State Mass Killings in Indonesia 1965 to 1966 In order to develop a general framework with which to understand collective political violence, I examine state mass killings in Indonesia 1965-66. While acknowledging the importance of historical/cultural factors, I identify elements within the sociopolitical sphere that influence actors of collective political violence at national, local, and event- specific levels. Elements discussed are elite interests, justification for violence, formal organizations, and mobilization factors. Finally, I suggest future preventative policy measures. Introduction Violence marks much of human history. Within the sociopolitical sphere, violence has continually served as a tool used by various actors to influence and/or to control territory, people, institutions and other resources of society. The twentieth century witnessed an evolution of political violence in form and in scope. Continuing into the twenty-first, advances in technology and social organization dramatically increase the potential destructiveness of violent tools. Western colonialism left a world filled with many heterogeneous nation-states. In virtually all these countries nationalist ideologies have combined with ethnic, religious, and/or class conflicts resulting in secessionist movements or other kinds of demands. Such conflicts present opportunities for various actors in struggles for wealth, power, and prestige on both national and local levels. This is particularly evident in Indonesia, a region of the world that has experienced many forms of political violence. The state mass killings of 1965-66 mark the most dramatic of such events within this region. My goal is to understand the killings within a framework of collec... ... middle of paper ... ... murders in democratic Kampuchea, 1975 to 1979, and in Indonesia, 1965 to 1966', Comparative Studies in Society and History, 35, 1992: pp. 769-823. 5. R. Hefner, The Political Economy of Mountain Java, 1990, pp. 193-227, Berkeley: University of California Press. 6. H.Schulte Nordholt, 'A genealogy of violence', [Unpubl paper], 2000, pp. 1-18. 7. G. Robinson, 'The post-coup massacre in Bali', in D. Lev & R. McVey (eds), Making Indonesia, 1996, 118-143. Ithaca: Cornell Southeast Asia Program. 8. O. Verkaaik, Inside the Citadel. Fun, violence, and religious nationalism in Hyderabad, Pakistan, Ph.D. Thesis University of Amsterdam, 1999, pp. 22. 9. H. Waterman, 'Reasons and reason: collective political activity in comparative and historical perspective, World Politics, v 33, n 41, 1981, pp. 554-589.
Ung (2000) mentions that the Cambodian genocide is a product of a perfect agrarian vision that can be built by eliminating Western influence. More specifically, the Angkar perceives peasants and farmers as “model citizens” because many have not left the village and were not subjected to Western influence (Ung 2000:57). Moreover, the Khmer Rouge emphasized the ethnic cleansing of individuals from other races who were not considered “true Khmer” and represented a “source of evil, corruption, [and] poison” (Ung 2000:92). Lastly, the ideology centered on obtaining lost territory was based on a “time when Kampuchea was a large empire with territories” (Ung 2000:78). In essence, Ung successfully demonstrates that multiple causes encouraged the Cambodian
The analysis of the genocides that took place both in Rwanda and Sudan’s Darfur region exhibit some similarities as well as differences. The character of violence was similar in both cases, but in Rwanda the violence was more intense, participatory, and extraordinary. The violence in these two places took place in an environment that had experienced civil wars. It was a period of political transition which was further aggravated by ethnic nationalism and a conflict of ethnic populations that were living in close proximity. However, in the Rwandan genocide, the state is more centralized, compact, and effective. This is what explains the intensity and variation. The international response to these genocides through observers emphasized on using the genocide label to create domestic constituencies especially in the Rwandan case.
The last two decades of the twentieth century gave rise to turbulent times for constituent republics of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, eventually leading them to split apart. There were a number of damaging aspects of past history and of the political and economic circumstances that contributed to the breakup and eventually caused the situation to snowball into a deadly series of inter-ethnic conflicts. Yugoslavia was reunified at the end of the war when the communist forces of Josip Broz Tito liberated the country. Under Tito, Yugoslavia adopted a relatively liberal form of government in comparison to other East European communist states at the time and experienced a period of relative economic and political stability until Tito’s death in 1980. In addition to internal power struggles following the loss of their longtime leader, Yugoslavia faced an unprecedented economic crisis in the 1980’s. As other communist states began to fall in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s, some former Communist leaders abandoned communism and founded or supported ethno-national parties, blaming the economic suffering on the flaws of communism and other ethnic groups. The ethnic violence that followed would not have been possible without the willingness of politicians from every side to promote ethno-nationalist symbols and myths through media blitzes, which were especially effective due to low levels of education in the former Yugoslavia. Shadows of the events of World War II gave these politicians, especially the Serbs, an opportunity to encourage the discussion and exaggeration of past atrocities later in the century. The ethnic violence in the former Yugoslavia can be traced back to a series of linked damaging factors such as the de...
Cook, Theodore F. , Jr. "Nanking Massacre." World Book Advanced. World Book, 2014. Web. 3 Apr. 2014.
Most people in the world have not heard of the genocide going on in Laos today. Most people have not taken notice, read about it or bother to spend more than thirty seconds of their lives learning about it. The world has managed to almost entirely ignore the genocide of the Hmong people in Laos for over 30 years and still allows this crime against humanity to continue. Since the 1970s, the ethnic Hmong people in the Southeast Asian country of Laos have been persecuted by the Laotian government (Malakunas, 2000). This harassment is a direct result of the Hmong’s link to the Central Intelligence Agency in the United States in what has become to be known as the Secret War (Malakunas, 2000). The Laotian government officials directing this massacre have not been detained due to lack of evidence (Sommer P.4).
While the 200,000 people killed during the 36 years of civil war is a large number the average violent deaths per year has increased to 54,223 in the years between 2000 and 2010 (Birns). The violence is an impact of the civil war leaving behind an inadequate judicial system and a corrupt police force without resolution by Peace Accords. The people now more than ever take matters into their own hands considering the court system leaves “ninety-seven percent of cases unsolved” (Birns). It is even common for many people who do not receive adequate “justice to form lynch mobs or hire assassins”
Violent Jihad as a struggle against one’s enemies has its root in [these] situations. When the Islamic religion spread over the region, Jihad became a religious tenet and assumed the form of a peaceful, internal struggle to strive for the good and reject the evil in one’s action. Violent, external conflict was never r...
The Cambodian Genocide took place from 1975 to 1979 in the Southeastern Asian country of Cambodia. The genocide was a brutal massacre that killed 1.4 to 2.2 million people, about 21% of Cambodia’s population. This essay, will discuss the history of the Cambodian genocide, specifically, what happened, the victims and the perpetrators and the world’s response to the genocide.
This article explores the idea that governments knowingly victimize civilians under war when they feel weakened or defenceless. The article provides two main reasons that states engage in victimization of civilians; desperation or appetite for territorial conquest. The former refers to lowering costs of war on the states part by increasing the enemy’s cost and lowering the enemy’s morale for continuing the battle. The latter refers to a states want for more land to claim, using force and death to get what they want, by subduing or eliminating the enemy. The civilians who are targeted for these purposes are also chosen strategically. Mistreatment of civilians of the enemy occurs when specific values or traditions are seen as barbaric to the
“Thus, what motivates men to slay the enemy is anger,” Sun Tzu says in The Art of War. The conflict between Algerian Islamic fundamentalists and the Algerian military backed government is rooted in anger. The conflict, which began as skirmishes between government forces and Islamic fundamentalists, has taken on the proportions of a civil war as fundamentalists carried out kidnappings, assassinations and other forms of civil disturbance. The government has tried pacifying the Muslims by including Islamic leaders in the government, but extreme violence committed by both parties in the conflict has made a peaceful solution difficult to achieve. This violence has claimed the lives of an estimated 100,000 people in the years between 1990 and 2002.
Ploughshares Armed Conflict Reports 2003. Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies, Conrad Grebel College Waterloo, Ontario, Canada. 2003©
Pressure and tribalism are the cause of violence but they are intertwined. Tribalism creates differences between nations then pressure ignites and magnifies those differences creating conflict. Therefore, pressure helps create each nation’s narratives. As nations evolve so does their narrative. But something that will not change is that these narratives will never disappear because tribalism is intrinsic. The question now is since violence’s origins have been identified how does humanity create violence’s endpoint.
The current violent conflicts in Mindanao in the southern Philippines can be broadly categorised into three interrelated types: those that are related to secessionist movement, those that are related to inter clan or intra clan, and those that are criminal in nature such as kidnapping, murder or homicide, robbery and other petty crimes. The same with other violent conflicts anywhere, these violent conflicts are not spontaneous but are products of structural and cultural violence that have accumulated over the years.
Political violence is the leading cause of wars today. Personal agendas have led to many of the political objectives that cause violence today this has caused many problems throughout the world and will continue to do so until a solution to this issue is found. Political objectives have been advanced involuntarily dependent upon the kind of government a nation exercises. For instance, in a democratic nation political groups must worry about convincing the majority in order to advance ethically. Those who try to influence the majority through acts of violence are considered today as “terror” organizations. Though perhaps if it were not because of the recent 9/11 terror attacks that maybe such warrants would not be seen as terror attacks, but instead the result of partisan advancement. Acts of terrorism have been around throughout the evolution of mankind. Terror attacks have even been traced back as far as the religious roots of an ancient middle east (Ross, Will Terrorism End?, 2006). However as man evolved, so did terrorism. Today’s extremism involves some of the main characteristics of ancient terrorism, but much more developed. Political advancement is no longer the root cause of terrorism acts. Instead influxes of “holy” wars have been appended the prior definition of terrorism. Mistakably modern terrorism has been confused for Political violence with political objectives, but research will establish that the nature of terrorism is fundamentally different from other forms of political violence.
It has been four years since the horrific Maguindanao Massacre or also known as the Ampatuan Massacre, but the painful memory that it left to the devastated family and friends felt like only yesterday. Last November 23, the Maguindano massacre victims remembered one again the said tragic event. It is even dubbed as the “deadliest day for the press” for 32 to 58 people in media was killed. It was estimated that there were at least 59 lives were brutally taken. Sadly, until now, finding justice had been painstakingly slow and very murky. The alleged suspect and mastermind, Andal Ampatuan Jr., are still not convicted. Even his people who helped him do the blocking, threatening, killing, and burying the victims is still being sought. The former mayor of the Datu Unsay, Maguindanao is still an “accused.” He is still undergoing a very slow trial. It cannot be denied that justice here in the Philippines is very hard to grasp and hold.