class: center, middle, inverse, title-slide # Dirty Wars ## Human Dignity and Political Community in War and National Security ### Jack McDonald --- class: inverse # Outline .pull-left[ > Dirty wars are conflicts where one or more parties denies the political, legal, and/or moral status/standing of their opponents. Why might that be an inherently bad thing to do? ] .pull-right[ - Justice - Human Dignity - Denial of Dignity - Rights in Context - Conclusions and Connections ] ## Main Points How do concepts of human dignity, human rights, status in war, and membership of a political community intersect in war/national security? Thinking about how and why human life is worth something, and when, gives us a better perspective on why some wars are classed as dirty, and others defined as "clean" War and national security are contexts that shape the interpretation of rights by states (and others!) ??? --- class: inverse # Part 1: Justice ??? --- # The Problem of Justice > Certainly there are historical moments when armed struggle is necessary for the sake of human freedom. But if dignity and self respect are to be the outcomes of that struggle, it cannot consist of terrorist attacks upon children. Michael Walzer, _Just and Unjust Wars_ > The rebel's weapon is the proof of his humanity. For in the first days of the revolt you must kill: to shoot down a European is to kill two birds with one stone, to destroy an oppressor and the man he oppresses at the same time: there remain a dead man, and a free man; the survivor, for the first time, feels a national soil under his foot. Jean-Paul Satre, _Preface to Frantz Fanon's Wretched of the Earth_ ??? --- # Engaged Philosophy > One, apparently plausible, answer, is to address real-world problems by working out how to solve them by ‘applying’ a moral or political theory, thereby providing ‘philosophical foundations’ for social and public policy. I shall call this the ‘applied philosophy’ approach. > The ‘applied philosophy’ approach supposes that it is possible to give the philosopher a distinctive, even privileged role in the policy process, as the formulator of the theory that provides a moral foundation for public policy. My arguments here, however, suggest that this is myth. On my alternative ‘engaged’ model, there are no foundations in this sense. The philosopher identifies relevant values, in the context of a problem, current facts, past history, and contemporary alternatives. There is a certain amount of sifting and balancing to articulate the moral dilemmas underlying the messy public debate, and then the identification and evaluation of possible solutions, before making recommendations, that may or may not have any effect on actual policy. I have also suggested that there is an inbuilt conservatism in the process, in that any proposals that are distant from the status quo are unlikely to be considered real possibilities, which also diminishes the role of the free-thinking philosopher. Jonathan Wolff, _Method in philosophy and public policy: applied philosophy versus engaged philosophy_ ??? --- # Justice: A Working Definition > "How should one live?" – the generality of _one_ already stakes a claim. The Greek language does not even give us _one_: the formula is impersonal. The implication is that something relevant or useful can be said to anyone, in general, and this implies that something general can be said, something that embraces or shapes the individual ambitions each person may bring to the question "how should I live?" Bernard Williams, _Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy_ > To ask whether a society is just is to ask how it distributes the things we prize – income and wealth, duties and rights, powers and opportunities, offices and honors. A just society distributes these good in the right way; it gives each person his or her due. The hard questions begin when we ask what people are due, and why. Michael Sandel, _Justice_ ??? --- # Distributive and Egalitarian Justice Aspects - Individuals: How people are treated - Force: Justice as an enforceable obligation rather than charity - Impartiality: Uniformity of application over individuals - Agency: The possibility of altering the circumstances one way or the other Issues - Change: Conservation of traditions or revision towards an ideal? - Correction or distribution: Aiming to remedy injustice, or allocate social goods fairly? - Procedure and substance: Fair procedures, or aiming for a fair end-state? - Comparativity: Does fair allocation require reference to others, or is it about what is enough for an individual? Frames - Utilitarianism - Egalitarianism - Social contract theory ??? --- # Retributive Justice .left-33[ ![Eye for an Eye William Ian Miller cover](img/2020/eyeforeye.png) ] .right-33[ > But the white man is misjudging the times and he is underestimating the American so-called Negro because we’re living in a new day. Our people are now a new people. That old Uncle Tom-type Negro is dead. Our people have no more fear of anyone, no more fear of anything. We are not afraid to go to jail. We are not afraid to give our very life itself. And we’re not afraid to take the lives of those who try to take our lives. We believe in a fair exchange. > > We believe in a fair exchange. An eye for an eye. A tooth for a tooth. A head for a head and life for a life. If this is the price of freedom, we won’t hesitate to pay the price. Malcolm X, _Racial Separation_ ] ??? Desert - who deserves what and why Who may punish? Proportionality Consequentialism/deontology Malcolm X Speech: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYQjlLqSWB4 Malcolm X Speech text: https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/1963-malcolm-x-racial-separation/ --- # Injustice .large[ > I think that there is a lot to be gained philosophically by concetrating on the normality of injustice, and one of the gains might be that we achieve a better grasp of what is required in practice to operate in a way that works against it. Miranda Fricker, _Epistemic Injustice_ ] ??? --- class: inverse # Reflection Question .large[ What are the most significant cases of systemic injustice that you have encountered in debates about national security in your own country? ] ??? --- class: inverse # Part 2: Human Dignity ??? --- # Power and Value .pull-left[ ![The Third Man](img/2020/lime1.png) ] .pull-right[ ![The Third Man](img/2020/lime2.png) ] > Victims? Don't be melodramatic. Look down there. Tell me. Would you really feel any pity if one of those dots stopped moving forever? If I offered you twenty thousand pounds for every dot that stopped, would you really, old man, tell me to keep my money, or would you calculate how many dots you could afford to spare? Harry Lime, _The Third Man_ (1949) ??? --- # Dignity and Social Standing/Status > Until about 1830-1850, neither the English term "dignity," nor its Latin root _dignitas_, nor the French counterpart _dignité_, had any currency as meaning "the inherent or unearned worth of all persons." ...until little over a century ago, dignity connoted _social_ status of the kind associated with nobility, power, gentlemanly comportment, or preferment within the church - not some fundamental, unearned, equally shared _moral_ status among humans. Remy Debes, _Dignity: A History_ > Of all the glaring confusions in the search for the "precursors" of human rights, one must have pride of place. Far from being sources of appeal that transcended state and nation, the rights asserted in early modern political revolutions and championed thereafter were central to the construction of state and nation, and led nowhere beyond until very recently... For many, human rights today are simply a modern version of a longstanding universalistic or "cosmopolitan" faith... But the fact is that there have been many different and opposed universalisms in history, with each equally committed to the belief that humans are all part of the same moral group... Samuel Moyn, _The Last Utopia_ ??? Quote from page 1-2 --- # Social Status and Political Standing > Institutionalized dependency and servitude had been accepted without question in Western and non-Western cultures alike, from the dawn of recorded history until the modern historical era, and they have formed one of the basic institutions that have appeared in almost every culture. Earlier discussions of dependency, and more specifically slavery, where they occurred, were couched in terms of how individual slaves should be treated, who should be a slave, and how one could fall into or lose slave status, but not whether the institution itself should exist. > ...institutionalized coercive relationships, whether for profit or for some more overtly social purpose, were normal before the nineteenth century and have diminished rather dramatically since. David Eltis and Stanley L. Engerman, _Dependence, Servility, and Coerced Labor in Time and Space_ ??? Eltis/Engerman quote from page 3, Cambridge World History of Slavery, Vol.3 --- # Human Dignity .pull-left[ ![SS - Schutzstaffel(protection echelon) - Sturmbannfuehrer Dr. Sigmund Rascher (right) and Dr. Ernst Holzloehner(left) observe the reactions of a Dachau prisoner who has been immersed in a tank of ice water in an attempt to simulate the extreme hypothermia suffered by pilots downed over frigid seas.](img/2/dachau.jpg) ] .pull-right[ > The professional and scientific context of the day promoted eugenic and racist ideas within the framework of the academic milieu and curriculum of the medical and scientific community... Having defined the victims, science had created its own research subjects. The helpless human quarry incarcerated by the state was viewed by medical science as a unique opportunity for the kinds of research which under German law were not permitted even on animals. William E Seidelman, _Nuremberg lamentation_ ] ??? Article https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.313.7070.1463 - Congo - Armenian genocide - Holocaust --- # Human Rights > Human rights are rights inherent to all human beings, whatever our nationality, place of residence, sex, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, language, or any other status. We are all equally entitled to our human rights without discrimination. These rights are all interrelated, interdependent and indivisible. > > Universal human rights are often expressed and guaranteed by law, in the forms of treaties, customary international law , general principles and other sources of international law. International human rights law lays down obligations of Governments to act in certain ways or to refrain from certain acts, in order to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms of individuals or groups OHCHR .pic-60[ ![UN Declaration of Human Rights](img/2/undhr.png) ] ??? Absent in antiquity Natural law -> Natural Rights Human dignity -> Human Rights Human rights as a universal _thing_ Social and individual rights The obligations of states (and corporations?) --- # War after Universal Moral Worth > The armed conflict in Yemen has resulted in the largest humanitarian crisis in the world; parties to the conflict have killed and injured thousands of Yemeni civilians. According to the Yemen Data Project, more than 17,500 civilians were killed and injured since 2015, and a quarter of all civilians killed in air raids were women and children. More than 20 million people in Yemen are experiencing food insecurity; 10 million of them are at risk of famine. > Since March 2015, the coalition has conducted numerous indiscriminate and disproportionate airstrikes killing thousands of civilians and hitting civilian structures in violation of the laws of war, using munitions sold by the United States, United Kingdom, and others. Houthi forces have used banned antipersonnel landmines, recruited children, and fired artillery indiscriminately into cities such as Taizz, killing and wounding civilians, and launched indiscriminate ballistic missiles into Saudi Arabia. Human Rights Watch, _World Report 2020_ ??? https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2020/country-chapters/yemen --- class: inverse # Reflection Question .large[ Why do you think that states might resist the application in war of peacetime standards of human rights? ] ??? --- class: inverse # Part 3: Denial of Dignity ??? --- # Sympathy for the Devil? > In the face of such evil some people believe that they must assert, and others that they must deny, that even people who have done such deeds are sacred… They may say that even such people are infinitely precious, or that they are ends in themselves, or they may say, more simply, that even such people are owed unconditional respect, meaning, not that they are deserving of esteem, but that they are owed a kind of respect that is not conditional upon what they have done and that cannot be forfeited. Some will say that even the most terrible evildoers are owed this respect as human beings and that we owe it to them because we are human beings. That amounts to saying they remain our fellow human beings whatever they do. Many find that incomprehensible. They are likely to retort that if someone is to be treated or respected as a human being then they must behave like a human being. That seems to be sober common sense. Raimond Gaita, _Good and Evil: An Absolute Conception_ ??? Gaita- recognition of others as persons equal in possibility --- # Crimes Against Humanity > Against the deceit, fraud, robberies, arson, murder, slave-raiding, and general policy of cruelty of your Majesty’s Government to the natives, stands their record of unexampled patience, long-suffering and forgiving spirit, which put the boasted civilisation and professed religion of your Majesty’s Government to the blush… All the crimes perpetrated in the Congo have been done in your name, and you must answer at the bar of Public Sentiment for the misgovernment of a people, whose lives and fortunes were entrusted to you George Washington Williams - The ending of the slave trade in 19th century - King Leopold II and the Congo - The Armenian Genocide - The Holocaust ??? First use of the term crimes against humanity in the contemporary sense --- # Contours of Genocide > Many aborigines say that they were treated as 'sub-human'. To see why that is often not even slightly an exaggeration, one need only remember that sub-human treatment need not be cruel. It can vary from the unrelievedly brutal to the treatment some 'benevolent' slave owners gave to their slaves. It is consistent with sincere, romantic admiration for the 'nobility' of the people who are treated as sub-human. Raimond Gaita, _A Common Humanity_ > For some time, certainly in the thirties, and in some places, certainly in Western Australia and the Northern Territory, the absorption program expressed the horrifyingly arrogant belief that some peoples may eliminate from the earth peoples they believe to be less than fully human. Australian Human Rights Commission, _Bringing Them Home_ ??? Gaita quote from p.121 --- # The Act of Killing .pull-left[ ![The Act of Killing poster](img/2020/aok1.jpg) ] .pull-right[ ![The Act of Killing makeup shot](img/2020/aok2.jpg) ] > We crushed their necks with wood. We hung them. We strangled them with wire. We cut off their heads. We ran them over with cars. We were allowed to do it. And, the proof is we murdered people and were never punished. The people we killed, there's nothing to be done about it. They have to accept it. Maybe I'm just trying to make myself feel better, but it works: I've never felt guilty, never been depressed, never had nightmares. Adil Zulkadry ??? --- class: inverse # Reflection Question .large[ Are members of ISIS who have committed genocide, slavery, rape, and war crimes, still “owed unconditional respect”? What would you say to someone who would deny them such respect? ] ??? --- class: inverse # Part 4: Rights in Context ??? --- # Rights in Context > A central tenet of contextual integrity is that there are no arenas of life _not_ governed by _norms of information flow_, no information or spheres of life for which “anything goes.” Almost everything — things that we do, events that occur, transactions that take place — happens in a context not only of place but of politics, convention, and cultural expectation. These contexts can be as sweepingly defined as, say, spheres of life such as education, politics, and the marketplace or as finely drawn as the conventional routines of visiting the dentist, attending a family wedding, or interviewing for a job. Helen Nissenbaum, _Privacy as Contextual Integrity_ .left-66[ > There are no arenas of life fully separable from the key functions of government that are shaped by _norms of security_. These aspects of government concern can be sweepingly defined as security contexts, providing a logic to the intersection of public and private life in a number of different overlapping domains. Me. ] .right-66[ - Public Defence - Public Safety - Public Order - Public Health ] ??? --- # Rights in Context: Detention .pull-left[ ![Pic of Dachau/Gulag](img/7/dachau.jpeg) > We are slaves, deprived of every right, exposed to every insult, condemned to certain death, but we still possess one power, and we must defend it with all our strength for it is the last - the power to refuse our consent. Primo Levi, _If This Is a Man_ ] .pull-right[ ![Pic of Mau Mau Camps](img/7/maumau.jpg) ![Pic of Gulag archipelago](img/7/gulag.png) > Unlimited power in the hands of limited people always leads to cruelty. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, _The Gulag Archipelago_ ] ??? Flag detention as theme for next three weeks --- # War and Human Rights > Our culture has been permeated with law generally and human rights specifically to such a level that even those state acts that have hereto been considered as the ultimate expressions of sovereign prerogative have become exposed to human rights scrutiny, in public discourse as well as in the courts. We live in an age of rights, and the rhetoric of rights is no longer solely the province of increasingly aggressive lawyers and human rights activists, but is employed by policy makers and actors of all stripes. > > Hence, people complain to human rights bodies more frequently and they do so in situations undreamed of even fairly recently. If, for example, an international lawyer had predicted even just a decade or two ago that Saddam Hussein, of all people, would soon be lodging an application with the European Court of Human Rights, he would have been thought eccentric at best. Yet this is exactly what happened after the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and that particular case turned on the territorial scope of application of the European Convention. Marko Milanovic, _Extraterritorial Application of Human Rights Treaties: An Overview_ ??? --- # National Security as Context .pull-left[ ![Surveillance footage of Jean charles de Menezes prior to the Stockwell Shooting](img/2020/jcdm.jpg) Surveillance footage of Jean Charles de Menezes prior to the Stockwell Shooting, July 22nd 2005 ] .pull-right[ Counter terrorism provides a wealth of examples of how national security threats can impact individual rights via the passage of laws, or the actions of police/security services - Surveillance - Detention - Lethal incidents - Deradicalization ] ??? Order, Repression, and Rights --- class: inverse # Reflection Question .large[ Do you think rights exist independent of social circumstances, or do you think that the particular context of state action matters when examining the infringement of individual rights? Why? ] ??? --- class: inverse # Part 5: Conclusions and Connections ??? --- # Key Issues .large[ We live in a world where the idea of individual moral worth and rights are widespread, but the particular interpretation of these varies dramatically between political systems Wars where each human being is (supposedly) equal in worth is a novel phenomenon, and our understanding of its implications is changing rapidly over time Considering the difference between treating war/national security as a frame or as a context enables us to understand important differences in discussions about rights and security ] ??? --- # Key Questions .large[ If belonging to a political community is fundamental to war/national security, is it ever possible to arrive at a 'view from nowhere' on these topics? Can human rights, and human dignity, be considered separately from core political issues such as national security? Under what circumstances should a state be able to violate individual rights, and for what purposes? ] ???