Kyiv, an Ukranian Psychoanalyst and EJP Editor
Dear Colleagues,
We have read Sergio Benvenuto's discussion "La psicoanalisi nella guerra. Un dibattito con colleghi russi". We, who are now in Kyiv, where shells are exploding and rockets are flying (we don’t even know what ones), where children are born in bomb shelters, where there is not enough food and medicine, we want to say the following. In this situation, all the symbolic ranks are collapsing. All these arguments about the war seem to us as far away as from the Moon. A certain historical monolith that connected two countries was destroyed. The invasion of Ukraine is the biggest mistake that could have happened and it had taken place already.
Best regards,
Svetlana Uvarova
01-03-2022
----
Dear Sergio,
I hope you are well and safe during this hard time. Just completed reading the email from EJP editorial board, I had different mixed feelings and only I can say that I am disappointed…after reading your debate with your Russian supervisees.
I know that for the last days my heart is broken by the war between my Russian and Ukrainian siblings, as the war between beliefs and ideas. Recently we, Kazakhstani citizens and guests have experienced terrifying Tragic January. We hadn’t been able to have enough time to take any breath and recover after Tragic January as we witnessed Russian invasion. I'm shocked! You know that I came from the Soviet Union, and I see all post-soviet people as my siblings even if we are now independent nation. Still, they are my siblings. Now, I feel this war as a war between my sisters and brothers. To be honest, all this terrible situation makes me cry, I feel so sad, so sorry, I felt guilty, even more I feel as if it was my responsibility. I cannot imagine dying women, men, and children. I was reflecting on this. It feels that I am from a peaceful family, growing with no hatred and violence. I even especially tried to think if I hate Putin. No. No hatred towards him but sadness, disappointment on Putin's regime and violence. My heart is breaking down day by day. I tried to stop psychosomatic processes inside of me. As an active person, I started to organize a group of psychological support for everyone in Ukraine and Russia, and those who suffers from and gets affected by the war. Our team, my students and I sent our banner offering a free help via many social networks. We had this type of support for ones affected by Tragic January in my country, even there was low Internet connection, we run free online groups of psychological support beginning January 6th until the end of the month. And now back to your debate… I believed that we, analysts are apolitical in the sense that we do not participate in any political parties, harming events. But it doesn’t mean we avoid our feelings connected with suffering people, with killing and bombing. I guess, some might think different. I didn’t expect that Russian supervisees could hold aggression and violence towards Ukrainians or as you say towards one who has deviating point of view. Some years ago some of them used to be my classmates in studying psychoanalysis…. I didn’t expect that they might be in the traps of idealization of their president. I can understand every citizen may and must respect their leader. But! Be supporter of the murder... So aggressive analysts might influence / increase aggressivity of their patients…No words… Just broken heart… I totally agree with your words: those who want to practice analysis must practice this ethics. And this ethics consists in not acting out our impulses of violence and oppression, which exist in each of us. We have to recognize them unconsciously, not commit them in reality. May I introduce myself? Since 2005 I led the Kazakhstan Psychoanalytic Association, now I am the director of Psychoanalytic Institute for Central Asia. Our students are from Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan. Very few supervisees of mine are from Ukraine and Russia. Our regular teachers are from Europe, India, and USA. We are taught by your Italian colleagues Graziano De Giorgio, Luca Caldironi, Paola Vizziello. By the way, I know you from your paper in Russian on history of Italian psychoanalysis. It was almost 20-25 years ago. Today I tried to find that paper on Google with no result. I remember well you called there one Italian analyst who was active on TV and radio shows as “psychoanalytic granddaddy” of Italy. At that time, I was doing my first steps in the field of psychoanalysis. Then I thought that I should become a good enough “psychoanalytic grandma” in my country. Really, I devoted many years to “propaganda” of psychoanalytic culture through different TV and radio shows in Kazakh and Russian. I recalled this story because very recently a friend of mine, psychoanalyst from India called me “Central Asian psychoanalytic grandma”.
All the best,
Anna Kudiyarova, PhD, Fulbright Scholar to USA, Director of the Psychoanalytic Institute for Central Asia, Almaty, Kazakhstan.
14-03-2022
----
Dear Sergio!
I have read your article “Psychoanalysis in the war. A debate with Russian colleagues”. Thank you, although it’s very sad to read about such positions of Russian colleagues. And I feel fear. Because:
Moral norms are something very deep which is in the basis of a person. If the norms are humanistic and democratic they are the same as psychoanalytical norms. But if the norms are superficial they are easily destroyed in a non-standard situation. And you can see that an analyst has collected a lot of knowledge, has mimicried under the psychoanalytical values but he (or she) has stayed an authoritarian person.
I live in Belarus. I am a candidate of EPI. I think all my colleagues are against the war in Ukraine. But in 2020, when the protests against cruel dictature in my country began, I was deeply disappointed by the position: an analyst should be neutral and should stay in a psychoanalytical chair and not on the street with other protesting people because all revolutions are manifestations of the splitting. I think that fear is covered under such a position. Fear is covered under the proclaimed moral norms and psychoanalytic postulates. Nowadays, in the time of cruel repressions in our country and serious danger for people because of the war, many patients ask for decreasing the payment and changing of the setting. So called analysts consider it as an attack on the setting and psychoanalytical borders. But what about reality and humanity? Probably under the pursuit to preserve the setting the pursuit to preserve the analyst’s comfort is covered?
I think about the reasons. And I think about the situation in Psychoanalysis, in IPA. And I have many questions
1. Why are there so many narcissically organized analysts who don’t realize their motives and reactions? Why are they so easily attested? They propose their views as the cultural norms to their patients, to their students! And they do harm to their patients!
2. Why so widely spread a limited psychoanalytical education? (for example 2-3-years courses of theory and personal analysis). Pragmatism and financial profit lead to degradation of psychoanalysis!
3. Why do psychoanalytic societies or funds propose theoretical education before the end of personal analysis? It’s a situation when an analysand - a feature psychoanalyst adopts/adjusts his feelings to “psychoanalytically correct and expected” and he/she escapes his real feelings, his real Self. He/she strengthens the defenses, he/she knows the theory very well but he/she cannot hear the experiences of the patients.
And I think about the psychoanalysis in the post-soviet countries. The wide-spread feature of a post-soviet psych is a special attitude to violence. In my opinion, fascism is not a special phenomenon in politics, in the society as a whole or in behavior of one nation towards another nation. It’s a manifestation of the abusing and anti humanistic attitude to people. It’s a manifestation of arrogance and permissiveness, absence of respect and empathy. It is formed in the families and cultures where the violence prevails and often not recognized. It’s very important to see and treat this problem.
In my opinion, many post-soviet analysts assimilate external psychoanalytical forms; even their minds successfully fit in the given formats of the psychoanalytical theories. But it does not mean that they think psychoanalytically. As one of Italian psychoanalysts (unfortunately I don’t remember his name) said: “Empathism appears instead of the empathy”. There is a huge danger here.
I think Russian colleagues and Belarusian as well should not be isolated from the world. But we must speak about the problems, call them, and not play to “wise neutral analysts standing above the good and evil”.
Best regards,
Irina Cheliadinskaya, Minsk
18-03-2022
-----