Does Force Matter?

Perhaps one of the most hotly debated subjects that often takes place across the globe is the impact if any in the use of force or the big stick so as to ensure compliance. Interestingly enough the subject is not limited to the household and many parents, but extends to the wider national community in terms of domestic laws, and even internationally in relation to mutually accepted treaties among states. What makes some children obedient, and others not? Can the tough approaches in punishment favored by a few societies in trying to curb crimes working, or can one draw any conclusions from the increase rates of recidivism? Why did Iraq fail to abide by the NPT agreements even in the face of overwhelming Security Council and US force, while Japan, Brazil and Germany choose to? What prompted Libya and North Korea choose to finally comply with the international treaty, when Iran still appeared willing to disregard any perceived threats? These and many others are legitimate questions , that have baffled social scientist and policy makers alike as they attempt to grapple with issues such as justice, social welfare for children and wider matters that contribute to peace ,security ,and development .
In the early stages of the US Presidential Republican and Democratic War of wills the Chicago Senator and Democratic contender had the gumption to suggest publicly that America can be better served if it talks to its enemies such as Cuba and Iran. This banishment of the big stick and pro carrots approach advocated by the Senator was nothing new as such, but a pragmatic approach that neo- liberal theorist such as Joseph Nye and Robert Keohane believed in as described in their theory called Soft Power. The Republican Senator from Arizona Mc Cain, almost fell to the floor consternation , as he first did everything to contain himself from breaking down in hysteria at the suggestion by opponent the possible future Commander in Chief, that never served his country militarily- as the senior Senator never fails to remind us.
Later in an effort to sound Reagan like, he was quoted as saying that “Senator Obama will do everything to loose the war and win the election,”or some reference to that effect. Most military minded men have adopted what is commonly viewed as the Offensive Realist theoretical approach where the big stick, tough talking and power approach is believed to make places such as Cuba, North Korea, Iraq, Libya and Iran keep in line. Political Science along with its sister study International Relations are not exact sciences; it is extremely difficult to draw any distinctive conclusions as to why states follows rules at the international levels. Libya for example finally burned it nuclear ambitious playbook acquired from Pakistan’s nuclear proliferation bandit Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan, soon after the invasion of Iraq by the USA. Many including the 43 rd President Mr. G. W Bush believes its because of his big stick approach in Iraq and Afghanistan. Brinkmanship master Kim-Jong-il, has finally decided to curb his nuclear ambitions , and save the lives of the suffering millions in North Korea his country.
It is the same dilemma that faces other Social Scientists that attempt to study matters of compliance on the domestic front, both in the homes and the general population. A former St. John graduate made the news recently when he attempted to be a Good Samaritan in the New York City, and was robbed of his car and murdered in the process for his efforts. What was intriguing to me was the fact that this very modern educated young man was awaiting a possible wife that his mother was expected to choose for him all the way back in India. What’s at play there is it fear? A perfectly normal and friendly young Bangladesh devoted Muslim young lady on her second year in Graduate school in New York, disappear for a week from class. Upon enquiries, she indicated she just got married to someone from home living in Texas that she never saw a day before she was married. Good old democratic America? “Dad seeks husband for beautiful educated daughter.” “Must be from the military or businessman.” So stated the classified add I happen to stumble upon in one of Islamabad Daily papers in Pakistan. Care to explain? A young 18 year old Mali virgin girl was given to a buddy of mine as part of his relaxing entertainment for a week -end by associates of his boss, who told him “she is all yours to do as you please, and will do what ever your hearts desire.” What’s at stake here?
As I walk along the campus of a certain New York University campus, I saw several young ladies proudly wearing their Muslim hijab head shaft and other paraphernalia. One might want to believe that these kids are subjected to some repressive force in the homes that demands that they hold steadfastly to this cultural tradition. However upon conversing with a few, you get different impressions. One proud young English speaking, South American native acquaintance even admitted that she defied her parents that felt she should avoid wearing it, as they had concerns for her safety in volatile post 2001 climate.
Again, in similar fashion to the international arena, there are many parents like public officials and policy wonks that would swear by the Bible, Bhagavad Gita, Koran and Torah that the tough approach works marvelously, is sanctioned from above, and therefore must be correct. Some of the older generations would even proudly present themselves as examples to show that ‘back in the day,’ there parents exerted real force and they are the positive result today. This topic will continue to be around for some time, I am sure as to the merits or not of the use of force to achieve desired end of obedience at home and compliance in the wider environment. I’ll keep you posted on this and other observations.