One of the worst fallacies in contemporary public life is the plea that if only people were more "reasonable", problems could be resolved to everyone’s satisfaction. The academic Professor Mary Kaldor, in a major book on modern war, actually contends that "No solution is workable based on the political goals of the warring parties . . . Once the values of inclusion, tolerance, and mutual respect are established, the territorial solutions will easily follow." The unstated assumption in this view of the world is that if we approach a problem in a spirit of conciliation and willingness to see the other side’s point of view, a successful compromise can be found.
In 2000 Yasser Arafat rejected a peace settlement that threatened to undermine the whole rationale for the PLO: resistance, resistance, resistance. It is an illustration of the cold realities of this type of war that much of the violence in Northern Ireland stemmed from deliberate political encouragement to perpetuate the conflict. This was achieved through the use of fiery rhetoric to incite the masses, the purpose being to better politicians’ leverage when the negotiation of a settlement on acceptable terms finally became plausible.
What quickly became the norm in Ulster was that extremism was not only "reasonable", but was positively encouraged by everyone concerned as it was "necessary" in order to manufacture a more favourable final settlement. Contrary to what we all wish, there is often no such thing as a "moderate centre ground". There certainly wasn’t in Northern Ireland. This means that appeals to rationality and reasonableness will not get us very far. The objectives of the participants in these wars – politicians, paramilitaries, and communities alike – are to defend their own interests. If anything, it is perhaps more "unreasonable" for us to expect otherwise.The only thing I would add is that continued "resistance" was extremely profitable for the IRA until the FBI started to lean on their fundraisers in the USA. Likewise the PLO leaders stole much of the money donated to the Palestinian cause, and the challenge to their authority by Hamas was entirely financed by Iran on condition that they should exacerbate the conflict with Israel.
The police observe the sound principle of following the money - so should political analysts.
Posts
In Pakistan, the military elite is well entrenched, and per Islamist orientation, was well-rewarded by Zia during the eleven years of his dictatorship. Housing and property schemes, business opportunities, and civil service jobs are made available to retiring officers.
ReplyDeleteThe current Taliban insurgency, it can be argued, is being forwarded by by lower-middle-class mullahs and their rousier relatives who see 'Islamism' as a viable
path toward the better things of life.
Admittedly. Some of the tribal 'Talib' leaders in the Pukhtun Northwest seem a little more bent on 'empire-building' than they are on immediate profit, but all of them are intent on blackmailing the weak central government into concessions of authority and privilege. e.g., immunity from prosecution.
In the American West, there is a saying, "It is quite safe to feed a bear. It is only dangerous when you stop feeding the bear." Successful blackmailers always work up more appetite.
The contemporary cliché is that weakness is provocative.
ReplyDelete