Are Civilians Culpable For The Actions Of Their Government?
Philip F. Harris
July 19, 2006
The first point I must make is that any government or group that specifically targets civilians are, in my opinion, terrorists. That being said, the issue of so called Collateral Damage is one that is appearing more frequently in news reports from around the world. We are constantly bombarded with reports of civilian casualties in places like Iraq, Lebanon, Gaza and other hot spots of terrorist activities. In some instances, civilians are the specific targets, while in others instances, civilian deaths occur because they happen to be too close to the action.
To me, there is an issue regarding whether or not all such casualties are as abhorrent as they appear to be portrayed in the media. All killing is essentially wrong and I do not dispute that point. However, are there any circumstances in which civilian deaths are truly not as despicable as they appear to be at first glance? If the citizens of a country allow its government to embark upon a militaristic campaign, are they not to be held accountable for the actions of their government? If the citizens of an area knowingly allow terrorists to operate from their village, do they not shoulder some responsibility for the actions of those groups? Is not inaction sometimes the same as actively participating in the events they permit?
In Lebanon, local populations know that members of Hezbollah are firing rockets at civilian targets at Israel. In Iraq, villagers know that terrorists live among them and will kill not only American, but their fellow countrymen as well. In the former Yugoslavia, it was well known by the populace that ethnic cleansing was in progress. In Nazi Germany, the civilians knew that Jews were being taken to death camps. In the former Soviet Union, death camps were not a state secret.
It is front page news if civilians are killed by Israeli bombers as they stand idly by watching rockets being launched into civilian Jewish towns. It is front page news if civilians are killed by American jet fighters as they destroy Taliban hideouts. Why is it not front page news that many of the places that suffer such casualties are also havens for terrorists? If children are killed, sadly so, in a place that is harboring those who give no second thought to slaughtering the children of others, why is this ignored by the media?
In a democratic society, the people are, technically, the government. If the actions of a democratic government are deemed deplorable, then the actions of its citizens must be deemed likewise. One may argue that in nations that are controlled by dictators or military regimes, the people cannot he held accountable because they have no choice. Did not these same people stand tall in the Ukraine? Did not these same people topple the old Soviet regime? Was such an attempt successful in China? No, but change has occurred in that nation. Did not Americans in the 1700’s say "enough is enough" and, against a superior force, defeat those who stood for oppression?
I am not saying that it is appropriate to purposely kill civilians. What I am saying is that people need to understand that they, too, must share in the responsibility when those around them are committing acts of terrorism and they simply turn a blind eye. Is it sad? Of course it is. But it is equally sad that these same people sit by while those among them are freely able to vent their hatred and bigotry on other civilian populations. When are people going to take responsibility for their actions? When are people going to stop blaming others for their self generated problems? Regardless of the headlines, civilians are not always as guilt free as they would have you believe. When motivated, people can move mountains, topple dictators and end tyranny. There is no “hold harmless” clause if people allow repressive and hate oriented governments or groups to try to destroy the lives of others.
Philip Harris
To me, there is an issue regarding whether or not all such casualties are as abhorrent as they appear to be portrayed in the media. All killing is essentially wrong and I do not dispute that point. However, are there any circumstances in which civilian deaths are truly not as despicable as they appear to be at first glance? If the citizens of a country allow its government to embark upon a militaristic campaign, are they not to be held accountable for the actions of their government? If the citizens of an area knowingly allow terrorists to operate from their village, do they not shoulder some responsibility for the actions of those groups? Is not inaction sometimes the same as actively participating in the events they permit?
In Lebanon, local populations know that members of Hezbollah are firing rockets at civilian targets at Israel. In Iraq, villagers know that terrorists live among them and will kill not only American, but their fellow countrymen as well. In the former Yugoslavia, it was well known by the populace that ethnic cleansing was in progress. In Nazi Germany, the civilians knew that Jews were being taken to death camps. In the former Soviet Union, death camps were not a state secret.
It is front page news if civilians are killed by Israeli bombers as they stand idly by watching rockets being launched into civilian Jewish towns. It is front page news if civilians are killed by American jet fighters as they destroy Taliban hideouts. Why is it not front page news that many of the places that suffer such casualties are also havens for terrorists? If children are killed, sadly so, in a place that is harboring those who give no second thought to slaughtering the children of others, why is this ignored by the media?
In a democratic society, the people are, technically, the government. If the actions of a democratic government are deemed deplorable, then the actions of its citizens must be deemed likewise. One may argue that in nations that are controlled by dictators or military regimes, the people cannot he held accountable because they have no choice. Did not these same people stand tall in the Ukraine? Did not these same people topple the old Soviet regime? Was such an attempt successful in China? No, but change has occurred in that nation. Did not Americans in the 1700’s say "enough is enough" and, against a superior force, defeat those who stood for oppression?
I am not saying that it is appropriate to purposely kill civilians. What I am saying is that people need to understand that they, too, must share in the responsibility when those around them are committing acts of terrorism and they simply turn a blind eye. Is it sad? Of course it is. But it is equally sad that these same people sit by while those among them are freely able to vent their hatred and bigotry on other civilian populations. When are people going to take responsibility for their actions? When are people going to stop blaming others for their self generated problems? Regardless of the headlines, civilians are not always as guilt free as they would have you believe. When motivated, people can move mountains, topple dictators and end tyranny. There is no “hold harmless” clause if people allow repressive and hate oriented governments or groups to try to destroy the lives of others.
Philip Harris
Print
Email
