The Stopping Function: Intervening In Active Violence

Stop Violence without Causing More Violence

How do we stop people who are hurting other people? Is it possible to stop them while at the same time preventing violence that may happen as a result of the stopping process itself?  Last week the prosecutor for the International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant for Sudan’s president, Omar al-Bashir, on charges of waging genocide and rape in Darfur.  This is the first time prosecutors have ever issued charges against a sitting head of state, a very high risk strategy indeed.

The international community is still ashamed of its inability to stop the genocide in Rwanda and its intervention in Bosnia came much too late.  These glaring failures led to the creation of the International Criminal Court as a permanent war crimes tribunal.

The Responsibility to Protect

The responsibility to protect doctrine, worked out with incredible care and thought by diplomats at the United Nations, includes circumstances under which military intervention would be necessary in the event of genocide.  In Sudan, over the past several years the government has made war on its own people, employing the murderous janjaweed milita.  Two and a half million people are now living in refugee camps. Part of what makes this conflict so complex is the fact China buys oil from the Sudanese government and would likely block any action by the UN the Security Council to arrest Bashir.

Do No Harm–Borrowing a Lesson from the World of Psychiatry

Can violent people be stopped safely? I am a psychiatric nurse and I work with violent people all the time. On psychiatric inpatient units we use a process to contain people who are out of control that we call a show of support.  The purpose is to keep everyone safe and to treat the violent person with dignity and respect.  Staff go through rigorous training to insure they can contain a patient safely without hurting the patient or themselves.

The most common way to stop violent people is the use the police. They have the authority to use lethal force to stop violent actors. But as we know, people project all kinds of negative stuff onto the police and sometimes the police are themselves seduced by the power of their weapons and their role.

It Gets Complicated at the International Level

At the international level there are multiple ways to try to stop violence: from economic sanctions to travel bans to no-fly zones.  However, when the leaders of a nation are sheltering terrorists or marauding militias, stopping violence, especially when it is covert, is enormously difficult.  When we have multiple countries and agencies trying to work together in emergency situations, often competing egos and agendas get in the way and a disaster like Rwanda can be the result, despite every-one’s best intentions.

Non-Lethal Weapons and other Non-Violent Aproaches

Fortunately the world is slowly learning some new approaches. Non-lethal weapons are being developed and both police forces are being trained in their use.  The Non-Violent Peace Force is now being deployed in violent situations around the world to accompany civilians and to offer non-violent solutions in volatile situations.

The Community as Peacemaker?

I close with this quote from William Ury, an extraordinary peacemaker, and his thinking about The Third Side, an untapped force for peace:

When the rules are broken and the limits on fighting exceeded , the community needs to employ the minimally forceful measures necessary to stop harmful conflict in its tracks. The role of Peacekeeping need not be limited to specialists like the police and UN Peacekeepers. It is a community function that anyone may be called upon to play. . . . The best Peacekeepers never fight.  . . . They accomplish their ends by intervening early and using persuasion.

How do we stop violence? Try on William Ury’s idea and see where and when it fits.