Illegitimate Violence in Belfast

Whether or not an act of violence is seen as legitimate often determines how successful the act will be in accomplishing the objective. In Malcolm Gladwell’s book David and Goliath-Underdogs, Misfits, and the Art of Battling Giants, he uses The Troubles in Northern Ireland during the late 1960s to illustrate the consequences of an illegitimate use of force. At some point during the often bloody conflict between Protestants and Catholics, the British army was called in to help the Northern Ireland police keep the peace. The British army was supposed to be a neutral party but it became clear soon after their arrival that neutrality would not be achieved. The British army was Protestant and as a result had a tendency to align itself with that side of the conflict. For instance, when taking a position to separate a group of potentially violent Catholics and Protests, the army would face the Catholic side. This showed the Catholics the army saw them as the aggressors and the Protestants as the group needing protection. The army eventually implemented a curfew on the Catholic section of Belfast and sought to enforce it through an overwhelming display of force. The army patrolled the streets with heavy weaponry and conducted nighttime raids on Catholic homes suspected of containing weapons. The British clearly wanted to send a message they should not be messed with. However, the Catholics in Belfast stood up to the British army and defied their curfew. The mass of people rejecting the curfew was too much for the British army to handle and they eventually were forced to stand down.

The situation in Belfast shows how a population can reject the authority of an organization which is much more powerful. The British were supposed to be a neutral party brought in to help make peace. However, their legitimacy in the eyes of Catholics was ruined when it was clear they had started to drift towards the Protestant side of the conflict. Despite demonstrating an overwhelming capability to inflict violence, their “rule” over the Catholic portion of Belfast was not successful. It goes to show how important legitimacy is when it comes to the use of violence. Had the British truly been neutral, they could have fostered a level of trust with the Catholic side of town. Gaining a level of trust and legitimacy would have made it much easier for the British to reach a peaceful solution with the Catholic population.

Over the years, I think military units have learned from what happened in Belfast. In Afghanistan, for example, the US military knew that it would only be successful in helping to develop a strong central government if it was seen as a legitimate force. With that in mind, they made efforts to connect with local populations and get them to “buy in” to what was trying to be accomplished. The US certainly had the military might to force local communities to behave how they wanted (like what the British army tried to do), but they knew this tactic would not be successful in the long run. Simply using a show of force to make changes within a population is not seen as legitimate and thus not effective.