Quote of the Moment

"Those who desire to treat politics and morals apart from one another will never understand either." - Rosseau


Tuesday, March 13, 2012

Seeking Justice

Recent events in Afghanistan have led to a provoked turn in relations between its population and the ISAF forces stationed there. There have been scores of civilian casualties from air strikes, untold terror on neighbourhoods during (necessary) Special Ops night raids, a souvenir video of US troops urinating on dead Taliban fighters earlier this year and the recent accidental burning of Korans. Sarcastic bravo. Now 16 civilians, including children, have been massacred their homes during the early hours of the morning by a US Staff Sgt.; needless to say tensions are on a knife’s edge.

mourning the victims
There is undoubtedly a need for justice in this case, but in whose hands to place the responsibility to decide what form it should take? The Afghan Parliament has called for the soldier in question to be handed over to Afghan authorities, so that he might be tried under Afghan law. In a society that has seen little progress beyond medieval customs and attitudes towards punishment, the narrative of asking an eye for an eye is expected. But there is more to the Afghan argument than the desire for blood, as it were.  
Regardless of the psychological trauma that likely led this soldier (on his 4th combat tour) to commit such an atrocity (which might lead to a sympathetic outcome in a US military tribunal), there is a prevailing sense in Afghanistan that US and ISAF forces have been able to take innocent life without punishment or justice. This leads to a much bigger issue than that of a ‘rogue’ soldier.
Afghans have been suffering civilian casualties for more than a decade now. Weddings have been bombed with laser-guided munitions, children playing on wreckage have been mistaken for insurgents and were killed, civilians are caught in the cross-fire during complicated Special Ops raids and those are just three out of countless examples. When civilians are killed and ISAF forces are judged to have been in the wrong, ‘sincere’ apologies ring out from the officer staff and diplomatic corps.
In addition to the apologies, which I would imagine in most cases are sincere, the families of the deceased are given approximately $2000 US as compensation for the loss of life. The sad reality is that if anything remotely similar happened in the United States, Canada or most other NATO countries, the government would end up shelling out a considerable fortune in punitive damages while public inquiries would be demanded instantly. Our society, Western society, is committing war crimes in distant lands yet it seems little is actually being done to hold individuals – or institutions for that matter – to account.  
Though civilian casualties are at times unavoidable in conflict and even more so in urban warfare, they have been far too high for the type of low-intensity, ‘win the hearts and minds’ counterinsurgency operations exercised in the Afghanistan campaign. For the average Afghan, hearing of civilian deaths almost weekly would surely cause a completely justifiable rage about the nature and intentions of foreign troops (as well as Taliban for that matter). Being unable to see any measure of justice would only magnify that.
So, when there is news of Afghan deaths and little or nothing is done two crucial things happen: the Taliban and friends grow stronger and their often harsh but expeditious form of justice is craved (as fate would have it this latest event happened in the Taliban's traditional region), and the people slowly creep towards a threshold in which they will reject any foreign help. Either outcome is unacceptable, but perhaps there is a third that might present itself in the future. Perhaps this event, as tragedies have so often done throughout history, will unite the people of Afghanistan to a common future. That it might be directed at ISAF and NATO forces for some time is understandable, but maybe that’s what it will take for their country to finally become whole. Afghanistan can emerge from this tragedy with a united national psyche that will have taken a step further towards internal reconciliation and will move from the shadows of clan and tribal loyalties that have for centuries shaped the geopolitcal landscape of the rugged nation. That’s my hope.
In the meantime, the US should not protect those who exist beyond the shores of humanity, yet the precedent of handing their troops over to foreign governments would have domestic repercussions of its own. Politics should not frame the debate over the implementation of justice, the moral right should.      

Sunday, January 22, 2012

Spelled as ‘Hiz’ or ‘Hez’ or ‘Absent’**

The march of democracy in lands long held by an entrenched political class tends to fill the winds with the stale odour of spilled blood and the gentle chiming of spent shell-casings as they celebrate their release once they hit the ground, through dancing that betrays their lethal purpose. This is a truism in the many such transitions throughout history, including the initially successful – though currently stalled – revolution in Egypt, was present in Bahrain, and as the case would have it has become the headline in Syria. The Assad government has demonstrated excessive force against civilian populations that are largely unarmed.
Protestors are great at shouting slogans of democratic reform; while only the foolish or brave dare brandish a weapon in the face of an army. It has sadly been a rather one-sided affair, with the civilian death toll numbering roughly 5 000 and growing. Of these women and children have been involved, and the Syrian army has dispatched snipers to pick-off protestors, tanks to attack civilian centers, and infantry to kill or capture any defecting security forces.

hope cracked, not shattered
What the movement is hoping to achieve is as simple as it is complex: democratic change. The Assad government has failed in its efforts to expedite reform, having instead decided to cling to power through brutality and force. It should be noted that in most cases, when the state loses its monopoly over the legitimacy of force in society, it always leads to civil disorder. In this case Syria has managed to do this through the kind of barbarism that despots and dictators use as a fail-safe.
So who will champion the cause of the Syrian people? While there is the Free Syria Army that has emerged since the outbreak of violence, their organizational structure is limited. It can be said that guerrilla tactics are valuable in the kind of asymmetrical (ie. David v. Goliath) conflict that is taking place in Syria, especially for the psychological edge that small successes can give the insurgents/freedom fighters. But a lack of numbers, equipment and sound organizational structure will hamper their results, as was the case in the Libyan revolution.
Though it is likely foreign intelligence services and militaries have a profound interest (and active hand) in the outcome of the Assad regime and the nature of its successor, the scope of the conflict and the volatile mood of an incredibly complex population might hinder any positive results. Surely organizations such as The Activity, the CIA, MI6, the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service and the French Direction Générale de la Sécurité Extérieure all have agents in the area. But even so, this may not be enough to expedite the end of bloodshed, or increase the rate of Syrian military defections.  
However there is another option for the current melee which exists in the notable absentee who might be best suited to take on the Syrian government: Hezbollah. Yes, that Hezbollah. While they are a designated terrorist organization and consistently declare a strong malevolence towards Israel, let’s put that aside for a moment. Tucked away? Good.
It is highly improbable, but let’s have a think over why Hezbollah might engage this crisis. First, in their manifesto c. 1985 that the peoples of Lebanon should have the full freedom to choose the system of government they want. This novel approach to self-government has found little footing in the Middle East to date, with reform in even ‘moderate’ nations like Jordan and Saudi Arabia best characterized as a snail with a severe case of hitting the snooze button. Nonetheless it stands to reason that, as an organization that has a strong presence in Syria, Hezbollah might again find their roots amid the current turmoil and stand with the people. Thus their popularity would soar in the streets, securing their base for the long-term.    
Another reason why Hezbollah should engage, is the idea of having a vested interest themselves filling the role of king-maker, rather than allowing such a moment to pass by. Assad is arguably on the way out, if not now then at some point in the relatively near future. Though the Syrian regime currently funds Hezbollah and provides them with weapons, logistical support and intelligence, this is no reason to shrink from changing allegiances. Assist in overthrowing the current government, as well as installing the next government (reflective of the people’s wishes, naturally) and Hezbollah would be well positioned to maintain their role as beneficiary of the Syrian state and chief antagonist to Israel.
Think of it from the position of a major tech company: old technology (the Assad regime) might work well for you and might even provide you with much needed income, but being able to find the next new technology (new government) will ensure longevity of the company, rather than having a competitor (anyone else in Syria) discover the technology for themselves, thus leading the market. Hezbollah's popularity would soar with the new government, thereby securing their long-term support.     
Finally, a broader perspective on engagement in the Syrian conflict might offer Hezbollah increased credibility in the Arab world – if not globally – as a fighter for the people and an organization that has more to offer than picking a fight with Israel. This effectively amounts to little more than a group hug on paper, however when tempers flare and borders are infringed upon, Hezbollah will be able to cash that group hug in exchange for tempered statements from foreign governments, funding and crucial support. They might also find that their image in the West will improve, at the very least because of the affection that the idea of the revolutionary cause manages to stir within the psyche of those nations who were birthed in a similar way. Thus their international recognition and credibility would soar.
Will they or won’t they? Likely not, since it’s often impolite if not hypocritical to bite the hand that feeds. Hassan Nasrallah should take note of similar organizations that have disappeared for failing to adapt: he might count his Hezbollah amongst their numbers in the coming years. Instead the people of Syria will be stuck with an increasingly defiant President, an Arab League draft resolution urging cessation to hostilities, reform and political reconciliation towards a unity government and general elections that has absolutely no teeth, and the constant struggle that has engrossed human spirit in such situations: fight on while risking death simply for hope, or give up all of the gains and ALL of the losses for nothing.     
**It should be noted that the title has relevance beyond the absent element attributed to Hezbollah. The name of the organization can be spelled in its Arabic form as either Hizbollah or Hizbullah, or as Hezbollah, with the latter being slightly altered through the transliteration from Arabic to English.