Non-Violent Resistance as a Form of Warfare

Professor of political science at the University of Massachusetts is Gene Sharp. Additionally, he founded the Boston, Massachusetts-based Albert Einstein Institution. Gene Sharp argued for non-violent warfare in the fight against social, civil, and political aggression in his 1993 book-length essay From Dictatorship to Democracy. This essay has been cited as the primary source of inspiration for many other non-violent uprisings around the globe, including the Arab Spring of 2011 and 2012. Gene Sharp presented two major justifications for non-violent conflict in the essay. The first was that the dictator or oppressor more often than not has a strong military base to protect their power (Sharp 12). Therefore, taking a violent approach to fight one’s way out of oppression or dictatorship would be difficult for the oppressed masses. It would require much effort in planning, mounting an organized military of their own and will definitely result in great loss of life and destruction of property. Further, taking violent action against the dictator will give them cause to employ violent means to quell dissent (Sharp 15). The dictator will more often win in a violent altercation. The second case was that mounting a violent uprising will more likely than not lead to a replacement of the dictator with another dictator (Sharp 23). A violent warfare will lead to the strengthening of the oppressed party militarily, giving them dominion over the oppressor. In most occasions, the victor of such a conflict is enraged by the loss of life and property during the struggle, giving them cause to exact vengeance on the defeated party.

Thus, violent warfare will lead to either a legitimization of the dictator’s position and strengthening of his base, or it will lead to the rise of another dictator in the place of the existing one. This makes non-violent warfare the most viable option to dispose of a despot. The concept of non-violent warfare is that it can achieve its intended goals with minimum loss of life, property, and dignity, and that it places the power on the masses rather than a small fraction of the population which may be able and willing to raise arms against the dictator. Therefore, the power goes to the people once the war is over, rather than being amassed by the small fraction, which would inevitably develop dictatorial tendencies both to exact vengeance and to protect the new found power.

Non-violent warfare makes a few key assumptions. The first is that the dictator has many more resources to engage in warfare than those rising up against him. The dictator is therefore in a position of greater power. In this kind of warfare, however, the need for material resources is minimized greatly, therefore neutralizing this strength possessed by the dictator. The second is that the masses will have greater control of the warfare as they control the manner in which it is carried out. Without any violent altercation, the dictator is placed on the defensive, as they will only react to the actions taken by the masses. It, therefore, moves the masses from a position of disadvantage to an advantageous position. Further, there is no need for the masses to concern themselves with fears of infiltration. Since the methods used are mostly non-violent and within the confines of the law for the most part, infiltration possess no major threat to the success of the strategy.

A dictator’s strength lies in assistance from the people, punishment for those who dissent and abundance in material resources (Sharp 36). In order for the non-violent conflict to succeed, all these bases must be dismantled systematically. The first step towards this goal is delegitimizing his claim to power and authority. When a leader’s legitimacy is brought to question, the people do not feel any moral obligation to disobey them and their rules. It is therefore much easier to convince the people to rise against them and initiate civil disobedience. The people must be rallied together for a common course which can only be achieved by removing the dictator from power. To achieve this end, it is important to strengthen social groups which are independent of the dictatorship’s control or influence. It then becomes easier to initiate civil disobedience, economic autonomy, and boycotts with the aim of restricting the dictatorship’s flow of material.

Non-violent warfare is, in fact, a form of warfare. Firstly, it has all the makings of a war, with two distinct sides, each with a clear goal which is contrary to that of the opponent. In effect, for either side to achieve its goals, the other one must be effectively defeated. It involves the employment of strategy and well-planned methods in order for it to work effectively. Just like in a military campaign, there is the employment of strategy and well-calculated moves to ensure success in a non-violent campaign. A non-violent campaign begins with a grand strategy, which is a blanket strategy for what the campaign should entail and the ultimate end goal, sometimes with a clearly defined timeframe. The second step is the formulation of strategy with refers to the specific measures to be taken to achieve particular objectives within the campaign. Tactic refers to the limited actions undertaken to achieve specific objectives while the method is the specific means of action which are employed to achieve these objectives without the campaign. Without proper planning and the employment of proper strategy, the entre process would end up in failure and prove an utter waste of time.

Conclusion

To conclude, non-violent warfare is perhaps the most effective method to dispose a dictator and achieve democracy. It is inexpensive in terms of material and leads to less loss of life and property. It attacks on the dictator’s most vulnerable places and avoids confronting them on their strongest fronts. As Mr. Gene Sharp demonstrates, it bears all the markings of a war, despite the lack of violence. It achieves the desired goals with little or no loss of life and property and places the power on the masses, eliminating the possibility of replacing one dictator with another.

Work cited

Sharp, Gene. From Dictatorship To Democracy. London: Serpent’s Tail, 2012. Print.