Stockholm Syndrome: A Reading into the Reality of Palestinian and Israeli Prisoners

In a completely different context, the Swedish capital, Stockholm, witnessed an incident in 1973, when gunmen took four employees of a Swedish bank hostage. They were released after a period of no more than a week. The detainees showed sympathy for the gunmen and defended them before the authorities and the media. The phenomenon was interpreted at the time as a psychological condition, through which the detainees sought to form a bond with their captors as a survival strategy. The researchers added that in the context of long and complex conflicts, “Stockholm Syndrome” may appear as a controversial psychological phenomenon. Given the reality of the Israeli prisoners in Gaza, questions may be raised about the possibility of the emergence of this type of phenomenon, and its consequences on the human and political levels.

In Gaza, the issue of Israeli prisoners is one of the most interesting issues, locally and even internationally, especially for countries supporting the war on Gaza, as is evident from their public discourse. It is a new and unprecedented issue in the history of the Palestinian struggle, at least quantitatively. In contrast, the issue of Palestinian prisoners remains an ongoing situation that has accompanied the occupation since its first day, and does not receive the same attention, despite the very large and unprecedented numbers.

The Israeli prisoners, whether soldiers or otherwise, who were captured on October 7 from military sites or settlements surrounding Gaza, lived and are living a captivity experience that is completely different from the traditional cases in which “Stockholm Syndrome” may appear. However, there are several factors, psychological, social and political, that form the captivity environment, which may affect the prisoners themselves and push the possibility of its appearance to the forefront. The first is the complete dependence on their captors to meet their basic needs, such as food, drink and health care. This was evident in the video of the female prisoners who were released on Saturday, January 25, which may create a feeling of gratitude, especially if the treatment was humane, which is what it seemed to be, at least according to the scenes we saw. The second factor is the extension of the period of captivity, which is a factor that increases the possibility of the phenomenon forming, as the prisoners may stop seeing their captors as “enemies”, as they preserve their security and lives, and are exposed to many risks in order to do so. As for the third factor, it comes in the context of the battle of the narrative, and presenting a completely different narrative, in fact the opposite of what was promoted during the long months of war. Rather, as a party that deals with prisoners in accordance with the values of Islam, the rules of international humanitarian law, and finally, the fourth factor, which is due to personal communication between prisoners and their captors, which increases the opportunity for that, if there is a common language for verbal communication, which may lead to bridging the gap and open the door to the emergence of a state of sympathy.

Hence, this highlights the role of political and media considerations. From the perspective of the Palestinian resistance, the issue of prisoners is more than just a humanitarian file, and is inseparable from their values with religious, moral and legal foundations. It is a compulsion, not a choice, that comes in the context of its commitment to Palestinian prisoners, which made it a pressure card and a military and political bargain, during which it was keen to present a superior moral model in dealing with prisoners, in contrast to the other model, the occupation model, which words fail to describe. This may make this positive image formed an impregnable barrier in the face of Israeli and Western propaganda, which has tried and is trying hard to demonize it and strip it of its moral and humanitarian character. Consequently, this may create a shock within Israeli society, shaking its confidence in the political and military leadership, which is already wavering, and sweeping away with it the foundations of the “official” narrative, with evidence from within, closer, for long periods, which constitutes an additional pressure card during negotiations, due to internal and external pressure.

On the contrary, the chances of this syndrome appearing among Palestinian prisoners are completely unlikely, and the simultaneous scenes of the release of prisoners from both sides are the best evidence of that, and it is not difficult to explain that. If we look at the psychological, cultural and political factors that shape and control the experience of captivity, we find that it is far removed from any sympathy or gratitude, and hostility is still its essence, which has been and continues to be consecrated by public and private policies, which have emerged in recent months in particular. Palestinian prisoners are portrayed and treated far from being “human beings,” which is clearly evident in the intentional oppressive environment, inhumane detention conditions, in addition to physical and psychological torture, and “stripping” them of their humanity, which has reached a great extent, reaching the point of murder or less, in addition to deprivation of their basic needs at their minimum.

In addition to the above, Palestinian prisoners see themselves as part of a long struggle and an extension of a collective awareness. They are not just an individual case or cases, but rather they constitute symbols of steadfastness in the Palestinian narrative and their cultural and popular heritage, which made them more fortified against that. The religious factor also played an important role in supporting them psychologically, as they saw their suffering as part of a sacred struggle, with noble goals, tools and objectives, coupled with a firm belief in the justice of their cause and the legitimacy of their struggle. Despite the efforts of prison administrations to create divisions among them, to scatter them, silence their voice, and facilitate control over them or isolate them from their surroundings, they succeeded in building an internal support system, in addition to other practical measures, which were manifested in organizing and managing their daily affairs collectively, which strengthened their sense of belonging, which was accompanied by overwhelming popular support and consensus on their cause and demands, despite the “differences” here and there. All of this embodied the image of heroism in the popular conscience, and reduced the chances of the emergence of such tendencies, which made building any positive or humane bond with their jailers an extremely difficult, if not impossible, matter.