Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
180321 Ethics Case Studies (Sudan Weller (military (need for coalition…
180321 Ethics Case Studies
Sudan Weller
tribes were social constructs but very deep enmity
split between President & VP
therefore split between Army along tribal lines
but essentially a power struggle between President and former VP
dominated by the Nile
divides the country
wet
military
peacekeeping to all means necessary very quickly
need for coalition building
UN relatively weak compare to national C2
inc military and civilian tensions
each nation had own interests and caveats
to a tension as a UN officer asking nations to do something that national caveats prevented
UN provided a protected area for who retreated (at the time)
and COs
disobeying, ignoring or delaying orders
lack of power of UN 3*
UN responses
poor SA as night patrolling prohibited
minor actions by belligerents (eg lying on the road) could halt UN acty
reluctance for rehearsals
cultural
notion that African civil wars last for decades so what was the hurry?
child soldiers
Australia
except for risk not generally not cared about
notion that our presence made it less worse
notion of a proxy war against Uganda through South Sudan
reliant on aid
so education may not be effective esp child soldier finance and all they knew
Remote Warfare Alsworth
can we?
CDE (collateral damage assessment): technical assessment`
NCV (non-combatant casualty value)
PID: only as good as our capabilities
Buses in the desert
agreement between ISIS and Hebollah for 300 fighters and families to travel from Lebanon for Albu Kamal (17 buses)
coalition desire to stop them
so strike the road ahead and behind them
six buses return
40 vehicles destroyed that were attempting to extract fighters
some insight of the buses to increase fear
CJTF would let women and children leave
fighters did not agree
males leaving the buses were struck
so a siege
remotely
after 11 days
Syrian regime forces overtake bus strike
coalition air assets removed due to airspace de-confliction
so questions?
'roof knock' legitmate
actions where within ROE but ethical?
human interaction necessary for ethical decisions
Ethics, Violence and Behaviour in War McDermott
understanding behaviour in war
group culture
greatest facilitator/presentor
the group is agnostic
every group has a virtue-ethic
aims to
set internal code of conduct
rewards those who follow
this is mutually reinforcing
how does this relate to SIT :question:
leadership is essential
what about people who have power you don't want to have power in the group?
values?
need to understand
individuals
situations
groups
risks
individual agency
formed through your life experience
but war will change people
military filtering
through criminal history
people who do not think about evil are most likely to do evil
situational pressure
corrupting triad of war
power
notion we have removed violence from our lives except miltary
really :question:
to kill
no social control
eg ROE
dehumanisation of the enemy faceless enemy
visceral emotion eg terror, hatred, disgust, revenge
persistent exposure to high emotional situations
Harrison
people's inability to act in times of extreme pressure astounding
less time on operations means you focus elsewhere so not expected for killing if necessary
Q&A
deception in every element of operations
emotional involvement from the chase will effect the decision to kill