The Roles that Military Can Play - Movie Review Example

Plan: A timetable of project activities and outputs. This should include internal milestones as well as external assessments and reviews. The plan should state both the progress achieved up to the date the plan is written as well as future activities. Role of military in conflict In the modern world, the level of conflict between the various countries, within the countries and the various religions and sects of the world has increased due to numerous reasons. Even though the world is inching towards globalization and becoming a multi-cultural and multi-ethnic community, conflicts based on ethnicity and religion have now become a major threat to peaceful coexistence. Often, such conflicts have reached heightened states where massacre and mass murder have been the consequences. A peek into history reveals that various conflicts have occurred within particular nations between the various ethnical groups (Holbrooke, 1998). In many such conflicts, the military also plays a direct or indirect role with various levels of involvement. The military is often the main entity involved in the war though the war itself is raged by the political needs of the region. Also, often, International community gets involved in a regional conflict due to the need to send troops as peacekeeping agents. This study takes a deeper look at the role played by the military in conflict based on the documentary, ‘A Cry from The Grave’. The documentary was directed by the award winning British film maker Leslie Woodhead. It probes the ethnical conflict in the region of Srebrenica, which ultimately led to genocide as the Muslims in Bosnia were attacked and murdered in large numbers. Here, the Bosnian Serb Army that was supported by the Serbian Government caused these murders in the name of ethnic cleansing (Gibbs, 2009). This article describes the role of military played in this brutal massacre by highlighting some situations from the documentary and also by looking at certain historical facts and incidents. It also discusses the role of the army as a tool for the political ambitions of the people in power, as the documentary highlights the atrocities committed under the command of the politicians. The paper discusses how the army can play as a tool and be made to commit immense horrors under the pretext of ethnical or religious cleansing. The paper also discusses how army can also work as a powerful machinery to help and support people in crisis by providing security and humanitarian aid to the people caught in war. Hence, the various different and extreme roles are played by the military during the various situations depending up on the political motivation and ambitions. Historical context Before taking a look at the documentary and assessing the role of military in conflict, it is necessary to get a historical perspective of the Srebrenica massacre. During the period of April – June, 1992, there was a huge campaign about ethnic cleansing by the Serbs who lived in the eastern part of Bosnia and eastern Herzegovina. This campaign continued for over three years until a major chunk of the land came under the control of the Serbs. Following this, the region surrounding Srebrenica witnessed extreme brutalities and massacre. During 1993, an alliance developed between the Croats and Serbs and hence, the Serbs started providing assistance to the Croats to develop a strong resistance against the Muslims of the region. The centre of the guerrilla activities by the Muslims against the Serbs was Srebrenica (Burg and Shoup, 2000). There were islolated incidences of brutality on both sides and the tensions were simmering. As the situation was tense, the United Nations Security Council declared this area as a ‘safe area’, which meant that this area should be free of any form of armed attack. However, during 1995, Srebrenica genocide took place where more than 8000 Bosnian Muslims were killed during the Bosnian war by the Serbian army in this area (McDonald and Swaak-Goldman, 2000). In spite of the International communities repeated appeals, and threats of sanctions from the United Nations, the genocide continued unabated and brought forth the extreme brutality that any army could commit on the civilians. A Cry from the Grave ‘A Cry from the Grave’ is a documentary which has been directed by Leslie Woodhead and it investigates the issue of massacre of the Bosnian Muslims in 1995 in Srebrenica (Arora, 2011). This is a narrative based documentary where Bill Moyers narrates the drastic attacks and the brutal killings that occurred during the Srebrenica massacre by documenting the various experiences of the survivors and the relatives of the victims. With the help of numerous video recordings taken by reporters and journalists, the Dutch army and also by the Serbian camera crew, the documentary is made in a very realistic manner. To further strengthen the premise, interviews with the investigators from the UN sponsored court as well as the UN special prosecutor have also been included in the documentary. All these factors gave this documentary a lot of authenticity and hence, it won various prizes. It was also shown at the United Nations and was used during the war crimes trial conducted at The Hague. As mentioned earlier, touching narratives form the core of this documentary and give a real picture of the horror that was unfolded on the Muslim civilians. Even though Srebrenica was the first ever area to be declared as a safe area, it became the location for the worst massacre that Europe saw post the Second World War. The documentary highlights personal stories (Danner, n.d). For example, it begins with the story of Sahila Osmanovic, who was separated from her husband and son during the course of the conflict. Osmanovic returns to the graveyard to the burial spot of her son, who is believed to have been captured by the military when he was trying to escape to the woods. Another story that the documentary contain is that of Hasan Nuhanovic. Nuhanovic loses his entire family during the massacre and wishes to see that the murders are arrested and punished. This compelling narrative of heart touching stories reveals not just the brutality of the attacks but also the helplessness of the victims. The documentary also contains several references of the work done by the NATO troops and the international military in providing some respite to the war torn region. Role of military in Srebrenica conflict The brutal massacre in Srebrenica highlights the fact that the military can play different roles when it comes to a conflict. In the case of the Srebrenica massacre, the military had a very direct involvement because the murder of the Bosnian Muslims was done by the units of the Serbian army (Army of Republika Srpska) which was led by General Ratko Mladic. The episode saw the involvement of the paramilitary unit of the Serbian army which were called the Scorpions involved in the massacre. The massacre was an event that was planned earlier and executed directly by the military. Contrary to the assumption that army can go berserk in a spontaneous act after a region is annexed, in the case of the Srebrenica massacre, the entire plan was developed and scheduled before hand by the top army officials and political leaders. In each stage of the operation, the military had a huge role to play. As early as 1992 - 1993, the Serbian military and paramilitary forces entered Srebrenica and gained control of the region by both killing as well as throwing out the inhabitants (Rohde, 1997). Here, military is the force that has enhanced the tension and crisis because it was the body that was directly attacking the civilian population. These initial incidents show that the military can play a role of inciter as it can undertake deliberate acts of provocation and brutality to curb the morale of the population. Even though the Bosnian government forces did fight back and recapture the area, the Serb military began to take steps to capture all the villages surrounding the region. The Serbian military forces took at the possible steps to ensure that the region became un-inhabitable by destroying the water supplies and cutting of electricity (Suljagic, 2005). Also, Serbs continued to attack the region using force and killing the ethnic population brutally. As in most cases of conflict, the military played the negative role because it was executing the Serbian command of capturing the area and killing people mercilessly. It was clear that the massacre was not something that happened suddenly or on the basis of an impulse, but it was something that was planned and orchestrated because a large number of women and girls were evacuated from the region and most men and boys were massacred. The role played by the military was one that involved aggression and brutality with the goal of capture of the particular territory. Hence, the military became a terrorizing and agonizing entity because it was directly involved in the killings. As the situation in Srebrenica was continuously tense for a long period of time because of the notion of 'ethnic cleansing', the United Nations took a bold step to ensure that a large scale massive and destructive event such as a massacre does not take place. Hence, it declared this region as a safe area - which means that no attack should be done there (Lebor, 2006). A 400 strong contingent of the Dutch army was entrusted with the responsibility of guarding the area as a part of the United Nations protection force (Honig, J., and Both, 1996). However, they were unsuccessful in preventing the massacre. Here, the contrast between the two different ways in which the military operates becomes very evident. On one hand, the Serbs were very keen on aggressive attacking and ruthlessly massacred the Muslim population. On the other hand, the Dutch force was merely a passive witness to the event because they were not able to control the attack or defend the population. The Dutch army that was deployed in the region was to ensure that population living in that region is protected (Honig, J., and Both, 1996). However, it led people into a false sense of security as many leaders assured them of protection. However, this false sense of security resulted in such a high scale of murder. This shows that if a fraction of the military is passive, inactive or non responsive, it can create a situation just as the one that was seen in Srebrenica. This level of massacre also proves that the military forces can play a major role in changing the geography if it was politically motivated. Even though most of the military bodies do not operate on their own, they are ordered to fight and take brutal steps to fulfil certain military purposes. In some cases, the military takes on the entire power and can even overthrow the political government, as seen in the case of countries like Pakistan (Hackett, 2010). Pakistan has been a nation which has tried to establish stable democratic governments. However, this effort has failed numerous times because the powerful defence forces have overthrown the government. The first instance was during the period of 1958-1969 where the Army took over under the rule of General Ayub Khan. In coup that was started by the army under the leadership of General Zia-ul-Haq overthrew the government in 1977 and ruled as military dictator. In 1999, General Pervez Musharraf came to power by overthrowing the democratically elected government of the country (Hackett, 2010). A military based rule is one where the population has to live under a constant threat because they are not sure of their rights anymore. It is similar to living under a dictatorial rule without freedom. The common citizens of the country do not have much say in the way in which the government operates because there is no democratic representation. However, this set up has created a very unstable situation in the country, where plots, intrigues and political chaos results. Therefore, the military is also capable of overthrowing a democratically established government. Therefore, if the situation demands, the military can be extremely ruthless and can function without any consideration of humanity. The numerous brutal wars are a testimony to this fact. Even though the issue is highly controversial, it is argued that the Bosniak (Bosnian Muslim) forces did not take very strong steps so that they could defend the town (Judah, 1997). Here, the job of the Bosniac military was to defend the entire region, but they were too weak in front of the Serb powers and hence, they could not have defended the area. Some investigators are of the opinion that the Bosniak forces withdrew from the enclave when it saw the advancement of the Serbian forces (Stover, 1998). However, this was said to be the order of the leader of the Dutch force that was deployed. The order was to withdraw their holds from several key positions in south of Srebrenica, the exact direction from which the Serb army advanced towards the town. While the Dutch army commander took this decision because the NATO was sending aircrafts to cause air strikes to the Serbs, it proved to be a costly one because it directly resulted in large scale massacre. It is also believed that the Bosniak military was held back by some of their commanders so that the Serbian army could enter the region and cause the havoc. The reason behind this stance could be that some level of ethnic cleansing could be carried out by them through these attacks. At times, it is also speculated that the Bosniak forces were the reason for the provocation of the Serb attack (Sudetic, 1998). Although there is no reliable proof of this issue, it was noticed that some attacks were carried by the Bosniaks outside the safe area, which led to the provocation and hence, the attacks were carried out with a greater force that resulted in large scale destruction. Even though these are just speculations, it shows the various roles which the military could have played a role in the traumatic massacre that happened in Srebrenica about 15 years back. These examples illustrate that military forces work as very strong and powerful mechanism that has some very potent resources and tools available to it. These resources and tools can be used in different ways depending on the purposes. It is also important to understand that these resources are mostly led in a political or diplomatic manner so that the desired result is achieved. The power of the military becomes evident in such situations of conflict because the level of destruction and havoc that can be caused is enormous. If the political motivation related to the cause is very strong, then military can use all its resources to ensure that the goal is achieved, regardless of the bloodshed or the havoc caused. The case of Bosniak military not taking adequate action, or actually indulging in acts that left the citizens of the region unprotected and open to the Serbian army’s onslaught, shows specifically that the commanding officers and also the political players can control the army to achieve their end objective – in this case, to allow a certain degree of ethnic cleansing to occur. On the other hand, the Serbian army was allowed to inflict mass scale damage and indulged in looting, raping and killing unarmed citizens. The dark face of the army is revealed in the situation. Such an attitude towards the civilians is largely the result of the top officials strategy that allows the troops to give a free hand to plunder and ravage. Had it been otherwise, if the political leaders and commanders on the Serbian side had been satisfied with only annexing Bosnia or taking control of the region, such large scale and apparently uncontrollable massacre of the Muslim ethnic population of the region would not have happened. However, it would be wrong to assume that the military is always associated with violence and bloodshed. For example, the NATO peacekeeping mission in 1995 was deployed in order to protect the region of Yugoslavia, so that the fighter planes do not fly over the no fly zone. In addition, the NATO peace keeping force was also enforced to ensure that The General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia (Bureš, 2006). Therefore, when there is the need, the military force can serve the purpose of restoring peace and helping difficult situations become calm and normal. The enforcement of the Dutch force in the conflict area by the United Nations was an effort to make sure that a certain level of peace is established between the Serbs and the Bosnian Muslims. It is a very tough and challenging task to function as a peacekeeping mission. Historically, Bosnia, Serbia and Yugoslavia have been regions that have a long violent history of bloodshed and any efforts to establish peace have been led by the peacekeeping forces (Bellamy, Williams and Griffin, 2008). As discussed earlier, the period of 1992-1995 in Bosnia was one of severe conflict that led to the arrival of the United Nations humanitarian aid convoys in the region. They were given the job of protecting the safe area to ensure that there are no attacks. Even though the duty of the force was to keep peace, the situation became considerably worse than before because the Peace keeping force was forced to take militarised action. While this questioned the very ethics of the peace keeping mission, it also led to an important question of how the military can serve as a protector without using any violence. Similarly, it was also found out that the term safe area was in fact a misnomer and there were not enough troops to guard the area. Ultimately, the peacekeeping force was not able to establish peace because the Serbian army managed to dominate and cause extremely large scale massacres (Goulding, 1993). However, it is important to understand that the peacekeeping mission, however flawed or ineffective it was, did have a strong role to play. Even though Bosnia is no longer the multi-ethnic society, if even the limited protection and assistance that was offered by the UN peacekeepers was revived, the region of Bosnia would have totally disappeared from the map of the world as Bosnia’s strong and powerful neighbours would have annexed it. The presence of the International forces lead to a semblance of normalcy and help in maintaining the status quo till the political turmoil is abated and situation is conducive to ensuring some amount of security and integrity for the region and its people. By taking a look at the numerous instances that have happened all over the world where the military has been enforced to establish peace highlights the humanitarian side of the military forces. The first peace keeping mission was sent to Israel when the state was newly formed to ensure protection. The political intention backing the military action plays a crucial role in deciding the impact that such peacekeeping forces have. It is very evident in the case of Israel, which in spite of being surrounded by hostile neighbours who were ready to unleash their military arsenal on Israel, the International peace keeping force was able to maintain Israels new found boundary. This was in contrast to the rule played by the Dutch forces situated in Bosina, which, due to their inaction (which in turn reflected the international community’s will or at least, the NATO’s super powers’ will) the massacre of the Muslims continued over a long period of time. Other areas where the military has been established in order to serve as a peacekeeping body in the Korean demilitarized zone, countries of El Salvador, Mozambique and numerous African countries (Morjé, 2008). These forces were supported by the United Nations and the peacekeeping missions involve not only using power and strategic deployment to prevent conflicts and to stop war, but also included supply of medical and food security for the residents. There has been a commendable role played by the military in various conflicts across the world where third party armies have trooped in to maintain peace and sanity and to give the much needed respite to the civilians. In addition, many national armies also participate in peacekeeping missions when there is an internal crisis situation that does not demand international intervention. In numerous incidences across the world, ranging from the Hindu-Muslim riots in India in 1992-1993 to curbing the Asian unrest in the UK more recently, the internal security forces have been aided by army and military action and support. This role of army as an internal peace-keeper is often debated as being invalid, as the army is supposedly an entity to ward of an external enemy (Goulding, 1993). Apart from playing the 'traditional' roles of attacking or serving as peace keeping missions, the military also play important roles during the situations of crisis such as natural calamities. The facilities and the training provided by the military equip the soldiers to carry out rescue and search missions, air-lift the people who need medical attention. In many situations, the support of the army becomes necessary to restore the situation back to normalcy in the case of natural calamities or terrorists attacks. Army has been playing this role of a rescuer in cases ranging from earthquake in China and Iran, Tsunami in Japan, landslides in China and India, Hurricanes in the Pacific Islands and the Americas (Gibbs, D. 2009) and many other similar occurrences. As seen in the documentary, on one hand, the Serbian army was the major force behind all the attacks that resulted in the brutal massacre. On the other hand, there were several efforts taken by the peacekeeping and humanitarian forces to make sure that peace and calm is established in the region. At times, the military faces a very severe dilemma because the steps that it has to take may not be one that has humanitarian considerations. However, strong political motivation often becomes the reason for the devastation and massacre. Conclusions The Different Roles that Military Can Play It is very evident that the military can play different roles in the conflict, depending upon the numerous situations. This study has illustrated that through the different situations, how the military takes on different roles. From being a force that leads a nation to a violent battle to making sure that a particular area is protected through peace keeping measures, the military is capable of adapting to the different roles. Military can act as a powerful tool in the hands of the aspiring politicians to develop and enforce their personal ideologies, and to curb human spirit and freedom of thought and expression. On the other hand, military can also be used to inflict a malicious blow on the enemies by allowing it to indulge in massive atrocities on the enemy combatants and civilians alike. While, legally and morally, military activity needs to be restricted to defending the homeland, or at the worst, making a debilitating impact on the enemies’ military or industrial set up. And yet, history has shown time and again that in times of war and conflict, the worst hit casualties are often the civilians who have had no military background or support. In a completely altered façade, the military can play a crucial role in helping the war victims and civilians and provide large scale aid to the war torn areas. Due to the powerful network of resources, management and equipment at the disposal of the military, it is possible for the military to reach out to war ravaged locations and make a constructive contribution towards rebuilding a region. It can also intervene when necessary to provide both humanitarian as well as rescue support to affected areas. However, as it has been noticed, strong political reasons greatly influence the strategy and the approach of the military. In some cases, the military also operates as an independent body that works under its leader. The commanding officers may have an immeasurable influence on the ground level operations and tactic that the troops adopt. References Arora, K. 2011. A Cry from the Grave. krishanarora.com. [online] Available at: http://www.krishanarora.com/Site/Blog/Entries/2011/5/28_A_Cry_from_the Grave.html [Accessed Jan 4, 2012] Bellamy, A., Williams, P., and Griffin, S. 2008. Understanding Peacekeeping. Cambridge: Polity Burg, S., and Shoup, P. 2000. The war in Bosnia-Herzegovina: ethnic conflict and international intervention. New York: M.E Sharp Inc. Bureš, O. 2006. Regional Peacekeeping Operations: Complementing or Undermining the United Nations Security Council? Global Change, Peace & Security 18 (2), pp. 83–99 Danner, M. n.d. Long Memories: Srebrenica, A Cry from the Grave.markdanner.com. [Online] Available at: [Accessed Jan 4, 2012] Gibbs, D. 2009. First do no harm: humanitarian intervention and the destruction of Yugoslavia. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press Goulding, M. 1993. The Evolution of United Nations Peacekeeping. International Affairs, 69 (3), pp. 451–64 Holbrooke, R., 1998. To end a war. New York: Random House Honig, J., and Both, N. 1996. Srebrenica: Record of a War Crime. London: Penguin Books Hackett, J. 2010. The Military Balance. London: Routledge. Judah, T. 1997. The Serbs: History, Myth and the Destruction of Yugoslavia. New Haven: Yale University Press. Lebor, A., 2006. Complicity with Evil: The United Nations in the Age of Modern Genocide. London: Yale University Press McDonald, G., and Swaak-Goldman, O. 2002. Olivia. .Substantive and Procedural Aspects of International Criminal Law - The experience of International Courts. The Haguge: Kluwer Law International Morjé. H. 2008. UN Peacekeeping in Civil Wars. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rohde, D, 1997. Endgame: The Betrayal and Fall of Srebrenica, Europe's Worst massacre Since World War II. Colorado: WestviewPress Suljagic, E., 2005. Postcards from the Grave. London: Saqi Books, Stover, E. 1998. The GravesL Srebrenia and Vukovar. New York: Scalo . Sudetic,C 1998. Blood and Vengeance: One Family’s story of the war in Bosnia. New York: Norton, 1998. Read More