Weaponizing Technology: The Psychological And Behavioural Impact Of IEDs In Modern Warfare – OpEd
Historical Roots of Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs)
Improvised Explosive Devices or IEDs are any explosive devices that are constructed or detonated in ways other than the conventional military ways. They are frequently described as a new technology. The term “Improvised Explosive Device” was coined by the British Army during the ethno-nationalist conflict in Northern Ireland that lasted from 1960s to 1998.
However, it is important to note that IEDs have a lengthy history. In the 16th century, the Dutch used explosive laden ships termed as ‘hellburners’ to fight against the Spanish in Antwerp. In 1800 an unsuccessful attempt was made to kill Napolean with help of explosives planted in horse carts. Yet other examples of IEDs from history include Mario Buda’s improvised wagon in the Wall Street bombing of 1920, suicide car bombing at the Bath School massacre in 1927 and the use of large vehicle borne IEDs in the Beirut Barracks bombings of 1983.
The Psychological Appeal of IEDs: Cost, Access, and Impact
While in the past the use of IEDs was fairly limited, they became significantly more widespread and impactful during the Iraq war beginning in 2003. Following which the use of IEDs spread to other conflict zones such as Afghanistan. Usually, use of IEDs is observed in ‘asymmetric warfare and power dynamics’ where one side is significantly weaker. While the conventional military forces may be better trained and equipped, use of IEDs offers opportunity to the weaker forces to strike from a distance, instill fear and disrupt army operations.
One of the main psychological drivers behind the choice of IEDs is the ease of access to the necessary materials. IEDs can be constructed using commercially available items, making them an opportunistic weapon choice. IEDs may also be chosen based on their perceived efficiency relative to their cost. However, in instances where a more powerful group opts for more expensive and sophisticated IEDs such as in the case of Israel’s use of walkie talkies as IEDs for attack on Hezbollah in Lebanon, it may be considered a strategically planned psychological move aimed at signalling control, capability and strength.
On 17th and 18th September communication devices dramatically exploded across Lebanon. Some of these devices were also being used by the members of armed group Hezbollah. The blasts occurred in crowded areas injuring and also killing several people. Through this attack Israel has demonstrated its dominance signalling its military superiority to the international community as well as Hezbollah. Where Hezbollah might have expected Israel to rely on conventional missiles and air strikes, Israel’s use of IED introduced an element of surprise. By employing IEDs, Israel has also sent a political message to its adversaries and international observers that it will utilize any means necessary to defend its national security.
The Psychological Ramifications of IED Use
This strategic move has psychological and behavioural implications for the wider population across the globe. These implications may be analysed and understood through the framework of Cyberpsychology and trauma studies. Cyberpsychology studies the impact of human-technology interaction on the cognition, emotion and behaviour of the individuals. The concept of trust in technology is a core component of cyberpsychology.
But when devices such as pagers, mobile phones, walkie talkies etc. that are known to foster safe communication become instruments of harm, they rupture the sense of security of people. This could lead to technophobia and erode the trust of people in everyday technology. Moreover, these devices often get detonated by familiar actions of pressing a button or responding to a notification which further amplify the breach of trust. This may create a sense of betrayal and may cause the victims to question the integrity of digital environment. This phenomenon could be compared to concepts in learned helplessness from classical psychology, where repeated exposure to uncontrollable harm leads to passive behaviour and a sense of powerlessness, further amplifying stress and anxiety.
From trauma perspective, such attacks directly cause physical trauma. However, the unpredictable and invasive nature of the explosions exacerbates psychological trauma. Additionally, the survivors of the incident may experience re-traumatization on subsequent exposure to similar devices in future. Such experiences may lead to development of symptoms similar to that of PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder). It may also lead to an increase in avoidance behaviours and hypervigilance among people. This form of avoidance aligns with the fight-or-flight response, where the brain prepares the body to evade potential threats, even in cases where the threat may be highly localized or rare. People who witness these attacks through social media and news channels might get vicariously traumatized. A well-documented response to mass experience of trauma is ‘contagion effect’ which can take the form of panic that spreads in the community as images and videos of such attacks begin to circulate. Social media platforms and news outlets may also amplify the feels of anxiety and fear making it difficult for the people to accurately assess the actual risk.
From a behavioural standpoint, the communities and individuals may exhibit changes in their patterns of interactions with technology. According to operant conditioning theory, which explains behaviour through rewards and punishments, the violent explosions serve as a form of punishment for using certain devices. People will be conditioned to avoid such devices in the future to reduce the risk of harm. The Lebanese Health Ministry’s call for people to discard their pagers reflects an attempt to mitigate the behavioural consequences of fear and anxiety, but it also showcases the broad behavioural shifts that these attacks can trigger.
The Future of Conflict: Psychological Battles in the Age of Weaponized Technology
In the face of increased use of IEDs in modern day conflicts, it is important to consider how technology is increasingly weaponized in modern conflict. Cyberpsychology offers insights into how individuals perceive and interact with technology during crises, and the psychological risks associated with weaponizing everyday devices are significant. If similar attacks are carried out in the future, society will likely experience further erosion of trust in communication technologies, potentially leading to a broader societal shift in how technology is viewed in both personal and military contexts.
The intersection of cyberpsychology and warfare suggests that future conflicts will not only involve physical battles but psychological ones as well. Combatants may increasingly target the technological infrastructure and devices people rely on, causing both physical harm and psychological damage. Understanding of these effects through the framework of Cyberpsychology helps prepare for the societal and psychological fallout of such conflicts.
Conclusion
The coordinated device explosions in Lebanon while may be representative of the nationalist sentiments of Israel, they also represent a chilling evolution in modern warfare, where the line between technology as a tool and technology as a weapon becomes blurred. From a psychological perspective, the implications are vast. The disruption of trust in technology, the trauma inflicted on individuals and communities, and the broader behavioural consequences require attention from mental health professionals, governments, and technologists alike. As future conflicts increasingly involve the manipulation of everyday technology, cyberpsychology will play a critical role in understanding the full scope of their impact on the human psyche.
