Unarmed Security and Conflict Resolution
Unarmed Security and Conflict Resolution: Replace the use of repressive and armed force with scientific knowledge of conflicts and violence, in order to reduce or effectively eliminate aggressions. Promote An European Civil and Non Violente Peace Corps.
The aim is to lay the experimental, practical, and theoretical foundations of a conception of security that replaces the use of repressive and armed force with scientific knowledge of conflicts, violence and crime (Conflictology) in order to reduce or effectively eliminate aggressions and crime so as to significantly lower their human, moral and economic cost well below that of traditional methods used by security forces and policies. This would decisively facilitate the development of a more efficient and more socially and morally coherent and responsible type of security in democratic societies that respect human rights.
This is an ambitious, original, unconventional and fairly innovative goal based on practical experience on the ground, as well as knowledge of similar experiences of other people and institutions both today and throughout history in a variety of countries. It thus aims to be both applicable and useful.
It is moreover based on interdisciplinary scientific knowledge of the causes and origins of violence, crime and conflict. To this end, it draws on social psychology, sociology, anthropology, history, and philosophy, but also neuropsychology, communications, strategy and many others disciplines.
As for the method of intervention, it, too, is a compendium of various techniques and procedures, with the exception of any method involving the use of force. It thus encompasses communication, both verbal and otherwise, social media, social networks, education, mediation, arbitration, preventive diplomacy, and any other useful means that does not involve the use of any type of violence or any violation of human rights.
The European Parliament has recommended developing a European Peace Corps, trained for non-violent intervention in armed conflicts.
The ability to innovate has always provided the decisive edge in overcoming problems and satisfactorily neutralizing danger. Even in the military arena, innovation in weapons, strategy and tactics has been the keystone for determining the victors. The switch from bows and arrows to firearms was crucial, as was the incorporation of aviation and mechanized cavalry as opposed to infantry and classic cavalry. Studies and practical experience have shown the real possibility of developing a type of defence or security that does not rely on destruction or repression. Today, innovation in the field of security has taken the form of the incorporation of a social sciences approach to conflicts, crime and violence, namely, conflictology.
Innovation in security policies
Unfortunately, it is not possible to do without a security policy that guarantees peace and freedom. Security is a basic need. Since the dawn of time, human groups and the societies they have made up have established protection and defence systems, which they have even sometimes used for the purposes of aggression and conquest. Violence and war have been constants throughout history, rationalized and perpetrated in the face of the imperative need for a type of security that safeguards life and integrity. To date, the methods used to ensure self-defence have culminated in the organization of extremely costly, yet questionably effective armies, which have only very rarely been replaced by other ways of doing things.
That armies and wars have devastating human and economic consequences is as much a truism as the need to protect ourselves from the armies of others. It is not hard to see the insecurity in which humanity lives as a result of the destructive build-up of weapons and the very existence of armies and strategic plans of attack or defence. The medicine is worse than the diseases themselves, and yet the diseases of aggression, war and crime continue to thrive. Unfortunately war is not prevented by traditional strategic defence plans. If anything, the risks and threat of triggering war are increased or, at best, the war is postponed and the sides enter into what has come to be known as a “cold war”.
In short, the civilian population lacks sufficient protection against a weaponry that harnesses the destructive power of chemistry, biology and atomic energy. Nor do there tend to be plans to organize or mobilize the population against the dangers of aggression or, simply, to tackle accidents, disasters and large-scale crises.
There are currently ideas, organizations and movements that advocate the creation of unarmed and non-violent defence organizations and the corresponding alternative security and defence plans. The European Parliament has recommended developing a European Peace Corps, trained for non-violent intervention in armed conflicts.
Michael Harbottle, director of the Center for International Peacebuilding, has written about the desirability of winning conflicts without resorting to the use of force, of blending contemporary strategic thinking with the philosophy of Sun Tzu, one of the classic military strategists and philosophers.