The Stockholm Syndrome, otherwise known as ‘capture bonding’ has its origins in a bank robbery in Sweden in 1973. The robbers took some bank staff hostage and over the six days of the siege, the hostages developed an emotional bond with their captors, an empathy rather than a sympathy. At one point, they rejected assistance from government officials and even when they were eventually released, some of them defended the actions of the men who had terrorised them.
The incident gave rise to much psychological head-scratching, eventually evolving into what is now a recognisable psychological condition with known and understood parameters that trigger it. The condition is one where the victim’s thoughts are irrational in light of the real danger they are being confronted with. Sometimes sufferers interpret a lack of abuse on the part of their captors as an act of kindness.
The condition does not have to occur in a hostage scenario, but any situation where there are strong emotional ties between two or more people and where one or more partners in the interaction sometimes beats, or threatens or harasses others in the group. The bond that develops is the response of the individual to becoming a victim by identifying with their aggressor as a way of preserving the integrity of their own ego, a core element of Freudian theory. Thus, when the victim comes to believe the same values as their aggressor, they cease to be a threat. Has a light come on yet?
The Stockholm Syndrome can have an economic aspect as well. This is a recent development and first arose at the June 2012 International Conference on Developments in Economic Theory in Bilbao. It was proposed that some governments have in effect been ‘kidnapped’ by international capital — or lending agencies — because of their need to refinance public debt (lights, anybody?). Those governments are then forced into acceptance of high rates of interest and, it was argued, a compromise to their sovereignty.
And who is it that is attaching a range of swingeing conditionalities that require ‘adjustments’ of real-time governance in Pakistan? Why, none other than our old friends at times of fiscal need (there is a measly $4bn FOREX in the bank right now) — the World Bank and the IMF. Agencies, which if you are willing to accept the ‘Stockholm’ analysis, are as much our captors as our benefactors.
Let us leave aside the evolutionary theories about female abductions in hunter-gatherer societies as a historical root for the Stockholm Syndrome and instead consider the way in which the nation is hostage to extremism in the broadest sense.
There are those who would appease those who have killed their fellow captives by the tens of thousands. There are those who, whilst not directly threatened themselves, are a part of the captive-collectivity and act in silent concert with their fellow hostages. The abusive actions of the captors are rationalised irrationally by the citation of external or hidden forces ‘making’ them commit acts of abuse and terror.
Thus, it is that rescue is difficult for what has become the ‘Stockholm state’. Difficult because those trying to do the rescuing — and their motives might not be driven purely by altruism either — are up against a hostage group that is in cahoots with the hostage takers and will frustrate the efforts of the rescuers at every twist and turn.
So what is it to be? Captivity or freedom of thought and deed? My bet is on captivity and as for the hostage negotiators whispering at the door: no thanks, not today, we are choosing servitude and compliance. But thanks, anyway.
Published in The Express Tribune, November 21st, 2013.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (11)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
So IMF is kidnapper and Pakistan being a victim in love with IMF.
I think we are stretching the argument too far and back in time which has no relevance to question at hand.Debt financing, if it hurts as painfully as we assume now may not be true in essence.It hurts more when economies are regulated with greater controls like in Europe of present times.Our is different and what we see as regulated is perhaps one third of the real size of economy,something entirely out of the controls of government and its failed systems.The astonishing fact remains as valid as ever is ,that loans are offered to us for we don't ever default on its payment,like many poor countries. Our capacity to remain productive is far greater than what our government considers.The regulatory systems to run the government with firm and fair controls is not very difficult a recipe to come out of current crisis and we can still do it .
I think we are stretching the argument too far and back in time and has no relevance to question at hand.Debt financing if it hurts as painfully as we assume now may not be true in essence.It hurts more when economies are regulated with greater controls like in Europe of present times.Our is different and what we see as regulated is perhaps one third of the real size of economy,something entirely out of the controls of government and its failed systems.The astonishing fact remains as valid as ever is ,that loans are offered to us for we don't ever default on its payment,like many poor countries. Our capacity to remain productive is far greater than what our government considers.The regulatory systems to run the government with firm and fair controls is not very difficult a recipe to come out of current crisis and we can still do it .
@mmr44
This is because ET wants to give hate-filled Indian commentators such as gp65, observer, waterbottle and blackjack a chance to do what they come here for.
This is an empty-headed, vacuous piece of writing. How come ET never seeks articles from independent Pakistani economists for their solutions on how to get back on track? Or at least to explain what they think is wrong with current Govt. policy? Don't tell me Pakistan does not have serious students of economics, or that the situation is irretrievable! That is difficult to believe. ET, get off your bottom, and go fetch some good minds!
Exceptional correlation. Unfortunately Pakistan is deep in debt due to loot and plunder by its own predators, mismanagement by political and safarshee appointees.
@Parvez:
"Nicely done. People are mistakenly made to believe that this is a fairly recent phenomenon but in my view the seed was planted even before Zia’s time, more as a governance strategy than as an ideological move. Nations have to pay the price for bad judgment calls. "
Think about it hard and deep.
The seed was planted in 1947.
Simply speaking, a country in the name of religion when there was no factor to support it, is a lie.
Pakistan was created on the basis of lies. How long can such a country thrive?
I think the sense of "victimhood" is a more appropriate psychological affliction of Pakistanis, and Muslims in general, than Stockholm syndrome.
Stockholm syndrome is a more proper description of the control that religion has in Islamic societies.
What took you so long? Perhaps because you are not from this land. What you have just discovered is our historical response for a long long time. I urge you read the history of Panjab. How do you think we responded to the white Huns, or the Mongols, or the Turks, or the Mughals, or the Afghans? We have always identified with the oppressors so we could survive, and if that meant changing our identity to that of the aggressor, so what? We survived!! And we will survive the present as well, even if we all become Talibs. No big deal.
Nicely done. People are mistakenly made to believe that this is a fairly recent phenomenon but in my view the seed was planted even before Zia's time, more as a governance strategy than as an ideological move. Nations have to pay the price for bad judgment calls.