Skip to main content

Resolving Asymmetric Conflicts

In a world which is getting more dangerous it is important to look at how conflicts can actually be resolved.

England has managed to avoid either a civil war or a revolution since 1688.  That is because people have accepted the constitutional settlement and that was a popular settlement.

From time to time there have been pressures for change.  Those have normally been resolved through essentially peaceful means including a referendum in Scotland and Wales.   The Northern Irish Peace process was much harder to resolve because of the violent incidents that occurred.

The reason violent incidents make conflicts harder to resolve is that they change the balance of a dispute from one which is to some extent rational to one which is driven by emotions and particularly the emotion of revenge.

Violent incidents that result in the deaths of innocent people always create more anger than incidents involving combatants.   This often creates a desire for revenge amongst the side of the dispute that has suffered from the deaths of their innocents as part of some atrocity.

In the Middle East, for example, the dispute has created a situation in which there are people on both sides of the conflict that desire revenge more than peace.  They may not wish to publicly state that, but politicians and anyone else who wishes to see peace need to recognise this.

Hence if we wish to resolve such conflicts which normally will require some compromise the top priority is to stop people killing each other and particularly prevent the deaths and maiming of non-combatants.  It may sound counter intuitive, but force may be required to achieve that.  The innocent, however, must be protected.  Unjust acts such as terrorism must be confronted.

In many ways International Humanitarian Law (the Geneva Conventions) has developed because of the recognition that this a route toward peace.

Similar issues arise in the conflict in Kashmir.  Top priority is to stop human rights abuses.  Without that happening any further resolution is very difficult.

This is why the suggestion by the Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell that "bombs"  ... "brought Britain to the negotiating table" are so dangerous.  It is important that groups such as Daesh recognise that atrocities will get them no-where.

It was a major error of judgment by Jeremy Corbyn to appoint him to one of the most senior posts in the Shadow cabinet.   It leads to a valid conclusion that the approach of Jeremy Corbyn as Prime Minister would be to create a situation in which terrorism is appeased rather than confronted.  That will lead to more terrorism.







Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.


I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…