Iben is shuffling her feet, searching for something like a lost shoe. Next she starts looking under the table, sending an unmistakable signal that the whole thing is beginning to bore her.

Malene becomes distracted too. She looks across the desk at Iben. Whats under the table? What are you looking for?

Anne-Lise glances at Camilla, who appears to be completely absorbed in her work.

Camilla behaves as if she werent there at all. Anne-Lise feels like crossing the floor and shouting in her ear: Are you aware of whats going on? Do you even care? Would you be pleased if I died too? But Anne-Lise doesnt dare provoke her.

Maybe Camillas inertia is a survival strategy that she learned to save herself. Maybe Camilla would have a breakdown if someone were to force her to take notice of what is going on in the office right under her very nose. Maybe her unstable mind would give way to lethal rage awaken a personality capable of e-mail death threats.

Camilla and the others look away from Anne-Lise, and she returns to the library.

Later that afternoon, the DCIG board member Tatiana Blumenfeld has arranged to come and pick up some reference material Anne-Lise has found for her. Tatiana knows everyone in human rights research in Denmark. It matters if she takes you seriously, regardless of which organization you work for. She is also one of the few academics who make use of Anne-Lises expertise.

Tatiana is a tiny woman in her sixties with jet black hair. She arrives at the board meetings wearing tight black trousers and vivid, unique sweaters. She dashes along the corridors with remarkably long strides for such a small person. The machine-gun clatter of her smart, extremely high-heeled shoes can be heard from afar. Although Anne-Lise has never seen Tatiana with a cigarette, her skin is that of a lifelong chain-smoker.

When Tatiana was a student of psychoa.n.a.lysis, she laid the foundations for a theory about the therapeutic management of children who had been imprisoned in concentration camps and subjected to torture or forced to watch their close relatives being tortured or murdered. Tatiana developed her theory from her a.n.a.lyses of camp childrens drawings and her research led first to a doctorate and then to a tenured post in the Department of Psychology at Copenhagen University. She has also become an a.s.sociate of the International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims, or IRCTV, a highly regarded organization.

Anne-Lise still doesnt feel close to Tatiana. What she knows about her she learned mostly through Tatianas friend and a.s.sistant, Lea. Anne-Lise and Lea met at the Bosnia conference and, during a lunch together, Lea spoke glowingly about her boss.

The doorbell rings. The image on their computer screens shows Tatiana waiting outside on the landing. Anne-Lise keys in the security code and goes to meet her visitor; she wants to usher her to the library before the others have a chance to descend upon her. But no sooner does Tatiana step into the Winter Garden than Malene and Iben are by her side.

You must come and see the new photos weve put up, Iben says, smiling.

They turn and lead the way to the notice board, Tatiana between them. She steps forward, catches sight of Anne-Lise, and calls out: Anne-Lise! Im just going to have a peek at their crazy pictures!

Of all the people she has met in this place, Anne-Lise has found Tatiana to be the nicest. Her impulse is to protect Tatiana from her venomous colleagues, but then, she knows that Malene and Iben wont want to show their ill will in front of the esteemed guest.

Tatiana exclaims at one of the new pictures. Oh, look! Its your old librarian! How sweet of you! Do you miss her?

She is looking at a photograph of the woman whose e-mails showed just how intensely she detested working at the DCIG. Sometime last week, Iben had scanned an old photograph of their ex-librarian and printed an enlarged version to pin up on the wall.

We do. But have a closer look. We have lots of pictures of our favorite people.

Tatiana takes Malenes prompt and moves closer to the board. She puts on her reading gla.s.ses. No its me! I look so odd. Its Rome, isnt it?

Thats right. Ole gave it to us. He was there too.

Tatiana is amused. She puts her coat on Malenes chair and leans forward to examine the picture.

It was at the conference. G.o.d, I look completely sozzled.

At this, she glances quickly at Anne-Lise, apparently alarmed, but with a hint of compa.s.sion. Anne-Lise doesnt understand what her expression means.

Iben comes closer to Tatiana. Never! You wouldnt drink too much at work!

She smiles at Anne-Lise now, but continues to address Tatiana. No one would ever think that about you. Its just the heat and the bright light. You look a bit flushed, thats all. And your smile is great. Everyone can see youre happy.

Anne-Lise tries to get a word in with Tatiana too. She finds it hard to sound relaxed and friendly, sensing Iben and Malenes intense desire for her to disappear.

Iben is very good at entertaining visitors and Malene is excellent. A quarter of an hour later, the little group is still chatting in front of the notice board.

Iben mentions the plan to merge the DCIG and DIHR, sounding troubled as she explains.

Tatiana is sympathetic. Yes, I see. Such a shame. Are you really worried about it?

Yes, we are.

Tatiana nods with concern. I understand, believe me. This is such an efficient office and so very pleasant too. Its a great pity. But dont worry, youre sure to keep your present jobs inside the new organization too. She goes on to talk about her experience of other inst.i.tutional mergers. I suspect Paul will be the most put out. After all, h.e.l.l have someone else as his boss.

Iben keeps stepping from one foot to the other. We were wondering about Frederiks role on the board once his senior post in Human Rights is announced. Now that its no longer in his interest to keep this place independent, it could be problematic, couldnt it?

Anne-Lise doesnt think they should be discussing this with another member of the board, but Iben is so much more knowledgeable about the rules and whats acceptable in terms of the politics of the organization.

Tatiana, however, sounds surprised. Iben, its not problematic in the slightest. Frederik can easily put on different hats at different times. We all do, you know. And hes very professional.

Malene looks intently at Tatiana and edges forward until she is in front of Anne-Lise. So you dont think there will be a conflict of interests?

No, I dont. Absolutely not. Tatiana picks up her coat, ready to get on with library business. I wouldnt worry about that. Truly. Trust me. But have you spoken to Paul about it?

Anne-Lise cant think what the correct way of dealing with this straight question about the Centers director might be.

But Malene doesnt hesitate. No, we havent raised it with him. Youre right, we should.

Yes, you really ought to. Paul attends the board meetings and can tell you how everything works. Im sure he will confirm that theres no problem.

Then, at last, Anne-Lise gets to escort Tatiana into the library. She shows her the results of her search, a collection of reports from the Portuguese Foreign Office staff, written in Portuguese and full of details about the Indonesian genocide of 200,000 civilians, roughly a third of the population of occupied East Timor.

Looking through books with someone else brings a special sense of intimacy, like having your hair washed by the hairdresser.

Later Anne-Lise and Tatiana sit at Anne-Lises computer and search for references to East Timor in international online magazines. The library also holds French investigations that are not yet entered into the database and Tatiana wanders off in search of archive material. Anne-Lise sends an overview of the articles they have selected to the small printer in the Winter Garden.

When she goes to collect the printouts, Iben and Malene are talking. They clearly know that Tatiana can no longer hear them, and Ibens voice is low and relaxed.

Malene, we simply havent had time to finalize the texts you need for the exhibition posters. So much has been going on these last few weeks, since Anne-Lise sent us those e-mails. Her tone is so matter-of-fact.

Anne-Lise would prefer to say nothing and retreat to her own s.p.a.ce, but she realizes that the remark will be left hanging in the air, ready to hurt her later. Once more they have forced her to join their little game.

She sighs, because she knows what will come next, and speaks quietly. I didnt send the e-mails.

The antic.i.p.ation of the hunt makes their eyes shine. Malene takes over. Oh, yes, you did.

You know it wasnt me. It was that Serb. The one the CIA arrested.

Iben sounds amused. Youve sent lots of e-mails, to us and other people.

Anne-Lise tries to be firm. Of course Ive sent e-mails, but not threatening ones.

But I wasnt talking about them.

Malene sides with Iben. Thats not the point at all. We didnt even mention any threats.

She pauses and looks at Anne-Lise, her expression now registering amazement. Why on earth would you a.s.sume that we were talking about those e-mails?

Anne-Lise feels her insides cramp up. Thats ridiculous! What was I supposed to think? Which e-mails do you mean?

Different ones.

Which ones?

Malenes voice changes, as if it had all been a playful chat but now Anne-Lise has crossed the line. Just drop it, Anne-Lise. And do try to stay calm.

Iben chips in: You mustnt be so paranoid.

Anne-Lise is about to say that she isnt paranoid. But the situation is simply impossible. Every single day something like this occurs. Whats the point of protesting yet again? Every day she loses another point in the game.

Anne-Lise goes to the restroom to pull herself together. She checks her face in the mirror. Nothing shows. No tears moistening her face. Have her features become harsher over the last few weeks?

What was the meaning of Tatianas glance earlier? She seemed concerned. Why? And hadnt they mentioned being drunk at work? How should she interpret that? Could it be that the others are spreading rumors that Anne-Lise drinks during working hours? It would explain Tatianas reaction.

She feels calmer now and walks back to the library. While she and Tatiana work together, Tatiana asks Anne-Lise about her reaction to the e-mails. Does she feel safer now that the sender has been arrested?

Anne-Lise is pleased at the thought that she could easily have given away more than she does. And if she had, Tatiana would have listened.

It takes them almost an hour to finish their work in the library. Afterward Tatiana has to get back to the Council for Torture Victims. Anne-Lise escorts her through the Winter Garden to the front door. Malene gets up to say goodbye and in no time at all makes Tatiana laugh. Once more, Tatiana lingers in the central room.

Then Iben exclaims, her voice still full of laughter, Oh, Tatiana, we havent had time to talk for ages! Its a shame, but theres been so much going on ever since we all sorry, everyone except Anne-Lise were sent those threats.

Tatiana doesnt quite understand the tone of Ibens remark. Her mouth opens in surprise. How do you ?

Malene helps her out. Oh, sorry! You couldnt have known! Its a running office gag that Anne-Lise sent those e-mails.

Tatiana looks around and speaks slowly, searching for words. Oka-ay.

In that instant Anne-Lise feels she has spotted a new side to Tatiana. The older woman is always trying to make an effort to act young in front of Malene and Iben. After all, she is more than thirty years older than they are, yet she tries hard to sound just as youthful and energetic.

Aha! Of course Anne-Lise mustve sent the e-mails!

They are all supposed to laugh or smile now, but the irony sounds awkward coming from Tatiana, and somehow the comment seems out of place.

THE PSYCHOLOGY OF EVIL II.

Social psychology contributes a myriad of surprising and uncomfortable insights into studies of perpetrator behavior.

BY IBEN HJGAARD.

In his book On Killing, Lieutenant Colonel Dave Grossman states that, in a war situation, men and women who kill at a sufficiently great distance from the victims are, to the best of his personal knowledge, not traumatized later in life. The closer the soldier gets to the victim, the harder it is to kill. Yet no government has ever had to cancel plans for genocide for lack of people willing to carry out their orders.

How to resolve this contradiction?

In the previous issue of Genocide News, the article The Psychology of Evil I referred to Stanley Milgrams experimental work on the parameters of obedience to authority. There are dozens of other approaches in social psychology that also illuminate the psychology of the perpetrator. This article presents a small selection.

ACTIONS SHAPE ATt.i.tUDES.

Generally we believe that it is our att.i.tudes that determine our behavior. However, the reverse is also true: what we do affects our way of thinking, our feelings, and our opinions.

It is unsettling for us when we realize that our actions are in conflict with our beliefs. To distance ourselves from this, we unconsciously tend to adjust our att.i.tudes and feelings rather than change our behavior. Social psychologists have carried out hundreds of experiments, attempting to pin down exactly how this change in att.i.tude is accomplished.

Festinger and Carlsmith devised an experiment in which the subjects were given tedious tasks taking many hours to complete, such as moving tiny four-sided sticks about, forward and back and from side to side. When the leader of the experiment finally told the subjects that the experiment was finished, they were also told that the leaders a.s.sistant, who was to instruct the next subject in line and stress how exciting the task was, would be arriving late. The current subjects were then asked if they could possibly take over the a.s.sistants role, meet the new subjects, and tell them about the procedure. One group was asked to lie about what a joy it had been to partic.i.p.ate in the experiment. The other group was not asked to feign enthusiasm.

The first group was divided into two sections and offered either one dollar or twenty dollars for their trouble. It is worth noting that in 1959 the value of the dollar was relatively much higher than it is today.

The results showed that those who had been paid one dollar and had lied to the new subjects felt that the experiment had actually been a good experience. Both those who had been paid twenty dollars and those who werent asked to lie admitted afterward that they had found the experience dull. The larger sum of money provided a strong external incentive to lie to the new subjects, and hence they felt no subconscious need to change their original opinion of the experiment in order to explain their action to themselves. Only those who had received a small reward needed to change their views in order to establish a link between their thoughts and their action. This instinct is driven by lack of internal cogency, an uncomfortable state that is a key concept in social psychology and described by the term cognitive dissonance.

There are real-life decisions that lead to cognitive dissonance, and thus to a switch in att.i.tude. Consider a research officer with moral, liberal views who is offered a job with an advertising agency and accepts it. This means that she will begin to suffer from a discrepancy between her ideals and her actions, and unless she rejects the job offer she must try to readjust her convictions to justify her new situation. After a few months she might argue, with genuine pa.s.sion, that advertising is an essential aspect of democratic societies with a free-market economy. Also, she will probably maintain this opinion for the rest of her life, even if she spends only a relatively brief period in advertising.

Another example is the Jehovahs Witnesses who soon learn that handing out pamphlets in the street serves a dual purpose. It will help to recruit new adherents to the faith, but it will also reinforce the bonds between the faithful and the sect. The first time they might well have been hesitant about going out pamphleteering, but afterward they will come home with a stronger light of faith in their eyes.

The process can lead to increasingly charitable or increasingly maleficent behavior. It can also create profound changes in outlook, much more so than would have been possible through words alone.

The n.a.z.is relied heavily on this mechanism to ensure conformity among German citizens. The incalculable risks of refusing to make symbolic signs of support for the regime, e.g., the Heil Hitler greeting, must have led individuals to ask themselves: Whats the harm in just lifting my right arm? But every time someone conforms, his or her way of thinking will have changed.

The conclusion must be that simple acts, which in themselves appear to cause only limited damage, can lead to psychological changes that in turn make possible even greater and more destructive acts.

ROLES SHAPE PEOPLE.

In 1971 the social psychologist Phillip G. Zimbardo and some of his colleagues at Stanford University decided to investigate the psychological consequences of the relationship between a prisoner and a prison guard.

They advertised for student subjects, stating that they needed twenty-one males, who would be paid for the two-week experiment. All applicants were interviewed, but only those who seemed reasonably stable, mature, and responsible were picked. They were then randomly divided into two groups: prisoners and guards.

On day one, real policemen came to the homes of ten of the partic.i.p.ants and arrested them on suspicion of break-ins and armed robbery. They were taken to a university bas.e.m.e.nt corridor that had been made to look like a prison and were ordered to undress, be deloused, and put on prison overalls. The designated guards were dressed in uniforms, complete with mirrored sungla.s.ses and truncheons.

The guards were called to a meeting and told to keep the prisoners under surveillance but not to hurt them physically. The prisoners stayed in the prison round the clock, while the guards went home to their normal lives after an eight-hour working day.

In the beginning of what became known as the Stanford Prison Experiment, there were no significant personality differences between randomly picked guards and prisoners. Later, both groups were to change remarkably quickly.

The absolute power given to the guards made the prisoners helpless and submissive, enabling the guards to extend their powers still further. This mutual interaction was the start of a self-reinforcing, damaging process.

A third of the guards behaved with increasing callousness and in an arbitrary manner, initiating punishments for no reason and devising inventive means of humiliating the prisoners. In their ordinary lives they had shown no tendencies toward aggressive or tyrannical behavior.

Two of the guards went out of their way to support the prisoners, but never came close to publicly confronting the hostile guards. The rest of the guards were tough, but they did not initiate any unofficial punishments.

The prisoners became depressed, despairing, and pa.s.sive. Three of them had to be freed only four days into the experiment because they wept hysterically, lost the ability to think coherently, and became deeply depressed. A fourth prisoner was released after getting a rash that covered his entire body.

All but three of the prisoners were willing to forgo payment for the days they had spent on the experiment if they could be let out. When they were told that their pleas for parole had been turned down, they pa.s.sively and obediently plodded along back to their cells.

The Stanford Prison Experiment demonstrates that prisoners and guards acted according to the roles given to them by an external agent, gradually changing their thought patterns, values, and emotional responses to fit in. Most of the partic.i.p.ants seemed unable to make a distinction between their real selves and their role in the experiment. Prison brutality escalated with each successive day. Ordinary moral values vanished, despite the fact that each group was determined indiscriminately.