Suicide pilots - Terrorist and kamikaze

I came across this paper through the good folks at ALD.

The author, Yuki Tanaka, begins with an examination of the principle psychological themes found in the records of the Japanese kamikaze pilots of WW2. The headings -

1) Rationalizing one’s own death to defend one’s country and its people

2) The belief that to die for the “country” was show filial piety to one’s own parents, particularly to one’s mother:

3) Strong solidarity with their flight-mates who shared their fate as Kamikaze pilots:

4) A strong sense of responsibility and contempt for cowardice:

5) A lack of an image of the enemy:

Read the whole paper. It is an interesting insight.

His conclusion -

In my view, religious or ideological indoctrination is not the decisive factor in turning a young person into a suicide attacker. Rather religion and ideology are used to justify and formalize their cause of self-sacrifice and to rationalize the killing enemies, whether military or civilians. In so doing, they mirror the strategies of their oppressors who likewise, in practice, make no distinction between military and civilian targets. Ritualising killing makes it psychologically easier not only to annihilate enemies but also to terminate one’s own life.

Ritualized violence and brutality as exemplified by suicide attack may constitute the most negative manifestations of a human being’s desire to let one’s own people live by sacrificing one’s own life. However, war and violent conflict inevitably brutalize not only suicide attackers, but all human beings. Undoubtedly war is an act of madness, its absurdity clearly shown in the paired (but imbalanced) actions and reactions of World War II: as Japan adopted kamikaze-style suicide attacks, the US used “strategic bombing” to indiscriminately kill hundreds of thousands of civilians, and finally engaged in atomic bombing attacks. Yet, to a great extent, it is the former acts that have borne the opprobrium of history while the latter would come to shape the strategic horizons of subsequent wars. Thus terrorist suicide bombing, which is occurring more and more frequently throughout the world, bears the opprobrium of “lunatic actions by fanatics,” while the bombing of civilians, such as those executed by the U.S. and British forces in Afghanistan and Iraq, are widely regarded as “legitimate military operations.” It is crucial that we find effective ways to break the vicious cycle of these two types of terrorism.

OK, to be very clear, his statement "... in practice, make no distinction between military and civilian targets..." carries an emotional charge that is not going to lead to reasoned debate.

I think I would have said, in order to be more accurate, "...in effect, make no distinction between military and civilian targets...".

That would be closer to the truth, in any and all of the possible examples that might be raised. It has to be said that the US euphemism "colateral damage" applicable in these military operations is a blunt acceptance that civilian casualties are inevitable if unintended. Why else would you drop an HE / incendiary mix if it were not to spread the fire as far and as wide as possible?

It also takes nothing away from Tanaka's conclusions.