In psychology and therapeutic intervention, the concept of a "double bind" has its roots in the work of Gregory Bateson and family therapy. It encapsulates a scenario where an individual faces conflicting messages or demands, rendering any response deemed inadequate or inappropriate. The repercussions of such communication dynamics within families include heightened emotional distress, strained relationships, and a compromised problem-solving environment.
This psychological principle, intriguingly, extends beyond family dynamics to illuminate the challenges faced by governments in meeting public expectations. In the case of the Israeli government grappling with the aftermath of the hostage-taking by Hamas on October 7th, the stakes are undeniably high.
The urgency to free hostages is unanimous in Israel, accentuated by the shocking revelations of Hamas' mistreatment over the past 120-plus days. Simultaneously, the discovery of extensive attack tunnels on a scope far greater than expected underscores Hamas' unquestionable commitment to Israel's destruction, intensifying the complexity of the situation.
The actions of Hamas on October 7th have evoked unimaginable pain and outrage globally, creating a political landscape rife with conflicting demands for action directed at Prime Minister Netanyahu and the government. Media attention has predominantly focused on the Hostages & Missing Persons Family Forum, demanding the safe return of citizens at any cost, attributing blame to the government for the events of October 7th.
In a contrasting perspective, the Tikva Forum, though sharing the same ultimate goal, advocates for the use of overwhelming military might, even at the expense of consequences in Gaza. Understandably, both advocacy groups share reciprocal empathy, yet their demands and conflicting calls for action place the government in a 'double bind,' with potentially survival-level consequences.
Adding to the complexities, each side's demands hold a second layer of double binds. The Hostages & Missing Persons Family Forum's insistence on 'Bring them home now' at any cost risks inadvertently empowering Hamas and would leave the citizens in Israel vulnerable to a similar attack the government is being blamed for not preventing. Complying with Tikva Forum's call for military might at any cost inside Gaza, including preventing Humanitarian aid to force Hamas to release the hostages would jeopardize the already fragile international alliances crucial for Israel's defense.
This intricate web of conflicting expectations places Netanyahu and the Israeli government in a precarious position, facing layers of double binds, a delicate balance between meeting public expectations and securing the nation's stability with both immediate consequences and with implications resonating into the future.
As previously noted, the repercussion of double bind demands in the family dynamics are most detrimental to the well-being of each of the family members, raising their anxiety, frustration, and helplessness, as well as to the family unit, as it creates an atmosphere of uncertainly and erodes trust which is essential for unity.
Such detrimental consequences are playing out now in Israel, at a time when unity and clear-headed decision making is of survival importance. The inability of the members of the government to speak with one voice accentuates problems much like when parents in a family participate in supporting opposing double-bind demands. Consequently, looking at components of successful family therapy techniques can offer valuable insight and potential guidance that would benefit both the population, as well as problem-solving capabilities.
Currently, in Israel, we are witnessing the negative impacts of internal discord at a time when unity and clear decision-making are crucial for survival. The disarray among government members, unable to present a unified front, mirrors the challenges seen in families when parents support conflicting double-bind demands.
Examining successful family therapy techniques can provide valuable insights and potential solutions applicable to both the population and problem-solving processes. A key focus should be on actions that ensure all relevant demands are heard and considered with empathy and understanding.
This approach contrasts significantly with a response that merely acknowledges a shared ultimate goal while asserting the pursuit of the best course of action without consensus, even among decision-makers. Like parents in a family, the government juggles various responsibilities and demands with differing perspectives. However, as the 'adults' in the family therapy room, they must work through their differences and present a unified front for the well-being of the nation, especially during significant crises.
It is crucial for the government to communicate the factors behind its actions effectively and respectfully to all parties. This communication should be clear enough that even those who may not agree with the chosen direction can acknowledge the validity behind the decision. This process helps rebuild trust by demonstrating that the government is fulfilling its obligation to protect its citizens and acting in the best interest of the country.
A soldier’s perspective.
For another psychological perspective on 'Bring Them Home ... at any cost" consider reading Dr. Kenneth Levin's book "The Oslo Syndrome: Delusions of a People Under Siege," published in 2005. He explores the psychological and historical dynamics that he believes led to the Oslo Accords between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) in the early 1990s. Levin argues that the Israeli acceptance of the Oslo Accords and the subsequent peace process reflects a psychological phenomenon he terms the "Oslo Syndrome."
Levin argues that this syndrome is rooted in historical trauma, wherein the Jewish people, having faced persecution and hostility throughout history, were particularly vulnerable to a psychological state that would lead them to pursue peace at any cost. He explores how this mindset influenced political decisions and perceptions within Israeli society during the Oslo peace process.