Concluding Thoughts

            Each of these books has greatly aided my search for understanding the phenomenon of female suicide bombing. The first book, “The Path to Paradise” by Anat Berko answered some of my questions regarding personal motivation. Her in-depth interviews were very helpful in allowing me to understand the personal issues that women in Palestine face and how these, along with social and political factors, play a role in the choice to bomb. The interviewees discussed their personal lives and the motivation that drove them to commit the act—they mention issues ranging from marriage and university to honor and shame. Her book proves that each woman is individual, not all issues being the same, yet she highlights the fact that the social circumstances with regard to gender and sex are overarching problems that affect each of these women. She brings to light the issues that surround gender politics and the Islamically-centered Palestinian culture.

            Barbara Victor’s book, “Army of Roses,” highlights the political landscape. She questions Arafat’s statements of “equality” with regard to death and also challenges the notion of power and autonomy of female suicide bombers. Her book is definitively feminist—she claims ultimately that female suicide bombers are the most radical examples of exploitation of women in the Arab world. She challenges the ideology of political and religious equality through martyrdom and notes that even if women are seen as equal in death, this does not change the fact that they are still considered second-class citizens in life. She gives an intensely detailed background on politics and demonstrates that each of the powerful political groups in Palestine—al Fatah, Palestinian Jihad, Hamas, al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, etc.—have used women for political gain globally and on the streets of Palestine. She answers questions regarding the religious/Qur’anic legitimacy of women as martyrs for Allah, and illustrates the strategic movement from banning women as martyrs to accepting them in order to become more powerful via religious edicts and approval by terrorist-supported and funded sheiks.

            The next book, “Female Suicide Bombers,” by Rosemarie Skaine is a collection of research regarding female suicide bombing; it presents differing arguments from all sides. She cites (Durkheim) society as part of the general motivation for bombing. She notes that the culture of death within Palestine permeates the hearts and homes of those who live there and encourages both men and women to commit suicide in the name of nationalism, revenge, and Allah. She also presents arguments from different scholars who suggest that motivation does differ along gender lines. These arguments challenge the first two books that I read, arguing that because women are marginalized in certain ways, and therefore that would influence their reasoning. She also touches upon the fascination with supposed subversion of gender roles—women as martyrs. Her research challenges previous understandings of females within society.

            My final reading, “Women as Weapons of War,” by Kelly Oliver delved into the way in which Western society understands the phenomenon. She also discusses the role of the media in creating a veil of victimization. War is also a huge theme in this book, and she answers questions about “right” and “wrong” acts of war and why we think of them in this way. Her understanding of body versus technology is very interesting and addresses some of the reasons why Westerners are so horrified by this use of body within war, while we can employ deadly technology without blinking an eye. Her book urges us to understand suicide bombing not just as a tool of war, but also as an attempt to create a life that is more than just bare existence—life with meaning.

            The reading of these books strangely synched with my thought processes as I continued this project. I was first very interested in the personal motivation behind the bombings. I assumed that people who chose to bomb in general must have some sort of personal issues or could be easily persuaded by terrorist officials. Although there is some truth to this, when reading further, I found that the phenomenon and motivations are much more complex. Having some knowledge of Palestinian culture and Islamic ideology, I had expected overlap between gender politics, politics, social situations, etc., yet nothing to the extent of what my readings informed me of. The more I delved into this project, the more I began to understand the complex web of politics and society that informs decisions with regard to terrorist activity. Although many of my questions were answered, there is still one that I have yet to answer: Okay, now that we can understand part of the motivation, the why, what about the how? How can this phenomenon be stopped? Can it be stopped? Who could stop it and would they? I believe there must be a certain combination of changes that have to occur over a period of time in order for this form of violence to cease. But where to start? These questions both sadden and intrigue me. I guess this is what the project was all about—I have a greater understanding and still more questions, most of which might be left unanswered. 

    Oliver claims that our culture values basic life over quality of life—“mere survival over meaningful life.” (133) “Moreover, our conception of life is reduced to what Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben calls ‘bare life’ rather than quality of life. Life in and of itself is seen as value that exists outside of the realm of politics.” (133) Our assumption that value of bare life occurs outside the social construction has lead to much of the horror that we experience when faced with suicide bombers. We attempt to save (certain) lives at any cost, and the fact that “bare life” is trumped by quality of life is shocking within the Western imaginary. “Suicide bombers make explicit the connection between the body and politics that has been denied within Western politics.” (133) The vulnerability of the body makes the technologically progressive West fearful of the “other” who utilizes the body in the same way we utilize guns, bombs, etc. “Hatred and the urge for revenge can be seen as a manifestation of fear, fear of our own vulnerability.  Victimization of the others literally puts our own vulnerability onto others.” (138) She notes that other authors have claimed that our vulnerability and use of violence is the very essence of humanity. She claims instead that our true essence, that that defines us as different from all others species, is our ability to forgive. “But this translation requires time and energy, scarce commodities in today’s global economy…” (140)

    Suicide bombers force us to realize that others outside of our Western imaginary do want more than “bare life,” and that some will even sacrifice their bare lives in order to give others the chance for meaningful lives. Also, their lives become meaningful by their actions, which demand quality of life over mere existence. “Ghassan Hage too maintains that suicide bombing is a last resort in a fight against colonialization; but, he argues, it becomes part of a culture of martyrdom because both material and symbolic resources are so limited by the colonial situation. In other words, martyrdom becomes a way of gaining symbolic cultural capital when one’s culture is perceived as being under siege.” (143) Not only just the East, but even within Palestinian culture itself, women have also been relegated to the realm of “bare lives” and their physical bodies—as vessels of reproduction. They lack access to particularly meaningful lives, and thus the bomber gains a sense of meaning by using the (patriarchally constituted) body outside of its prescribed role. Julia Kristeva suggests “that the shahidas represent the triumph of a culture of death that values women’s biology over biography, reproductive life over meaningful life.” (144) Female suicide bombers not only break the rules of the West and challenge our notions of body politics, they also confront Palestinian notions of women as strictly reproductive “bare life” bodies. 

Nature vs Culture

Oliver suggests that our fear and fascination with suicide bombers is their use of the body as weapon. She asserts that the use of the body directly correlates to our conceptualization of imperialism and colonialization—we believe that the use of the technological weapons are of a good and civilized variety, as opposed to the emotionally driven/irrational/primitive weapon of the body. Oliver discusses the use of the word “terrorist” to denote the “bad guys with technology” as opposed to the liberated Western fighters, who are known as “heroes.” In regards to attitude of good people having technology and bad ones using their body, “It also suggests that we feel somehow threatened by bodies themselves; that bodies used as weapons are especially uncanny because they conjure a deeper ambivalence we feel about our own bodies as well as the bodies of others. …Within the history of Western thought bodies are figured as finite, inconsistent, even irrational, and so they have been conceived of as opposed to civilization and culture.” (128) Bodies are conceived of as lesser than technology, being the epitome of civilization:“…bodies are imagined as part of nature and therefore never completely assimilated into culture, while politics is imagined as the most organized form of culture, which removes us from the realm of nature altogether.” (130)

         The dominance of culture over nature is at play here. Not only do women’s bodies reflect the “natural,” but the “other”—Palestine in this case—also reflects the “natural” and “other”: “…real flesh and blood bodies have been associated with women and excluded from the realm of the properly political while properly political bodies are seen as male bodies.” (131) The issue of the body as a weapon crosses these standardized boundaries of bare bodies versus technology. “Yet what is most remarkable about these bare bodies is that they are not bare; they are not natural; they are not innocent. Rather, they are armed and dangerous…they are more than the return of the repressed natural body within Western politics. What is more dangerous than a natural body is a body that won’t stay put, a body that moves between nature and culture, a body become a political statement.” (130-1) This ambiguity surrounding the body of female suicide bombers is intriguing. They have successfully employed their body as a weapon by combining nature and culture. They are willing to kill their own bodies in order to kill others. This is a huge threat to Western countries where “saving one’s own ass” may be the goal, while simultaneously killing as many others as possible, pushing a button from afar. “Indeed, what these women suicide bombers make manifest that unsettles Western politics is the way in which the body is always political; there is no bare body, no natural body.” (131) 

Women As Weapons of War

      Kelly Oliver believes that our cultural associations between women, birth, death, sex, and violence contribute to our use of women as weapons of war. Our stereotypes of sex and gender simultaneously allow for shameful use of violence by women and also direct our understanding of women’s “natural” state of motherhood and nurturing. “Indeed, the association between sex and violence trades on stereotypical images and myths of dangerous or threatening women upon which our culture was, and continues to be, built.” (3) Oliver notes that women are seen as both life-giving and life-taking; they are givers of life as mothers, but are dangerous and have the propensity to kill the life she can also give. “Women are serving and dying, but, in the words of retired Navy captain Lory Manning, ‘A lot of social conservatives have powerful feelings about training mothers to kill.’” (1) She notes that even though it may appear that women are gaining equality or feminist-driven power by joining the ranks, “the rhetoric surrounding their involvement betrays the lingering association between women, sexuality, and death.” (19)

     Oliver explicitly discusses the fact that women’s sexuality is seen as dangerous, something that must be kept under wraps, so to speak. “Akin to a natural toxin or intoxicant, women’s sex makes a powerful weapon because, within our cultural imaginary, it is by nature dangerous. Yet becomes more threatening because we imagine that it can be wielded by women to manipulate men; it can become the art of seduction through which women beguile and intoxicate to control and even destroy men…” (31-2) She discusses the fact that female suicide bombers are especially dangerous because their dangerous sexuality appears to be cloaked and covered (socially and physically) within the patriarchal society, yet at the same time, they can be seen as the femme fatale, allowing for them to move across security checkpoints as “innocent” women, while simultaneously hiding their dangerous bombs. 

Agency?

            Scholar Karla J. Cunningham brings to the book a perspective that denies differences across gender lines. She notes that women are viewed differently than men in many places (especially where the bombings take place), but that their motivation and significance are the same. She states, “Importantly, the ‘invisibility’ of women both within terrorist organizations, and particularly their assumed invisibility within many of the societies that experience terrorism, makes woman an attractive actor for these organizations, an advantage that female members also acknowledge. This invisibility also makes scholarly inquiry of the phenomenon more difficult and may lull observers into the false assumption that women are insignificant actors within terrorist organizations.” (62) She makes a good point—obviously there is a strategy behind using women as bombers due to their “invisibility,” but just because they are used as human smart bombs does not necessarily mean that they are significant actors in terrorist organizations. Where are the female dispatchers? Where are the female heads of political organizations? Ironically, their invisibility might just make them invisible even within power structures such as in terrorist organizations where their importance seems to lie in the fact that they are the bombs—strategically necessary, but dispensable.

“Women join politically violent organizations for reasons similar to men’s, such as political change, Cunningham concludes. The argument that women join for personal reasons suggests women do not choose their participation.” (132) Of course women and men join for a variety of reasons, political change being among them. But personal motivation does not necessarily exclude agency. Even women (and men) driven my personal loss, grief, whatever, typically decide themselves to become bombers and seek out dispatchers. At the same time, there are a good number of women who actually do not choose to participate, but are instead forced. This should be taken into account, as well. Force includes physical, social, and religious (psychological).

V.G. Julie Rajan says, “Recent interest in suicide bombers is rooted in the seemingly unlimited and unknown power they possess.” (167-8) She states that their influence comes from the fact that “as women continue to participate in suicide bombing they symbolically assume the power to disrupt traditional patriarchal female gender notions and thereby destabilize current social and political, economic and ethic and religious identities worldwide.” (168) This is a perspective that can most definitely be justified. At the same time, these types of arguments beg the question of whether manipulating or employing one’s patriarchally designated gender is equally as subversive or disruptive as challenging it. Are these women promoting their own agency as individuals by committing these acts or are they simply women who are instead being used by men as political tools? Maybe it’s both. I propose that many of these women most likely see themselves as liberators of women and believe that their actions are aiding not only Palestine and their personal path to Paradise, but also bettering the lives of living women by demonstrating individual freedom, while they are simultaneously (maybe even unknowingly) being used as political pawns in the hands of the patriarchy who cloak political goals in religious and individual ideology.

Suicide Bombing in Russia

Click here to read about it.

More

            Moving on in “Female Suicide Bombers,” one scholar notes that we should not assume that motivations differ along gender lines. Lisa Kruger states, “In my opinion, it is dangerous to categorize motivations of women as different from men. Doing so would cause analysts to look for ‘female-type’ motivations and ignore that women can rationalize the use of violence in the same manner as men. We will be caught off guard if we only allow ourselves to think that women will use violence only if they are pushed far enough on a personal or emotional level.” (34) She makes a legitimate point—not all women have the same motivation and some may be more likely to have motivations in common more so with men than other women. At the same time, because Palestinian society is so divided along the lines of gender, it is important to note that there are certain restraints placed upon women and not on men, thus challenging the notion that both men and women are on an even playing field and may have the same reasoning behind committing a bombing. Even if men and women are motivated for different reasons, it does mean that we have to assume that women are only motivated because of personal issues. But, it is true that many scholars have analyzed the choices that men and women make along gender lines (Berko, Victor) and this may not be the best way of viewing the situation. Both men and women who commit suicide bombings involve other people, kill people, and die. The simple story is basically the same.

There are many aspects of subversion and victimization that seem to be more apparent when a woman commits a bombing. V.G. Julie Rajan “writes that the reason women are successful…is that they are still associated with traditional female gender norms in domestic life while at the same time they are associated with masculine gender norms of aggression and violence.” (38) I think this is an interesting analysis. I believe that groups such as Hamas and Fatah all understand that the subversion of social norms brings a lot of attention to the cause. It is also one of the reasons why this phenomenon can be considered at attempt at liberation of women—breaking out of traditional gender roles. Men who bomb are obviously a big deal, they still wreak havoc. But during wartime, it seems as though society accepts men dying and killing others as more “natural” than women doing it. Even this perspective is placed upon the situation from the outside, individuals, along with the nation, take this into account when setting up a bombing. Political groups understand the way that their cause is viewed from the outside, Palestine especially. It may appear that women are victims, so victimized to the point of killing themselves, and this can also be viewed as an appeal to a global audience, or audiences of other Middle Eastern countries. 

"Female Suicide Bombers"

Rosemary Skaine’s book “Female Suicide Bombers” is more of a huge research paper, an unbiased piece that questions typical views of female suicide bombers. She beings by stating that huge part of motivation for bombing can be understood by Durkheim’s theory: “by relation to the collective inclination, and this collective inclination is itself a determined reflection of the structure of the society in which the individual lives.” (1) The cult of death is so intensely supported by individuals and, on a larger scale, the nation itself. Thus, she points out that the Palestinian nation is a collective one, not focused as intensely upon the individual. She claims, “Suicide bombers seek harmony with the society in which they live and adopt the ways of thought and action around them. The bombers are so tightly integrated into their society that they commit suicide.” (2) If society dictates that suicide is not only advantageous for the nation as a whole, but for individuals as well (who will go to Paradise), there is obviously going to be a great number of people who choose to commit this act. Women are not left out of this. Because they are equally a part of the society in which they are constituted, this collective ideology does not exclude them. She asserts that as a whole, “The Palestinians [for example] combine a sense of historical injustice with personal loss and humiliation by Israeli occupation…” (21) There is a sense of victimization that is acutely felt by the nation of Palestine that is seen as justification for terrorist acts, such as suicide bombing.

Skaine also cites the religious atmosphere as contributing to terrorism. The fundamentalist movement is “publicly fueled by Islamic fundamentalism, while being privately driven by money and the quest for political power.” (16) This is most certainly true in Palestine, where the heads of political groups use suicide bombers for political reasons, yet indoctrinate bombers in a religious manner, teaching them that they are committing an act of jihad and will go straight to Paradise. She believes that religion can be viewed as a symbol of society itself. The Islamic religion is employed in order to justify political acts religiously, as dictated by Allah.

Belinda Morissey states, “victimization denies agency through invoking victimology theses which insist on the powerlessness of the oppressed. Many portrayals of women who kill depict them as so profoundly victimized that it is difficult to regard them as ever having engaged in an intentional act in their lives.” (30) This may be true, considering that Western views of women in East are typically synonymous with victimization.  Even when women do commit violent terrorist acts they are still understood, even within scholarly circles, as victims of the oppressive, Islamic patriarchy.  Because women are seen as stereotypically nurturing and passive, Skaine remarks, “Women make use of the non-violent myth, ironically asserting their gender-difference precisely because it enables them to operate undercover behind enemy lines.” (29) Thus, female suicide bombing can be seen as defying the stereotypes placed upon women, from both the East and the West, or as victims (as pawns or human bombs) of the political/religious/social construction.

Heather A. Andrews states, “These female bombers tend to be from traditional, patriarchal societies that restrict them in some manner or the focus of society tends to be on the males. These women set out to prove that they can do the same job as the males and hope to attain equality in death…Becoming a suicide bomber also allows women to struggle for their emancipation while maintaining their Muslim identity…In my research, I concluded that there is a catalyst that places immediacy of a female to conduct an attack. This catalyst is usually attributed to a deeply personal event or crisis that has occurred in woman’s life such as the death of a loved one, ultimately humiliation by the enemy to the breaking point, or the need for moral purification.” (33) She notes that both equality and subversion play a role, yet also she also implies that personal issues are the “true” catalyst that lead women to commit suicide acts.

Skaine pulls information from different scholarly perspectives. Some of her cited authors state that women are men have differing reasons behind committing the act, yet others claim that men and women, as part of a collective unit, are both motivated by a larger vision of victimization and desperation that goes much deeper than simple gender division. I agree with both of these points, there cannot be one or two simple issues to point to when multiple people of different backgrounds, gender, etc. commit this type of terrorist act.

I question whether she will note that both Palestinian society as the “other” to Israel and women within that society as “other” to men are part of the motivation.

Roses

            One main difference between Anat Berko’s and Barbara Victor’s theories regarding female suicide bombers is motivation. Berko gives insight into the personal motivation and implies that personal issues influence women and provides them with the sense of despair necessary for a suicide bomber. Victor agrees that personal problems do affect the motivation, but that more importantly we cannot separate women and their personal lives from the society in which they are constituted. Understanding the roles of women, and their extreme limitations allows researchers to better understand the combinations of motivation.  She points out the intense political situation within Palestine itself and notes that internal conflict plays a huge role in the phenomenon of suicide bombing. The differing factions, both secular (Fatah, al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade) and religious (Palestinian Jihad, Hamas), use female suicide bombers, and according to Victor exploit them, in order to gain political status on the street.

            Mira Tzoreff states, “Occupation is an oppression from the outside, and their own leadership oppresses them from the inside. They can’t say what they think and feel. They must have a national explanation, and that is to see Israel and the United States as the ultimate enemy. Encouraging suicide bombings is a strong example of a united force against those two military powers.” (174) Because women are already marginalized to such a degree within Palestinian society, those who have personal issues or desire for revenge are the perfect human smart bombs. They are second-class citizens to men, their every move in monitored and even the slightest hint of dishonor can taint a reputation. Psychiatrist Shalfiq Masalqa notes, “Choosing to go to Paradise means that life on earth is hell. Would they do it if their life was good? If they had a reasonable environment, education, an ability to live with dignity and earn a living, would anyone choose death?” (177) Who knows. Maybe the would-be-bomber could deal with personal issues or grief in a different way if society promoted different strategies. But the organizations who send out bombers intentionally look for these kinds of women, those who are sad or have disgraced themselves or thief families, in order to exploit them for political gain and notoriety.

            One of the main issues is that it is men who make decisions that govern both men and women. “In a religious atmosphere where Imams and revered spiritual leaders issue edicts in the name of Allah, or announce fatwas taken directly from the Koran, their words, coming from God, become law.” (174) The population trusts the religious leaders to interpret the Qur’an correctly, and thus Shari’a is the law. These leaders, both religious and secular (who all invoke religion when convenient) are using women as pawns in order to gain national fame and political status. When Hamas began using female suicide bombers, their status in the street went up due to the spectacularity of the act. Victor states, “Each of these men [Yassin, Arafat, al-Rantisi] seduces women with promises that are easy and attractive for the potential shahida to grasp, imagine, and eventually respond to, since the idea of equality touches upon the very core of what they long for.” (235) Politicians and group leaders present the idea of equality to women—something unheard of in Palestinian society—and put a price tag on it: death. “…the most immoral act that has become a trend is the ultilization and victimization of women who are recruited, trained, and sent off to die with explosive belts strapped around their waists and kill others under the guise of equality or the promise of rehabilitating a family member or cleansing their won reputations. In the end, the burden of immorality lies with those cynical leaders who first marginalize their women, setting impossible conditions for them to lead happy lives and then send them off to die by promising them equality and a better life in Paradise.” (288)

            Victor notes that most of the women who are “taken advantage of” in a terrorist way are typically young and unmarried. Many of the bombers and would-be-bombers had become pregnant outside of wedlock. “The unmarried Palestinian woman today lives under a stringent set of social and religious rules: if she is too educated, she is considered abnormal; if she looks at a man, she risks exclusion; if she refuses to marry, she is thought to be out of control; if she sleeps with a man, and especially if she gets pregnant, she disgraces the family and risks death at the hands of her male relatives.” (193) She is the upholder of honor and has the power to easily disgrace her family. This disgrace has grave consequences for the woman, and her redemption can also redeem the entire family. When Victor asks women’s rights leader Andalib Audawan what happens to an unwed mother, she responds, “In our culture, when an unmarried girl is pregnant, there are three solutions: either she marries her partner, her father hides her in the house, or…her male relatives kill her.” (194) The bizarre thing is, unmarried women are usually hidden in the father’s house until they are married, anyway. If she is even alone with a man or suspected of having sexual relations she must usually marry the man. Even is she does nothing with a man, she is typically chained to one through arranged marriage. If she does anything to dishonor herself or her family, the male relatives might kill her. Societal restraints play a huge role in the motivation to commit suicide.

            Because of these restraints, many believe that by committing a bombing they are somehow defining equality for women, even in death. Victor states that this act is a pathetic attempt at liberation of women. She claims that the so-called Feminist movement that encourages women to become bombers is completely illegitimate. She points to the fact that men are the driving force behind the operations. Even if a woman ultimately blows herself up, there are at least ten men who have set up the operation, provided a safe house, built a the bomb, and drove the bomber to her kill site. She believes that women are not helping the state of inequality, but are actually reinforcing the patriarchy by allowing themselves to be used as human smart bombs.

Army of Roses: Now Religious Feminists Involved

            Again, political institutions have cloaked their motives for women under the guise of “feminism” and “liberation.” “A fatal cocktail? Martyrdom that is rewarded in Islam by everlasting life at Allah’s table in Paradise, combined with the political and economic oppression of an occupying force and exacerbated by personal problems caused by constraints from one’s own society that make life unbearable. What if the idea that women who die as martyrs will finally achieve equality to men were added to that equation?” (46) Victor states this perfectly. The last part is added to the equation for many. When secular organizations, including the military wing of Arafat’s al-Fatah, began to understand that their power was being threatened by more extremist Islamist factions, they began to exploit women: one of the only options that extremists could not combat. Dr. Boaz Ganor states, “When the al-Aqsa Brigade saw that Hamas was taking a lead in the Intifada and threatening their status in the street by a spate of suicide bombings, they adopted the suicide strategy in an even more sensational way by utilizing the one weapon that the Islamists could not, according the Koran, which was women and young girls.” (95) This was a clever strategy devised by the “secular” movements, yet the extremists found a way to challenge this and use women, as well. Because the warring factions in Palestine are all connected to factions in other countires, religious edicts apply, or can be applied if so desired, everywhere.  Religious factions that support Hamas and al-Jihad realized that if it were religiously permitted, then these religious factions could use women, too. Thus, the mufti of Saudi Arabia, Abd al-Aziz Ben Abdallah Aal al-Sheik stated, “I am not aware of anything in the religious law regarding killing oneself in the heart of the enemy’s ranks, or what is called ‘suicide’…although the Koran permits and even demands the killing of the enemy; this must be done in ways that do not contradict the Shari’a. There is nothing that differentiates between men and women shahides.” (96) The same day that this religious fatwa went out, February 26, 2002, Darine Abu Aisha became the second female suicide bomber and was adopted by Hamas—a bold move that was criticized by many. Arafat was again outsmarted politically. This was the beginning of the end for Arafat and the powerful al-Fatah movement. Even though most female suicide bombers are not religious, this fatwa allowed for a more women, especially religious, to consider the option of suicide bombing—as an act of jihad, permitted in the Qur’an.

Darine Abu Aisha was a very religious young woman, a brilliant scholar, and most importantly a feminist. Darine’s best friend, Nano, states, “This has shocked me. And I am sure that everyone who knew Darine is shocked because this is not what she wanted to do with her life. She was a leader and a feminist, someone who was not easily influenced by others and who stood up for what she believed in regardless of what her peers thought.” (103) At first, this woman seems like a strange candidate for a bombing. She had risen through the ranks of university and had achieved much more than most women are able to in Palestine. Nano gets down to the heart of why Darine most likely committed this act. “And, as time went on, and she knew absolutely that regardless of her achievements at university, her fate as a Palestinian woman was sealed—an arranged marriage, six or seven children, a husband who probably wouldn’t have the same hopes or curiosity about life as she did. Eventually she became nihilistic. Nothing mattered. Nothing excited her. Nothing pushed her to achieve more. She had gone as far as she could in this environment.” (104) As a feminist, Darine understood the restrictions that her society had placed upon her. She knew she couldn’t run away, her family’s honor was too important to her. But she also knew that she would not be able to live the life that she wanted. This story is illustrative of the complexity of politics that, when combined with gender limitations and religious motivation, female suicide bombers are created. At this turning point, there are a variety of women that can justify committing the act of bombing and many see it as a way out of society, as well.

"Army of Roses"

            Is to be in equal in death the same as to be equal in life? As international terrorist Leila Ahmed states, “When the religious leaders say that women who make these actions are finally equal to men, I have a problem. Everyone is equal in death—rich, poor, Arab, Jew, Christian, we are all equal. I would rather see women equal to men in life.” (64) It seems as though the ideal “feminist” or “liberated” Palestinian woman is one who dies—equal to her male counterparts, as they are both seen as martyrs for religious and nationalistic purposes. A survivor from Sabra and Shatilla camps said to Barbara Victor, “You American women talk constantly of equality. Well, you can take a lesson from us Palestinian women. We die in equal numbers to the men.” (2)

            After the beginning of the Intifada on Dec. 11, 1987, Palestinian women had to take charge of their lives and their families’ lives emotionally and financially, as men began to go to jail and curfews were in place. It was then that women were attempting equality. As the fighting began, religious factions warned against women participating.  Militant Islamic groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad “took a position against women participating in violent demonstrations.” (11) “Women were ordered to resume their traditional roles as wives, mothers, and homemakers, a demand that was eventually obeyed.” (11) Because nationalist goals were more important than gendered ones, women were silenced. If there were to have been a protest, secular and religious factions would have begun to split, allowing for Israel to more easily fight against Palestinians.

Later on, factions realized that they could use women to their advantage. They could more easily pass through security and could hide bombs under their jilbab. Women, in turn, began to feel as though they were becoming more equal to men, as they were fighting together. “Not only did Palestinian women believe that by doing these actions they were maintaining their equality, but the leaders of the various factions also realized that as long as women were dressed in the proper attire, they could be used more effectively to penetrate security and transport weapons.” (14) In order to keep afloat politically and to join forces with the terrorist/religious groups that were beginning to take control, Arafat gave a speech for the women of Palestine. “On the morning of January 27, 2002, more than one thousand Palestinian women came to hear Yasser Araft speak in his compound in Ramallah. It was an address intended specifically for them…he made it clear that women were not only welcome but expected to participate in armed resistance against Israeli occupation. ‘Women and men are equal,’ he proclaimed with his hands raised above his head and his fingers forked in a sign of victory. ‘You are my army of roses that will crush Israeli tanks.” (18-19) He made a bold statement, claiming equality for women and men, but in actually he was hoping for equality with regard to death. He claimed, “You are the hope of Palestine. You will liberate your husbands, fathers, and sons from oppression. You will sacrifice the way you, women, have always sacrificed for you family.” (20) A few hours later, Wafa Idris blew herself up in a downtown Jerusalem shopping mall and the first female suicide bomber had completed her mission.

Is this new phenomenon truly a “new brand of feminism”? Is this really the equality that women are striving for? At first, secular groups such as Fatah were the only ones that would allow for women to participate in terrorist action. At one point even Sheik Ahmad Yassin states, “A man who recruits a woman is breaking Islamic law. He is taking the girl or woman without the permission of her father, brother, or husband, and therefore the family of the girl confronts an even greater problem since the man has the biggest power over her, choosing the day that she will give her life back to Allah.” True, the man does have power over the life of another, a woman at that. But eventually, even religious groups such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad began to support female suicide bombing. Is this because they were supportive of equality for men and women? Doubtful. Since these male-powered factions realized how effective women could be when attempting to sneak past security, they have promoted female suicide bombing. In order to encourage more women to do the job, these factions have cloaked this suicide in religious and equal terms: men and women are equal, every man or woman who dies by the hand of the enemy or kills the enemy is a maryr and will go straight to Paradise with Allah. Nationalism, gender equality, and religion are obviously very significant within Palestinian society. Yet it appears as though secular and religious organizations have collaborated in order to save their own asses, as it were, by convincing women that they are somehow equal only in death, and by their act as a shaheeda they can not only save their own souls, they can also save their families, be a religious leader and feminist.

"The Path to Paradise"

            Anat Berko provides an intimate insight into the lives of women who attempted suicide bombing. She travels to jails in Israel and the Occupied Territories, also known as Palestine, to interview these fascinating women and allow their individual stories to be heard. Berko creates a personal atmosphere by allowing her individuality to be known, her history-as a refugee from Iraq, and her position as a scholar and mother. She also speaks a fair amount of Arabic and is one of the best people for this type of research. I originally questioned if there was such a generic profile that could be created to address all female suicide bombers and their motivations. While this is obviously impossible, Berko illustrates that there are indeed many similar factors that come into play when a certain person decides to become a suicide bomber.

            Within Arab culture there is a specific role that females play. The gender division has been great, and suicide bombing is actually one of the few areas in which both men and women have certain amounts of equality. The division of private space and public space is important for the understanding of Arab culture. Men are in control of the “public” areas—they can go out freely, without a chaperone, and have there are more lenient social norms for men than women. Men and women who are not related or married are not generally allowed to be alone together or the woman’s honor could be tainted.  Honor is a core issue here, as it is a huge part of motivation, as well. The patriarchal system that once dominated the area has crumbled to a certain degree, as fathers can no longer provide solely for their families, brothers and even sisters have begun jobs in order to sustain their lives. Many Palestinians also work in Israel and travel back and forth on a regular basis. Some of these workers have even been blackmailed into spying on terrorist groups for the State of Israel. When these men and women are found out, they are usually killed and their families shamed and even excommunicated. There is also much suspicion surrounding anyone working in Israel, as many are seen as “collaborating” or “helping” the enemy. If someone is even suspected of this, their honor is at stake and they could be considered a “bad family” or “shamed person,” which in turn shames their family. Interestingly, men are in control of the honor, but women are the ones who uphold this honor. If a woman is caught with another man without a chaperone (father, brother, or husband), she can be put to death—a common occurrence known as an “honor killing.” The male, of course, is given a slap on the wrist. The woman’s family will then be shamed. These social norms are very important for life in Palestine and the consequences are dire. With regard to gender division, one woman states, “It’s more impressive when a woman carries out a suicide bombing attack, because this is the Middle East and a woman is very limited, and that makes her action special. Not only that, the Qur’an allows it, because we are in a state of war and this is jihad.” (112)

            One commonality that I witnessed in almost all of Berko’s interviews with women was that the original confession as to why they attempted the bombing was personal. One woman fell in love, yet her father would not accept the dowry that the man’s family was willing to give. She was already twenty, which is considered old for marriage, and she felt as though she would have no other chances. She was so angry with her father that she decided, “I’ll get my revenge against my father by becoming a shaheeda” (103). One woman had been seeing a boyfriend behind her family’s back. When her boyfriend found out she was to be married, he convinced her that if she loved him she would become part of an “action” group, a.k.a. terrorist organization. She did, and when Israeli authorities finally questioned him, he gave her up as a terrorist to save his own skin. One woman who actually succeeded in committing a suicide bombing had been married for a few years, but was unable to conceive a child. Her husband, allowed by law to divorce her for this reason did so, and married another. The new couple moved in next door to her house and she watched as they started a new life and had multiple children. Her family teased her that she would never marry again, as an older woman (mid-twenties) and as a divorcee. She believed her life had no purpose and decided to die with honor, as a shaheeda. Many of the women interviewed had family members that were either imprisoned for terrorist association or killed by IDF fire. Many cited revenge and “eye for an eye” philosophy as reasoning behind their attempted action. “Of course I would attack a kindergarten,” one woman stated, “I can watch your children eating and playing and blow myself up in the middle of them. Once in the Gaza Strip they shot at children in a school and threw tear gas at them” (128). The atrocity of war is cited as a main motivation for, well, more atrocity.  With regard to honor, many women who accept the first step, deciding to talk to someone about a terrorist action-usually the dispatchers or part of the organization-always men, have already doomed themselves. Even if they turn back or decide to forgo the bombing, they have already been in contact by themselves with men who are not their father, brother, or husband. By telling their family, they risk their honor, status, and lives. Many women stated that even if they wanted to turn back they could not because of this. Some women didn’t even know what they were getting into, but were forced to continue. One woman states, “I was very surprised when he told me I would be a shaheeda. I wasn’t planning to die like that. He said, ‘…you have to do it.’” (7)

Another similarity among the female would-be-bombers is that the psychology that they have adopted.  Surrounded by the pervasive “cult of death,” a huge part of society, many men and women (regardless of level of religiosity) begin to adhere to “religious” or pseudo-religious ideology regarding jihad and “life” in paradise. In order to carry out such a dramatic and serious offense, they have permitted themselves to believe that life is somehow less significant than death, and that the “enemy” is inhuman. Once Berko came back after months and spoke to the same women, and they had supposedly changed their original motivation. Even in jail the heads of Hamas, Palestinian Jihad, and the representatives of other terrorist groups were indoctrinating them. Many became more militantly religious, quoting the Qur’an for reasoning and citing slogans from the “cult of death” surrounding them. Issues became black and white, they were right and the Israelis were wrong, thus they could attack and kill multiple Jews and even Arabs simply. There also appeared to be an intense environment of self-deceit. Even in jail for life, many of the female prisoners discussed their desire for and belief that one day they would be married and have children. As a survival tactic, it appears as though many of the women still believe in their choice to commit suicide, yet have to take on the persona of a one who is not incarcerated in order to get by. 

Berko allows for a greater understanding of the personal motivation with regard to female suicide bombers. Her interviews give insight into the complex life of women in Palestine and their sense of honor. She highlights that most of these women are not hyper-religious and their motivations are usually not political, but instead very personal. One cannot pinpoint a specific profile of a bomber, but they do all have certain things in common.  

Random Thoughts

            I question whether there is a profile of women suicide bombers that differs from men. Of course, in a place where the gender divide is great, I expect there to be vast differences, but among women are the differences that great? I also wonder what those differences between men and women are and how they are reinforced by society.

            In the interviews with failed suicide bombers, one commonality that I’ve noticed with females is that when they first come to jail and share their motivations, they are all private. The reasonings are all different, yet none (discussed) have motivations that one would immediately assume. None are religious fanatics, many aren’t religious at all. Only some cite jihad or the Qur’an as justification for their actions, but most cite personal motivation.  One woman had a boyfriend before she was married, something uncommon and considered taboo by society. When her boyfriend found out she was to be married, he convinced her that if she loved him she would become part of an “action” group, a.k.a. terrorist organization. She did, and when he was questioned by Israeli authorities, he gave her up as a terrorist to save his own skin. She joined for love. Another woman was badly burned when she was younger and she believed she had no future in Palestinian society, because she was “too ugly” to be married. Her parents constantly teased her that no man would marry her and that she was most likely to be a burden, one that would feed off her parents for the rest of her life. Because she had no agency (and supposedly would never) in society, she chose to end her life in a “honorable” way. One woman was already prone to depression and had attempted suicide twice before. She fell in love when she was twenty—which was already fairly old to be marrying in Palestinian society—but her father would no accept the dowry, saying it was too small. The proposal was called off. She was so angry with her father that she turned to a terrorist organization. She stated, “I’ll get my revenge against my father by becoming a shaheeda” (103).

            These are all accounts of prisoners when they first came into the prison. Berko visited months later and talked to some of the same women, and interestingly they claimed that their original motivation was different. The same woman who’s father would not allow her to marry stated eight months later that personal reasons were not why she attempted to commit martyrdom. She said that jihad was the reason, and that she was religiously motivated to overthrow the Jews.  She said at the end of their interview, “In any case, my life won’t do anyone any good, and there are a lot of people who want to do it, to become shaheeds, and nothing can stop them” (106). Supposedly, Berko states that she had been indoctrinated by the other women who were part of the Fatah Tanzim operatives within the prison. It was not uncommon, according to Berko, that women would take back their original statements and instead cite motivation based upon a prescribed monologue put forth by terrorist organizations within the prisons.

            Possibly, these women are originally telling the truth about their motivation, but while they were in jail they realized that it was more acceptable to carry out an attack due to religious fervor or intense love of the nation.

ANOTHER POINT:

            The theme of retaliation is constant. Many bombers attempt to carry out terrorist activity in order to seek revenge. “Of course I would attack a kindergarten,” one woman stated, “I can watch your children eating and playing and blow myself up in the middle of them. Once in the Gaza Strip they shot at children in a school and threw tear gas at them” (128). The atrocity of war is cited as a main motivation for, well, more atrocity. There is a strong sense of “eye for an eye” within these interviews and the women see themselves as bravely offering up their lives for sacrifice.

            Land ownership also plays a huge role in the ongoing war. Many of the suicide bomber attemptees were women around the age of twenty. Many claim that they remember events that happened in 1948 and 1967, and that their “memory” serves as their motivation. Although horrific things happened and still do, this falsification of memory, or nostalgic memory passed down through generations has a huge affect on the would-be-teenage-suicide-bombers. They claim that they used to live in what is now Israel and they want their land back. They deny the fact that many Jews lived in Israel beforehand. Of course, their land was taken away, this is true. But after sixty years, this memory of the past still incites people to war and suicide bombing. 

Intro Summary and Disconnected Thought

            This is a small summary of the introduction to Berko’s book, “The Path to Paradise.” I’ve just written down some of the important points that I will go back and address in greater detail:

Berko begins her book by asking whether suicide bombers “freely and voluntarily choose to commit suicide.” (1) Of course some suicide bombers do go looking for dispatchers, and for a variety of reasons. Berko also brings up the case of honor. Many Palestinians who are suspected of collaboration with Israel fulfill suicide bombing missions in order to restore their family honor and to possibly save their family, and themselves, from torture or death. One such bomber is the famous Ayat al-Akhras who became a human smart bomb in order to clear her father’s name and save his honor. It is important to note that within Palestinian culture, along with many other cultures-specifically those heavily influenced by Islamic practice-the act of martyrdom is considered the most highly honorable way to die and the families of suicide bombers are praised and even receive financial rewards for the brave act undertaken by a son or daughter. Other reasons for committing suicide bombings include social embarrassment, again in keeping with one’s honor. Honor killings of women by males of the family are not uncommon, and suicide bombing is not much different-except that their may be a sense of autonomy and even power in the fact that one is purposefully taking their own life on their own conditions. A friend of Berko states, “If someone decides to become a shaheed, (a martyr for Islam, or in this case a suicide bomber) every bad thing he (or she) ever did is cancelled, even if it’s a question of a woman who slept around” (2). One prisoner, Nazima, discussed her path into jail. She claims, “There are children they (dispatchers) talked into it by exploiting their youth” (2). This brings up the question mentioned earlier: are martyrs really choosing their own death or are the coerced by dispatchers, religious or political figures, or their own culture of death that asserts martyrdom equals eternal life and forgiveness, a culture that glorifies death? The culture of death is pervasive in Palestinian territories. Posters can be seen everywhere of men and women martyrs-shaheeds and shaheedas; their final statement on videotape played on televisions in many homes.

 Nazima tells her story: A girlfriend had originally told her that she could help Palestinians in the resistance movements against Israel. “I went into an unfamiliar house. There was an older man there, and other, younger men in the same room…and then he told me that the following Monday I was going to carry out a suicide bombing attack, itishhad. He said, ‘Get ready, prepare yourself…’ I was very surprised when he told me I would be a shaheeda. I wasn’t planning to die like that…He said, ‘…you have to do it’” (5).  Nazima eventually caved and accepted the job. She felt as though she could not ask her father or family for help because she had been in training alone with other men, without her makhram-brother, husband, or father. This type of story is repeated throughout the first half of the book. Many of the young women recruited are not religious nor particularly angry or ideologically motivated. Most all suicide bombers are recruited by friends or family and then sent to a dispatcher: always an unknown male. The power dynamic in Nazima’s story is interesting, although not unique. After meeting with a training group once, the chance of going back on one’s word is almost impossible. For some of the young women, the chances of being killed or disowned by their family are equivalent to their chances of dying by pressing the detonator. The dispatchers know this. Psychology plays a huge factor in who is chosen, or who chooses to become a bomber. A dispatcher in an Israeli jail told Berko that he specifically asked his comrades to find “sad guys”-mainly men and women “who have trouble finding themselves, sometimes influenced by anger and bitterness at their marginality, and who are willing to try anything to feel they have worth and to win the approval of society or their families” (7).

Berko notes that one of the reasons for the “explosion” of new suicide bombers is due to a disintegration of patriarchy and male dominance within the family. The father is no longer the sole breadwinner in most homes and poverty has created a new system of familial power. She states, “Often potential shaheeds view the religious individual, the ideologue, and especially the suicide bomber dispatcher as a source of the authority which, in the past was indisputably in the hands of the paterfamilias” (10).

Another interesting aspect of the suicide bombing phenomenon is group mentality. Palestinian culture has created itself as an “other” to Israel and

the surrounding Arab countries. Palestinians portray themselves as the Phoenix-esque victims; ground down by every other country and peoples, yet still able to gather their resources (people with bombs, stones, Molotov cocktails, etc.) and fight back. War psychology has become mainstream in the sense that Palestine is always at war. Life is seen as a war for survival; it is a physical, economic, territorial, and psychological war. Being at war, Palestinians have united against the enemy and thus group mentality flourishes. Berko notes that circumstance and society play a huge role in determining the individual and collective acts of suicide: “The collective social force encourages the individual to commit suicide, while in Western society it would be expected to deter him from doing so” (12). Along with a collective mentality and awareness of mortality, many suicide bombers and dispatchers must also prepare themselves psychologically in order to see the enemy as less than human. In order for individuals to become martyrs, they must “become emotionally detached, behaving mechanically on the way to the target” (10).

ISP: Info

     I am doing a research ISP about female suicide bombers. My interests concern the motivation, gendered power dynamics, and politics of suicide bombing. I have narrowed my sources down to four books-one a week-and I intend to focus only on the suicide bombings within Israel/Palestine.  The first book is titled "The Path to Paradise: The Inner World of Suicide Bombers and Their Dispatchers" by Anat Berko. Berko is has a Ph.D. in criminology and is currently a research fellow at the International Policy Institute for Counter-Terrorism. The book is a compilation of her research on terrorism and her interviews with suicide bombers who have failed in Israel and Palestine. She also interviews suicide bombing dispatchers and the once-major leader of Hamas, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin. This book will hopefully address questions I have regarding gender and the powerplay between dispatchers and their bombers, along with personal motivation as explained by failed suicide bombers themselves. The second book I intend to read is entitled "Army of Roses: Inside the World of Palestinian Women Suicide Bombers," written by Barbara Victor. The title is taken from a direct quote by Yasser Arafat, who proclaimed to over a thousand Palestinian women on January 27, 2002 that, “Women and men are equal. You are my army of roses that will crush Israeli tanks.” Victor is a journalist who covered the conflict extensively. Her book explores the history of and the role of women within the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. She focuses on four shahidas-female ‘martyrs,’ or suicide bombers-and her information comes directly from the families of those women. She also includes interviews with Israeli counterterrorism researchers, journalists, and psychologists. This book could possibly be biased because most of her “professional” information is coming directly from Israelis and not Palestinians, but I believe her interviews with the families of shahidas will shed light on political or religious motivation and possibly allow for a greater understanding of the phenomenon of female suicide bombing. My third book is aptly titled “Female Suicide Bombers,” written by Rosemarie Skaine. Skaine is a sociologist in Cedar Falls, Iowa and has written many other books on the topic of Arab women in wartime. Her book examines the history of suicide bombing, specifically in Israel/Palestine, and attempts to create the profile of a female suicide bomber. She strives to answer the question of why female suicide bombing has become such a ­­­popular tactic of war in Israel/Palestine and also explores the Western ideology that places women in the category of non-violent, nurturing souls. My final book is “Women as Weapons of War: Iraq, Sex, and The Media,” written by Kelly Oliver. Oliver is a professor of Philosophy at Vanderbilt University, as well as a prolific author. This book does not fully focus on Palestinian female suicide bombers, but Oliver does have a couple of chapters that directly discuss the issue. I chose this book because it explores how women are used in war. She takes a feminist perspective and looks at the way women’s bodies are used as weapons. She looks at the media and the portrayal of women as part of the justification of war, specifically American/Iraqi. I believe that this book will aid my research and understanding of the larger forces, social and political,that lead the phenomenon of female suicide bombers and women as weapons of war in general. I am going to write a one to two page essay/blog about three times a week. These essays will address specific questions I have before reading the book of the week, and will then proceed to address those questions or ask more. These will basically be documentations of my research and findings. I hope you find this blog interesting/intriguing/etc. and if you have questions or think I should focus on a certain topic related, please let me know!

HI! This is a post.