Psychology of communication and the psychological codes of war

Abstract This study argues that war is shaped not only by political, economic, and geopolitical factors, but also by individual unconscious drives, collective psychology, and the historical traumas of large groups. From a psychoanalytic perspective, Sigmund Freud's theory of Eros (the life instinct) and Thanatos (the death instinct) provides a conceptual framework for understanding the emergence of aggression and destructive impulses in human beings (Freud, 1920/1990). In this sense, war cannot be interpreted solely as a product of rational self-interest; it is also an expression of deeply rooted destructive tendencies embedded in human nature (Levy, 2007). Vamık Volkan's concept of "chosen trauma" refers to the preservation, within collective memory, of severe historical experiences such as defeat, occupation, or genocide (Volkan, 1997). These traumas are transmitted across generations and become constitutive elements of group identity. Political leaders may reactivate such historical wounds in order to strengthen emotional cohesion within the group and to construct a psychological ground for mobilization toward war (Volkan, 2006). In this way, unresolved suffering from the past can be instrumentalized in the service of contemporary political conflicts. Albert Einstein's ethical and humanistic perspective offers a universal lens through which these dynamics can be critically assessed. Einstein emphasized that violence and war do not lead to sustainable solutions, but rather undermine the shared existence of humanity (Einstein, 1933/2007). This view foregrounds the importance of moral responsibility and a culture of peace in international relations (Howard, 2013). The theoretical framework outlined in this study is examined through contemporary cases such as the Syrian civil war, the Russia–Ukraine conflict, and the Israel–Palestine dispute. Sectarian trauma in Syria (Phillips, 2016), historical belonging and imperial nostalgia in the Russia–Ukraine war (Kuzio, 2017), and intergenerational narratives of victimhood in the Israeli– Palestinian context (Milton-Edwards, 2008) illustrate how collective memory and psychological codes continue to shape contemporary conflicts. Ultimately, understanding the causes of war requires more than political and economic analysis; it necessitates a deeper exploration of individual psychology, collective memory, and the ways in which leaders mobilize these dimensions. Keywords: War; psychoanalysis; collective unconscious; chosen trauma; leadership; boundary psychology; group identity; Einstein; Freud; Volkan