top of page
  • bluesky
  • Facebook
  • YouTube

#3. Wouldn’t An Invading Force Violently Repress Obstructionist Nonviolent Defenders?

9 minutes ago
2 min read

Richard Sandbrook


They might do so. However, they will feel constrained because (a) reporters and resisters will broadcast worldwide the graphic details of violent repression of harmless civilians, and (b) the commanders cannot be sure their troops will obey such a command.


Consider first how people will react to the spectacle of the beating and shooting of unarmed people who are simply defending their right to be free in their own country. It will mobilize active resistance by outraged Canadians who were formerly passive, though sympathetic, spectators. It will provoke condemnation of the invader as a rogue state both internationally and in the homeland of the aggressor. We can expect widespread protests by Americans, if the US is the aggressor. Major global institutions, including the UN General Assembly and the European Union, will vehemently object.


And how will the troops and their field commanders respond to the command to repress? Soldiers are trained to respond with lethal force against an armed enemy whose goal is to kill them and destroy their supply lines and morale. They are not trained to beat and kill harmless women, children and men who only want to retain their sovereignty. In the case of the Americans, the soldiers will share a language and similar culture with most Canadians, if not friendships or even kinship with the defenders. The soldiers will wonder, following defenders engaging verbally with the soldiers, what they are doing there at all. Some may desert; others will be hesitant or slow to obey orders to repress. Rebellions are possible.


In short, violent repression often backfires. It can leave the defending forces in a stronger position than they formerly held. Now aggressors may face an enlarged resistance, a demoralized military and vocal US-based and international condemnation.


Richard Sandbrook is Vice-President of Science for Peace and Professor Emeritus of Political Science at the University of Toronto.

 

Comments


E-7705 

An important e-petition about Canada peacekeepers headcount

Science for Peace believes the UN peacekeeping mission program is an important tool for minimizing conflicts around the world. Guided by impartiality and undertaken only with the consent of warring parties, missions under this program are critical in the efforts to transition violent societies to peace.

 

We know that Canada has a long history of supporting these missions and has earned a significant reputation for its expertise in this area. Thus we have been dismayed by the fact that the actual number of Canadian peacekeepers has been drastically reduced over the last decade. Despite the paucity of our country’s contribution, we know that Canada is nonetheless recognized for its leadership and know-how.

 

We want to dramatically enlarge the contingent of Canadian Peacekeepers and play our part in the worthy project of reducing violence in this turbulent world. As well, in light of ongoing changes in Peacekeeping technology, we believe Canada should invest majorly in tech training and support for our Peacekeepers, and at the same time furnish such skill development to countries less able to provide this for their own contingents.

 

To focus public attention on this critical issue, we have created an e-petition to the government and are seeking your support.

Please have a look and sign e-7705 if you agree.

 

www.ourcommons.ca/petitions/en/Petition/Details?Petition=e-7705

 

 

Gilles Fecteau

Treasurer, Science for Peace

​

​

​

​

​

Science for Peace

A Peace Education NGO

Based in Toronto

 

​355-15 King’s College Circle
Toronto, Ontario M5S 3H7 Canada

Follow Us:

Email: info@scienceforpeace.org

Registered Charity: 893240861 RR 0001

  • BlueSky
  • X
  • Facebook
  • YouTube

Get Monthly Updates

bottom of page