Militant Jihadi Terrorists, Mass Hostage Takers, Suicide Bombers & “Martyrs” She is also currently serving as the co-chair of the American Psychological Association, Division 48, Presidential Task Force on “Research Agenda on Abortion from a Peace Psychology Perspective”.

 

The Chechen Black Widows—Female Terrorists in al Qaeda and the Tsarnaev Brothers

As Tamerlan Tsarnaev’s body awaits a burial place and Dzhokar Tsarnaev a trial for charges of using weapons of mass destruction, the spotlight has temporarily been turned to the elder brother Tamerlan’s wife, Katherine Russell, whose computer has been found to have al Qaeda materials downloaded to it and whose kitchen and bathroom show traces of explosive materials indicating the brothers’ bombs were likely assembled in her home.  Katherine Russell, an all American girl who converted to Islam after falling in love with Tamerlan was married to him in June of 2010 and together they had a small child.

Russell claims that she knew nothing about her husband’s intentions and has, according to FBI informal reports, been working closely with them.  The possibility that Russell could also be a terrorist alongside her husband raises questions for many about the involvement of the female “Black Widows” –suicide operatives in the Chechen terrorist groups that following the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, hijacked that republic’s secular independence movement turning it into a Chechen “jihad”.

During the early nineties when the Chechen secular rebel movement was met with a firm Russian response culminating in the first Chechen war of independence, the Chechen freedom fighters looked to the west for support.  Except for westerners decrying human rights violations, the Chechen freedom fighters didn’t find the support they hoped for.  But they did find—between the two wars of independence with Russia—an influx of foreign fighters coming victorious from the Afghan jihad—militants still euphoric over defeating the former USSR.  These foreign fighters were confident that they could declare and win a “jihad” in Chechnya as well.

Most notable among them was Saudi foreign fighter Khattab, who brought the nascent al Qaeda ideology along with the methods of “martyrdom” or suicide missions into the Chechen battle for independence.  He successfully convinced then rebel leader Shamil Basaeyev to change methods.  Khattab and other foreign fighters brought the ideology, themselves as trainers and funneled funds into the “Chechen jihad” changing it completely. And as a result starting in 2000, a long terrorist campaign grew up out of the Chechen rebel movement in which over thirty suicide missions were carried out involving over one hundred and twelve “martyrs” half of whom were women operatives who blew themselves up in subways, on airplanes, at checkpoints and most infamously who took over a Moscow theater of over eight hundred theater goers and the Beslan school, taking over twelve hundred hostages—mostly women and children. 

And what was perhaps most chilling about the Chechen terrorists was that they used women from the start.  The first Chechen suicide bombers were two young women who drove an explosive laden truck into their target.  Half of the hostage takers in Moscow were women dressed in long black Salafi style robes with bomb belts strapped to their waists—they were seen by journalist as women in mourning clothes when in fact they were dressed in conservative Islamic dress common to their extremist groups and they were wrongly dubbed the “Black Widows”. 

All the Chechen suicide bombers that we conducted psychological autopsies on (over half of the total) had lost a family member traumatically to the two wars but the women had lost not only husbands, but brothers and fathers as well—so many were widows, but some were simply traumatically bereaved and seeking revenge.  For Chechens this was the first time that women had been involved in revenge seeking behaviors – a domain in Chechen culture usually reserved only for the men.

As Chechens joined the militant jihadi ideology we found that they were instructed by their Middle Eastern teachers that they should fulfill their life duties before going on suicide missions—by marrying and having children—something that Tamerlan also did.  Likewise women were presented in their world view as useful for childbearing but the best “love” was presented as “brotherly” or homosexual lovemaking and women were presented as needing to be respected, but as unclean.  Basaeyev as well as other terrorist leaders also chose their wives strategically from among various areas and clans so as to guarantee protection when needed from their extended families.

The Chechen case gave us one of the first insights into how women carry out their roles in militant jihadi groups.  Thus far al-Qaeda central has been slow to use women—although two Belgian women were recruited into their ranks and one—a European descent white convert—Muriel Degauque carried out a suicide mission in Iraq.  Al Qaeda in Iraq also began to use female bombers toward the end when males could no longer pass the checkpoints and we have now seen them in Afghanistan as well.  But unlike in Chechnya where women joined the fighters in the forest and were suicide bombers from the beginning, al Qaeda has kept women in the roles of money carriers, instigators—some in Europe even offering themselves as a prize in marriage to potential “martyrs”, as translators of militant jihadi texts into the local languages and in some rare cases even as suicide operatives and trainers.  Women have yet to be fully activated in al Qaeda central. 

And although women joined right from the start in the Chechen case, we did not find them in leadership roles—men still call the shots when it comes to terrorism. Indeed in the Moscow theater hostage taking the women terrorists inside the theater (mercifully) did not detonate their bombs without an order from the men who were outside the theater proper—engaged in battle with Russian Special Forces.  Although the women could have blown the theater and all those held there to bits, had they felt the initiative to act on their own.

With Katherine Russell, we still wait to learn more.  She was a hardworking mother supporting her family—working seventy to eighty hours a week outside her home.  She may have been just like the many Palestinian family members I interviewed who were in complete shock upon learning their son or daughter had blown themselves up—and she may have failed to notice how radicalized and serious her husband had become about his extremist views.  Lack of knowledge and denial of the horrific is often a common attribute among close family members of terrorists.

Her case does however bring up a chilling parallel of the 7-7 London metro bomber, Germaine Lindsay’s widow—Samantha Lewthwaite—who also claimed innocence after her husband’s terrorist act, calling it “abhorrent”. Lewthwaite, also the mother of her “martyred” husband’s two children later turned up in Kenya leading and carrying out terrorist attacks against western targets.  Lewthwaite according to a UK police officer’s comments reported in the Telegraph to have written in her diary that the devoted wife of a mujahid (holy warrior) must realize that her “life in the hereafter promised to be sweeter because of her husband’s “sacrifice” and that a wife must be “discrete”, “obedient” and must understand that her husband’s calling meant that she and her husband would be cut off from their families.

Let’s hope the story of a terrorist’s wife and mother to his child doesn’t follow those same lines in the case of Katherine Russell who in any case must be suffering from a great deal of sadness and loss over her husband’s sudden heinous death.  And let’s hope that al Qaeda continues to be reluctant to use women operatives as time has proven they are the best at passing security checkpoints and lulling us into a false sense of safety. 

Anne Speckhard, Ph.D. is Adjunct Associate Professor of Psychiatry in the Georgetown University Medical School and author of Talking to Terrorists: Understanding the Psycho-Social Motivations of Militant Jihadi Terrorists, Mass Hostage Takers, Suicide Bombers & “Martyrs” In the last decade she interviewed over four hundred terrorists, suicide bombers, terrorist supporters, family members, close associates and hostages. She also conducted psychological autopsies with a Chechen colleague on over half of the 112 Chechen suicide bombers investigating what put them on the terrorist trajectory and what motivated them to explode themselves.

Is There Much More to the Tamerlan Tsarnaev Story than Meets the Eye? What is the Meaning of the Ritualized 9-11 Tenth Anniversary Murders of Three Young Men–One that Tamerlan Called his “Best Friend”?

Radicalized into an extremist form of Islam over the Internet and by perhaps also meeting with extremists in Dagestan and even in Boston it appears that Tamerlan Tsarnaev was the main instigator behind the Boston marathon bombings–bringing his younger brother along with him into his murderous acts.

As the facts of the case are still being uncovered it looks like Tamerlan Tsarnaev, a young man who came out of the Chechen conflict was perhaps carrying traumatic memories in his heart and was well aware of the civilian casualties and human rights atrocities there–even having lived through some of them. And perhaps feeling sympathy for Muslims in other parts of the world who also live under oppression, he fell prey to the al Qaeda militant jihadi ideology that claims Muslims are under attack by western powers and urges Muslims to do something about it.

From his Internet record it appears that on his road to extremism Tamerlan felt particular empathy for the rebel uprising in Syria that was being crushed with a high civilian death toll by Assad, as was the Chechen uprising crushed by Putin. We know that Tamerlan entered this country a vulnerable individual–an asylum seeker with likely sympathy for Muslims under attack and somewhere–either in his Internet browsing, trip to Dagestan or even in Boston–he encountered a virulent ideology espoused by a worldwide terrorist group as well as social support for buying into a sick narrative.

Tamerlan was also stymied in his pursuit of the American dream. His father, a former official in the Kyrgyz prosecutor’s office struggled to make it here–demoted to a car mechanic working outside in the cold. His parents divorced, his mother was arrested for shoplifting and they both left the country. Excelling as boxer, Tamerlan found his dreams dashed as well. In 2010 he was blocked from continuing to compete by his immigration status following a change in the boxing tournament rules. Once a flamboyant, cocky upstart known to enjoy partying, Tamerlan became dejected and retreated into a conservative form of Islam–rejecting those who had rejected him–and he then slipped somewhere along that path into extremism.

But is this the whole story in his case?

It appears not so, as the reopening of a triple homicide in Boston, occurring on 9-11-2011 is also raising some other troubling questions about Tamerlan Tsarnaev.

The homocides involve the murder of three young men–two Jewish and the third, Brendan Mess–a young man who Tamerlan had formerly introduced at his boxing gym as his “best friend”. The men were murdered in their apartment on a highly symbolic date–the tenth anniversary of the 9-11 al Qaeda attacks. There was with no forced entry–it appears the young men opened their door to a familiar person. $5000 was left on the scene of the crime indicating it was not a robbery. And the men each had their throats slit–in the same manner in which Mohamed Boyeri of the Netherlands ritually murdered Theo van Gogh, a man who Boyeri viewed as an apostate. Some reports state that the three were nearly beheaded–a crime common among Chechen terrorists. And marijuana was sprinkled over their bodies. It seems the crime was meant to convey a message–about the corrupting power of the west, drugs and a militant jihadi answer–of annihilation and destruction.

Tellingly, after the murder of his “best friend” Tamerlan did not attend the funeral and self isolated–he stopped going to the gym. He was already at that time a “revert” for a couple of years to a more conservative form of Islam than is practiced in his home country–except by extremists–and he had backed off of drinking, changed his dress and lifestyle. He had also argued with some of his family members about his views of Islam, expressing extremist’s views, calling one uncle an infidel and telling them that Allah had a plan for him–that he no longer had a need to concern himself with work or studies. And within three months of the murders he disappeared to Dagestan only to reemerge in July 2012 apparently with an ugly plot forming in his mind.

Is there a connection between the 9-11 murders of Tamerlan’s “best friend” and his roommates? Was theirs a ritualized Takfiri murder similar to beheadings carried out by al Qaeda affiliated groups throughout the world, Chechen terrorists and others expressing their murderous rage at the west? Had Tamerlan–perhaps like many trauma survivors or those stressed by immigration–tried to calm his nerves by drinking or using drugs? But then after having lived outside of Islamic rules in the west later decided to clean up by “reverting” to a conservative form of Islam, fall into extremism and in doing so blamed the west for corrupting him–then seeking to destroy it? Or was he angry about his brother’s marijuana use and striking out at those who may have supplied him?

Certainly the April bombings point to a young man who was filled with a self righteous hatred that allowed him to strike out at innocent men, women and children–maiming and killing them with no sense of conscience. Did this hate have some of its origins in either his or his brother’s drug use and a wish to destroy those who he blamed for corrupting him?

These are questions that still remain unanswered but beg to be more thoroughly investigated by the authorities.

Is There Much More to the Tamerlan Tsaraev Story than Meets the Eye? What is the Meaning of the Ritualized 9-11 Tenth Anniversary Murders of Three Young Men–One that Tamerlan Called his “Best Friend”?

Radicalized into an extremist form of Islam over the Internet and by perhaps also meeting with extremists in Dagestan and even in Boston it appears that Tamerlan Tsaraev was the main instigator behind the Boston marathon bombings–bringing his younger brother along with him into his murderous acts.

As the facts of the case are still being uncovered it looks like Tamerlan Tsaraev, a young man who came out of the Chechen conflict was perhaps carrying traumatic memories in his heart and was well aware of the civilian casualties and human rights atrocities there–even having lived through some of them. And perhaps feeling sympathy for Muslims in other parts of the world who also live under oppression, he fell prey to the al Qaeda militant jihadi ideology that claims Muslims are under attack by western powers and urges Muslims to do something about it.

From his Internet record it appears that on his road to extremism Tamerlan felt particular empathy for the rebel uprising in Syria that was being crushed with a high civilian death toll by Assad, as was the Chechen uprising crushed by Putin. We know that Tamerlan entered this country a vulnerable individual–an asylum seeker with likely sympathy for Muslims under attack and somewhere–either in his Internet browsing, trip to Dagestan or even in Boston–he encountered a virulent ideology espoused by a worldwide terrorist group as well as social support for buying into a sick narrative.

Tamerlan was also stymied in his pursuit of the American dream. His father, a former official in the Kyrgyz prosecutor’s office struggled to make it here–demoted to a car mechanic working outside in the cold. His parents divorced, his mother was arrested for shoplifting and they both left the country. Excelling as boxer, Tamerlan found his dreams dashed as well. In 2010 he was blocked from continuing to compete by his immigration status following a change in the boxing tournament rules. Once a flamboyant, cocky upstart known to enjoy partying, Tamerlan became dejected and retreated into a conservative form of Islam–rejecting those who had rejected him–and he then slipped somewhere along that path into extremism.

But is this the whole story in his case?

It appears not so, as the reopening of a triple homicide in Boston, occurring on 9-11-2011 is also raising some other troubling questions about Tamerlan Tsaraev.

The homocides involve the murder of three young men–two Jewish and the third, Brendan Mess–a young man who Tamerlan had formerly introduced at his boxing gym as his “best friend”. The men were murdered in their apartment on a highly symbolic date–the tenth anniversary of the 9-11 al Qaeda attacks. There was with no forced entry–it appears the young men opened their door to a familiar person. $5000 was left on the scene of the crime indicating it was not a robbery. And the men each had their throats slit–in the same manner in which Mohamed Boyeri of the Netherlands ritually murdered Theo van Gogh, a man who Boyeri viewed as an apostate. Some reports state that the three were nearly beheaded–a crime common among Chechen terrorists. And marijuana was sprinkled over their bodies. It seems the crime was meant to convey a message–about the corrupting power of the west, drugs and a militant jihadi answer–of annihilation and destruction.

Tellingly, after the murder of his “best friend” Tamerlan did not attend the funeral and self isolated–he stopped going to the gym. He was already at that time a “revert” for a couple of years to a more conservative form of Islam than is practiced in his home country–except by extremists–and he had backed off of drinking, changed his dress and lifestyle. He had also argued with some of his family members about his views of Islam, expressing extremist’s views, calling one uncle an infidel and telling them that Allah had a plan for him–that he no longer had a need to concern himself with work or studies. And within three months of the murders he disappeared to Dagestan only to reemerge in July 2012 apparently with an ugly plot forming in his mind.

Is there a connection between the 9-11 murders of Tamerlan’s “best friend” and his roommates? Was theirs a ritualized Takfiri murder similar to beheadings carried out by al Qaeda affiliated groups throughout the world, Chechen terrorists and others expressing their murderous rage at the west? Had Tamerlan–perhaps like many trauma survivors or those stressed by immigration–tried to calm his nerves by drinking or using drugs? But then after having lived outside of Islamic rules in the west later decided to clean up by “reverting” to a conservative form of Islam, fall into extremism and in doing so blamed the west for corrupting him–then seeking to destroy it? Or was he angry about his brother’s marijuana use and striking out at those who may have supplied him?

Certainly the April bombings point to a young man who was filled with a self righteous hatred that allowed him to strike out at innocent men, women and children–maiming and killing them with no sense of conscience. Did this hate have some of its origins in either his or his brother’s drug use and a wish to destroy those who he blamed for corrupting him?

These are questions that still remain unanswered but beg to be more thoroughly investigated by the authorities.

Lone Wolf Terrorist Attacks–are they Really Lonely? The Boston bombers and how they may have radicalized over the Internet

Writing answers from his hospital bed, 19-year-old accused bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev told investigators that he and his older brother Tamerlan acted alone – that they received no training or support from outside terrorist groups and planned their attack following instructions from the al Qaeda in the Arab Peninsula’s online magazine Inspire – according to official remarks from government officials Tuesday.

This brings up questions of if the two were indeed “self” radicalized as Dzhokhar claims – explaining that his slain older brother, Tamerlan, was “upset” by the U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and thus angrily justified attacking Americans as a result. It also brings up questions of how “lonely” these lone wolves actually were. 

Nowadays with terrorist groups present on the Internet it is entirely possible to bring all four elements of the lethal cocktail of terrorism together simply sitting in front of a computer monitor. These four elements – that I found in my interviews of over 400 terrorists, terrorist supporters, suicide bombers, their family members, close associates and even their hostages are: the group, the ideology, social support for terrorism and the individual vulnerabilities inside the potential terrorist recruit. 

And while I definitely found individuals who were radicalized via the Internet, in all my interviews with terrorists it took more than just exposure to a terrorist group and its virulent ideology via the Internet.  There was always a handler, some small cell at a minimum that provided social support, as well as planners, senders and equippers. Now however Al Qaeda may have made that all obsolete – if what Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is saying is true – we may indeed learn that the group, the ideology and the social support may all be supplied via the Internet. 

However with breaking news now reporting Dzhokhar as speaking about a man named “Misha” who may have been instigating in Tamerlan’s case – at least moving him down the terrorist trajectory – we may see again the warm hands of a real human combined with what exists in the virtual “University of Jihad” available via the Internet.  

When it comes to individual vulnerabilities these two young men came on asylum visa out of the war-torn Chechen area – similar to the Somali boys from Minnesota who also joined the militant jihadi movement after coming for asylum here in the U.S. – although their paths to radicalization differed in they chose to leave our country, albeit to join al Shabaab which does name the U.S. as its enemy. 

Tamerlan – according to his kindergarten teacher (speaking in Russian to reporters in Kyrghizstan) had lived through the first Chechen war of independence and as a young boy showed reactivity to loud noises like firecrackers.  And being connected to a Chechen clan–he and his brother surely heard many stories, if not actually lived through the many human rights violations and killings of Chechen civilians in the decade of conflicts.

Having direct knowledge of the Chechen sufferings likely made Tamerlan and his brother highly responsive to civilian Muslim victims in other parts of the world and potentially increased their vulnerability to be drawn into extremist explanations and narratives about ‘Muslims under attack’ and the need for militant jihad. Tamerlan displayed his sympathy and anger over the heavy handed crushing by Assad of the Syrian rebel movement and of the killing of civilians there–he had uploaded a video showing the Syrian atrocities–events similar to the civilian deaths and human rights violations that occurred under Putin’s iron fisted response to the Chechen uprisings.

As an immigrant from a conservative Muslim culture Tamerlan also underwent the stressors of multiple moves, entering a completely new culture as a teenager and this with many temptations for coping–drugs and alcohol at the ready.  His father failed to make a living here, his parents quarreled and split up, his father developed a brain tumor and both parents returned to Dagestan leaving the two boys alone in a foreign country with an extended family that apparently rejected them.  Tamerlan had dreams of going to the Olympics for boxing but didn’t make it, he went to community college but dropped out and he was unemployed relying on his wife to support the family at the time of the attacks. 

If Tamerlan was having trouble settling here, as his uncle claims, and especially if he had a drug or alcohol problem he might have been deeply vulnerable to an extremist group and ideology offering him a way to clean up his act – even if it meant taking him down the road toward terrorism.  The militant jihad I found in my interviews with terrorists around the world offers a psychological first aid for troubled Muslim youth.  It offers an emotional salve for PTSD, along with a set of strict rules to step out of chaos, and if that proves too difficult an easy exit from life’s pain as a “martyr”.  And for those who chose the “martyrdom” path I found that can be accompanied by such a deep sense of euphoria – delivering a high that can be as strong as any narcotic drug for a would be “martyr” – that it sustains him to the point where he pulls the cord ending his life as he takes others with him. 

Tamerlan was clearly enamored of the militant jihadi ideology.  He had uploaded a video on his site in which Dagestani “Emir Abu Dudzhana” warns that he will kill anyone who willingly works for the Dagestani republican government or Russian federal government.  And Dzhokhar states that the two brothers radicalized by watching extremist websites and videos and that they drew their bomb plans from Inspire magazine put out by al Qaeda in the Arabian Penisula.

But was the Internet the whole story? Tamerlan’s mother says she encouraged her son to take on a more conservative form of Islam.  Why?  And both she and his wife wore a form of hidjab much more conservative than is what is indigenous to Chechen culture.  Why did she urge her son to become more religious?  Was he struggling with drugs and alcohol and needed a way out?  Many persons have found their way out by turning to religion.  But perhaps, if this was his path with all his other vulnerabilities and easy access to extremist ideologies at the click of a mouse he got pulled too far – way beyond conservative Islam – into violent extremism. 

In asking how and why, we still have this issue of the unsolved triple murders that occurred on 9/11 murders of three young men whose parents are now asking for the case to be reopened in light of Tamerlan’s alleged involvement in terrorism. Tamerlan once introduced one of the murdered young men as his best friend.  Later that youth turned up with his throat slit and marijuana sprinkled over his body.  Was this a ritualized militant jihadi murder – similar to how Mohammed Boyeri in the Netherlands killed Theo van Gogh for what Boyeri believed were Gogh’s apostate ways? 

In my interviews with extremists I have found cases where young first and second generation immigrant Muslims who have gotten into drugs, womanizing, homosexual relationships or anything else forbidden to them and later enter extremist groups as a way to cleanse themselves.  However, instead of coming to terms with their own behaviors they are encouraged into the psychological defense of splitting – in which they project their hatred outward and seek to destroy the host culture that they blame for having corrupted them.  Was this also part of the picture in Tamerlan’s case?  Did this play any role in the murders if Tamerlan is shown to be involved in them?  Could this be one of the reasons he left for Dagestan in the first place?  And while there, did he also find social support for solidifying his already forming extremists views?

While investigators work hard to piece the story together we already know that the ideology and the equipping that terrorist recruiters usually offer in person is now available virtually, as is the social support for terrorist attacks upon the west.  So even if they turn out to be two lone wolf attackers – we also know that they weren’t necessarily that lonely. 

They were perhaps lonely – as new immigrants missing their parents who had divorced and moved back to Dagestan – and they perhaps felt alone. But they were hardly alone once they decided to adopt an extremist ideology and join the global militant jihad.  Even if all the companionship they found, including the instructions and perverted virulent ideology to justify their attacks was only virtual – it seems that was enough to move them into action.

Anne Speckhard, Ph.D. is Adjunct Associate Professor of Psychiatry in the Georgetown University Medical School and author of Talking to Terrorists: Understanding the Psycho-Social Motivations of Militant Jihadi Terrorists, Mass Hostage Takers, Suicide Bombers & “Martyrs”  In the last decade she interviewed over four hundred terrorists, suicide bombers, terrorist supporters, family members, close associates and hostages.  She also conducted psychological autopsies with a Chechen colleague on over half of the 112 Chechen suicide bombers investigating what put them on the terrorist trajectory and what motivated them to explode themselves.

Mocked by Rush Limbaugh I wait to hear his explanations of how worldwide terrorist networks radicalize asylum seekers who live among us…that is if he can think that deeply about the issue.

I heard today I was getting mocked by Rush Limbaugh for referring to the signs of PTSD in Tamerlan Tsaraev that his kindergarten teacher referenced in a Russian language newscast… Well Rush you need to wake up and start thinking about how these things happen, because they aren’t going away. 

 Terrorist groups, their ideologies and the degrees of social support for terrorism that individuals find on the Internet and in various parts of the world (Dagestan potentially) all play upon the individual vulnerabilities of potential recruits turning them into evil actors. 

 Some don’t want to hear about the vulnerabilities of terrorists retrospectively, feeling it extends sympathy for them, but if we don’t empathetically try to get into their heads and begin to understand the reasons why they could ever buy onto a terrorist ideology we will never defeat terrorism. 

And in the case of Tamerlan’s PTSD it could make him sympathetic to the terrorist narrative of Muslims under attack and also make it easy for him to dissociate from any normal emotions about doing violence to those he lived among and had decided are his enemies.

Regarding the ritualized murders he may be linked to, it would be much like what happened to Theo van Gogh in the Netherlands an evil act carried out by Mohammed Bouyeri, a second generation immigrant also vulnerable for other reasons to turning to a militant jihadi ideology.

 Only careful study including retrospective analysis of the cases we encounter will allow us to come up with thoughtful solutions that can actually work to defeat terrorism.  Mock away Rush, some of us are spending decades of our lives journeying into war torn areas and taking the risks necessary for such study.

 Anne Speckhard, Ph.D. is Adjunct Associate Professor of Psychiatry in the Georgetown University Medical School and author of Talking to Terrorists: Understanding the Psycho-Social Motivations of Militant Jihadi Terrorists, Mass Hostage Takers, Suicide Bombers & “Martyrs”  In the last decade she interviewed over four hundred terrorists, suicide bombers, terrorist supporters, family members, close associates and hostages.  She also conducted psychological autopsies with a Chechen colleague on over half of the 112 Chechen suicide bombers investigating what put them on the terrorist trajectory and what motivated them to explode themselves.

Psychological Splitting and Hating the Freedom Afforded by the West—Thoughts on the Boston Bombers Possible Involvement in Murder and Terrorism

While news is still breaking over the Tsaraev brothers and their apparent vile hatred for the West, everyone is asking how did the Chechen conflict infect these young men so deeply that they struck out here against Americans who have nothing to do with the heavy handed Russian crushing of their independence movement?  The answers are still emerging, but the facts look like a profile we’ve seen before –including possibly that of the 9-11 bombers—of those Muslims who have come to the west from extremely conservative cultures, seeking its freedoms and later coming to hate the very things they at first embraced and profited from.

While we still don’t know the details of the Tsaraev brothers alleged radicalization and Tamerlan’s possible involvement in the ritualized murder of a young man he formerly introduced as a friend, it fits a pattern I’ve seen before. When a first or second generation Muslims from an extremely conservative society confronts the freedoms to drink, chase women and engage in activities that are forbidden to him in his home culture he may find that he has poorly built internal constraints to keep him within his moral comfort zone.  This is because in the society he came from these constraints are provided to him externally by a system of very strict rules requiring women to be covered, interactions across the gender divide to be strictly regulated and drugs and alcohol to be outlawed.  In the freedoms of the west—particularly if he came, like Tamerlan apparently did, from a war torn area rife with trauma, and if he has PTSD—he may turn to drugs and alcohol to self medicate his traumas or simply for the enjoyment of temporarily living a free and fast lifestyle.  But later the “fall” into the “evils” of the West may cause a deep crisis of guilt, grief and need to come to terms with what he regards as inner corruption.

Then if he engages in the psychological mechanism of splitting or disavowing the “bad” self, the “sinner” may project his anger outside of himself blaming and wanting to destroy others for his inner corruption. If this is what occurred with Tamerlan—which we have no way of knowing yet, although there is evidence that he had turned away from drinking and that his brother regularly smoked up—he would have failed to look inside himself for whatever caused him to turn to drugs and alcohol.  And he would have blamed western society for corrupting him—and in his disavowal of his “bad” self—wished to punish or destroy the community that he saw as responsible for his corruption.

This unfortunately is often the mechanism that militant jihadi ideologues take advantage of when preying upon lost young Muslims trying to make their way in western cultures they don’t understand. And we know Tamerlan felt alienated in our culture stating that he didn’t have friends and didn’t understand Americans.  We also know from an interview in Russian with his Kyrgyz teacher that he came out of Chechnya traumatized and sensitive to loud noises like firecrackers—that he appeared to have war trauma.  Indeed as a young child he may have had PTSD.

Now with the news of the friend he had being ritually murdered—having his throat slashed apparently on 9-11 with cash left in the murder site and drugs sprinkled all across his body it certainly looks like this splitting mechanism could be one of the motives if Tamerlan turns out to indeed be responsible for the murders. 

There are still so many questions to be answered but it’s clear that militant jihadi terrorist groups with their virulent ideology proclaiming that Muslims are under attack by Western powers and calling for and even providing instructions for Muslims in the west to rise up and attack, may find a resonant response in young men coming with traumas from war torn areas.  From the jihadi videos and uploads on Tamerlan’s Internet site we know that he felt sympathy for the Syrian rebel uprising and innocent civilians killed by Assad, and that he had been pulled into glorifying the militant jihadi movement.  

What we still don’t know is how the brothers if they are the perpetrators had their psychological vulnerabilities activated into taking part in terrorism and potentially murder as well—but the psychological splitting mechanism alongside a terrorist group and ideology urging such action is one potential explanation.

Anne Speckhard, Ph.D. is Adjunct Associate Professor of Psychiatry in the Georgetown University Medical School and author of Talking to Terrorists: Understanding the Psycho-Social Motivations of Militant Jihadi Terrorists, Mass Hostage Takers, Suicide Bombers & “Martyrs”  In the last decade she interviewed over four hundred terrorists, suicide bombers, terrorist supporters, family members, close associates and hostages.  She also conducted psychological autopsies with a Chechen colleague on over half of the 112 Chechen suicide bombers investigating what put them on the terrorist trajectory and what motivated them to explode themselves.

How Does My Neighbor Become a Terrorist? The Chechen Boston Bombers – Delving into the Minds of Terrorists to Try to Understand their Motivations

The two Chechen brothers who are suspects in the Boston bombings—Tamerlan Tsarnaev, 26—now dead, and his younger brother, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, 19—who was captured and remains in serious condition at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, raise important questions of how the terrorism in the Chechen conflict appears to have ended up being played out here as well.  Having interviewed over four hundred terrorists, their family members, close associates and even hostages worldwide—including those from Chechnya, I have some ideas as to how these young boys may have been radicalized.

Both boys, Chechen by ethnicity came to the U.S. a decade ago from Kyrgyzstan via Dagestan in 2002 and 2003, where they had lived in a Chechen enclave in the town of Tormok.   Tamerlan (who arrived at age 15) and his father especially appear to have been struggling to succeed as new immigrants in Boston.  While Tamerlan became a successful Golden Gloves boxer he never made a living from it, nor achieved his dream of making it to the Olympics, and when funds became a problem he was forced to drop out of community college.  His father a talented auto mechanic also never found steady work, reportedly got a brain tumor and separating from his wife, returned back to Dagestan. Dzhokhar (who arrived at age 9 or 10), appears well liked, charismatic but to have been struggling in university.  He also had been researching his Chechen roots—perhaps trying to understand where he came from.

Tamerlan’s mother reports that in 2008 he became more religious—probably referring to his turning to a conservative form of Islam, and his uncle reports that in 2009 that Tamerlan called the uncle an infidel and stated that that God had a plan for him—that he no longer needed to be concerned about work or studies.  During that same time period Tamerlan was arrested for allegedly assaulting his girlfriend.  In 2010 he married and had a baby.  He had grown a beard, begun keeping the five Islamic prayer times and his wife also covered herself in manner not normal for mainstream Chechens—he was clearly deeply religious, but only the infidel comment give signs of extremism at that point. 

In January 2012, Tamerlan Tsarnaev travelled to Dagestan, a republic in the Russian Federation adjacent to Chechnya, where his father currently resides—and flew back to the United States in July, according to a U.S. official.  During his six months in Dagestan we don’t know what happened but after returning in 2012 Tameran put up a video of a Chechen militant calling for militant jihad as well as some other terrorist videos.  The Chechen militant featured in the video was later killed in a violent confrontation in Dagestan with Russians.

Tamerlan also put up videos of the Syrian regime’s brutal killing of civilians in response to their rebel movement.  Evidently Tamerlan became enamored of, and was drawn into glorifying what began as the Chechen secular independence movement—an insurgency that transitioned into the Chechen “jihad” and which then spread into a terrorist insurgent movement through out the region—via what in 2005 was announced by Chechen rebel leader Baseyev as the New Caucasus Front. 

And perhaps because of what he knew about the crushing of the Chechen rebel movement by the heavy handed Russians, Tamerlan easily identified, felt empathy for, and was enraged by what is now going on in Syria.  And from his empathy and identification with the traumas of others—alongside what must have been exposure to militant jihadis—either in Dagestan or over the Internet or elsewhere—Tamerlan it seems was drawn into the larger militant jihadi movement and was ultimately convinced (or convinced himself) that he should attack inside the U.S.

The insurgent group in the Caucasus is now led (after the death of Baseyev) by Doku (Abu Usman) Umarov. Designated as a terrorist organization by the United States its stated goal is to withdraw from Russia to establish the Caucasus Emirate in the region. Recently designated by the U.S. as terrorist organization and terrorist leader, Umarov responded by saying the U.S. move was a concession to the Russians and concluded, “I am the enemy of all of the enemies of Allah.”  However, the Chechen or wider Caucasus group have never specifically named the U.S. as a target, struck outside of Russia or plotted directly against the U.S. 

Indeed in an official statement in response to the Boston bombings the Dagestani militant group declared, “The command of the Vilayat Dagestan Mujahidin… declares that the Caucasus fighters are not waging any military activities against the United States of America. We are only fighting Russia,” This was stated via the Kavkazcenter.com website.

Chechens as individual militants however have long been involved in Al Qaeda activities in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan and throughout Europe—including some recent arrests in both Spain and France, and activity in Belgium. And the wider militant jihadi movement (al Qaeda and all it’s affiliates)—and the ideology propagated by Al Qaeda to which Chechens as individual fighters have adhered and been active individually in globally—does name the U.S. as an enemy.  It appears that this wider movement is what Tamerlan was drawn into—either in his trip to Dagestan or via the Internet.

Tamerlan’s methods also point in this direction, as the pressure cooker bombers that he and his brother allegedly used appear to have come straight out of the pages of the summer, 2010 issue of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula’s Inspire magazine entitled “Make a Bomb in the Kitchen of Your Mom”. This is a handbook Tamerlan could easily have accessed via the Internet or a method he could have learned in Dagestan.

The Inspire magazine article describes the pressurized cooker as an effective method for bomb-making, instructing online followers to: “Glue the shrapnel to the inside of the pressurized cooker then fill in the cooker with the inflammable material.”  These instructions for multiple methods of attack—including starting fires, creating explosions, even causing road accidents—were also placed online again this year in the Lone Mujahid Pocketbook, a summary of tips for the do-it-yourself jihadist again. In both cases the call is for “lone wolf” terrorists to rise up from inside the U.S. and attack here using simple methods inflicting damage in a “thousand wounds strategy” and was put out by al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula.   

While many of the Chechen terrorists have used suicide operations—following the Chechen rallying cry of “Victory or Paradise”—believing that their death equates into Islamic “martyrdom”, these boys did not elect that path.  The fact that the brothers had additional explosives and even a third pressure cooker bomb leads one to believe that they wanted to live, to fight another day.  Or potentially, if they got caught—they planned to stage a standoff dying in an explosion while killing those who came to arrest them.  It’s the usual modus operandi among Chechen terrorists who have had such standoffs in Dagestan and Chechnya in the past, and we saw the same activity with the Madrid train bombers, the husband of Muriel Degauque and others involved in the militant jihadi movement.

While we still don’t know the exact path the radicalization of Tamerlan took, the Russians had identified him over two years ago to the FBI as a “follower of radical Islam and a strong believer,” and informed U.S. officials that Tsarnaev “had changed drastically” since 2010 and was preparing to leave the United States “to join unspecified underground groups,” (this according to the FBI unofficial statements). 

Yet when the FBI interrogated Tsarnaev and his family members in 2011, as well as scoured his Internet accounts they found no evidence of terrorist related activity and they evidently dropped their investigation asking the Russians to continue sharing information about him, which the Russians apparently did not do.

The young men by all accounts were not displaying to others any other type of extremist activity.  The head of their local Muslim center in Boston told news outlet RIA-Novosti, “The brothers were members of our community in Cambridge. They wouldn’t come very often and they had never expressed any radical views.”

And when questioned, their father Anzor Tsarnaev also seems amazed.  Although having conducted research interviews investigating how nearly half of the 112 Chechen suicide bombers got on the terrorist trajectory, my collaborator (Khapta Ahkmedova) and I found the same disbelief among their Chechen parents who also had no idea of their family members involvement with local terrorist cells. 

Described as gentle, smart, peace-loving by their friends and family in Dagestan and also in the U.S. it appears that the boys, if indeed the perpetrators of the Boston attacks, held their hatred well hidden inside.  That these alleged terrorists had two sides to their personalities should not be a surprise.  First generation immigrants often feel that they have two selves—one identified to the cultural roots of their past who speaks the indigenous language at home and another that is the more assimilated self that takes on the host culture.  For many first generation immigrants these two selves can feel divided and pulled in differing directions.

In the UK some friends of the London metro bomber, Mohammed Siddiqui Khan were aware of his radicalization after he traveled back to Pakistan, while others felt completely astounded by the “killer” side to his personality.  I found the same interviewing family members of Palestinian suicide bombers and terrorists—often complete shock to find their family member radicalized to that extent.  Yet when I dug deeper I often found the roots in those from conflict zones usually related to traumatic loss and a desire for revenge. And for those not from conflict zones the radicalization was often connected to exposure by terrorist recruiters to graphic imagery of traumas inside conflict zones—images that terror groups are adept at using to manipulate their potential recruits to create empathy, identification and a sense of duty to fight in behalf of other Muslim victims.  In the case of these boys they had one foot in both regions.

That a young Chechen traveling back to Dagestan and potentially exposed to extremists there or trolling the Internet and exposing himself to AQ type messaging could be manipulated to become sympathetic to the global militant jihadi narrative that Muslims worldwide are under attack coupled with the call to attack western powers, is also not exactly surprising.  It happens in Europe, Canada and has happened here also with others coming from war torn areas—although in other cases the domestic plots have been thwarted or the actors traveled to attack outside the U.S.—as for example, in the case of the Somalis who left to join al Shabbab.

We also have evidence that Tamerlan was alienated and felt alone in the U.S.  He reportedly said, “I don’t have a single American friend,” in a photo essay about his love of boxing, adding “I don’t understand them.”  Yet at his boxing club he is said to have introduced to the owner there, a young man as his best friend who later was brutally killed in a still unsolved murder case that appears drug related.  Perhaps Tamerlan was deeply affected by that murder as well?  His father leaving, his friend murdered could certainly leave him feeling even more alone and vulnerable.  We also know that he had problems curbing his temper and had been hauled up on a domestic violence charges for striking his girlfriend.

While we still need to learn exactly what their paths for radicalization were, we can see that in this Internet age, the traumas that occur in one part of the world quickly travel through and influence actors far from them—particularly if they have any relation to them by family, ethnicity or roots—and when terrorist groups and their perverted ideologies become part of the mix that can become dangerous indeed.

Anne Speckhard, Ph.D. is Adjunct Associate Professor of Psychiatry in the Georgetown University Medical School and author of Talking to Terrorists: Understanding the Psycho-Social Motivations of Militant Jihadi Terrorists, Mass Hostage Takers, Suicide Bombers & “Martyrs”. In the last decade she interviewed over four hundred terrorists, suicide bombers, terrorist supporters, family members, close associates and hostages.  She also conducted psychological autopsies with a Chechen colleague on over half of the 112 Chechen suicide bombers investigating what put them on the terrorist trajectory and what motivated them to explode themselves.

The Long Arm of the Chechen War – How Empathy and Identity can be Twisted to Devastating Results

The Internet mouthpiece of the Chechen rebel and later terrorist movement — the Kavkazcenter.com— has long linked the Chechen independence struggle to a wider militant jihadi struggle—naming, but not limiting—Russians as their legitimate enemies.  Indeed Western powers have also been named as legitimate targets, with the statement made that “everyone who wages war against Islam and Muslims” are common enemies. The global militant jihadi narrative that Muslims are under attack worldwide and the call for fighters to strike back may have  ensnared the two Chechen brothers in Boston despite the outward appearances of assimilation into American culture.

As I found in my work interviewing terrorists worldwide—including conducting psychological autopsies through interviews of friends and families of over half of the Chechen suicide operatives – the trajectory to becoming a terrorist nearly always included a group, an ideology, and social support.  These factors were active in playing upon the individual vulnerabilities of the potential terrorist recruit to cynically ensnare him (or her) into enacting terrorism. 

While we will need to wait for more information, in the Boston case, the identification of the young men with their traumatic Chechen past perhaps coupled with Internet radicalization or in person contact with actual fighters via Internet or on trips home to Dagestan — may have influenced them to accept the common militant jihadi narrative of Muslims worldwide being under attack—and its perverted justification for terrorist strikes, including against Western powers.  The goals of such attacks are of course to cause terror, suffering, and revenge for Muslim civilian deaths elsewhere, and to change the course of politics. “Victory or paradise” is the call of the Chechen terrorists meaning in their mindset, to die for the cause is to take on the glory of “martyrdom”.

Sadly the freedoms afforded to these young men in the United States were not enough to protect them from such cynical manipulation of whatever pain or insecurities that was going on inside of them.. The details of how this happened are yet to be revealed but my guess is it has its roots in their identification with the Chechen separatist movement and its unfortunate infiltration by militant jihadis from the middle east.

For those interested in the history of the recent Chechen struggle, it began as a secular bid for independence in 1991 as the former Soviet Union fell apart, but as events unfolded Chechen separatists at that time were sorely disappointed when Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Georgia, Armenia etc. were supported by the West in their moves for independence but Chechnya—being inside the Russian Federation was not. 

In spite of the lack of recognition, the Chechen rebels did not stop their struggle but continued their fight while Russia sent their military to quell them in two iron fist incursions, the first occurring from 1994-1996, and the second from 1999-2004. It involved the carpet bombing of Grozny the capital of Chechnya and a mass exodus of millions of fleeing Chechen refugees—some who like the alleged Boston bombers made their way even to the United States as asylum seekers. 

Between these two wars, what had started as a secular independence movement transitioned into a militant jihadi one.  Help for the Chechen rebels came not from the West, but from the Middle East and the former Afghan jihadis who were still euphoric over defeating the former Soviet Union in Afghanistan. The foreign fighters eager to declare jihad in Chechnya as well, brought with them funds and the militant jihadi ideology and introduced the up till then unknown “martyrdom” or suicide operations into the fight.  This completely changed the secular independence struggle into the Chechen “jihad” with the new goal of establishing an Islamic emirate—something the majority of Chechens never embraced despite their rebel movement transitioning from freedom fighters to terrorist militants. 

As a terrorist movement, from 2000 onward, the Chechens launched over thirty suicide attacks utilizing over one hundred suicide operatives—interestingly, including nearly as many female as male operatives.  These suicide bombers overtook the Moscow theater threatening to blow up the eight hundred hostages they held for three days.  Two years later, they held over one thousand hostages—mostly women and children—in the Beslan school, threatening to kill everyone.  Two Chechen females exploded themselves on two separate internal Russian flights bringing the planes down.  And Chechen terrorists also blew themselves up on the Moscow subway and elsewhere in Russia.

In 2005 the movement spread to the surrounding region—with rebel leader Basayev announcing the formation of the New Caucasus Front” to institute a regionally a group of fighters situated throughout the Caucasus to rise up against Russia to fight for independence and to institute a regionally based Islamic state in Dagestan, Ingushetia and the surrounding Muslim republics.

Caught in the middle of a warzone, with families shattered and atrocities common from all sides, Chechnya became a virtual hellhole, prompting widespread emigration, first to surrounding areas and then to the West.  As Chechen refugees spread across the world seeking asylum, the majority settled in foreign lands as peace loving and good people who valued education for their children and assimilated well. 

But a tiny minority of Chechens that spread out worldwide, carried the traumas of war inside and some also retained or later took on the militant jihadi ideology.  Chechens instigators have recently been arrested for allegedly recruiting for Al Qaeda affiliated groups in Europe—some recently arrested in France — as well as having been active as al Qaeda fighters in Afghanistan, instigators in Pakistan, and elsewhere.  Indeed when I made interviews in Belgium I ran across those who had been recruited into Al Qaeda affiliates by a Chechen actively recruiting in Antwerp.  

And now sadly, it looks like even inside the U.S., Chechen refugees—perhaps having had their ethnic connection to the Chechen struggle played upon by cynical manipulators of vulnerable young men—have been sadly convinced to strike against the very people who offered them safe harbor and a new life apart from a deeply troubled region.  Apparently in the case of these young men—despite being an entirely new generation, the struggle that their parents left behind found, or followed them here.

Anne Speckhard, Ph.D. is Adjunct Associate Professor of Psychiatry in the Georgetown University Medical School and author of Talking to Terrorists: Understanding the Psycho-Social Motivations of Militant Jihadi Terrorists, Mass Hostage Takers, Suicide Bombers & “Martyrs”  In the last decade she interviewed over four hundred terrorists, suicide bombers, terrorist supporters, family members, close associates and hostages.  She also conducted psychological autopsies with a Chechen colleague on over half of the 112 Chechen suicide bombers investigating what put them on the terrorist trajectory and what motivated them to explode themselves.