34 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
Bradford Non-Lethal Weapons Research Project (BNLWRP). Research Report No. 4.
yesNon-lethal weapons (NLWs) are explicitly designed and primarily employed to incapacitate personnel or material whilst minimising collateral damage to property and the environment. Existing NLWs include rubber and plastic bullets, entangling nets, chemical sprays such as OC and CS gas, and electrical stunning devices such as the `TaserÂż gun. New NLWs are on the way, which will include acoustic and microwave weapons, non-lethal landmines, malodorants, and sophisticated weapons developed through rapid advances in neuroscience and the genomics revolution. Most analysts would agree that there is a `legitimateÂż role for non-lethal weapons, both for civil and military applications. However there is considerable disagreement as to the operational effectiveness of NLWs, and the threat such weapons pose to arms conventions and international law. As usual, a balance has to be achieved where the benign advantages of developing and deploying non-lethal weapons are not outweighed by their more malign effects.
In particular, emerging non-lethal technologies offer an increasing opportunity for the suppression of civil dissent and control of populations Âż these are sometimes referred to as the `technologies of political controlÂż. There is a continuing need for sustained and informed commentary to such developments which highlights the impact and threats that these technologies pose to civil liberties and human rights.
Because the last BNLWP Report was produced in August 2001, this edition is somewhat longer than usual so that key developments since then can be highlighted and summarised. Future BNLWRP reports will be published three times a year, and we welcome material to be considered for inclusion
Recommended from our members
Bradford Non-Lethal Weapons Research Project (BNLWRP). Research Report 1.
yesThe NLW database illustrates the extensive and eclectic literature regarding NLWs which covers the last few decades. It currently contains over 250 entries. It is important to have access not only to the more recent material, but also to earlier sources since many of the general debates and controversies have already been rehearsed, and lessons learnt from them are still relevant today.
Yet, it is also vital to follow new developments of NLWs closely because rapidly changing technology is producing weapons whose implications for integration into military and civil police forces have yet to be clearly defined and understood. Of particular interest are not only NLW applications for war fighting, but opportunities for deployment in peace enforcement and peace keeping missions. These technologies span many bases including: psycho-chemicals; unmanned weapons platforms and delivery systems; biogenetics; acoustic and microwave weapons; biological and chemical weapons; laser systems; kinetic energy ballistics; dual purpose (lethal/non-lethal) weapons; and, sprays and foams which inhibit movement. The database will keep up to date on these developments and future reports will highlight new issues and debates surrounding them.
With these rapid technological advances come a series of associated dangers and concerns including: the ethics of use; implications for weapons control and disarmament treaties; military doctrine; public accountability and guidelines; dangers of misuse and proliferation; and, research and development strategies.
Using the database, and drawing from military and non-military sources, this report will select the main current issues and debates within the non-lethal community. Bearing in mind that many operations undertaken by military forces are now more akin to policing actions (such as peace support operations) there are lessons to be learnt by military units from civil police experience. There still remains a tension between perceived benign and malign intent both in NLW operational use and non-lethal research and development
Recommended from our members
Bradford Non-Lethal Weapons Research Project (BNLWRP). Research Report 3.
yesThis third report from the Bradford NLW Project aims to give the reader a brief update of developments and debates within the NLWs field over the last few months. We hope that it will be of interest not only to NLW `specialists', but also to those with a general interest in this area.
Interest in non-lethal weapons, which have been defined as being `explicitly designed and primarily employed to incapacitate personnel or material while minimising fatalities, permanent injury to personnel, and undesired damage to property and the environment', has increased dramatically over the last five years as a result of non-lethal technology progress and increasing calls from military forces (especially those engaged in peacekeeping) and civil police for more sophisticated non-lethal responses to violent incidentsÂżwhilst there are evident advantages linked with non-lethal weapons, there are also key areas of concern associated with the development and deployment of such weapons. These include threats to existing weapons control treaties and conventions, their use in human rights violations (such as torture), harmful biomedical effects, and what some predict as a dangerous potential for use in social manipulation and social punishment within the context of a technology of political control
Presbyterians, Jews, and Divestment. The Church Steps Back
In 2004 the Presbyterian Church voted to begin a process of "phased, selective" divestment from five stocks that were profiting from the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. In 2006 they voted to continue engagement with the corporations. The author wrote an article on the 2004 vote and the controversy surrounding it. This is an article on the 2006 vote and the controversy that surrounded it.http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/110130/1/ChurchStepsBack2006.pdfDescription of ChurchStepsBack2006.pdf : Main articl
When Art Becomes Political: An Analysis of Irish Republican Murals 1981 to 2011
For nearly thirty years in the late twentieth century, sectarian violence between Irish Catholics and Ulster Protestants plagued Northern Ireland. Referred to as âthe Troubles,â the violence officially lasted from 1969, when British troops were deployed to the region, until 1998, when the peace agreement, the Good Friday Agreement, was signed. Despite the changes in the government system, two things have not changed in Northern Ireland since the Good Friday Agreement: the pride both Loyalists and Republicans have in their cultures and their means to express this: murals. Traditionally a Loyalist practice dating back to late 1920s, Republican murals did not become widespread in 1981 when a real mural tradition emerged. This proliferation of Republican murals happened because of the 1981 Hunger Strike led by Bobby Sands in the H-block prison. With renewed vigor in Irish Republicanism combined with anger and sadness over the death of the hunger strikers, artists began to paint many murals in nationalist areas; in the months following Sandsâ death, over one hundred murals were painted in Belfast alone. For both Republicans and Loyalists, the murals, painted on the sides of businesses and homes throughout cities in Northern Ireland, served as a way to generate and solidify popular support through non-violent means. Muralists from both sides incorporated portrayals of historical events and heroes in their activist artworkâpresumably in order to stir pride and renewed commitment among their comrades and to encourage support in their respective causes. Because they are on the opposite sides of the conflict, the murals draw on completely different sources of inspiration and depict different events. By looking at the murals one can see the violence, devastation, and ultimately progress that took place in Northern Ireland during the Troubles and after the Good Friday Agreement. This project demonstrates how hunger strike inspired murals painted in 1981 and 2011, for example, have differences like artistic quality, inclusion of symbols, and use of quotes, even though they are depictions of the same event. Because the political climate and the circumstances of the conflict changed, so did the murals