In 2016, rapper and provocateur M.I.A. questioned why Black Lives Matter discourse doesn’t extend beyond U.S. borders. She calls on audiences to recognize the growing nature of policing in different contexts across the world today — even in places some may see as disconnected from police violence whether at home or abroad. 

Though M.I.A. was harshly criticized, her point deserves further attention. In the spirit of her critique, we need to look at policing and militarism again using an international perspective: how has policing and militarism spread and mutated across borders and regions in the world today? 

As academics at Syracuse University, we must study cases such as policing in the states of Colombia and Israel, raise complex questions and develop our own understanding of international militarism.

Colombia’s progress on achieving key points in a peace agreement it signed in 2016 has stalled. Recently, the country erupted in protest against the government’s new tax reforms, which the Colombian president introduced despite opposition from concerned citizens. 

These reforms were meant to address COVID-19 economic deficits. However, many Colombians have rejected these reforms, stating they are part of a larger and ongoing class-realignment redirecting wealth away from the bottom to enrich the wealthy. 

Colombia’s president Iván Duque initiated military force against demonstrations, arguing that protesters are committing criminal acts against the nation. In response, nongovernmental organizations, social leaders and independent media have been reporting ilegal and arbitrary detentions, torture, unjustified killings and other abuse committed by the Mobile Anti-Riot Squadron of the National Police against protesters. 

Police violence and corruption in Colombia is nothing new. The recent outbreak is simply a heightened example of what has been smoldering in Colombia for years. 

Similarly, half a world away in occupied East Jerusalem, the Israeli military dragged Palestinians out of their homes and attacked them as they stood in prayer at the holy Al-Aqsa Mosque. 

Recent violence broke out after Israeli forces entered Palestinian homes in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood as part of a forced removal of Palestinians to make room for settlers by the ethno-nationalist Israeli state. After days of violence, the U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres urged “restraint,” cautioning Israeli police against their flagrant brutality and disregard for human life. Israel is also the largest recipient of U.S. foreign assistance, and the U.S. spent $3.8 billion on military aid for Israel in 2020 alone.

These are two increasingly brazen states using more force with fewer consequences. There are those who might argue that these examples of police brutality are too different for comparison. On the contrary, these two examples are profoundly joined by their links to nationalism and statism buttressed by militarism and policing.

Both states, Colombia and Israel, are structured around the idea that states exist as neatly organized entities that contain easily definable populations. The reality of states and nations include — and have always included — the mixing of populations and their characteristics, which spill across borders in defiance of this nation-state logic. So, how have citizens enabled these human rights violations and what does this have to do with “military minds?”

A close look at entertainment media in the U.S tells us a great deal about how the use of force is made appealing based on the stories we tell over and over again. Many of the stories we tell in movies and TV shows feature cops and soldiers doing the “good work” of fighting crime. The popularity of crime dramas and superhero movies attest to this, despite the reality that police often perpetuate crime in many countries such as the U.S., Mexico, India, Chile, Brazil, Belarus and Turkey, among others.

Popular stories don’t reflect these realities and often depict cops and soldiers as “good guys” fighting “bad guys.” If enforcing peace is a legitimate public necessity, then citizens should think critically about how they consent to its implementation. It is worthwhile to analyze how we as professors, students and as citizens are connected to policing and its portrayal.

In direct parallel to these stories, we see how police and military expenditure continues to rise, and the use of force continues to multiply while spending on education and health care remains stagnant. An example from Colombia captures these disparities: Colombia invested $9.2 billion U.S. dollars in its military in 2020 — during the pandemic — when it should have been prioritizing health care and education. How many stories do we tell about the virtues of teaching and administering health care? And how many do we tell about using force to “fight crime?” 

It is important to recognize and resist the contradictions in criminal policing and the ways we quietly manufacture consent for it. Why do we love police dramas so much? Why are we so fond of stories about so-called superheroes who use force to right wrongs? How have we gradually become used to a military mindset that blindly admires the use of force as the best way of accomplishing desirable ends?

Although we, as SU members, may feel distant from policing and militarism across borders, we must consider the pro-military character of our university. SU plays an important role in the education of military and public service officials, and its faculty have received funding from the Department of Defense. 

SU also has a commitment “to promote learning through teaching, research, scholarship, creative accomplishment and service.” In the spirit of these goals, we as members of the SU community are called to have “a close interaction and engagement with the world.” In the current circumstances, this means that we need to learn about the connections between militarism and higher education to think critically about how the logic of policing becomes a widespread problem, how this exists in our daily lives, how we contribute to the state of global actuality and what consequences it may bring — including to our institution. It is urgent to reflect ethically outside the box that surrounds us.

 

Azadeh Ghanizadeh

Doctoral student, Composition and Cultural Rhetoric

Catalina Nino Cordero

Executive Master’s student in Public Administration

 

Published on June 29, 2021 at 10:57 am