Silberman7

542 PSYCH O LOG V OF RELIGION AND APPLIED AREAS

the fight against religious terrorists. First, ia addition to applying relevant conflict resolu-tion strategies as mentioned above, psychologists could also suggest ways to remove some conditions that provide the contexts for religious violence and terrorism, For example, Moghaddam (2005) suggested that the best long-term policy against terrorism is preven-tion, which could be madę possible by nourishing contextualized democracies. Time will test the validity of the idea, which has been promoted for years by Ieading scholars such as Lewis (2003), and supported by severa! influential journalists, some Arab intellectuals, and by President Bush (Zakaria, 2005).

Second, psychologisrs could help discourage religious (or nonreligious) ideas and prejudices that may facilitate terrorism. For example, in an effort to prevent additional acts of terrorism against Western civilians in the name of Islam, Muslim and non-Muslim psychologists together with peace-oriented religious leaders could help counter the anti-Wesr, and parricularly anri-United States, propaganda that seems to scapegoat the United States, blaming it for all of the difficulties of the Arab world, and portraying it inaccu-rately as heading a crusade against Islam (Lewis, 2003; Staub, 2004). Psychologists can help the deveiopment of public diplomacy programs aimed at providing morę accurate images of the United States and the West in Muslim countries through cultural and edu-cational exchange programs. This could include the creation of Arab-Ianguage television and radio networks (Powell, 2004) that would discuss Western culture and Western points of view on Muslim countries and their relations with the West, as well as provide factual information such as how the United States tried to save Muslims in Bośnia, Kosovo, and Albania (Lewis, 2003). Such public diplomacy could emphasize, for exam-ple, the responsibility of the leaders of repressive societies within the Muslim world for the difficult conditions of their citizens. It could also describe the corruption and the hy-pocrisy of certain political and religious leaders within the Muslim world, as well as their disregard for human life (induding the life of Muslims). In certain cases, such public dtplo-macy could also highlight the vulnerabilities in the Islamie and ideological credentials of certain political and religious leaders who encourage violence and terrorism (Lewis, 2003).

Third, religious institutions, such as the Palestinian terrorist organization Harnaś (see U.S. Department of State, 2004 for a list of designated foreign terrorist organiza-tions), often provide critical social services and affordable educational opportunities. Un-fortunately, the social weifare activists who run these welfare support organizations are often closely tied to the group’s terrorist activities (Levitt, 2003), and their religious educational system tends to promote terrorism (Stern, 2003). Psychologists could help local and outside governments deve!op alternative affordable humanitarian Systems that would provide the reąuired social services, as well as educational systems that would edticate youth in a morę open-ended and tolerant way.

Further, psychologists could contribute significantly to the deterrence of religious terrorists by illuminating their decision-making processes, and by suggesting creative ways of influencing these process. Morę specifically, according to the U.S. Army Field Manuał, as cited by the Terrorism Research Center (1997), a rationally motivated terrorist is a terrorist who makes decisions about terrorism through analyses of the presumed cost-benefit ratio of the intended actions. Ganor (2001) suggests that at least some of the religious terrorist organizations (e.g., Harnaś, Islamie Jihad, and Hizbollah) are rarional according to this definition, but emphasizes that both the variables that enter the ratio, the relative wcight they are given, and what is considered to be an acceptable ratio may differ from what democratic liberał communities would conclude. Indeed, the meaning-system approach to the phenomenon of suicide bombing suggests that within certain religious meaning Systems the act of suicide bombing can be perceived as a logical act, for which the perceived spiritual and materiał benefits outweigh the costs (i.e., losing one’s life). Using the meaning-system approach, psychologists could suggest ways to deter potential suicide bombers by changing their perception of the cost-benefit ratio, as by convincing them that, according to their own religion, such homicide acts contradict the wish of God, thereby preventing them from reaching heaven (Lewis, 2003).

Coping with the Consequences of Religious Terrorism

Psychologists could significantly contribute to individual and communal efforts of coping with religious terrorism. First, psychologists could help individuals and communities cope in ways that would efficiently decrease the emotional, psychological, and political im-pacts of terrorism. They could promote resilience in response to terrorism, using existing knowledge of psychological and religious coping with trauma, stress, anxiety and grief (Levantet al., 2004; Pargament, 1977; Park, 2005; Seligman, 2001). They could also de-velop new coping methods that would address the special challenges that may be raised by terrorism in the name of religion. For example, psychologists could help increase public awareness, as wel! as the awareness of decision makers, security personnel, and media representatives, of the psychological manipulations used by terrorists in order to magnify the fears of populations and increase their support of the terrorists’ cause (Ditzler, 2004), and by emphasizing the discrepancy that is often found between the actual damage caused by terrorists versus the power they claim to have.

Second, psychologists should be the leaders in discouraging prejudice, discrtminn-tion, and hate crimes toward individuals who belong to the same religion as the terrorists—for example, by discouraging anti-Islamic and anti-Middle Eastern hate crime inci-dents and the erosion of civil liberties in the United States, which seemed to increase aftcr the September 11, 2001, terrorist artacks on New York and Washington DC (Levant et al., 2004; Wuthnow, 2004). It is extremely important to emphasize that the war against terrorism is not a religious war against Islam, and that most Muslims are not fundnmen-talists and most fundamentalists are noc terrorists (Lewis, 2003). Psychologists should develop research-based interventions that aim at the reduction of prejudice and discrimi-nation in rhis particular context.

The fact that the 21st century has started with religions demonstrating their destruc-tive potential in facilitating conflicts, war and terrorism all over the world (e.g., Juergensmeyer, 2003; Kimball, 2002; Silberman et al., 2005) is not going to make it a unique century. Hopefully, through the collaborative efforts of researchers, political and religious leaders, and communitv members, this century will become a special and memo-rable one by revea!ing rhc unique potential of religions to facilitate conflict resolution and to create cultures of peace (Silberman, 2002, 2003b).

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I wish to thank Jonathan Fox for his helpful comments on previous versions of this chapter and Miriam Frankel, Eliezer and Nechama Silberman, Aviad Shragai, and Naomi Struch for their cn-couragement and support.