Culture in War.
October 8, 2009
What role can culture play in war? What role does the global north play in cultural conflicts? Who should intervene in conflict? Is some obligated to end conflict?
Culture significantly impacts the repercussions of war, the reasons why a war is fought, how a war is started, and who supports the war. Cultures role in war is immeasurable. A cultures attitude towards war shapes the face of war.
In America we are lead to believe we fight wars to undo injustice. The people of the United States are lead to believe their country does not fight ethnic wars but wars against overseas countries, which are individually fighting wars amongst themselves or with other countries. The attitude the United States has towards war is apart of our American culture. The notion that America fights for the freedoms of others, and spreads justice and hope, is part of a set of cultural values.
After September 11th, 2001 a war erupted, purposely disguised as a cultural war. Images of celebrations across the Middle East spread like wild fire through the media after the attacks. A common idea was extended through out the states; the attacks on September 11th where a direct result of Islamic disapproval of the American culture. Could this be true? Perhaps but the message sent to Americans by emphasizing this information is that the attacks were based upon disapproval of their culture in turn making the American disapproval of Islamic culture acceptable and wide spread. By somewhat permitting the disdain for the Islamic culture it has been easier to fight the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. A battle between cultures has been ignited; the ongoing battle between different cultures continues to fuel the flames of war.
The two wars being fought between the U.S. and the Middle East is a prime example of the role culture can play in war. Cultural ideals are utilized during wartime to manipulate the agendas of countries, which partake in international wars, i.e. the United States.
It is evident that culture also plays a clear-cut role in other conflicts international and internal. In Rwanda, the genocide of 1994 was an internal conflict between the Tutsi and Hutu groups of Rwanda. In Rwanda an attempt was made to eradicate the country of the Tutsi minority group. What motivated this mass genocide? A rift was wedged between these two groups. The Tutsi where portrayed as a threat to the cultural foundations of Rwanda. The eradication of the Tutsi, just as the eradication of the Jewish during the Holocaust, would have ethnically cleansed Rwanda and Germany, thus sustaining the ideal ethnicity, cultural and religious values a radical group desires.
As emphasized above the role of the global north in war is immense and the use of culture as weapon is even greater. In Rwanda the separation of Rwanda’s people into the two ethnic groups Hutu and Tutsi can be see as the result of a Northern influence. Belgian can be accredited with differentiating the two ethnic groups; in 1916 identity cards where distributed specifying individuals “ethnicity” (BBC). The Belgians favored the Tutsi and in time the Tutsi welcomed more opportunity and greater political power due to the favoritism.
In 1994 when the Hutu president was assassinated the idea that the Tutsi were responsible for the president’s death spread rapidly provoking the genocide. The influence of Belgian lingers in the after math. The Hutu and Tutsi where classified by their physical features, the Tutsi where taller sometimes lighter and more resembling of Europeans. The idea that the Tutsi and Hutu where of different ethnicity and cultures created the tension which lead to the genocide of 1994.
Culture is used to support acts of war. It is used to manipulate people and influence their choices and ideologies. The Middle East is a prime modern example. It is still fresh in the minds of American’s the burning Twin Towers; amongst the images of the burning towers is faulty images of members of Arabic and Muslim communities celebrating the success of the terrorist attack. War in itself is part of a culture. The culture of war is complex and encompasses many different aspects. It is important to identify the use of culture in war and how it can affect a war.
Interventions in war are typically for a nations own gain. The United States does not intervene in conflict unless it directly benefits the nation. If intervention were based on liberating human beings there would be endless international conflict being fought on ever-continent excluding Antarctica. Nations and leaders of surrounding countries or of specific countries fighting in a conflict should be obliged to end conflict.
Government institutions and developed nations should become obligated to prevent and eradicate war. The obligation one nation has to another is respect its culture and rights of its people and to protect the people’s inborn rights.
“Afghan Girls, Back in the Shadows – washingtonpost.com.” Washingtonpost.com – nation, world, technology and Washington area news and headlines. Web. 04 Oct. 2009. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/22/AR2006092201404.html>.
What does he mean by the standing army is used not so much against the external enemy as against the internal enemy? The standing army can be utilized to fight against an internal enemy. Embracing foreign cultures during times of war could be somewhat of an internal enemy. On a governmental international scale the war in Iraq lacked support but internally the Bush Administration attempted to exploit the fears of the American people by giving them a culture to identify their fear with. The American people feared terrorist attacks and where given a face to fear, the face of the Middle East.
This video is part one of a few installments I found on YouTube. I found it very well done in sending a message that the Muslim community has a strong positive presence in American culture. Its an interesting piece that focuses in on how Islam is portrayed in this country and how members of the Islamic/ American community identify themselves.
