Weapons of war : Ramesh Shrestha

Like everything else in the scientific world, weapons of war have also evolved from the rudiments of spears and swords to bunker busting bombs coated with depleted uranium and nuclear capable missiles mounted in submarines that can be launched remotely. There are even unverified news of space being weaponised using satellites. These are the hardware of the battlefields. The war machines have weaponised almost everything surrounding us with a view to remain in power and kill people indiscriminately, while lecturing the world on human rights and in minimising civilian casualties. There is international law on war which sanctions the warring parties on what is allowed and what is not allowed and there are humanitarian principles to be observed during wars and conflicts but unfortunately the international community has no mechanism to enforce such international instruments.

Besides the hardware in the battlefields, chemical agents are popular among the military as a weapon of choice. Agent orange (dioxin), a herbicide used extensively with 20 times concentration for nine continuous years in Vietnam to defoliate the dense forests which also killed food crops, thus starving people. Mustard gas and other nerve agents have been used in the Iran-Iraq war and Syrian war. Another popular chemical weapon is white phosphorus which burns the skin upon exposure and debilitates the respiratory system. White phosphorus has been used in Vietnam, Chechenia, Iraq, Afghanistan and in the Gaza war in 2008.

Beyond hardware

In our civilized world there are still many sinister ways of weaponizing everyday items such as withholding food and water to deliberately starve people to death, destroying medical facilities so that patients would die for lack of treatment. In recent years destroying agricultural land and disrupting food supplies have been practiced in Gaza, Sudan, Haiti and in Yemen civil war as a coercive method against the opponents for submission (Foreign Affairs, March 2024). According to SCF, 27 children have died of starvation in Gaza as of 2 April 2024. Water wells in several Palestinian villages were known to have been poisoned in 1948 Palestine war which spread typhoid in villages killing civilians (Benny Morris B., and Kedar, B.Z. (2023), Cast thy bread: Israeli biological warfare during 1948 war, Middle Eastern Studies, 59(5),752-776). Such acts are against Geneva Convention and humanitarian principles. But, hey, who has the authority to stop?

On 23 June 1990 in Madison Park High School, President Mandela said that education is the most powerful weapon in the world as it has the power to change individuals and society. But contrary to this powerful positive image of education, weaponizing education has become a common practice. It is perhaps the worst act of violence against children as it distorts the normal course of cognitive development of children. Children have the right to religious education but when it takes extreme views it diverts the normal course of development of children. Conservative Islamic societies send children to Madrasas to educate them with strict Islamic scripture which exposes generations of children to behaviour modification. Some of the children from these schools have become suicide bombers. In the same trend of argument, students demonstrating against funding of universities and even high schools by Jewish diaspora in North America also influences university policy which has become a kind of weapon against civilians who seek peaceful solutions to the Palestinian issue in the Middle East. Bombing schools and universities are also against all norms of civic society and against humanitarian principles. Education too has become a weapon of war not against military or extremists but against civilians.

Weaponizing media

Knowingly or unknowingly, even the mainstream media has become a complicit in modern warfare by citing one-sided news, views and sometimes deliberately spreading false news. False and exaggerated news incite violence and cause harm to people and properties. The recent allegation against UNRWA staff colluding with Hamas without any proof is a case in point, which led to suspension of funding of UNRWA without due investigation. On many occasions such false news has been retracted but the damage was already done. Meanwhile, targeted killing of journalists has become a common practice in recent conflicts which not only filters but completely stops people’s access to accurate news. Some 140 journalists and media workers were killed during Balkan war with just one conviction for wrongful killing. Similarly, 105 journalists and media workers have been killed in Gaza as of 15 May 2024 with no conviction. Since the international media is owned by just about ten media houses, what goes on in the air is controlled by their editorial policy with total lack of objectivity. There are only very few ‘independent’ media who can afford to operate with their freelance journalists such as Al-Jazeera (partially state funded) or TRT World (also partially state funded). The Bottomline is that the mainstream media has been weaponised with biased news and views to successfully manipulate public opinions.

Authorities in countries are faced with a dilemma of maintaining freedom of press while also maintaining the integrity of the media. Deception, disinformation and provocation has become a common feature of global media promoted by rival factions in social media. It brews instability and tensions where politicians thrive. The ultimate beneficiaries of instability are the weapons industry. Such situations divert government investments from public services to war industries.

Incidentally the spread of social media has become a choice of new sources of news for the majority which comes in fragments. Unfortunately, there are also social media mercenaries in the form of ‘influencers’ convincingly promoting one sided views and hateful messages. The news sources are heavily influenced by financial resources and political prejudice. There is very little objectively verifiable source of news for the public to rely on anywhere. It is up to the readers to decide what is and is not worth reading. The end result is that there is no more professional journalism. The ultimate losers are the public.

What about public opinion?

Public opinions matter in resolving differences at every level of our society but in modern warfare public opinions have been ignored and can be auctioned for a price. The United Nations and the UN Security Council (UNSC) may be considered as the highest level of authority for public debate and public opinion on all international issues with a hope of finding a long-lasting solution. According to an article authored by Ilyana Kuziemko and Eric Werker in the Geopolitics of Foreign Aid (ed. Helen Milner and Dustin Tingly, 2013) (originally published in Harvard Business School: Faculty & Research Publication, 5 October 2006) some of the ten rotating members of the UN Security Council can be influenced on how they vote on issues that are tabled in UNSC. Depending on the importance of agenda items tabled for vote, the non-permanent members can anticipate an increase in bilateral aid from the US government as much as 59%, amounting to anywhere between $16 mil to 45 mil depending on how they vote. Although this article is fairly old, there is little doubt if such practice has changed. By extension similar practice exists in bilateral aid (Weaponization of everything, Mark Galeotti, 2022). Can anyone complain of vote buying or rigged elections in Nigeria or Indonesia or anywhere else?

Read more articles by Ramesh by clicking here
Or contact Ramesh at ramesh.chauni@gmail.com