Perpetrators’ Trauma and Implicated Witnessing: Between the Psychoanalytic and the Political

How—and why at all—should we listen to voices of perpetrators of political violence, lend an ear to their stories and hear their (self-inflicted) pain? In this paper I try to show how the psychoanalytic concept of “witnessing”, which came forth in the context of the treatment of trauma victims, gets problematized when applied to testimonies relating to perpetrators’ trauma. While initially the idea of witnessing marked an increased affinity between the psychoanalytic and the political/ethical, current literature on witnessing and trauma in the context of perpetrators reveals a re-growing gap between these two spheres. I examine these complexities through the case of Israeli soldiers and the testimonies they recite, both within clinical settings and in the public realm. I use the concepts “implicated witnessing” and “failed witnessing” in order to relate to possible ethical perils, especially in the context of ongoing, socially sanctioned violence. I point to the potential proximity between notions of the therapist qua witness and the therapist qua bystander. However, I also insist on the potential gain of applying psychoanalytic ideas (such as working-through) to processes in the public sphere and on the importance of thinking politically about clinical processes. In this spirit, I aim to find a way to go beyond two binary positions towards perpetrators’ narratives which are lacking in their account of the witness’ own involvement and responsibility: on the one hand, a resolute critical denunciation, and on the other, an alleged neutrality. In the case of testimonies of perpetrators and their trauma, I assert, this may be an important step in a social process of shifting from defensive splitting to assuming responsibility, and thus in diminishing political violence.