Just War Theory
As Sri Lankans and as members of civilized society, we consider ourselves peace loving citizens who wish to live in a harmonious environment devoid of violence which reflects our true nature and culture. However, this ideal state is far from the reality that we experience in our daily lives today.
We have to firstly contend with the daily dose of violence as a consequence of the war. Although we may not be actively involved in the theatre of war, we are passive participants sanctioning violence. As an extension of the war, society has sub-consciously normalized the occurrence of violence in daily life mainly as a coping mechanism. We live in constant denial that a state of anarchy has pervaded our lives.
The current thinking advocated by the state is based on the Just War theory which was propounded by certain philosophers many centuries ago. The Just War Theory asserts that “legitimate defence by military force” is acceptable subject to the following parameters:
- the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;
- all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;
- there must be serious prospects of success;
- the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated.
The Just War theory has gradually become obsolete over the centuries due to many reasons. Highly sophisticated and destructive weapons technology has emerged as a potent force of annhilation never envisioned before. Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) is a doctrine of military strategy in which a full-scale use of nuclear weapons by two opposing sides would effectively result in the destruction of both the attacker and the defender. It is based on the theory of deterrence according to which the deployment of strong weapons is essential to threaten the enemy in order to prevent the use of the very same weapons. The strategy is effectively a form of Nash Equilibrium, a state in which both sides are constantly attempting to avoid the worst possible outcome—nuclear annihilation. It is a high risk strategy which also holds true for other equally deadly combat strategies of last resort such as as chemical and germ warfare.
Recent newpaper reports inferred to the possible use of chemical warfare by the LTTE as a last resort. In light of this possibility, has the state seriously re-evaluated its continued strategy to prosecute the war? Is the State considering to resort to chemical warfare, as well, in order to maintain Nash Equilibrium?
Furthermore, in the practice of terrororist and guerilla tactics by the LTTE who are also citizens, retaliation by the state using conventional techniques usually results in harm to noncombatants as the enemy cannot be distinguished and isolated from the rest of the civilian population. This strategy usually results in gross human rights violations leading to Genocide. From the civilian population springs forth the enemy resulting in further alienation and multiplying of enemy forces thereby negating the very strategy of eliminating the enemy.
Another negative impact of a military confrontation is the multiplier effect of war. Due to its retaliatory nature and rapidly modernizing weapons technology coupled with covert financial support from weapons industrialists, war leads to the rapid deterioration of the economy, heightened insecurity and aggravated corruption.
The negative consequences of armed conflict in a developing country are numerous such as:
- Economically unproductive.
- Destruction of valuable economic infrasturcture.
- Loss and debilitation of most productive segment of human capital, the youth.
- Disruption of the social equilibrium of the country resulting in a state of anarchy.
- Financially unsustainable in the long term.
- Neglect of economic development due to diversion of scarce resources.
- Economic deprivation and marginalization of weak and vulnerable sections of the population.
- Increase in the country’s indebtedness to finance the war leads to inflation and further economic destabilization.
- Inevitablility of War Crimes and Genocide
- Extreme physical and psychological trauma amongst the affected population.
- Cost of post war resconstruction,
- unsustainable debt repayment schedule.
Extension of violence beyond the war zone
Wars which are justified by nations gradually lead to the justification of use of violence by their citizens in settling disputes in all other spheres. Socially, economically or politically powerful forces attempt to normalize the use of force and violence in order to intimidate and establish control over society resulting in authoritarian governance, rising levels of corruption and break down in law and order.
In the case of Sri Lanka, a culture of violence has grown insidiously among the general populace over the past twenty five years since the commencement of the ethnic conflict. The civil conflict has aggravated ethnic predjudice and covertly justified the use of violence even outside the theater of war. The rule of law has eroded over time as the power of the bullet has overtaken its role through a perverted form of justice.
Theory and Practice of Non-violence
Nonviolence is a philosophy and strategy for social change that rejects the use of all forms of violence. It is applicable in every sphere of life whether personal, community, political or international in scope.The central tenets of nonviolent philosophy exist in all major religious traditions.Secular movements have also utilised nonviolence for its effectiveness rather than a claim to any religious, moral or ethical worthiness.
For many, practicing nonviolence goes deeper than withholding from violent behavior or words. It means caring in one’s heart for everyone, even those one strongly disagrees with, that is who are antithetical or opposed. By extrapolation comes the necessity of caring for those who are not practicing nonviolence, who are violent. Of course no one can simply will themselves to have such care, and this is one of the great personal challenges posed by nonviolence – once one believes in nonviolence in theory, how can the person live it?
The greatest living exponent of non violence was Gautama Buddha who expounded his philosphy via the Dhamma. The Buddha, when He converted a non-Buddhist, got the convert to abide by five precepts called ‘ Panca Sila ’.The first of these is not to kill any living being. This indicates that the primary quality a Buddhist should possess is non-violence. The Buddha denounced all forms of violence and asked loving-kindness to be extended not only to men but even to all animals. It is truly ironic that as a constitutionally entrenched Buddhist nation, Sri Lanka can justify the annihilation of a group of its own citizens. One cannot deny that the LTTE are guilty of heinous crimes and savage tactics in seeking attention and redress from the state. However, one cannot also deny that they have a valid cause. Undoubtedly, the Tamil community has endured a long history of suffering continuous discrimination and marginalization which has never been genuinely addressed by the state.
Modern day exponents of non violence include great leaders such as Mohandas Gandhi and Nelson Mandela who advocated and practiced the philosophy for the advancement of their societies. A key inspiration behind Mahatma Gandhi’s nonviolent resistance movement was that he was seeking to return good for evil as quoted below:
“My nonresistance is active resistance in a different plane. Nonresistance to evil does not mean absence of any resistance whatsoever but it means not resisting evil with evil but with good. Resistance, therefore, is transferred to a higher and absolutely effective plane.”
This understanding of nonresistance overlaps significantly with nonviolent resistance and most notably overlaps religious and world views. Ignoring dogma or tradition but allowing a unity and harmony of peace.
Nelson Mandela was greatly influenced by Ghandi’s philosphy of non violent resistance in his initial struggle against apartheid in South Africa. He only resorted to economic sabotage, as a last resort, when state sponsored repression and violence escalated. When finally elected to power as president of South Africa, Mandela conceived an unique method of reconcilliation through the establishment of The Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) which was a court-like body assembled in South Africa after the end of Apartheid. Anybody who felt he or she had been a victim of violence could come forward and be heard at the TRC. Perpetrators of violence could also give testimony and request amnesty from prosecution. The TRC was seen by many as a crucial component of the transition to full and free democracy in South Africa. It is a truly significant and unique strategy in national peace building as it prevented blood shed through revenge and retaliation by the marginalised black majority.
This strategy also worked in the aftermath of the bloody genocide in Rwanda. After thousands of lives were lost, the warring Hutu and Tutsi tribes have finally reconciled their differences through village level reconcillation commissions and proceeded to work hand in hand displaying to the world a model for economic development.
Talking to your Enemies
Folllowing closely on the idea of reconcilliation is the concept of Nonviolent communication(NVC) which describes all actions as motivated by an attempt to meet human needs. However, in meeting those needs, they seek to avoid the use of fear, guilt, shame, blame, coercion or threats. The ideal of NVC is to get one’s own needs met while also meeting others’ needs. A key principle of NVC that supports this is the capacity to express oneself without use of good/bad, right/wrong judgment, hence the emphasis on expressing feelings and needs, instead of criticisms or judgments. The application of this concept as a means of conflict resolution definitely makes more sense than mutually destructive military retaliation. Unfortunately, the timely application of this strategy does not happen due to emotions supeceding ratinal behaviour.
In his campaign for Change, no less than US President elect Barack Obama has made it clear that such a strategy will be a cornerstone of his government’s foreign policy. In fact, his approach has already created a glimmer of hope for goodwill between the US and the islamic world as evinced by the congratulatory wishes of President Ahamadinajad of Iran referred to by President Bush as part of the Axis of Evil. Obama has also sent positive overtures of unconditional talks to the US hostile socialist President Chavez of Venezuela who has responded favourably despite being condemned by the current US regime.
It is hoped that such positive communications will lead to better understanding between states with competing ideologies and strategies for development. It can also guide Sri Lanka in developing strategies for communicating with the LTTE to seek a mutually acceptable political solution.
The Responsibility to Protect
Arbitration by international courts and the United Nations should play a more critical role in settling of international disputes not only between soveriegn nations but also non state idelogical groups who have now taken centre stage in destabilizing the global political, economic and social order in order to draw attention to their causes. Certain States are also resorting to covertly supporting and using terrorist groups for the purpose of furthering their own power interests through subversion.
The so-called “right of humanitarian intervention” has been one of the most controversial foreign policy issues of the last decade – both when intervention has happened, as in Kosovo, and when it has failed to happen, as in Rwanda. United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan, in his report to the 2000 General Assembly, challenged the international community to try to forge consensus, once and for all, around the basic questions of principle and process involved: when should intervention occur, under whose authority, and how. The independent International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty was established by the Government of Canada in September 2000 to respond to that challenge.
The Commission’s report, The Responsibility to Protect, is the culmination of twelve months of intensive research, worldwide consultations and deliberation. It has been formally presented to Secretary-General Kofi Annan and the United Nations community, where it will hopefully help build a new consensus in the debate the Commission was mandated to advance.
The report’s central theme is that sovereign states have a responsibility to protect their own citizens from avoidable catastrophe, but that when they are unwilling or unable to do so, that responsibility must be borne by the broader community of states.
A current CNN documentary titled ‘Scream Bloody Murder’ is a vivid portrayal of the history of Genocide commencing with Hitler and the atrocities of war and covering conflicts in Cambodia, Kosovo,Sudan and Iraq. It shows how quickly a situation of conflict can degenerate into a condition of Genocide. It also portrays how the international community and key international actors have repeatedly chosen to ignore the moral and legal responsiblilty to intervene in resolving conflicts for reasons of self interest. However, in many cases, the consequences of such in-action have served to harm the very interests that those nations and actors attempt to protect.
Tthe 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG) defines genocide as “any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; and forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.”
As the Convention was criticized as focused more on punishment rather than prevention, a resolution was adopted in 2006 by the UN Security Council which commits the Council to action to protect civilians in armed conflict and to protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity.
Genocide scholars postulate that conditions and acts that often occur before, during, and after genocide— such as dehumanization of victim groups, strong organization of genocidal groups, and denial of genocide by its perpetrators— can be identified and actions taken to stop genocides before they happen. Critics of this approach think that this is unrealistic and that for example “Darfur will end only when it suits the great powers that have a stake in the region”.
The Sri Lankan government has to contend with suspicions of Genocide against the Tamil community and the pressure from India to intervene with humanitarian assistance as a consequence of intensive military action and large scale human displacement in the theatre of war. The only way in which the govt can overcome this problem is to be transparent in its prosecution of the war. However, upto now, they have failed in doing so particularly by preventing media coverage on the battle front. The current allegations, by the LTTE, of the state’s indiscriminate use of internationally banned cluster bombs in the war needs to be investigated in a transparent manner to clear unwarrented suspicions. Does the govt have the integrity to respond positively?
The govt has also taken a confrontational stance against the UN and other international bodies for expressing their grave concern over the armed conflict and its repercussions. Prominent politicans have responded in a naïve and tactless manner in implying not only an international conspiracy against national soverignty but also covert support to the LTTE and double standards in addressing the threat of terrorism.
The govt has also antagonized the international community by attempting to conceal and cover up alleged human rights violations by the forces in the prosecution of war.They have been severely critcized by the International Independent Group of Eminent Persons(IIGEP) specifically set up with govt approval to monitor their investigations on human rights violations. The highly respected group headed by retired Chief Justice Bhagwati conveyed their serious reservations on the biased manner in which the investigations were conducted particularly with regard to inadequate witness protection. The govt not only condemned their report as baseless but also implied international conspiracy against their regime, once again. The fiasco ultimately resulted in the winding up of the Group and loss of govt credibility.
The govt’s lack of transparency and defensive stance in cooperating with the international community in safe guarding the non violation of human rights has further destroyed their credibilty. It has resulted in the possibilty of losing substantial export advantages granted by the EU through the GSP plus facility as a consequence of non compliance with agreed and accepted EU Conventions on Good Governance. The loss to the economy through a sharp decline in profitability of key exports and possible large scale unemployment has been considered as inconsequential. In spite of of this cavalier attitude, the EU has graciously offered an extension to the trade benefits pending the govt’s favourable response to required accountability despite the threat of global recession and financial meltdown..
Rule of Law
It is acknowledged that not all volent acts against the state and community can be addressed in a negotiated manner.Individual, gang or mafia related crimes which do not espouse a particular cause of a marginalized segment of society but are committed due to psycho social problems, revenge or mercenary reasons belong to this category. They range from assault, robbery,vice and murder to sophisticated white collar crimes such as bribery,corruption, fraud and nepotism committed for personal gain and power. Such crimes have to be addressed through the Rule of law which demands justice through the judicial process by providing expeditious legal recourse and effective enforcement and rehabilitation via implementing agencies such as the police and penitentiaries. A judicial system and police force devoid of political and other interferences is essential in winning the confidence of citizens and for the effective enforcement of law and order.
In Sri lanka, we can see a steady degeneration in law enforcement and legal recourse available to ordinary citizens which has contributed to the current situation of aggravated violence at all levels of society. Evidence of politiczation and consequent corruption of the judiciary and law enforcement agencies has also distorted the practice of law and order which increasingly serves the interests of the elite for personal gain, power or revenge.
What Can we do as concerned citizens?
If state institutions which are intended to serve the maintenance of law and order fail in their functions and duties towards their citizens,then the citizens must find other recourse to register their concerns in a very explicit but non violent manner through other means.
Individuals need to protest openly and strongly against the escalation of violence in their communities. They need to be supported by economically powerful and ethically acceptable indiviuals and corporate entities in addressing social concerns which challenge their own growth and advancement in the long term.
Corporate Social Responsibility
The level of violent crime in the United States has been unacceptably high. In order to address the situation, corporate America’s resources and high profile provide a prominent platform from which to advocate nonviolence. Through this strategy of corporate social responsibility, corporations join with state, community, or national partners to promote antiviolence events, campaigns, products, and services.
Both on their own and in partnership with local groups, state agencies or national organizations, corporations can effectively promote antiviolence messages and products. Joining others concerned about violent crime’s effects on individuals and communities, corporations can sponsor local and national events, supported public education campaigns, change their own marketing and sales practices, lend executives and services to violence-prevention groups, donate services and facilities to antiviolence causes, and contribute funding for specific programs. The visibility of corporate community members helps publicize antiviolence efforts, reinforce the marketability of nonviolent products, and demonstrate support for communities troubled by violence.
However, one must remain guarded against excessive corporate influence and control over such programs as it can be vulnerable to corrupt and unethical practices due to heavy financial dependence.
Although the corporate sector in Sri Lanka may not be able to garner comparable financial resources as in the developed economies, there is still much opportunity to initiate a crime prevention network and gradually build it into an effective social force to control the escalation of violence and crime and complement state sector organizations which are established for the purpose.
Addressing Terrorism
The US congress predicts that within the next five years the world will be subject to unprecedent mass destruction through international terroist networks. The world has to be prepare for this eventuality in a rational and non self destructive manner. Unbridled poverty as well as an inequitable world order will continue to widen the gap between rich and poor communities and between rich and poor nations. It will provide ample justification and fuel to the marginalized segments of society to create economic, political and social instability both nationally as well as through international networks in order to force attention and seek redress to their cause. For that is in essence what ‘Terrorism’ is really about as evinced most recently in the Bombay carnage. This is not anattempt at justifying violence but analyzing its root causes which is an inconvenient truth to most of us.
Ironically, the tragedy of an inequitable and unjust economic and social order in India is incitefully portrayed in Aravind Adigar’s 2008 Booker prize winning novel “White Tiger’ which is a ‘must read’ for all rational minded persons. Ominously, the novel focuses on the poor man’s view of five star hotels as vulgar symbols of vice and corruption and ostentatious living by the privileged few in a country riddled with mass poverty. Thus indicating them as potential targets to express the spite and revenge of the under privileged.
Collective Security
It is only through a collective effort of nations that the world can prevent the further deterioration of global economic, social and human security. The time has come for both rich nations and poor nations to work hand in hand in addressing the root causes of terrorism. It is a social cancer that cannot be tackled purely through military means as it has its roots deeply entrenched in social and economic disparities which divide communities and nations. No community or nation can ensure its superiority or prosperity by suppressing or exploiting another as eventually it will be dragged down into conflict by its oppressed. This is exactly what is happening in Sri Lanka and all other countries which are currently fighting terrorist rebels. The problem is futher compounded by these marginalized forces who seek to reinforce each other through global networks.
The truth is that it is in our self interest to ensure a stable and equitable society and economy. This reality must be faced by all nations whereby progress and prosperity is ensured for all stakeholders both at national and global level if we are to safeguard ourselves from total anarchy in the not too distant future.
Man’s only hope is the realization that humanity is totally interdependent in all respects and thus requires the equitable and just sharing of all resources in a sustainable manner for its wellbeing and survivial in the long term. All attention must be focused towards achieving this end which is now termed as Smart Governance as a follow up to Good Governance. Alas! Sri Lanka is lagging far behind in achieving both targets.
Concerned citizen, 2008 December
********************
