582 Aggression, Violence, Evil, and Peace
implicated by revelations of human rights abuses. Above all,
as Lederach (1997) observed, the relationship between
groups must change so that out-group members are no longer
excluded from one’s moral framework, and this must occur at
the grassroots level as well as at the level of top leadership.
Lederach stressed the need for years of work in rebuilding
trust in teams from different strata of the society. He showed
that such reconciliation requires the assistance of third parties
who can accompany disputants with an attitude of humility as
they, both individuals and communities, wrestle with the
problems of combining truth, justice, and mercy.
Governmental initiative is often required, and certainly
the most successful effort to date has been the South African
government’s establishment of its Truth and Reconciliation
Commission. Rather than attempting to punish those respon-
sible for the torture and murders that occurred during the
maintenance of apartheid, the commission was charged with
establishing what happened—making known the fate of vic-
tims and providing them with the opportunity to relate their
accounts and achieve some measure of reparation, facilitat-
ing the amnesty of offenders who made full disclosure, and
recommending measures to prevent future violations (de la
Rey, 2001). Although justice was not achieved in the sense of
adequate reparations, of punishment of the guilty, or even of
an adequate admission of guilt or request for forgiveness, the
public hearings held by the commission provided a forum
that allowed a public acknowledgment of what had happened
and the establishment of a common moral framework. In
contrast to the situation in Argentina, where there is still no
public recognition for the abuses under the military dictator-
ship or condemnation of those involved in torture and disap-
pearances, the South African public can speak of what
occurred and move on with a new public identity and history.
Terrorism
Terrorism may be distinguished from the guerilla tactics of
rebels who are fighting a military opponent within their own
territory. Terrorism involves random attacks on civilians as a
means of gaining political ends and has been used by both
states and revolutionaries (J. R. White, 1998). In the former
case, a government that is engaged in a war attempts to
destroy its opponent’s will to fight, or a despotic government
maintains its power by creating an emotional climate of ter-
ror that prevents the organization needed for political opposi-
tion (de Rivera, 1992). In the latter case, groups without
access to political power use terror to publicize their griev-
ances, extort concessions, or overthrow a regime that is expe-
rienced as repressive. All cases involve the training for
aggression and moral desensitization described in the section
on aggression. However, terrorism is situated in historical
circumstances that have interesting and largely unexplored
psychological aspects.
An example is provided by the September 11, 2001, attack
on the United States. Most of the terrorists were from Saudi
Arabia. Although the government is repressive in that there
are no ways to express discontent, the United States supports
the regime in exchange for access to oil. The alternative
to the king Monarchy would probably be an Islamic state
rather than a secular democracy. Such a state is fundamen-
tally religious and is conceived hierarchically rather than de-
mocratically. Vatikiotis (1986) noted that it is not based on
the skepticism, experimentation, and tolerance essential to
pluralistic politics. It is based on a different psychology, and
its stability would require the cultivation of a different set of
emotional relationships and customs (de Rivera, in press).
Hence, we are dealing with the problems of psychological
identity and the ambiguous role of religion that will be con-
sidered when we discuss the nature of evil. An examination
of past attempts to deal with revolutionary terrorism suggests
that the more successful have involved meeting the underly-
ing needs that fuel the terrorism, as well as the suppression of
terrorist elements.Structural ViolenceThe concept of structural violence has been articulated by
Galtung (1969, 19751980, 1996) to capture how economic
and political structures may place constraints on the human
potential. It sees violence as present when humans are dimin-
ished and points to the fact that this occurs when social struc-
tures prevent the meeting of human needs. Galtung pointed
out that modern society is organized hierarchically and that
those on top often use their position in ways that exploit those
below, preventing them from having the resources they need.
The top dogs are in control of resource distribution, and their
decisions determine who has access to education, health care,
and good jobs. Further, he argued that the top dogs maintain
their power by a series of devices that work against the
underdogs organizing a resistance.
One measure of structural violence is furnished by the
human poverty index (HPI; United Nations Development Pro-
gramme, 1999). This index uses five variables that reflect the
loss of potentials that could be resolved by public policies.
These are the percentage of the population dying before age 40,
the percentage of underweight children (under age 5), the per-
centages of the population without access to potable water and
without health care, and the percentage of illiterate adults.
It is important to realize that the hierarchies of power and
privilege that exist within each society are connected to those