He argued for direct involvement in his work the Social contract displaying that ‘to be represented is to give up’. Direct democracy makes frequent use of referendums where citizens are asked directly instead of matters being discussed through elected MP’s. Nonetheless, this system isn’t flawless. It requires the affair to be simple, at the same time as binary. As soon as the issue becomes complicated it loses its authority to serve its purpose since it only allows space for a yes or no question. There is no room for greys in a system that is designed for black and white. Also, throughout history, referendums have been frequently used by dictators in an attempt to legitimate their power, rendering this type of democracy vulnerable to its abuse.
Modernly, democracy is conceived as electing the representatives of the people, ruling out direct democracy. This entails certain conditions. First of all the existence of choice which infers that people have to be given several options and the chance to decide freely between them. This implies pluralism, freedom of speech and press. As well as this, everyone should be eligible as well as elector. The electoral system also has a big impact on the outcome. For instance, the British system favours the existence of two big parties. It reduces pluralism but make it easier to form stable governments. A proportional system, allows more parties into Parliament but has to frequently rely on coalitions to form governments.
Another concept inherent to how democracy works, is the idea that the system is not only ruled by the majority, but also protects minorities. First of all, elections have to be held at regular intervals to allow a change of government. Hitler, for example, came to power by election but soon afterwards eliminated democracy. Secondly, the rule of majority is not the tyranny of majority. Alexis de Tocqueville brings up a fundamental flaw to the system expressed in his book Democracy in America (1835) where he addresses the ‘tyranny of the majority’ where suddenly the risk of minorities rights being threatened by the intolerant masses appears. Modernly it is admitted that democracy has to comply with the respect of Human Rights as defined by International Organisations.
The last matter relating democracy I’d like to draw up is the importance of the division of powers. Montesquieu established that power should be split between the Parliament which makes the laws, the government which executes them and the judicial power which controls the application of law. Without what the Americans call a “check and balance” system, a true democracy doesn’t exist.
Nowadays we can say that democracy has never been so acclaimed, since everybody relies on it as a legitimation principle, however, its current working has to be continuously checked so as to be sure that it is adapted to the initial idea. Modernly we have to address several issues. One of the most important being, what is the impact of technology? Technology can help direct democracy but it has also facilitated the ease with which leaders can court uninformed public opinion, exemplified in Trumps use of twitter or Hugo Chavez and his television phone-in show called ‘Aló presidente’. It has also been a strong precursor of fake news. Another pressing issue is the people´s feeling of disconnect from the government. For a long time it brought about political apathy. People didn´t go to vote as they rendered it useless. Modernly, populism has taken the relay. People are rising in anger all around the world and the conception that the governing have detached themselves from the governed is growing in strength as the ‘gilets jaunes’ take the streets to reclaim their rights. It is the people against the elite.
We must now conclude by establishing how we should interpret democracy if it is to have any chance at survival. Democracy should be seen as a delicate and layered flower in need of nurturing, watering and caring for, if it is to flourish and perform its functions, which in this case would be, the power to vote, the maintenance of freedom of speech and the separation of powers. In continuance with the analogy, as time takes its toll on it, and eras change, it must shed its petals and grow new ones in accordance to current movements, to ensure it is not left behind. Its classical foundation has to be rejected and redefined in order to enable dynamism and the engagement with current civilians. This is the only way it’ll be able to survive and pull through, in this time of crisis where conflict seems to loom upon the very nature of it.
Democracy, according to Abraham Lincoln former American President is a government of the people by the people and for the people. In other words “Democracy is a system of government in which all the people of a state or polity are involved in decision making”. Most theories of democracy are based on the principle of “government by the people”. This implies that people participate in the making of crucial decisions that influence their lives and determine the societal environment. Bühlmann (2008) defines “Democracy as a system of government by which political sovereignty is retained by the people and exercised directly by citizens. ” In etymological terms, the word democracy comes from ancient Greek (demokratia), which combines demos, the “people”, with kratos, meaning “rule”, “power “or “strength”.
Democracy is a system of government where by people participates in government either directly or through representatives periodically elected by themselves. It is the government of the people by the people and for the people. Minimalist democracy refers to government of the people that is supposed to promote just effective governance. Maximalist democracy refers government of, by, and for the people. Best representation, high participation and greater possibility of social justice. Based on a maximalist understanding of democracy, it entails the characteristics of the representative and participatory types of democracy, but considers the social prerequisites of citizens also essential for fair and meaningful democratic participation. Therefore, looking at both definitions of maximalist and minimalist forms of democracy adheres to the following principles. Hence draws the following similarities which includes;
Firstly, in both, people’s fundamental freedoms and fundamental, however, human rights are much more than a mere component of democracy. They represent sine qua non requirements for the well performing of a democratic system. The development and evolution of human rights are only possible when humans live in a democracy, given the fact that it is only within this system that the population itself can draw up the laws that will rule and publicly control the three powers: the legislative power (power to propose and vote for laws: for example in Madagascar, this is the role of the Parliament), the executive power (power to enforce laws: in Madagascar, this is the role of the President of the Republic and the Government) and the judiciary power (power to make and to promulgate laws, in addition, for example, the High Constitutional Court).
Moreover, human rights are only efficient when the State power is linked to an autonomy and independence right, and when all the individuals are treated on equal terms in front of this justice. In the same way, it is essential, in any democracy, to establish a clear separation of powers, so that the judiciary can be autonomous and independent. The result will be a triangular relation between Democracy, Human Rights and Separation of Powers, which thus represent interdependent elements.
Secondly, in both maximalist and minimalist elections constitute one of the most important pillars of democracy. These are the texts of electoral law that rule and clearly define both the organization of these elections, and how to undertake the deduction of the votes in order to assign them to the corresponding seats. This implies that there is an active electoral law and a passive electoral law. Citizens who can use active electoral law have the right to vote whereas those who can use passive electoral law have the right to be elected. In most cases, the whole electorate can use both types of right. Democratic elections are free when citizens have the right to choose from several candidates or parties that can run for the election without any restriction. They must also be free to decide whether they want to use their right to vote or to abstain from doing so, if they prefer allow for people to choose a leader of their choice through free and fair elections.
Thirdly, both uphold the rule of law, which stresses that there are fundamental principles and procedures that guarantee the freedom of each individual and which allow participation in political life. There is, first of all, the right to a free blossoming of individual personality. To sum it up, the power of the State is linked to the laws that rule it. Thus, the notion of Rule of Law is directly opposed to that of “Police State “or “Despotic State”. In a democratic State, all the citizens are equal in front of the law, even state employees and administration. The latter can only take action when it has been vested with the accruing responsibility by law or by the Constitution. The rule of law is then always founded on the respect of law and Constitution. This is a system that holds the State accountable for its acts in front of the citizens and it also gives the latter the opportunity to take a stand and to react according to its acts. In this State ruled order, citizens are completely free to take part in political life as well.
Fourthly, both uphold separation of powers, there are three State powers within a State and these includes; legislative power draws up and adopts laws, executive power enforces laws and government policies and judiciary power represents the legal framework for exercising the power. Separation of powers means “division” of the State power. In a democratic State, the power of the State can be controlled and influenced efficiently, first and foremost, by itself. The State power must then be distributed among several organs. In general, it is the constitution of a country that settles how the State power is to be distributed among different organs and what attributions are to be assigned to them respectively. In general, it is the Constitution of a country that settles how the State power is to be distributed among different organs and what attributions are to be assigned to them respectively. As a general rule, there are two government systems that need to be distinguished: the “parliamentary regime” and the “presidential regime”.
In parliamentary regimes, the government stems from the parliament that is elected by the people. Ministers within the government can also be vested with a double mandate. The government is put in place by the Parliament and can be destitute in the same way at any time by the latter. The government attributions and that of the parliament interlock. In general, it is the government that deals with documents for the drawing up and proposals of law. However, it cannot decide anything on the way those bills are passed. Each bill is subject to a vote at the parliament; consequently, the government depends on the parliament for passing the bills that it puts forward. Additionally, political parties play a very important role as the majority at the parliament constitutes the necessary requirement for accession to government seats. According to Hetherington, K. (2009) as the concept of democracy is highly contestable almost everyone has a different view on what it means to call a country a democracy, or to call it more or less democratic than another it’s not surprising to see that most of the research projects that have attempted to measure democracy such as Polity IV, Freedom House for example have chosen a different definition of democracy, and are, therefore, actually measuring something different the minimalist and the maximalist one. The former could, for example, view democracy as no more than a system of regular elections, and measure simply the presence or absence of elections in different countries. The latter, on the other hand, could include in its definition of democracy stuff like rights protections, freedom of the press, division of powers for example and measure the presence or absence of all of these things, and aggregate the different scores in order to decide whether a country is democratic or not, and to what extent. However, having looked at the similarities between the minimalist and maximalist forms of democracy, the following are some of the differences.
The use of a maximalist definition of democracy would make it possible to rank all types of regimes on such an ordinal scale. A maximalist definition of democracy would include a relatively large number of necessary attributes of democracy, and the combination of presence/ absence/partial development of each attribute would almost make it possible to give each country a unique ranking the ordinal scale. Such a wide- ranging differentiation is an advantage for progress analysis. A binary scale does not give any information on the quality of democracy. Hence, it would be better to speak of measuring democratization rather than measuring democracy and democratization not only in the sense of a transition from authoritarian to democratic governance, but also in the sense of progress towards a deepening of democratic rule.
While, the minimalist definition of democracy necessarily focuses on just a few attributes of democracy. As a result, it is impossible to differentiate between degrees of “democraticness” of different countries. Moreover, the chosen attributes may not be typical of or exclusive to democracy (such as good governance or citizen influence), and may not include some necessary attributes. For example, Polity IV, perhaps the most widely used measure of democracy, does not sufficiently incorporate actual citizen participation, as opposed to the mere right of citizens to participate. Hence, it’s not fair to say that a country that gives its citizens the right to vote but doesn’t actually have many citizens voting can hardly be called a democracy. The maximalist democracy measurement system offers a lot of information and the possibility to compare countries beyond the simple dichotomy of democracy/nondemocracy, but it may be rejected by those who claim that this system is not measuring democracy as they understand the word whereas minimalist system will measure something that is useful for many people as no one will contest that elections are necessary for democracy for instance, but will also reduce the utility of the measurement results because it does not yield a lot of information about countries.
On the other hand, the minimalist camp claims that there is a sense that the people need a supreme authority or state that seeks to shape and regulate social life while the maximalist democracy views that social life of its citizens should not at any point be regulated because it is viewed as a violation of human rights.
Further, in the minimalist there is a notion that people should be led as opposed to ‘participate’ in public affairs. According to Joseph Schumpeter’s view supports that the state takes power from the people, as the people are just as willing to submit to it. He accepts that people can grasp local or personally specific political issues, but he believes that they have no incentive to participate in national or international issues. His theory claims that the peoples’ lack of skill or capacity means that they are easily manipulated. His vision could certainly help to provide an explanation for example, of the political affairs in Nazi Germany and the mass votes for the victorious National Socialist Party (his book was written during World War II). While in the maximalist, people actively participate in public affairs public participation is an action or a series of actions a person takes to involve themselves in affairs of government or community. These activities include voting, attending meetings, participating in public or private political discussion or debate on issues, signing a petition on a desired government action or policy, volunteering in community activities and contributing money to a political party or candidate of one’s choice among other similar activities so that the citizen can know if their participation is adding value to the governance process or not.
In conclusion, democracy can be defined: minimally ‘in terms of procedures such as competitive elections’ and maximally ‘in terms of ideas of participation, deliberation and the direct involvement of citizens in government. However, the maximalist is that the measurement will are more open to controversy. The more attributes of democracy are included in the measure, the higher the risk of disagreement on the model of democracy as people have differentiate as about the number and type of necessary attributes of a democracy, even of an ideal democracy. On other hand the minimalist definition makes it very difficult to differentiate between countries. It would make it possible to distinguish democracies (minimally defined) from nondemocracies, but it wouldn’t allow measuring the degree of democracy of a given country.
The definition of democracy concentrates on the debates among proponents of deliberative, substantive, and procedural justice. Procedural democrats generally emphasize institutions and practices characterized by a democratic regime (Dahl, 1-3). Deliberative democrats make decisions showing that the most appropriate procedures can be transformed into a proper form of democracy (Dahl, 2-5). Substantive democracy explains the procedures as necessary but not adequate to bring about democratic results (Miller, 201-210). Modern political democracy is therefore defined as a system of governance where the leaders are held responsible for their actions in the public domain by citizens (Szolucha, 18-20). The citizen acts indirectly through the participation of their elected representatives; thus, the supreme authority is vested in the people, exercised directly by them or by their elected delegates under a free electoral system (Szolucha, 20).
A system or a regime of governance is an organization of patterns confining the methods of access to the principal public office with the characteristics of the participants excluded or admitted from such access (Miller, 207-218). The realm entails making the collective choices and norms that unite the society backed by state compulsion. In the democratic form of governance, citizens are the most distinctive elements; in other words, all the regimes have public domain and leaders, but only to the extent to which they are democratic the citizens. Standard courses of action are taken after citizens have weighed the demerits and merits and listen to the alternatives of such activities and decisions. The fundamental feature of democracy is, therefore, cooperation (Miller, 215-220). Participants who primarily include the citizens, through their representative, voluntarily make collective decisions that unite the republic as a whole (Schmitter & Terry, 75). They cooperate and collaborate through associations, parties, and even movements to elect candidates, select petition authorities, and also to influence policies. Furthermore, democracy’s freedom should also encourage citizens to discover their basic needs, deliberate among themselves, and to resolve their dispute and disagreements without relying on some supreme central authority (Schmitter & Terry, 78-80). The representatives, whether elected directly or indirectly, usually do most of the real work in a modern democracy; these representatives mostly constitute professional politicians oriented to their careers (Schmitter & Terry, 80-82).
Since the representatives are elected by citizens, in turn, the final decision making power rest with those elected by the people; this means the people are the Supreme in a democratic form of governance and that all the voices count. Thus, democracy can be deemed to be the will of people and the people’s sovereignty (Szolucha, 20).
In a real democracy, a representative or the state is always elected by the majority vote. All the citizens are equally considered to have equal power in terms of choosing a representative or the government as a whole; in other words, one man one vote as in most of the states thus, all voices eventually count (Miller, 220-226). However, the fundamental rights are restricted to a minimum form and not like a total free democratic state. Ideal democracy is similar to real democracy in terms of equal power of electing the government. However, in an ideal democracy, all citizens are provided with total fundamental rights and liberty concerning the law of the country (Dahl, 5-10).
The minimum democracy infers that a system or a regime should have a least a universal, competitive, and fair elections, mostly with more than one source of information and more than one political party (Miller, 226). Therefore existing rights, decision-making processes, and democratic institutions should not be constrained by external powers or non-elected elites. The main objectives of an ideal form of democracy are, therefore, freedom and equality.
For an ideal democracy to be depicted as the will of the people, it should involve a degree of uncertainty about who is to be elected and what policies they will pursue (Miller, 226-227). The constitution guarantees rights to property, expression, privacy, and other rights; however, the most effective boundaries are created by competition among the interested groups and cooperation within civil society (Miller, 228). Therefore these boundaries or limitations ensure that not just any participant can get into the competition and raise any issues that only, please. Again there are previously constitutional rules that must be adhered to or observed (Schmitter & Terry, 85). Again not just any policy is adopted since there are some specific conditions and regulations by the constitution; the country constitution, therefore, provides governance-related institutions such as the judiciary and the civil service (Miller, 226).
Also, an ideal democracy generally requires the existence and free exercise of certain primary groups or individual rights. Some of these fundamental rights include the right to life, liberty, due process of law, equality, non-discrimination, judicial access, and freedom of assembly and expression (Dahl, 7). These fundamental rights, in turn, give rise to other substantive rights; however, all the substantive rights are dependent on their fair and effective implementation on procedural fairness (Schmitter & Terry, 86).
These texts (The Democracy Sourcebook, What is Democracy) have reinforced my understanding of democracy and made me acknowledge that democracy is the best form of governance. I have remarked that good governance has various attributes; however, citizen participation contributes to good governance in many ways and at different levels. Citizen participation is often not spontaneous but comes through the effective mobilization of all citizens of sound mind. More importantly, it provides the citizenry with the appropriate information or knowledge. It uses message and communication strategies that are well attuned to the cognitive capacities of the target populations (Szolucha, 20). By providing information and expertise in a very understandable manner, the citizenry will have the requisite tools for engagement. Thus the citizen will be in a better position to contribute to policy debate, decision making, and action, monitoring, and feedback devoid of fear, intimidation, and the rest of it that tends to make people sit on the fence. The political elite have to liberate the energies of all its human resources for real-time citizen participation.
I have also realized from the texts that in very dense environments, adequate mobilization of the citizenry can come through genuine/committed political, administrative, judiciary, and fiscal decentralization. This mobilization can be possible as from the center to the lowest level possible with well-educated and dedicated human resources in leadership positions and where there is a robust regular feedback mechanism both vertically and horizontally. In general, to allow involvement of citizens, it is necessary to adapt the processes majorly on the legislative level, because the state should allow the citizens to make contributions on the current changes, creating new and advancement of the policies. It also ensures that citizens can apply only society’s relevant policies. The state needs a threshold since the policy is suitable for a larger group of citizens and not only for a small consortium from enterprises. On the other hand, the barrier should not be too high because it must be possible for engaged citizens to apply a new policy; however, one has to keep in mind that not the whole society will participate in the policymaking.
Is Dewey’s (1916) Democracy and Education still relevant in context with the current National curriculum?’ (Hopkins 2018) This is the question that Hopkins (2018) asks throughout this article. Hopkins is a unit leader in the philosophy of education at the University of Bedfordshire, and his argument progresses by looking at three main themes. Firstly, how Dewey’s (1916) publication applies to current issues within Primary and Secondary schools. Secondly, if Dewey’s (1916) ideas connect to fundamental British values (FBV) and how pupil voice can feature within this. Finally, the insights Dewey’s (1916) work has provided on both the academic and vocational divide.
In this critique we will unpick Hopkins’s (2018) ideas around the relevance of ‘Dewey’s democracy and education’ (Dewey 1916) and its bearing today with particular reference to FBV, also touching on pupil voice. Certainly, Hopkins’s (2018) article does appear to claim that Dewey’s (1916) ideas on democracy and pupil voice are extremely relevant one hundred years on, however, he looks at how democracy fits into the national curriculum and it could be argued that his portrayal of this is fairly one-sided with little reference to counter opinion. Another key factor is that even though this article is less than two years old, a huge amount of change has occurred within the education sector during this time which challenges just how relevant Hopkins’s (2018) paper is, over and above the relevance of Dewey (1916).
Hopkins (2018) leads with Dewey’s (1916) argument that an education system can’t be controlled by the state because a state-controlled education addresses what is needed for the nation but not for the individuals within it. Certainly, this is an interesting point and historically does carry credence, however, since the publication of this journal, we have seen the implementation of the new Ofsted framework which in a recent speech (21 Sept 2018) Ofsted’s Chief Inspector, Amanda Spielman stated that Ofsted recognizes the importance of schools’ autonomy to choose their curriculum approaches. Spielmans’ (2018) words challenge Dewey’s (1916) argument as whilst an education framework is being provided, schools and practitioners are now being encouraged to adapt this to best suit their school setting and children.
Hopkins (2018) links Dewey’s (1916) issues with state-controlled education to the introduction of Fundamental British Values and PREVENT within the National Curriculum in 2014. Hopkins (2018) argues that the FBV curriculum was created with limited consultation into what it means to be British, again relating to the motivation of the state providing the basis of this education (Dewey 1916). But what Hopkins (2018) does not appear to be mindful of is that the framework provides the ability for every child to receive the same basic educational entitlement, along with a structure that allows differentiative learning for all pupils (Lewis 2002). Add to this the evidence that has shown a lack of framework can have negative results such as students acquiring misconceptions, (Kirschner, Sweller & Clark 2006) then it could be argued that the Government providing the framework for what should be taught also limits opportunity for learners receiving inappropriate education and possibly more biased opinion of highly sensitive subjects.
Hopkins (2018) does not consider the benefits of a framework at any point but instead references the fact that Dewey (1916) would be skeptical of the introduction of SBV in light of who the values are for – nation or individual. The May 2019 edition of Ofsted The Education Inspection Framework, discusses that FBV prepares learners for life in modern Britain in a variety of ways including how to contribute to society, understand diversity, and draw on the knowledge and cultural capital they need to succeed in life. If we again look at the changes to the Ofsted framework it could be argued that FBV provides a framework that schools and education practitioners use to encourage Dewey’s (1916) ‘intelligent action’ by inspiring people to have a personal interest in the subject matter and respect the viewpoint of others along with creating opportunities for social involvement.
Hopkins (2018) did not have this context when he wrote his journal in March 2018 as the new Ofsted guidelines were not created till later that year however he could have referenced the 2013 National Curriculum in England Framework which states that as part of the curriculum, every state-funded school must prepare pupils for opportunities, responsibilities, and experiences of later life. Based on the evidence we now have from Ofsted (2018) and The National Curriculum (2013) we could now challenge the relevance of Hopkins’s (2018) theory that Dewey (1916) would be skeptical of the FBV curriculum and offer a counter-argument that FBV is a vehicle for ‘Intelligent action’. Expanding this point further, Garratt (2000) discusses the importance of understanding and accepting that children enter school with contrasting sets of cultural and gendered expectations. Garratt (2000) states that through carefully structured activities and meaningful dialogue, children can learn how different cultures work and how they contribute to their society. A much more balanced argument from Hopkins (2018) may have considered that the FBV curriculum not only allows for intelligent action but also creates the opportunity for more democracy within the school environment with teachers actively encouraging pupil voice and facilitating meaningful discussions on culture and society.
Hopkins (2018) himself likened pupil voice to Dewey’s (1916) opinion of the classroom as a place where people develop and construct knowledge so if FBV does create an opportunity for pupil’s voice then this provides another contradiction to Hopkins’s (2018) article. When considering that FBV can provide an opportunity for pupil voice it is then interesting to look at Pike (2007) as he discusses that how we deliver curriculum is in fact down to pedagogy and this is where the element of democracy can be included. Reflecting on Hopkins (2018) and Pike’s (2007) ideas around the implementation of FBV, one could construe that the FBV framework provides a structure to work within, not limited to what must be taught, but guidelines that are open to interpretation, and adaptable in terms of pedagogy and setting. Furthermore, if we teach British Values in this way it becomes less about what is needed to be taught but demonstrating the key characteristics required for living and contributing to society (Pike 2007). This line of thought links directly to encouraging and endorsing the Pupil voice as a key tool in delivering such elements of the curriculum. After critiquing the key points within Hopkins’s (2018) article, a fair conclusion would be that many of Dewey’s (1916) ideas and beliefs are still relevant however the interpretation of them given by Hopkins (2018) about democracy within the national curriculum and FBV are not.
The main weakness of Hopkins’s (2018) article is the failure to address that the 2013 National Curriculum and more recently 2018 Ofsted guidelines, both allow education professionals the ability to consider social and cultural influences relevant to the individuals within their local environment. This also allows the pedagogy to be adopted by the teachers to include more democracy and pupil voice, especially in subject areas such as FBV. There are many questions raised by this critique and certainly, areas of further research and reflection would lead to analysis of types of pedagogy within different areas of the National Curriculum and how professionals can learn, adapt, and improve their teaching within this framework.
In the study of comparative politics, many political theorists such as Andrew Hindmoor, Mark Petracca, and Jon Elson explain political occurrences such as war, voting methods, and the economy through the understanding of Rational Choice Theory. Rational Choice Theory is a prominent theory in the study of Politics and Economics. It posits that individuals, institutions, and societies construct purposive, goal-seeking choices based on their interests and preferences, which are rational (Hindmoor, 2006). For many people, one aspect of being part of a democratic society is the ability to take part in the political system. This can be done in several ways: by voting in an election, participating in public discussion-based meetings, serving jury duty, or simply protesting for a cause. These civic duty activities are known as political participation. Political participation is a crucial centerpiece within a democratic society. Through this, individuals participate in the political process by sharing their opinions on an issue or making their concerns and beliefs known. These are actions taken by individuals and political groups to influence government policy and the outcome of a political issue. However, applying the rational choice theory to the understanding of political action with the assumption that people are rational actors in political engagement is erroneous. This brings into question: are we rational actors when it comes to politics? This essay will critique the rational choice theory and argue that individuals are not entirely rational but rational to a certain extent in pursuing their objectives. Because individuals act in their self-interest, this can ultimately result in an unrepresentative flawed system of government that only represents a minority group of individuals, leading to an illegitimate government. Although individuals are not fully rational actors in politics, they are boundedly rational because they are goal-oriented. However, their human intellectual ability and emotional manner, at times, fail in making important decisions because they cannot handle multiple problems at once. They do not fully maximize their utility but only strive to satisfy their goals and what makes them content. Lastly, this paper argues that people are uninformed due to a disadvantage they hold within a democratic society.
Individuals do not always select the best action to achieve the overall goal that is beneficial for the common good but instead, they make irrational decisions based on their interests. We all have different interests, beliefs, and needs, and the same applies when we make our political decisions. The study of how our self-interest is relative to our decision-making by Andrew Hindmoor (2006) and Amartya K. Sen (1977) in the fields of economics and politics explains how we participate in politics. The Rational Choice Theory is used by economists and political theorists to explain the notion that individuals exercise rational thinking before making any decisions. Rational choice is an approach of positive analysis that attempts to tell us something about how the world functions and how individuals act within it. It uses the assumptions of self-interest and rationality of people to construct models of political processes or events. It states that individuals make purposive and goal-oriented decisions based on their beliefs and preferences, which are seen as rational. For that reason, individual actors are capable of making decisions in all case scenarios. This theory assumes that people take into consideration all possible costs and benefits of their options before making a decision. However, just because it is assumed that individuals are capable of making rational decisions, not all decisions made are fully thought-out and rational. Political action is not entirely rational because people only act in their self-interest and not for the common good of society, which leads to bad policies and decisions. The role of self-interest in elected officials and voters affects the formulation of public policies. For instance, when a voter feels strongly about a particular cause, they will use their voice to speak their interest and vote to elect a candidate that would meet their views. Because voters want their interests to be implemented in policies, they will exercise their political rights. The same goes for political organizations and elected officials. Political candidates and organizations want to hold a government position; therefore, they will tend to the voters and align with policies that a substantial number of voters appeal to in an attempt to get elected. However, this can lead to corruption and the exploitation of power that will result in bad policies and an unrepresentative government, such as governments influenced by self-interested corporations and political interest groups. Although interest groups are important for a democratic society, large interest groups can pose challenges to the government and society. Some powerful interest groups can use their financial resources and power to corrupt the government to ensure that policymakers remain in favor of their interests. Because elected officials are keen on getting elected, they are more likely to help side with larger interest groups and tend to their needs to get re-elected than the smaller groups. This can lead to pluralism that will only work in favor of the minority groups and not the general public, which shows to be unrepresentative. Larger interest groups and elected officials are not entirely rational but rational to a certain extent about what is beneficial to their cause rather than the cause for the common good. They make choices based on maximizing their utility rather than for the common good of society. Therefore, individuals are not fully rational because they make irrational decisions based on their desires and interests. Individuals focus on a limited amount of aspects that they believe are more essential to them than others. People are not thorough decision-makers; rather, they make decisions based on limited facts, and they do not consider the full range of consequences or benefits that a particular decision has on others.
In the modern day, an increasing number of autocratic regimes are being overthrown and replaced with democracy. Within a short time, several North African and Middle-Eastern countries have had their autocracies challenged and overthrown (Danju, Maasoglu, and Maasoglu 2013). It can be argued that development spurs democratic transitions or stabilises current democracies (Boix 2011). In this essay, I will begin my island (Saboc) with a despotic leadership and demonstrate a gradual change towards democracy.
In many developing countries, autocracy was seen as the ‘price to pay’ for rapid development as only autocracies can repress consumption (Luo and Przeworski 2019). For this reason, Saboc is an established despotic autocracy six months into the island journey. Despotism is a legitimate and legal form of authoritarian government in which a set of laws set by the leader or ruler exist (Turchetti 2008). The old Lawyer is the despotic leader and runs a tight ship. There is no set currency system in place, and everyone works for the betterment of everyone else. Two cross-island marriages have seen a Saboc resident relocate to Island Partially Friendly (IPF) and a high skilled boat maker from IPF relocate to Saboc. The man has taught the Islanders how to safely travel between islands. This reduces the risk of travelling.
The only societal actors currently present in Saboc are the apparel-making business. One of the skilled men currently makes all apparel for the Islanders and for trade. Although they do not trade for currency, they trade with IPF for tools, seeds and fertilisers. The Lawyer’s daughter is the representative of the island and goes to IPF to negotiate and trade. She also acts as a messenger and delivers any grievances or issues to the leader. Trade and democracy are commonly linked in political and economic discussion (Milner and Kubota 2005) which suggests the island is already making some strides towards democracy. At this stage, the focus of the island is efficiency and survival, and so factors such as representation, equality and accountability are not of primary concern.
Eighteen months into the island journey, an increasing number of IPF Islanders have relocated to Saboc. Relations between the two islands have somewhat eased, and people have moved to Saboc from IPF due to the community spirit and respected leader of Saboc. There are more boats between the islands as Islanders with boat-making knowledge now inhabit the island. The island is not yet ready to travel to Island Developed (ID) but is developing quickly due to the newfound knowledge and skills from new people. Due to higher productivity, there has been a greater focus on wellbeing. The Lawyer’s daughter is quite popular with the Islanders as she is making strides to improve welfare for each member of the island. There is only one recognised language on the island, and there is a makeshift school for basic language skills and education for children and adults. The Lawyer’s daughter also teaches the Islanders about the laws of the island and listens to their concerns before voicing them to the Lawyer. Voting has been introduced for some significant decisions on the island, but elections are still not in place.
The marginalised woman is a lot happier in the society as the Lawyer’s daughter listens to and acts on her concerns. She is becoming educated through the school system and is also teaching other Islanders about her culture. The marginalised woman has also been granted an opportunity to publicly give her opinion on all big decisions by speaking before voting commences. She is also working together with some of the new Islanders on making a group that speaks up for minorities on the island. By the end of year two, they expect to be recognised as an NGO on the island. The movements made up to the eighteen-month mark such as the introduction of voting and representation show a shift towards a democratic system.
When a country undertakes a political transition to democracy, it faces a complex period of change (Kalpokaite and Radivojevic 2019). By the time of the third year, the combined efforts of the new Islanders from IPF and the Islanders of Saboc have successfully travelled to; and established relations with Island Developed. The high-value apparel is now a very profitable business of six employees and a very attractive investment for Island Developed. ID have sent a representative over to live in Saboc and assist in developing and maintaining a representative democracy with their first election just passing. A representative democracy can be defined as a “governing system in which politics are organised around an elected assembly.” (Lovenduski 2019, p.19). The representative reports back periodically to the president of ID. The Lawyer won the election and still is very well respected as the president of the island. People are able to move between the islands as the new Islanders from ID have brought new technology and knowledge over, advancing the island’s productivity and potential.
The marginalised woman runs the NGO for minorities and is a political representative for the island minorities. The school has now developed and is teaching higher value education to the Islanders. There are a small group of businesses currently on the island and Saboc is using the established currency from the Island Developed. A small eatery has been established with high skilled cooks migrating from ID, the aforementioned apparel business and school, and some small trades such as carpentry and fishmongers. Tensions between IPF and Saboc have eased due to many people moving freely between the islands. An educated immigrant from IPF writes a newspaper and gives her opinion on political decisions. She is also part of a political lobbyist group who hold the president accountable for any questionable decisions or bring to light any inequality in the society. Year three indicates that the island has developed into a functional representative democracy and is rather progressive in terms of representation and equality.
The change from autocracy to democracy is one that often faces a lot of conflict as autocratic leaders are not always willing to lose absolute power. In the case of Saboc, the Lawyer was well-respected and open to change. He had enough confidence in his ability and in the voters to vote for him that he agreed to adapt to a representative democracy in order to improve relations with a far more developed society. The island addressed representation concerns of the people and are focused on improving the lives of the Islanders in terms of equality and economic prosperity. The transition of the island proves to be successful and promotes positive change for the people of Saboc.
There has been widespread concern about how to explain the occurrence of wartime rape in the years since it has successively been used as a last-resort weapon of war. In the years since the advent of the first instances of war in any civilization, reports of mass rapes have been reported with succession, with feminist scholars, human rights organizations, scientists and even journalists begging to seek a viable solution to this formidable scourge. While some researchers argue that the occurrence of wartime rape, with its frequency, savagery and systematic organization during these times, is inherently entwined with the nature of the conflicts, most of them emphasize that the phenomenon has a timeless ubiquity that can be traced to the times of Homer and the raping of mythological Sabine women (Boehm 15). Researchers throughout history have also been united by the absence of attention in the national and international criminal courts for the perpetrators of these crimes, a serious dereliction of not only the social/moral but also the intellectual rights of those wronged. Most importantly, there is the growing consensus that the only way to try and understand the occurrence of wartime rape as a weapon of war is to understand and appreciate the factors and conditions that promote it. As this paper tries to address, the occurrence of wartime rape in the Democratic Republic of Congo was done purely as a means of increasing the militia’s influence in the warring regions, as a last resort means after every other war tactic had failed to bear fruit. Militias and other warring factions often use rape as a means of demoralizing and degrading their enemies, sneaking back and taking refuge in their already beaten foes.
As it is with most African conflicts, the situation in the Democratic Republic of Congo has much to do with the legacy of the nation as well as the political backdrops of colonialism. Since the violent imposition of the Belgian colonial rule in 1885, calling the nation the Congo Free State, there have been many killed in the nation, with most of the murders being so grotesque and monstrous that people have literary lost touch with humanity (chopped limbs and body parts). These conflicts and clashes that were registered in this far too marginalized African country were described as the most monstrous fights in history within the African continent, with registered adversity being so catastrophic that they literary affected the entire spheres (economic, political, social, traditional) of life of the affected people.
The crisis that went down in the DRC was unswervingly linked to the Rwandan genocide and the Interahamwe militias that were in a major way to blame for the genocide just crossed the borders into Congo causing their action there in 1994 and have never left. As time went by, inhabitant rape become a regular thing making instrument to attach the civilians increasing its levels from 20% in 2004 to about 75% registered rape in 2008. It soon became an ordinary thing in different areas especially in the eastern province bearing a nickname for it as “the ground zero of rape” (Boehm 30).
The rape cases increased affecting hundreds of thousands of girls children and women, and the most unfortunate thing is the people that were expected to protect the civilians, as the armed combats, were the ones that were terrorizing the community by assaulting their women. When it come to the point that the law enforcers were the ones assaulting the civilians, rape in Congo was soon declared rape is a weapon of war. New data information suggests that rape by the combatants and other law enforcers was declining mainly in the eastern side of Congo and more commonly in the other areas. As time went by, there was a diverse drift indication that the felonies have distorted their habits all for the worst behaviour. As the figure of resident perpetrators increased rape in the country was seen as more than a problem of warfare.
Speculation has it that the poor rehabilitation and the deprived reintegrated combats are playing a major role in the molestation of women. With men that have left the hostile rebel group, they have secretly continued to perpetrate crime and different kinds of felonies, directing them to the enduring of the war while they were still in the forces. Multiple humanitarian organizations have reported that the number of women exposed and those that give information about their encounter with the military has enormous increased. This does not mean that the civilian rape consequently decreased, unlike the expectations of many it did go up.
During this period of the genocide in DRC, rape had become the main instrument of war, playing the role of a bullet in a gun. Unlike in these days’ wars and battles that the mindset of rape has cooled down, a few years earlier that scenario was like a way of life they had to endure and a memory that never left their mind. It has been realized that one other major reason that there has been an increase in civilian rapes is due to the collapsed social structures that bonded and make the constitution of the community. The war displaced very many leaders demolishing these set configurations that make the society exist in peace. Though it is said that “We hear from both men and women that it’s no longer easy to enforce social mores” (Card 25).
With this large-scale involvement of the Congolese militia, more casualties and even more problems at the local homes were experiencing. The then Congolese President, though he had all the power to put a stop to the suffering, was too arrogant and concerned with his public image, refusing to end the war for fear of reprisal back home. As the pressure to end the war rose, he chose not to run for a second term, essentially handing over the “hot potato” to his successor (Card 25). Top Congolese commander charged with the assault in Congo, General Laurent Nkunda, was faced with the predicament of having in his charge an army full of young men, ready and eager to engage in full combat bloodbaths. However, the enemy did not present a full-frontal attack and as such, the Congolese army men had to lay in wait, hiding in the bushes, hoping to catch some action. As time went by, drugs and other stimulants were made available to the army personnel from some of the local sources and soon, morale in the camps began to fall. Back home, heavy public resistance was mounting as the majority of the citizens did not see any reason for furthering the suffering of both the army personnel and the Congolese locals. By 2006, most of the Congolese militia had been pulled out from the region after the truce negotiated on January 27th of the same year (Boehm 30). The absence of the US military paved the way for the easy success of the Southern Congolese region over the South. Though official statistics are vague, it is believed that that the war caused the death of about 2.5 million Congolese militia and civilians, with an estimated 900,000 reported cases of rape and caused about 500,000 childbirths from the rapes and 300,000 prostitutes as the rape victims were commonly ostracized from the community (Boehm 30).
As the war wore on and the Congolese army feared that they would not be able to win, systematic rape and sexual violence against women was often used as a weapon in a bid to ostracize them from society thus creating disunity and conflicts within the families and making it easier for the United States army to conquer them. The terms wartime rape, commonly used interchangeably with mass wartime rape, is used to describe a mass increase in the number of rapes, perpetrated by soldiers, in levels that are not consistent with those witnessed during times of peace. According to General Laurent Nkunda, “there would unquestionably be some raping,” (Boehm 30) where rape was by the army GIs (informally General Infantry) was seen as a standard operating procedure (SOP). On being questioned by a reporter about the occurrence of the rapes in the Congolese Eastern region of Buni, the 34th platoon squad leader said that “That’s an everyday affair… you can nail just about everybody on that–at least once” (Boehm 32). Another GI testifying to the Winter Soldier Investigation said that “This wasn’t just one incident; this was the first one I can remember. I know of 10 or 15 such incidents at least,” (Boehm 34) a clear indication of the level of rapes that occurred in the region during those few years. In the words of a Congolese civilian (Boehm 30),
“When we fought in earnest, with lethal weapons, we went to the help of our friends also. We burnt houses, slashed banana trees, tore the aprons of women off and raped them, axed big pigs, broke down fences; we did everything. We carried on until the place was empty of resources…. When we left our women behind and went out to fight, they were in danger. Men came to find them…”
Even in all this, very few GIs were arrested for the rapes that they committed in the region. Even though rape is seen as a crime both in the eyes of the international law (under the Geneva Convention) and the Congolese Uniform Code of Military Justice, the perpetrators were rarely tried and, according to writer Susan Brownmiller in the book Against Our Will, only fifty-eight per cent of those tried got serious convictions (Brownmiller 17). There are varied justifications for the occurrence of rape during any war. The feminist theory, that explains the existence of wartime rapes as being a source of the need for men to exert their dominance over women as opposed to being crimes of sexual passion (Gottschall 130). Thus, according to the theory, the war rapists themselves are victims of “irresistible biological imperatives” that force them to vent out their frustrations, fears and insecurities on the most vulnerable of their kind (Guttschall 130). The theory explains the existence of misogynistic pressure building up in virtually all men, conditioning them to distrust, despise and need to dominate women they come across.
According to writer Jacqueline E. Lawson in her book, The Misogyny of the Vietnam War, “Raping a Congolese woman during the war became a hallmark of the guerrilla phase of the war” (Lawson 17). According to the writer, “young Congolese males, intent on asserting their superiority, their potency, their manhood, (and by extension their country’s)… raping a woman in a combat zone is something a man ‘has’ to do, ‘needs’ to do, has the ‘right’ to do” (Lawson p.18). The writer explicitly states that it is especially in the Congolese culture of the men to have a natural predisposition to misogyny and to want to express their control and dominance of women citing that, for the most part, the rapes that took place in the DRC were “part of war because rape is a part of male-centered culture” (Brownmiller 33). It is worth noting that most of the sources of information into the context of the rapes that occurred during the war were not the victims, as most of them were murdered post-rape, but instead, it is the Congolese men who are the representatives of a hegemonic culture of misogyny and dominance.
DRC’s cases of rape as conducted by the Congolese militia were a clear display of violence, subjugation and male sexual desire-motivations requisite of the feminist theory of wartime rape explanations. In the 1986 James Henry’s novel, The DRC Story, based on the true story of a Congolese soldier, who at one time holds up a gun in the air and tells his platoon members
“This is my weapon [raising his gun] This is my gun [clutching his crotch] This is for fighting[gun], This is for fun [crotch]” (Henry 34).
However, the very fact that the Congolese were losing the war and thus necessitating a change in fighting tactics suggests a diversion from a total conclusion of the feminist theory. The actions of sexual violence depicted by the Congolese soldiers can highly be attributed to the soldier’s failure to discriminate sexuality from gender. Their misogynistic and other main depreciation acts against all the Congolese women that help in protecting them and are sturdily reflective of a culture that is in a position to enjoy masculinity and a scheme in which they appreciate the male gender dominating the rest of the community (Brownmiller 38). These approaches however are not fundamentally a result of the mere biological distinction that exists between the female and the male in society. Rather, misogyny is a socially and culturally cultivated reflection of a society that dictates the lives of both men and women. The feminist theory is based on the misogynistic attitudes of men and their willful attempts to exert their dominance against women under the chaotic conditions of war. Thus to prevent a future repeat of similar events, peer education into the equality of men and women, especially amongst the Western cultures, should be encouraged thus diffusing some of the potent dominance traits possessed by the soldiers (Brownmiller 39). There is also the need to view any sexual acts against women not merely as sexual offences but as crimes directed towards the entire gender.
The term wartime rape, as it is employed in literature, does not indicate the isolated examples of rape of the individual warring fighters that are involved in the factions involved in the fights. Rather, it is interchangeably used with Mass wartime rape that is used to indicate the distinct patterns of the occurrence of rape by individual soldiers and militia, at rates that are typically increased in comparison to those that prevail during peacetime. As there are typically no prevailing available statistics that provide this information, with regards to the reluctance of the informants to come forward, there is an excepted increase in the numbers and their prevalence.
Works cited
Boehm, Charles. Hierarchy in the forest: The evolution of egalitarian behaviour. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2008. Print.
Brownmiller, Samson. Against Our Will: Men, Women Rape. New York, NY; Simon and Schuster. 2004.
Card, Timothy. Rape as a Weapon of War. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2008. Print.
Guttschall, John. Explaining Wartime Rape. The Journal of Sex Research. Research Library Core, 2004, p.129-136.
Henry, James. The DRC Story. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill/Irwin Publishing Co., 2009.
Lawson, Jones. The Misogyny of the Vietnam War. Mahwah: University of Iowa Press, 2010.
Recent regional conflicts and military actions affected the global community, forcing a large number of people to become refugees. Forced to escape the place of violence, these people move to different territories, usually without resources to support themselves. The refugee crisis in the Democratic Republic of Congo is one example of how refugees suffer because of poor healthcare access and the inability to provide for themselves. The global community has to create a response strategy to help refugees reintegrate into society and support their adaptation to new living conditions.
The conflict in Congo has been an ongoing issue for many years, yet the crisis faced by the refugees has not been addressed adequately. According to BBC, Congo has been the center of “Africa’s world war” (“DR Congo country profile,” 2019, para. 1). However, state officials do not appear to have a clear strategy for mitigating military action or helping the refugees. According to the CIA Factbook, the Democratic Republic of Congo has vast natural resources (“Democratic Republic of the Congo,” 2020). However, the inhabitants of the state cannot benefit from these resources because of corruption and military conflict. Therefore, the refugee crisis is an issue of political and military nature, requiring a multidimensional approach.
Congo’s example showcases the issues regions with unstable political and social environment’s face. CIA even recommends the United States citizens to reconsider a decision to visit Congo because of the ongoing civil unrest that poses a threat to both foreigners and locals (“Democratic Republic of the Congo,” 2020). Moreover, the refugees are facing additional difficulties because of Ebola outbreaks and the inability to access healthcare services. This type of disease can spread quickly across the population and affect a large number of people, making access to healthcare a priority in refugee camps.
Refugees cannot access many of the essential services and take advantage of opportunities. As was mentioned, in Congo, the refugee crisis coincides with Ebola outbreaks, and the refugee population is especially vulnerable to the disease. Refugees usually leave their homes out of fear because of violence, which forces them to flee as fast as possible. As a result, they can lose connections to their community, children can no longer go to school, and their parents are unable to go to work. Moreover, for people who rely on growing their own food, such displacements affect their ability to have adequate nutrition. Therefore, they are deprived of the basics and live with uncertainty because they do not know if they will be able to return home.
International non-profit organizations try to relieve the suffering of refugees. According to BBC, “some militias fight on in the east, where a large United Nations force is struggling to keep the peace” (“DR Congo country profile,” 2019, para. 15). Due to issues with rapid displacement and inability to support themselves, these people rely on the financial support and resources provided by organizations such as the UN, which are limited.
The global community does not have an effective way of responding to refugee crises. It is evident that other states cannot engage in the internal conflicts that happen in Congo unless the situation is threatening other countries as well. However, the community can find an effective way of helping the refugees, since, in recent years, the number of conflicts that force people to live their homes and run away has increased. If the conflicts continue, it is possible that other countries will face the problem of supporting foreign refugees as they move across borders to find safety.
To conclude, the global refugee crisis has to be addressed by developed states, to ensure that the struggles faced by refugees are relieved. Although the global community, for example, the UN, have shown some efforts aimed at helping the refugees in Congo, the crisis is more complex and required additional action. The experience gained from the refugee crisis in this state showcases a need for a worldwide response strategy to the refugee crisis.
Terrorism has become one of the acute problems of our time, as a hard-to-control manifestation of cruelty and aggression. Usually, terrorism results from extreme dissatisfaction with the foreign or domestic (less often) policies of a country. The legal definition of the term is still ambiguous, but the best definition is considered to be the achievement of ideological, political, economic, or religious goals by violent means. Although the problem is quite acute, there are many measures, regulations, laws, and units to combat terrorism today. One of these is the Diplock Commission which was set up to reinforce existing measures to control and combat terrorism. This paper aims to analyze how the Diplock Commission was set up to look at ways of dealing with the legal aspects of controlling terrorism in a democratic society.
The Northern Ireland Emergency Provisions Act, passed in 1973, gives the security forces the ability to bring the terrorists before court. It also ensures safety and integrity, covering all the controversial legal issues (Spindlove & Simonsen, 2017). Thus, terrorist offenses were listed as “scheduled offenses,” and the measures served the security services well. Judges had to try scheduled offenses sitting alone, with more than the right of appeal. Unless the High Court granted the bail, it was prohibited, with strict conditions attached. Security forces had extended powers for search and seizure, moreover, one could hold a person on arrest without a warrant for seventy-two hours. The onus of proof was reversed for those arrested for explosives and weapons to prove their innocence.
Nationalists, Republicans, and civil liberty organizations opposed the introduction of “Diplock Courts.” Nonjury trials were established in response to witnessing intimidation by paramilitary groups. At its peak, there was more than 300 trial per year that were held without a jury. The government technically abolished Diplock courts in 2007, however, nonjury trials can still be held if there is a risk of jurors’ intimidation. Speaking about how it works in the context of a democratic society, one may notice that this was not a reaction to a violation of human rights, which is contradictory to democracy. Thus, in 2000 Terrorism Act was established, which reformed much of the mechanisms and powers dealing with terrorism. The act extended the definition of terrorism; thus, it also included intimidation of the public, influencing the government, and advancing a political, ideological, or religious cause.
Moreover, endangering a person’s life, involving serious violence against the person or damaging the property, and creating a serious threat to public health became also considered terrorism. This act was further complemented by the Anti-terrorism Crime and Security Act of 2001, which addressed terrorism and foreign nationals (Spindlove & Simonsen, 2017). Although, civil rights movements opposed provisions of these acts, especially the points where the burden of proof is reserved in suspected terrorism cases. The basic principle of the Diplock Commission is trial with an only judge, thus, minimizing the threat of intimidation or attack. It seems to be an effective method of dealing with legal aspects of controlling terrorism since there were fewer possibilities for suspects to undertake crushing methods.
To conclude, one should mention that all the methods aiming to minimize the impact of offender groups seem to be controversial as it is not beneficial for some individuals. Similarly, the Diplock Courts were perceived debatably, despite some cases of child rights abuse by paramilitary groups. In some cases, children and entire families were banished from the area and moved to other regions of Britain.
Reference
Spindlove, J., & Simonsen, C. (2017). Terrorism today: The past, the players, the future. (6th ed.). Pearson.
President Obama once noted that the Taliban’s momentum had been crashed down in Afghanistan. As a matter of fact, the Obama administration noted with concern that his government was already in the process of withdrawing the US troops from Afghanistan because the pacification process was almost being concluded (Joscelyn & Roggio, 2012). However, it is interesting to note that similar utterances and affirmations have been echoed in the past by most of the western powers that have had long term interests in the developments taking place in Afghanistan. In particular, the officials in the Obama administration have regularly made such statements. This also explains the reason why the US troops in Afghanistan are supposed to clear from this war-torn country by 2014.
We may not refute the fact that the Afghan surge made crucial steps towards the southern regions of the nation. Even before the onset of this surge, startling gains had already been made by the Taliban and close allied forces. As a result, the Taliban forces managed to seize Kandahar and Helmand territories that they had lost earlier. It is vital to mention that several parts of the country are still in control of the insurgency contrary to the popular notion that they are only concentrated in the southern parts of Afghanistan (Joscelyn & Roggio, 2012). The grand question still remains to be whether the insurgency will succeed or fail in spite of the heavy presence of the US and UN troops.
Despite the fact that we can tentatively present an argument that towards the south the surge was successful, it is vital to recall that other parts of the country did not receive a similar counterinsurgency attack. From this perspective, it is undeniable that the UN and US troops have not fully broken the Taliban’s momentum. Therefore, we may as well argue that the insurgency has higher chances of succeeding than failing. Unless a thorough counterattack is uniformly carried out in other parts of the country, it may prove to be extremely difficult to streamline the activities of the Taliban insurgency.
In order to reasonably weigh the war effort as well as its overall impact, it is perhaps instrumental to take stock of the events before the emergence of the Taliban movement and how the rebellion has always conducted itself in the warfront. Information obtained from the Coalition fatalities per annum, crucial data gathered from the National Counterterrorism Center as well as data obtained from the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) have been used in this analysis (Galula, 2006).
The Taliban-led insurgency still has the potential of causing serious mayhem throughout Afghanistan according to the data obtained from the above reports. In spite of the fact that the above resources are not harmonious in terms of the contents reported, they still have a converging conclusion that the Taliban insurgency is far from over. Each of the resources measures the degree of violence using different criteria. Most importantly, one of the outstanding weaknesses of these resources is that the insurgent’s capability to take full control of a territory has not been measured even though it is a vital aspect that can be used to determine the success or failure rate of such a movement (Joscelyn & Roggio, 2012). For example, it is historically understood that before the close of 2001, the group used to operate without the insurgency label even though it was a relatively powerful force in Afghanistan.
Hence, the effectiveness of this insurgency group has been measured by the limited available statistics that may not fully take into account all the parameters of success or failure. The big picture of the outright ability of this insurgency may not be visualized on account of the limited studies on violence that have been carried out in the recent past. In fact, if the US and United Nations’ troops are compelled to rely on such paltry data, it may significantly mislead the entire operation. As already mentioned, the Taliban insurgency has better chances of succeeding in future than it is currently perceived (United Nations Office on Drug and Crime, 2009).
Due to lack of readily available and reliable data, the Taliban’s command structure and its cohesiveness have not been gauged by the resources at hand. For instance, does this insurgence have the ability to train new leadership structure as well as new fighters who can be deployed readily? As a matter of fact, executing the ring leaders may not be a surety that the group has been disengaged. In spite of several years of continuous attacks against the Taliban insurgency, it is apparent that the group has the ability to regenerate itself into vibrant leadership structure and command systems that are capable of fighting back viciously.
Moreover, the Quetta Shura’s top leadership cadre has not even been attacked all these years bearing in mind that they are largely stationed in neighboring countries like Pakistan. The leadership structure is also well organized with various levels of command structure that have been adequately trained to succeed the immediate seniors in case of any eventualities (Collier, 2009). Reports also indicate that the losses incurred (in terms of killed or captured soldiers) in Afghanistan have always been compensated by the Taliban leadership that is operating in Pakistan. Hence, soldiers who are killed or captured are regularly replaced in order to replenish the team.
Summary of findings
It has been indicated that the degree of violence has worsened in Afghanistan than it was before the beginning of the surge. Even if violence is measured using data obtained from ISAF and the Defense Department, the same result is still attained. It appears that the increasing incidences of violence have been aggravated by the presence of peace keeping troops. There have always been attacks and counter attacks from both sides of the divide. Any gains made by ISAF and the Defense Department have often been revered by the Taliban insurgency. Since the current overall incidents of attacks are higher than the past, the information provided by the military that the attacks are declining is indeed misleading (Joscelyn & Roggio, 2012).
In 2011, substantial growth in the IED attacks was observed. It has also been noted that the rate is higher than it used to be before the onset of the surge. The campaigns of the Taliban insurgents are usually executed using the IRDs. Most of the attacks targeted at the civilians are mainly facilitated by IEDs.
From the above analysis, it can be concluded that the Taliban insurgency will continue to launch successful attacks in future as opposed to the notion that they have been weakened (Collier, 2009). There are new leadership structures and commands that are inaugurated on a regular basis in order to replace those who have been captured or executed by the US and UN command troops.
References
Collier, P. (2009). Wars, Guns, and Votes: Democracy in Dangerous Places. New York: Harper-Collins Publishers.
Galula, D. (2006). Counterinsurgency Warfare: Theory And Practice. London: Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc.