Day: May 8, 2012
War on war
The newly established North America office of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute directed by Chantal de Jonge Oudraat yesterday hosted discussion of the statistical decline of armed conflict and whether it will continue. Moderated by Sissela Bok, presenters were Peter Wallensteen of Uppsala University and Joshua Goldstein of American University, author of the recently published Winning the War on War. The presenters and audience took as undisputed the uneven statistical decline of war since 1945, with a further dip after 1989.
Wallensteen attributed this mainly to better management of conflict, especially through the UN Security Council after 1989, and increased attention to rights, minorities and human dignity. There is no increase in ethnic or one-sided conflicts that would muddy the statistical picture. With war declining, other security concerns have emerged: terrorism, state fragility and state failure. Wallensteen thought the future looks promising if major powers continue to cooperate, security concerns remain limited, welfare economics has priority and human dignity is central to international concerns. It is possible to envision zero conflicts in the future.
While not so sure about the zero conflict vision, Goldstein mostly agreed. He debunked three causes for the decline in war:
- nuclear weapons, because their number is decreasing sharply, without triggering an increase in war,
- U.S. hegemony, because it too is declining without triggering an increase, and
- democracy, because China has been peaceful but not democratic.
He supported three other causes:
- normative disapproval of war and growth of the idea that peace is good, a view also advocated by Steven Pinker;
- increases in prosperity, trade and global interdependence, which is what keeps the Chinese leadership out of war, since it derives its legitimacy from prosperity;
- UN and other conflict management capacity, including increased use of peacekeeping.
Americans, Goldstein noted, on average pay $700 per month for U.S. defense and veterans benefits but only $2 per month for the UN. Eighty per cent of Americans support the UN. Doubling its budget would clearly bring real benefits. When will politicians realize this?
The presenters were too polite to mention it, but there is a great irony for Americans in the decline of war: our armed forces have been active in conflict zones every year since 1989. While much of the rest of the world has enjoyed relative peace, we have been expending trillions of dollars on less than fully successful military enterprises in Iraq and Afghanistan. This, too, is something for our politicians to ponder.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Trouble in Balochistan
Eric Shu reports on the National Endowment on Democracy event May 2 on “Threats to Democracy in Balochistan”:
Malik Siraj Akbar, a Pakistani journalist and current Reagan-Fascell Democracy Fellow at the National Endowment for Democracy, presented an overview of the human rights threats in his native Balochistan, the largest province in Pakistan. It was not until February 2012 that Balochistan gained attention in the United States, largely due to a Congressional briefing and a House resolution in favor of self-determination drafted by California Congressman Dana Rohrbacher. Immediate backlash from the Pakistani government ensued, but the fallout has been limited.
Akbar’s presentation focused on the background of the region, the threats to the area’s defenders of democracy, and ended with a set of recommendations for both domestic and international players.
Akbar described Balochistan as a “richly-poor” Texas-sized province in southwest Pakistan with immense but little recognized geo-political importance. Annexed in 1948, Balochistan contains one of the region’s largest reservoirs of natural gas and an abundance of gold and copper. However, it is also a region with the lowest literacy rates in Pakistan and a severe lack of human rights protections.
There are three primary threats to democracy in Balochistan: political assassinations, enforced disappearances, and limited press coverage.
Political leaders and individuals who have advocated for an independent Balochistan are the assassination victims. The Pakistani military has denied responsibility. Non-existent communication between the federal and provincial governments has exacerbated tensions in the region and led to increasing calls for independence through violent means.
The victims “enforced disappearances” are predominantly ethnic Baloch as young as 12 and as old as 80. Estimates gathered from local sources suggest they number in the hundreds. They are picked up off the street or plucked from their homes and subjected to torture, solitary confinement, and warned of retaliation if they speak out. The military has denied responsibility.
These problems are compounded by the fact that local media and press networks are severely underdeveloped in Balochistan. Coverage of the area is limited not only internationally, but also domestically. Pakistani press do not cover Balochistan well. Foreign journalists are routinely denied access, making it difficult for human rights violations to be documented and publicized abroad.
Akbar concluded his presentation with recommendations for stakeholders.
To the Pakistani government, Akbar advocated ensuring freedom of the press by providing access to international journalists. He also pushed for fair Baloch representation in the region’s security structures (army, police, frontier corps) and called for the military and intelligence services to be brought under civilian control.
Akbar’s suggestions to the United States focused on implementation of the Leahy Amendment prohibitng U.S. foreign assistance to foreign military units that commit human rights violations. Although Human Rights Watch reported violations in 2010 and 2011, there has not been an investigation into these cases and U.S. aid to Pakistan has continued.
The Congressional hearing in February 2012 on Balochistan drew short-lived attention to the region and its challenges. Continued attention on the issue of human rights in Pakistan from brave individuals such as Akbar will help keep the discussion in focus and hopefully bring badly needed change to the region.
RSS - Posts
