Let me start by saying that one of my colleagues was brutally murdered months ago and I know how the blood boils in such instances. In fact, I would have joined any operation to teach the suspects a lesson, despite any casualties. I still remember my strong desire to vent beyond my words. I therefore do not disrespect those emotions in anyway today. I have not ‘moved on’, but here is a reflective piece.
Before then, another disclaimer: I do not side with the killing of security personnel. I condemn that in its totality. To misconstrue what I write below as a support for the killing of security officers will be your own misunderstanding.
Secondly, I hereby write in principle and expect such principles to be applied as rules in any case. This piece of writing is to stir our thinking on two matters: the matter of military or police brutality especially as a form of revenge and the direct intervention of the military or any other security service in response to an offense against a colleague, including killing. Apply the opinions shared herein to any situation if it fits.
WHY WE MUST THINK AGAIN
It is absolutely wrong to think that because one civilian committed a heinous crime, any agency, including the Military, under a democracy has a right to brutalize and terrorize a society in revenge. Respectfully, that makes no sense. Think again.
It is absolutely wrong to think that because you were trained under conditions that did not really respect some of your rights, you are justified in unilaterally and illegally denying others their rights either as a Service or a Force man/woman. Respectfully, that makes no sense. Think again.
It is absolutely wrong to think that the Military is unaccountable to anyone because they are the Military. It is against the law of reasoning to assume that under a democracy. There may be difficulties in getting them to account. But that cannot be justified in the name of “Military”.
Many of our colleagues unfortunately joined the forces or services with the childhood memories of what happens in movies. We still have those childhood views on who a soldier is and what they can do. We have not bothered to understand that even the soldier is under the law. We have become admirers of military oppression because we think it is a show of strength and power. When we see them jacked up and in action, we are excited as though it was a Rambo movie. That is why you cannot see any wrong in any action of theirs. All you can think is that these are soldiers and they are untouchable. They are on fire. This is not a movie scene. This is a democratic state. Think again.
Even in war, there are laws against war crimes. And read the description, WAR CRIMES. The Military is very aware of these laws that the ordinary man will not bother to learn about. And perhaps, their statement targeted international stakeholders who I believe are watching with great concern. The military is not beyond the law. That is why there is a thing as war crimes. Do not justify brutalities, even as casualties, when you see them; especially to the civil world. If you do, the explanation that we must allow it because they are “Military” is most problematic. Learn about the rule of law.
When angry soldiers respond to the killing of one of theirs and unfortunately revenge on mostly innocent citizens, call it so. At least, be tactful enough to hide it under the guise of an intelligence-led operation that has excesses. Be tactful. Don’t be so insensitive towards your civilian family and friends and proudly call it a revenge. He who seeks revenge, they say, must dig two graves.
WHY AM I ANGRY
I am angry because you are thinking very narrowly, if you say that everyone in a notorious community must be whipped when the unfortunate happens to a serviceman or force man in that community. Let me explain.
There are people in such communities who have been victims of those criminalities perhaps similar to or even beyond what you are currently concerned with. If you have any patriotic and noble concern, it should be to sanitize the city in a way that the innocent ones stop being tormented on a daily basis. Your noblest action is certainly not to bundle the victims with the culprits under a misconstrued military jargon. Your instructors need to do more to explain to you what that jargon means.
The same victims who have been crying for redemption from the hand of these hard criminals cannot become the victims of your late “enforcement”. Perhaps, if you were a serious security service or force, your role would have been played in deleting or managing such red zones more effectively. One reggae song describes the innocent people, They are “the victims every time.”
Someone told me that the even the innocent ones deserve the brutalities because they live in that city. Really? Deserve? Deserve what? Deserve beatings, drinking gutter water, sleeping in gutters? They deserve it? For what? For staying in a slum? Okay. You are very right. You think you don’t live in a slum so it’s ok? Your country is actually a slum and you all deserve the wicked treatment of your politicians. Deserve, you say!
I FAULT THE MILITARY LESS
I am not even as disturbed about the actions of the Military as I am about the clapping from bystanders. If the bystanders who should separate a fight, however justified, get entertained by it; there will soon be a funeral. I can understand that angry soldiers may take the law into their hands. Any angry person can attempt such. I can even understand that the Military High Command will endorse such actions happily or reluctantly. I can understand the anger that boils and the possible resentment for anyone and anything related to the murder of their brother.
What I don’t understand is how bystanders who can separate the fight, at least, after a few thunderous slaps, seem to be urging the Military on. Dangerous! If you happen to be bended towards the military, people like me are only separating the fight by condemning both the lawless killing of a soldier and the lawless beating of residents. We are not on any side. Don’t war with us.
Next time, it may be your relative or community on the other side. And you will also wish the fight ended.
THE DANGER WITH THE TACTICS
IF that action was not strategic or intelligence-led but just an emotional response as many suspect and profess, it is not a very sustainable tangent for the Armed Forces of a country virtually surrounded by terrorist threats.
If the State’s Armed Forces can release scarce resources to show force in an area just because one thing happened, terrorists may stage that one thing as a decoy. While you send your limited logistics out to that sight to “shut down” a slum, they would have been a step ahead of you if not behind you. The real havoc you should prevent would have happened.
This is why you must not encourage the emotional deployment of the Military. Emotions are not evil unless they ride above reasoning at the wrong time. Don’t consider those on this side as indifferent towards what you feel. It takes the heart and the brain to be healthy. A heartless brain and a brainless heart are both not desired.
GOODWILL WITH COMMUNITY
No Army is strong enough not to need the civilian community. The Army and the people who Armed them need each other to be alive together. The enemy is not the community. The enemy is not civilians or the Army. The enemy is the criminals. All armed institutions have been armed because of this enemy called criminals.
The We vs. Them approach by civilians or the Military (and other services) will not profit the country. It is not going to deal with the actual criminals. We must not lose sight of what we are fighting and who we are fighting. In a frustrating fight, your vision can shake for a moment. But always reset and target appropriately. Otherwise, you will be chasing the wind.
It is both braver and more intelligent to deal with the enemy rather than beat around the bush. Beating around the bush, however forcefully, may not clear the core issue effectively and efficiently. If we let anger lead, these “operations” will be nine-day wonders. Sorry, nine-day terrors! If we let wisdom lead, we will find more sustainable ways of dealing with the crime zone, not just reactively for our sake but for the sake of all well-meaning residents of the area and citizens at large.
We can have anger, but anger should not have us. Citizens as a whole must respect security officers to the extent that they are respectable. But whether you respect them or not, you cannot take the law into your hands against them.
Those who pretend every civilian must beaten or lynched when a soldier is down do not think that every soldier must be beaten or lynched when one of them wickedly kills a civilian. Is this the animal farm of equals where some are more equal than others?
THE WISDOM OF THE MILITARY
The wisdom in shutting down a place where a soldier was severely and publicly offended is to send “fear” down the spine of people. It is to announce that the single soldier has an army behind him and touching him is like calling for war. Such operation is not just targeted at the criminals but those who saw the crime happen. The long-term or secondary effect is that others should not think it is okay to beat a soldier or police officer just because he is walking alone.
The effect on onlookers is supposed to be secondary especially if the culprits are still within reach and alive. The primary lesson should be taught to the culprits, not the others.
But if you create a trend where the innocent suffer and the culprit escape, you rather empower the culprits and create more of them. In such a situation, criminals will always set their community members up for beatings (they don’t care about them anyway!) and watch the news like Netflix. The focus must be sharper. YOU GET THE CRIMINAL AND YOU DEAL WITH THEM TO TEACH ONLOOKERS A LESSON.
If in your quest to get the criminal, onlookers are justifiably affected (especially those who are also criminals in other ways), you are doing well. The ghetto will respect next time. If you even harm innocent people who were in your way, it may be accepted as long as there is a greater good and the level of harm is justifiable. But your mentality should always be to use the culprit to teach the biggest lesson.
The success of such operations in a civilized setting therefore is scaled in this order:
- Get the culprit
- Sweep other criminals with them
- Let onlookers know you are in charge (send a strong message)
You are not more successful because you beat more people, especially innocent ones. That’d be beastly than human, and signal a lack of self-control rather than a show of strength or love for an affected colleague. Even the barbaric way was not exactly so. That tactic was for war. And our military cannot war against their own country. If they ever attempt such, calm heads should be entreating them to stand down or be measured; not encouraging them instead.
ADVICE TO CRIME ZONES AND CRIMINALS
One may justifiably deserve the anger of a lion if he steps on its tail. All we have said here is that a human differs from a lion because of our intelligence and self-control. A lion will not pick out the one who stepped on its tail. It may devour all it sees. Humans must be more reasonable than lions.
But there is an animal aspect to every human that anger can bring out. And if you have any game of stepping on tails, it is foolish to see a lion and still dare.
ADVICE TO CIVILIANS
I am even afraid to advice civilians because they are often the victims everytime. Soldiers want a special treatment when one of theirs die. But haven’t civilians suffered at the hands of criminals more? If civilians are not justified in mob action against criminals, why should others be?
I am about to advise civilians to give out information for the arrest of criminal elements in such cases. But how many times have civilians suffered attacks even unto death because the system could not protect them when they gave out very sensitive information?
ADVICE TO MYSELF
We live in a jungle and maybe your ideas can only be read and shelved. But no matter how long you live in the jungle, take care that the bushes do not grow over your brains. Clear thinking is very necessary, even for the jungle life.