「我們都害怕的一件事就是發瘋」——斯德哥爾摩症候群和人質談判的藝術

On August 23, 1973, a significant event took place in Sweden that would later lead to the creation of a term known as Stockholm Syndrome. This term describes the unusual bond that can develop between hostages and their captors. The event began when a man named Jan-Erik Olsson attempted to rob a bank in Stockholm. He took four people hostage, including a young woman named Kristin Enmark. During the second day of the hostage situation, Olsson shot one of the hostages, Sven Säfström, in the leg to prove he was serious. Kristin later reflected on this moment, saying, 'In that situation, I thought that he was somehow being a coward, not letting himself be shot in the leg. ' This statement reveals the psychological complexities that can arise in such extreme situations. Kristin felt ashamed for her thoughts, but she recognized that the stress of the situation altered her perception of reality. The term Stockholm Syndrome was coined by a Swedish criminologist named Nils Bejerot, who observed the strange affection that some hostages developed for their captors during the siege. This phenomenon gained more attention a year later when a young woman named Patricia Hearst was kidnapped by a group of revolutionaries and later participated in a robbery with them. Her defense claimed she had been brainwashed and was suffering from Stockholm Syndrome. The art of hostage negotiation was still in its infancy during the 1970s. New York police officers Frank Bolz and Harvey Schlossberg were among the first to develop strategies for negotiating with hostage-takers. They believed that building a rapport with the captors could lead to a peaceful resolution. Their approach was influenced by a tragic incident in 1972 when 11 Israeli athletes were killed during a hostage crisis at the Munich Olympics. Bolz and Schlossberg emphasized the importance of delaying tactics, allowing hostage-takers to make mistakes and creating opportunities for negotiation. By the end of the 1970s, many police forces around the world were sending officers to New York to learn from their experiences. However, during the Stockholm siege, the local police were not equipped with these negotiation techniques. Olsson demanded a large sum of money, a getaway car, and the release of another criminal, Clark Olofsson, from prison. The police, under the advice of psychiatrist Nils Bejerot, agreed to bring Olofsson to the bank, which was a controversial decision. As the days passed, the hostages began to form a bond with their captors, who showed them kindness. This bond was perplexing to many observers, as the hostages expressed more hostility towards the police, fearing that any attempt to rescue them could lead to violence. Kristin Enmark later recounted a phone call she had with the Swedish Prime Minister during the siege. She pleaded for her life and expressed her trust in the robbers, saying, 'I fully trust Clark and the robber. I am not desperate. They haven't done a thing to us. ' This statement highlights the psychological turmoil that the hostages experienced. They felt safer with their captors than with the police, who they believed might harm them. The police eventually decided to storm the bank using tear gas, but the hostages were reluctant to leave their hiding place. They feared that the robbers would be shot, and instead, they witnessed a surprising moment when the robbers embraced two of the female hostages as they exited the bank. This behavior baffled the public, who had been following the dramatic events closely. The term Stockholm Syndrome became widely known after this incident, but it has been criticized for oversimplifying the complex emotions involved in hostage situations. Kristin Enmark later expressed her frustration with the label, stating, 'It’s a way of blaming the victim. I did what I could to survive. ' This incident serves as a reminder of the psychological effects of extreme stress and the complexities of human relationships in life-threatening situations.