~Meaw & More~


Reactive blogger (~and more~)

Make bullets expensive (i)

As I log in to my Yahoo account I saw this news Haiti, U.N. to disarm gang members Contary to what the media had been reported in August of something like Haiti tells gangs to disarm or face death. The disarmament attempt would, according to the UN Envoy

[R]eceive 1,000 armed people who would willingly give up their weapons and arms. […]We have kits to provide for their families, food and economic assistance.

I would be happy to hear that the compensation will be given instead of threats to violence for unitary disarmament of gangsters. I am being especially optimistic that when violence is a cheaper or an easier and nore effective way to earn things in chaotic and dangerous setting, people would retort to violence. I think it is fundamental and more instinctive (if instrict is a discourse, so be it) to try simple ways to get things done. As far as I could remember, my province had its saying that “bullets are cheap” and it is not complicated to be killed. Much less complicate that resolving inter personal conflict. (excluding thrill seeking behavior that put some people who would willing to be at risk). A broken woman like me could, for example, simply end my life and suffering at the cost of USS 60-70 (some could get it chaeper than this but my survey is at this price), some courage which could be bought by a bottle of vodka for another USS 20 and procurement cost about USS 10. Effectively at USS 100, I’d say good by to all conflict using cheap illegal homemade gun. It would be less costly than upcoming months of insomnia and despair that would cost more. Only 100 USS could terminate trouble caused by unfaithful husband, cheating lovers or minor wives. Better price, better service. To get rid of business or political adversaries this way would be cheaper than to lose money in business or political competitions.

Not to mention Keen (2001) that we need to make people gain more from peace than in war. There would be many situations that, despite the hidden cost of violence, it seems to be a cheap and effective measure to get things done. The non-violence ways, in some setting would be costly and dangerous. I personally think that the cost of operations in peace and in conflict must be considered in case of conflict based disarmament. The cost to obtain things thoru violence should be reduced in order that it would not be nessessary for people who would dnot normally use violence and arm themselves to seek want they want to be forced by the situation to do so.

Now I could only think about “situation” when violence would be expensive. I am not referring to human rights/human security discourse but I think about “justice.” In a public lecture given by Dr. Ranabir Samaddar (2005) and organised by Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhon Anthropology Centre, co hosted by Peace Information Centre (Thailand), Thammasart University on Peace Audit: Idean and Experiences from South Asia, the idea of minimum justice set a thin borderline between war and peace.

If there is so much common in between war condition and peace condition, what is the difference between these two? The issue marking the difference is that of justice, justice historically defined at one particular stage, justice seen as principles of minimal justice, justice that invokes both rights and reconciliation. For that we need to be aware of the reality of conflict and its contradictions. […]

My reflection on justice began when I started to question discourses of reconciliation and human swecurity in Thailand. The two measures were said to calm conflict in the south, during a short and stressful life span of having to read news of policies to be used in the three southern most provinces, I am sick of human security and human rights. Despite my personal notorious inclination toward decontructionism, I think that Dr. Samaddar’s arguement sound better to me.

Food, economic assitance and skills training to compensate what could be earned at gun pints would be the first step to mobilse people to drop arms for other human security packages. This would not be enough. In short I would like to supply this news before I go to bed shortly. Suspect was ‘paid to put bomb in Yala bank’ The cost of putting bomb in a bank is 2000 THB or about USS 60— almost not enough for a person to live with freedom from want for a month. This a payback with interest from injustice from state induced disapperance, torture and other repression (actual or alledged), violence was still a cheap way to gain attention and revenge, but not a final reprieve. When basic needs could be provided by basic human rights/human security packages, sences of injustice will soon fuel resistance and ignite another strike back.

But justice was also mentioned in Samassar’s lecture as “dangerous supplement”

Also reading this: http://www.sacw.net/2002/samaddar062003.html
Keen, D. (2001). ‘War and Peace: What’s the Difference?’, in A. Adebajo and C.L.
Sriram (eds) Managing Armed Conflicts in the 21st Century, International Peace
Academy, Frank Cass: Oxon.

Samaddar, Ranabir. (2005). Peace Audit: Idea and Experiences form South Asia. Bangkok, Thailand: Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn Anthropology Center and Peace Information Centre (Thailand)


Filed under: Ideas, Security, Truth and Reconciliation, Uncategorized

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: