When Minds Are Under Siege: Psychoanalysis in Times of Collective Trauma

In the face of collective trauma—whether in war-torn Ukraine, the Middle East, or other regions of violent upheaval—psychoanalytic work faces unique challenges. The principles that guide traditional psychoanalysis must adapt to circumstances where human experience is dominated not only by individual psychic conflict but also by societal, cultural, and political forces.

The Analytic Position in Extreme Contexts

Pierre Marty (1980) emphasized the importance of consistency and presence in the analytic relationship, especially when external stressors threaten psychic stability. In conflict zones, the analyst’s neutral stance becomes both ethically and clinically critical. It is no longer just a technical principle; it is a safeguard for both patient and analyst, allowing psychic containment amidst chaos.

Wilfred Bion (1962) highlighted the concept of container and contained, describing the analyst’s role in metabolizing unprocessed anxieties so that patients can gradually tolerate their own overwhelming emotions. In times of collective trauma, this process is magnified: individuals’ projections are amplified by the societal context, making the analyst’s capacity for reverie and containment essential. Bion’s notion of “negative capability”—the ability to tolerate not knowing and remain receptive—is particularly relevant when reality itself is unpredictable and violent.

From Individual to Collective Psychic Pain

Marion McDougall (1989) observed that trauma is not solely intrapsychic; it also manifests interpersonally and culturally. Collective trauma generates a shared unconscious field, where fear, grief, and aggression circulate among communities. Analysts working with such populations must recognize the interplay between personal histories and broader societal anxieties.

For example, children and adolescents in conflict zones may project primitive anxieties not only shaped by early developmental experiences but also by daily exposure to danger, displacement, or the loss of family members. Here, the analyst’s task is to maintain a holding environment that is flexible, attuned, and ethically sensitive, even when the setting itself may be compromised.

Neutrality, Ethics, and Political Awareness

Maintaining analytic neutrality in contexts of collective trauma is not equivalent to political detachment. Marty (1980) and subsequent analysts emphasize that neutrality refers to the management of transference and countertransference—not a refusal to acknowledge real-world suffering. Analysts must navigate the fine line between empathy and enmeshment, providing containment without succumbing to external pressures or moral panics.

Recent psychoanalytic commentary on Ukraine and Middle Eastern conflicts suggests that neutrality allows the analyst to:

1. Recognize the patient’s projections without imposing their own political stance.
2. Contain and process the overwhelming affects of fear, grief, and aggression.
3. Foster reflective thinking, even when the patient’s environment is chaotic or threatening.

Clinical Implications and Reflections

Working under conditions of collective trauma often entails practical and emotional challenges: interrupted sessions, displacement of both patient and analyst, and heightened countertransference responses. Analysts must be prepared to tolerate intense emotional turbulence without acting impulsively, and to reflect continuously on the impact of their own subjectivity.

Bion’s insistence on avoiding premature interpretations and McDougall’s attention to the relational field provide critical guidance: the psychoanalytic method must adapt to preserve the psychic space necessary for transformation, even in extreme circumstances.

Conclusion

Psychoanalysis in times of collective trauma demands a delicate balance: the analyst’s neutrality and containment provide a secure base, while sensitivity to social, cultural, and political realities ensures relevance and ethical integrity. As Marty, Bion, and McDougall remind us, the core principles of analytic work—listening, containing, reflecting—become both more difficult and more vital when the psyche is under siege by external chaos.

References

• Bion, W. R. (1962). Learning from Experience. London: Heinemann.
• Marty, P. (1980). Psychoanalytic Technique and the Analytic Position. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
• McDougall, J. (1989). Theatres of the Mind: Illusion and Reality in Psychoanalysis. London: Karnac.
• Fonagy, P., & Target, M. (2003). Psychoanalytic Theories: Perspectives from Developmental Psychology. London: Routledge.