Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010

War Turns Social Exclusion

War causes dehumanization and legitimizes social exclusion

Maiese, 03 [Michelle, research staff at the Conflict Research Consortium, July, The Beyond Intractability Project: Guy Burgess and Heidi Burgess” http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/dehumanization/]

Dehumanization is a psychological process whereby opponents view each other as less than human and thus not deserving of moral consideration. Jews in the eyes of Nazis and Tutsis in the eyes of Hutus (in the Rwandan genocide) are but two examples. Protracted conflict strains relationships and makes it difficult for parties to recognize that they are part of a shared human community. Such conditions often lead to feelings of intense hatred and alienation among conflicting parties. The more severe the conflict, the more the psychological distance between groups will widen. Eventually, this can result in moral exclusion. Those excluded are typically viewed as inferior, evil, or criminal.[1] We typically think that all people have some basic human rights that should not be violated. Innocent people should not be murdered, raped, or tortured. Rather, international law suggests that they should be treated justly and fairly, with dignity and respect. They deserve to have their basic needs met, and to have some freedom to make autonomous decisions. In times of war, parties must take care to protect the lives of innocent civilians on the opposing side. Even those guilty of breaking the law should receive a fair trial, and should not be subject to any sort of cruel or unusual punishment. However, for individuals viewed as outside the scope of morality and justice, "the concepts of deserving basic needs and fair treatment do not apply and can seem irrelevant."[2] Any harm that befalls such individuals seems warranted, and perhaps even morally justified. Those excluded from the scope of morality are typically perceived as psychologically distant, expendable, and deserving of treatment that would not be acceptable for those included in one's moral community. Common criteria for exclusion include ideology, skin color, and cognitive capacity. We typically dehumanize those whom we perceive as a threat to our well-being or values.[3] Psychologically, it is necessary to categorize one's enemy as sub-human in order to legitimize increased violence or justify the violation of basic human rights. Moral exclusion reduces restraints against harming or exploiting certain groups of people. In severe cases, dehumanization makes the violation of generally accepted norms of behavior regarding one's fellow man seem reasonable, or even necessary

War Turns Human Rights, Sexual Violence

War leads to human rights violations and sexual violence

Amnesty International 9 [Amnesty International, May 28, http://www.africafocus.org/docs09/hr0906b.php, accessed 7/13]

Armed conflict and insecurity in several African countries forced hundreds of thousands of people to flee from their homes, trying to find international protection across borders or some form of security within their own country. In some of the worst armed conflicts still affecting the region, government forces and armed groups completely disregarded the dignity and physical integrity of the population. The civilian population was routinely the object of attacks by parties to the conflict; rape and other forms of sexual violence remained widespread; children were often recruited to take part in hostilities; and humanitarian workers were targeted. Those responsible for crimes under international law, committed in the context of these armed conflicts, were hardly ever held to account. The role of UN and regional peacekeeping missions in Africa increased during 2008, but failed to make a significant impact in terms of protecting the civilian population. This was partly, but not entirely, the result of inadequate resources. The UN and regional bodies, such as the African Union, made little progress in resolving the armed conflicts in Sudan (Darfur), Chad, Somalia and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (North Kivu). The proliferation of small arms remained a significant contributing factor to the continuation of armed conflicts and to widespread human rights abuses. UN arms embargoes have not been effective. The international community mobilized unprecedented resources to combat piracy off the coast of Somalia and to protect its commercial interests. It made no such efforts, however, to halt the flow of arms to Somalia - despite a UN embargo. Nor did it act effectively to stop the widespread violations of international humanitarian law by all parties to the conflict; nor to hold those responsible for crimes under international law accountable. Hundreds of thousands of people were also newly displaced as a result of the conflict in Somalia. Fighting in and around the capital Mogadishu has led to 16,000 deaths, and undocumented numbers of wounded, among the civilian population since January 2007. The Transitional Federal Government was not able to establish its authority across south central Somalia and lost ground to armed opposition groups. Humanitarian organizations had only limited access to provide emergency assistance to an estimated 3.2 million people in need. Aid workers, as well as journalists and human rights defenders, were often targeted for political and criminal reasons. The armed conflict in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo escalated again during the second half of 2008. Numerous human rights abuses were committed by all the parties to the conflict, including killings and abductions of civilians, rape and other forms of sexual violence, and the recruitment and use of children as armed fighters. Hundreds of thousands of people fled the fighting.