Understanding the Pattern of Violence of the Oppressed
History
has shown us again and again, that colonialism and the suppression of a
national identity by a larger state, often leads the suppressed group to take
up arms and resort to violence in an attempt to vye for independence. Groups
like the FLN in Algeria, the PIRA in Northern Ireland, and the PLO in Palestine
are all modern examples of ethnic minorities that have resorted to violence in
an attempt to rid themselves of the oppression of a state that does not share
in their identity. Comparing these three groups is important in discussing the
broader theme of how populations respond to oppression. While the concept of
colonialism all but disappeared after the end of the Cold War, there are still
many instances where minority groups are being subjugated. Exploring historical
examples of the reactions of oppressed peoples and nations gives insights as to
how oppressed groups should be dealt with in future scenarios.
The FLN, the PIRA, and the PLO are
all considered terrorist organizations that have fought or are still fighting
for the freedom of their respective communities. France, having occupied
Algeria 1827, refused to give the people of Algeria their independence, even
after decolonizing many of the other States under their empire. Given this
refusal, radical Algerian nationalists formed the National Liberation Front
(FLN) and started to conduct massacres and bombings in an attempt to force
France into liberating Algeria. Similarly, in 1969, the Provisional Irish
Republican Army (PIRA), was founded from a group of radical Northern Irishmen
who wished Northern Ireland to be freed from the authority of the United
Kingdom, and be allowed to join Ireland. The PIRA is noted for bombing many
areas of Northern Ireland and England and directly fighting British troops with
guns and bricks. Lastly, in response to the creation of the State of Israel and
the suppression of Palestinian Muslims, radical Palestinian Sunni Arabs formed
a group known as the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) to regain
control over the land of Palestine. They have launched a series of attacks
against Israeli military personnel and civilians and conducted suicide bombings
to promote their goal.
In all three examples, radicals from
an ethnically suppressed group joined together and used violence to attempt to
gain freedom and independence. While it is important to note that Palestinian
Muslims are actually a majority, they were never able to combat the military
might of the State of Israel. Algerian nationals, Northern Irishmen, and Palestinian
Muslims were/are victimized by a more powerful state. These examples prove a
direct connection between oppression and violence. As Frantz Fanon writes in
his book The Wretched Earth, “it is
the intuition of the colonized masses that their liberation must, and can only
be achieved by force” (p. 73). Not only is violence a common occurance, it is
viewed by many an oppressed person as the only way to achieve their goal of
freedom. It is then viewed as a necessary measure by the oppressed to accomplish
their goal.
Kurdish groups in Turkey, Syria, and
Iraq have often pled for independence and the creation of their own independent
state. Catalans in Spain voted to succeed from the State and form their own
independent country. Northern Ireland continues to be under the control of the
United Kingdom and Palestinians are still oppressed by Israel. These are but a
few modern examples of ethnic minorities that wish for independence which has
not been granted. Given the history and direct connection between oppressed
peoples resorting to violence, it is possible that terrorist groups or actions
may rise from these groups. While the PIRA is temporarily in a cease-fire with
England, the future of the province is uncertain, especially given recent
tensions regarding brexit. Minority groups should not be underestimated.
Government’s whom have populations that feel oppressed should learn from the
examples of History. They should acknowledge these groups as legitimate
organizations, and work to appease said groups. They should realize that doing
nothing, and continuing the behavior of oppression will only lead to turmoil
and chaos. While colonialism may be seen as over, suppression is not, and
leader’s should end their practices of suppression in an attempt to prevent
future acts of violence.
The Kurds are interesting since there are Kurdish groups that are generally considered 'terrorists' (the PKK) and those who are part of the US fight against ISIS. Where do you think things are going in the 'fight' for a Kurdish state?
ReplyDeleteI think that you picked a really interesting topic and that you discussed it very well. Exploring the idea of how minority groups respond to oppression is important in understanding and attempting to make changes to systems of government that are biased towards specific groups. It seems from many of the readings that we have done in class and from the examples you provided that violence has been commonly used by these minority groups in order to have their voices be heard in the only way that actually seems to produce results: acts of violence. I think it is interesting how you argue that leaders should recognize the oppression they are causing and put an end to it so that the oppressed stop their violent acts, and I think you make a great point, I just wonder how realistic that is. Unfortunately those who are in power seem to primarily care about staying in power and because they do not experience what it is like to feel oppressed they have no reason to stop oppressing others, especially when they are gaining personally from the oppression. I definitely agree with your point that leaders needs to take action, however, I’m not so sure what would prompt them to do so, or that there is an easy fix to this ongoing issue.
ReplyDeleteThe groups/events you picked and the way you covered them, I thought, did an excellent job at arguing that oppression and the reactions that come from it, have a history that proves oppression can be the breading ground of terrorist organizations. For example, the PIRA as you pointed out became a domestic terrorist group because of the oppression from British Rule, just like Palestine and the PLO springing from Israeli oppression, etc. I found while reading your post that the aspect of oppression from the current order is a key element within terrorism, especially how it comes about, (Bobbitt definition) but within your "defining terrorism paper" you make sure to define terrorism as not having to be in reaction to the current order, but did not point out the significance of it within your definition. Maybe something to include when we have revise that prompt. Overall, I really agreed with what your said, especially "Minority groups should not be underestimated."
ReplyDeleteI agree, I believe that many of thee statements that I have made in the above article are different from my previous stance on the definition. Thank you for bringing this up, I will definitely make sure to include this in my revision of my terrorism essay.
Delete