(no subject)
Aug. 10th, 2011 08:39 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
drewkittyInteresting PDF on protection operations by humanitarian agencies. Interesting set of techniques.
http://www.alnap.org/pool/files/alnap-protection-guide.pdf
One point emphasized again and again is the need for people to be involved in their own protection.
"4 -- Build on people’s own self-protection capacity"
"Humanitarian common sense affirms the value of people’s own knowledge, capacity, insight and innovation in any given situation that threatens them. As a result, good practice in humanitarian protection values close cooperation and participation in any relationship between humanitarian agencies and the people they are trying to help. People are seldom passive when they feel at risk: they engage in a range of finely judged actions to cope, respond, adapt and survive. This makes it essential that people are involved in, and often take the lead on, decisions concerning their own protection."
However I also note throughout unthinking support for the United Nations position that civilians, IDPs ("internally displaced persons") and refugees should be disarmed, that non-state combatants should be demobilized and disarmed, and that misbehavior by state actors should either be shamed or re-educated.
It seems like a slam-dunk to organize communities to protect themselves. However, the individual and collective right to self-defense gets short shrift in international law, despite a rich history in philosophy and law. (See also http://www.hrea.org/index.php?doc_id=427)
The UN position on denying people around the world the right to self-defense makes the UN participant in atrocity.
Against this, I note that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights at Article 3 states in full, "Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person."
This right to life, liberty and security of person is an individual right, and arguably a community/collective right, especially in response to an attack on the community.
I note that the UN Firearms Protocol requires member states to establish firearms tracking systems. http://www.poa-iss.org/FirearmsProtocol/FirearmsProtocol.aspx
" requires that States implement a series of control measures on firearms and ammunition such as maintaining records on firearms markings and transactions, marking firearms for the purposes of identification and tracing and establishing effective export, import and transit licensing systems. Importantly, the Protocol requires mandatory marking not only at the time of manufacture, but also at the time of import to facilitate the identification and tracing of each firearm."
Tracking is the necessary prelude to confiscation. Disarmed civilians plus hatred plus armed government agents equals genocide.
http://jpfo.org/pdf02/genocide-chart.pdf
Never mind the 2nd Amendment. Where are the self-defense rights of people around the world made into IDPs (UN speak for refugees) when they are forced out of their homes and off their lands by gun-toting paramilitary thugs whose guns are specifically EXCLUDED from the UN Protocol?
"The Protocol is not designed to apply to all possible transfers in firearms. Particularly, Article 4 states that it shall not apply to state-to-state transactions or to state transfers where the application of the Protocol would prejudice a state's right to maintain national security as specified within the United Nations Charter."
Why am I reminded of the crack about Lincoln's Proclamation in the Civil War, to the effect that he freed the slaves he had no power to free, and kept in slavery those he could have freed?
The UN would prefer to continue the 'legitimate' international trade in arms of all kinds and disarm only individuals and villagers.
http://www.alnap.org/pool/files/alnap-protection-guide.pdf
One point emphasized again and again is the need for people to be involved in their own protection.
"4 -- Build on people’s own self-protection capacity"
"Humanitarian common sense affirms the value of people’s own knowledge, capacity, insight and innovation in any given situation that threatens them. As a result, good practice in humanitarian protection values close cooperation and participation in any relationship between humanitarian agencies and the people they are trying to help. People are seldom passive when they feel at risk: they engage in a range of finely judged actions to cope, respond, adapt and survive. This makes it essential that people are involved in, and often take the lead on, decisions concerning their own protection."
However I also note throughout unthinking support for the United Nations position that civilians, IDPs ("internally displaced persons") and refugees should be disarmed, that non-state combatants should be demobilized and disarmed, and that misbehavior by state actors should either be shamed or re-educated.
It seems like a slam-dunk to organize communities to protect themselves. However, the individual and collective right to self-defense gets short shrift in international law, despite a rich history in philosophy and law. (See also http://www.hrea.org/index.php?doc_id=427)
The UN position on denying people around the world the right to self-defense makes the UN participant in atrocity.
Against this, I note that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights at Article 3 states in full, "Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person."
This right to life, liberty and security of person is an individual right, and arguably a community/collective right, especially in response to an attack on the community.
I note that the UN Firearms Protocol requires member states to establish firearms tracking systems. http://www.poa-iss.org/FirearmsProtocol/FirearmsProtocol.aspx
" requires that States implement a series of control measures on firearms and ammunition such as maintaining records on firearms markings and transactions, marking firearms for the purposes of identification and tracing and establishing effective export, import and transit licensing systems. Importantly, the Protocol requires mandatory marking not only at the time of manufacture, but also at the time of import to facilitate the identification and tracing of each firearm."
Tracking is the necessary prelude to confiscation. Disarmed civilians plus hatred plus armed government agents equals genocide.
http://jpfo.org/pdf02/genocide-chart.pdf
Never mind the 2nd Amendment. Where are the self-defense rights of people around the world made into IDPs (UN speak for refugees) when they are forced out of their homes and off their lands by gun-toting paramilitary thugs whose guns are specifically EXCLUDED from the UN Protocol?
"The Protocol is not designed to apply to all possible transfers in firearms. Particularly, Article 4 states that it shall not apply to state-to-state transactions or to state transfers where the application of the Protocol would prejudice a state's right to maintain national security as specified within the United Nations Charter."
Why am I reminded of the crack about Lincoln's Proclamation in the Civil War, to the effect that he freed the slaves he had no power to free, and kept in slavery those he could have freed?
The UN would prefer to continue the 'legitimate' international trade in arms of all kinds and disarm only individuals and villagers.
