Evictions and Nonviolent Resistance

Dara is a 16 year-old young man. His family are members of InnerChange and serve on the Cambodia team in Kampot city. Our families were team together for 7 years.

Dara contacted me on Facebook a week or so ago saying that their English class is reading The Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck and it's theme of structural injustice was related to my work with Cambodian activists. Would I come and speak to his class about my work?

I decided that I wanted to make use of my emerging pedagogy of experiental training.

The Mattress Game

My main concern was that I didn't know the participants at all and what their familiarity with nonviolence might be. I guessed that being young they would be more likely to be drawn to exciting political events and have some knowledge of the recent and ongoing Arab Spring, but I didn't want to risk relying on that assumption.

After connecting my laptop to the large screen TV and a short introduction by Dara, I mentioned my work with Cambodian activists who were trying to resist injustice and oppression and that, just as in the Grapes of Wrath, knowing where to identify the source of injustice can be quite difficult.

I briefly introduced the 3 main forms of nonviolent action: protest and persuasion, noncooperation and nonviolent intervention, giving several examples of each. I then asked the group, 14 students, to number off (remember, if you want 6 groups have them count off to 6) and arrange themselves in their groups. I handed out the descriptions of sources of power from The Mattress Game and went through each one. Then asked them to watch the following video on Cambodia 101 East Cambodia Land Grab part 1 with their particular pillar in mind.

At this point I was feeling nervous. I felt I'd given a whole lot of information and wasn't sure if they were with me or not. I started the documentary and sat down to watch it. I watched the students throughout the video and as far as I could see they were engaged.

Afterwards I asked each group to report back what they observed from each pillar perspective (Authority, Human Resources, Skills and Knowledge, Material Resources, Intagible Factors and Sanctions). Each group shared what they saw and demonstrated a good grasp on the various pillars. Few! I hadn't raced beyond their capacity, and infact, they were proving to be insightful young teenagers.

I invited everyone into the large space where the mattress was waiting for us. I asked each group to think for a moment, if you were to counter your source of power with a nonviolent action what kinds of actions can you think of? We spent a moment then I asked if anyone was having trouble. One group put up their hands and we brainstormed possible actions for this. I think I ended up suggesting one. I think next time I could open this up to the whole group for suggestions. I wasn't sure how this part would go, either, and is why I did the opening introduction to the 3 forms of nonviolence and give everyone a chance to think about different actions they'd come across.

One person from each group lifted up the mattress above their heads. And one-by-one each group announced the action they would use to counter their source of power and removed the pillar. “A prayer vigil”, “sitting in front of a bulldozer”, “blocking a road” … . As each pillar was removed the pillars left had to move around as the balance shifted. Finally, the last pillar was left balancing the mattress (a stiff spring mattress) on top of her head. As she left, the mattress fell to the floor.

We stood in a semi-circle around the fallen mattress and began debriefing the exercise. I asked people what they noticed about the excerice? “Small actions add up to a big effect” was one reply, “power really does rest on people's consent to an authority,” was another. What did people holding the mattress notice? “As pillars were removed we had to shift around a lot to keep the balance.” As the reflection came I spent time affirming them and at times expanding on them, giving some examples of how I saw that in Cambodia or a reference to The Grapes of Wrath. What did you feel in the exercise? One tall youth said, “I felt like a traitor! But when the mattress fell I felt so happy.” Wow. What an incredible insight into the psychology of unjust power.

At that point time was up. I thanked everyone for their participation and they thanked me with a surprising (and pleasing!) amount of applause.

Why I Joined the Green Walk for Jobs and Justice

More Stories of Community Resistance to Forced Evictions in Cambodia

A great case study of the Om Laing community last year begins at 5:20.

A Recent Conversation on Egypt and Nonviolent Protest

Friend 1: "It's amazing that it's possible to bring down a government simply by amassing large numbers of people (peacefully). Thoughts on why demonstrations and protests are so much less efficacious in America?"

Friend 2: "I feel like it's because in general we are more content with our lives and the government. Although it does seem like when I read the news, people seem less and less satisfied with the government but honestly, I think most people realize how good they have it there (in the US)."


Me: "Great blog to check out on this very issue is www.wagingnonviolence.org. They go into why nonviolence is/isn't effective in specific situations. My guess on the US is that many protests are purely symbolic, no one is really putting their lives/careers on the line for the cause. Whereas in Egypt the simple act of a public gathering is a seditious act and not just symbolic. It shows the strength of people's commitment to change. Of course, if this drags on, their tactics will need to evolve. There may be other issues to, like perhaps the US is better able to co-opt the message of any protesting group. There is a veneer of respectability in the US that is harder to penetrate, whereas someone who is openly a dictator is a much easier target. If one hundred thousand US citizens engaged in obvious public nonviolent civil disobedience, eg over immigration reform or to close Guantanamo, daily for ten days you will probably see more effectiveness."


Friend 3: "I agree. There are protests and protests. Symbolic protests are just so. Real protests in countries where the very right of protesting is almost nonexistent can be quite effective. But look what happens in Egypt. Almost two weeks of protests and the dictator won't budge..."


Friend 4: "let's not kid ourselves: the protests we are seeing in the middle east are not entirely peaceful. the implicit threat that the large groups of people become more unhappy and less peaceful if their demands are not met is part of the reason behind their effectiveness."


Me to Friend 3: "It may look like the dictator isn't budging, but he's making all the classic moves of a dictator in his last throws of power."


Me to Friend 4: "The protesters are not less peaceful because their demands are not being met, rather because of provocation by hired thugs. It's a strategy used by incumbent regimes of all kinds to turn public sentiment away from the core concerns. The protesters need to gain better discipline. As far as I know, there have been no threats made otherwise. The large group can be seen as a a potentially violent threat. It can also be seen as a statement saying, "do what you like, you are no longer relevant and we will choose how to live from now on.""

Mass Worker Strikes Demand Wage Rise in Cambodia

CAMBODIA. Tonight unions and human rights organisations estimate 159,850 garment factory workers struck all around the country today as daily numbers of striking workers increase since Monday. The first day of industrial action saw 53 factories striking totaling 120,000 workers. Fifty-eight thousand workers were prevented from entering the city to join their fellow workers in meetings around the capital of Phnom Penh.

September 11 – A Time to Mourn and Celebrate

Once again we approach a momentous date. A time to remember when the world changed.

A Time for Mourning

On first glance we are reminded of a date nine years ago focused on the centers of economic and military might of the United States of America.
     We are called to mourn the loss of lives, both those in the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon; and also the soldiers who have died, and continue to die, in the course of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
     We are called to mourn the loss of Iraqi and Afghani men, women and children who have perished in almost countless numbers.
     We mourn the loss of civil freedoms as a result of many countries passing terrible laws allowing for torture and unending imprisonment of suspects and alleged enemy combatants, as well as racial profiling, phone-tapping and the new military mantra of pre-emptive strike.
     We mourn the ongoing financial burden these wars place on the citizens of the United States, Iraq and Afghanistan, and the fear-mongering required to perpetuate a desire for security in the guise of technology and weaponry; hatred and exclusion.

A Time for Celebration

     Giving the date another look we will find something quite different; a call to hope, bravery and a vision of the immense power of people resisting evil in all it's forms. On September 11, 1906, Mohandas K. Gandhi, a young lawyer, gave a speech that changed history. It was his inauguration speech for satyagraha at the Empire Theatre in South Africa. At that time, South Africa was a colonial outpost of the British Empire. Given the racist and unjust treatment of Indians Gandhi took it upon himself to lead nonviolent action to overturn laws that were unfair, unjust, and dehumanizing. This speech is dramatized in the film "Gandhi" and you can watch the satyagraha speech here.

     In 1906 Gandhi was a little-known failed lawyer on the margins of the world's biggest Empire. But he came to realise that there was power in Truth which he named satyagraha (truth force). The tactics he used were not passive, as many think of nonviolence. He intentionally went out of his way, asking others to do likewise, to push the issues of injustice to the forefront of public life. By refusing to carry identification papers he forced the police and government to respond - often through beatings and imprisonment. By marching thousands of out-of-work miners across state borders he forced the government to respond. With prisons full and Indians unwilling to cooperate with the government there was little choice but to accede to his demands.

     His creative use of persuasion, noncooperation and nonviolent intervention, in South Africa and India, included economic boycotts on British-made cloth and direct challenges to monopoly laws forbidding Indians to make salt in their own country, blazing the way for today's nonviolent activists.

     While we rightly mourn with those who have lost so much since September 11, 2001 we remember with hope that there is a better way to solve our conflicts and achieve justice and freedom. We can still fight, but our weapons are not made from metal and explosives, but from the strategic and collective use of nonviolent tactics as well as our undying search for Truth.
     Finally, we would do to remember that behind (and in front of) Gandhi were hundreds of thousands of people willing to suffer hardship for a better world where all have their basic needs met, and are respected as equal partners of humanity.

Awareness and Training Enhance Choice for Nonviolent Action

My assumption and heart-felt belief is that most people in most situations would prefer to choose nonviolence over violence to resolve conflict - regardless of faith, race, or socio-economic status. The limiting factor is awareness of the range of nonviolent tactics available for engaging conflict in many situations, including some of the most violent situations humanity has known, and the way in which these tactics create dynamics that successfully lead to greater peace, justice and freedom.

While many philosophical, ideological and theological arguments rage over why war or violence may well be justified, what is often missing is a clear understanding of the range of nonviolent options at our disposal, and hence, the opportunity to continually pursue nonviolent means. There are many studies on the application of what is sometimes referred to as "pragmatic" nonviolence because of it's attention to the application of tactics and strategies, rather than focusing on changing people's motivation for action. Personally, while I am motivated by an inner desire and spiritual journey to engage conflict nonviolently, I am convinced that it is possible to persuade others of the effectiveness of nonviolence by increasing awareness and building skills in nonviolent conflict as a starting point, rather than from complex, though meaningful, arguments of the rightness of nonviolence.

Gandhi is probably the most well-known name connected to nonviolence, but very little is known about him beyond that. Following him we might be able to list off a small number of other names such as Mother Theresa, Nelson Mandela, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, Martin Luther King Jr, Rosa Parks and perhaps a few others. Again we probably know little beyond their names and that they were good people or championed justice. We probably don't have an understanding of the specifics of their contexts, why they chose nonviolent action, and the specific tactics they used and the reasons for choosing those tactics over others. Nonviolence becomes quickly boiled down to "being nice to everyone" and "turning the other cheek" as we remember that many of these names ended up being reviled, beaten or assassinated at some point. Obviously they refused to fight back, we assume (wrongly).

There is a growing body of knowledge in the area of nonviolence. At it's most basic, nonviolent civilian resistance understands that: “when the people deprive the oppressor of their consent it reduces his/her legitimacy; when enough people refuse to cooperate, they increase the cost of holding control; [and] when the system's legitimacy drops and its costs rise, its enforcers doubt its endurance.” [1]

Nonviolence scholar Gene Sharp arranged nonviolent tactics into three broad categories: protest and persuasion, non-cooperation and nonviolent interventions. These include such tactics as:

(persuasion) speeches, petitions, mock awards, use of symbols like flags and ribbons, humour, satire, and music; (non-cooperation) boycotts, strikes, suspension of various normal activities like sports, stay-at-home, slow-downs, withholding rent, and providing sanctuary to political fugitives; (nonviolent intervention) fasting, sit-ins, nonviolent raids, nonviolent land-seizure, provoking imprisonment and harsh or violent treatment, and parallel institutions. For a more exhaustive treatment see http://www.aeinstitute.org.

Other scholars are helping us understand the dynamics of nonviolent conflict, that is, why nonviolence is effective against violence at all. It is counter-intuitive that someone armed with a commitment to simply not use violence, no matter what, could defeat someone armed with a gun - yet they repeatedly do. One such dynamic is called "backfire", or "the paradox of repression". This dynamic refers to the seemingly innate desire of humans to resist control, repression and violence. As violent regimes (of all persuasions) increase their usage of violent domination the populous reaches a tipping point of pent-up frustration and temporarily repress their very real fears of imprisonment, torture or death to take to the streets and engage in civil disobedience and other, often spontaneous, nonviolent tactics. The more training they have in nonviolent resistance the more persistent and likely to succeed they will be. It is the ultimate irony. Regimes using violent and domineering tactics hasten their demise. Knowing this, nonviolent civil resisters can make effective use of this dynamic.

New research helps us understand not only the tactics and dynamics, but also the "hard facts" about the effectiveness of nonviolent resistance. Until recently nonviolence was studied exclusively through case-study analysis, which has wrought important information. Empirical research is now backing up what was being assumed: that nonviolent conflict is more efficient and effective than violent conflict [2]. In another study on the manner in which insurrections end researchers found that it was not through effective military operations, but through careful diplomatic efforts to include the aggrieved parties in political processes and addressing their core complaints [3]. Yet another study gives four significant findings about nonviolent civilian resistance:

“First, “people power” movements matter, because nonviolent civic forces are a major source of pressure for decisive change in most transitions. ... Second, there is comparatively little positive effect for freedom in “top-down” transitions that were launched and led by elites. ... Third, the presence of strong and cohesive nonviolent civic coalitions is the most important of the factors examined in contributing to freedom. … Fourth, the data suggests that the prospects for freedom are significantly enhanced when the opposition does not itself use violence.” [4].

These findings point to several benefits of nonviolent conflict, or civilian resistance as it is also referred to, that it promotes and requires broad-based, bottom-up, civilian input leading towards more just and democratic decision-making processes and greater freedom for societies, and that nonviolence is a major force for change towards freedom. This is a clear demonstration of the dynamic of "means and ends equivalency". That is, in nonviolence the path one chooses is just as important as the end goal in mind.

There are many obstacles to nonviolent civilian resistance. The first is lack of awareness and understanding of the tactics, strategies, dynamics and research. Secondly, many conflict situations actively work against the promotion of nonviolent resistance. Thirdly, people are not clean slates and have prior experiences that can predispose them to choose violence such as deep-seated hatred of their opponents, a sense of futility, and sense of great urgency requiring immediate and decisive action, or worse, inaction. Fourthly, most aid and development agencies have little understanding of nonviolent resistance themselves and often promote strategies that undermine this approach, or are afraid of the repercussions to funding or government approval if they promote civilian resistance. These are significant, but not insurmountable, problems.

Once populations are exposed to the practical applications of nonviolence there is an opening for deepening their understanding of why what just happened worked so well. In many cases months and years of deep violence has ended in a few days of open nonviolent action. Gandhi believed deeply that if just one person, completely devoted to nonviolent action, held out success was assured. This may seem hard to believe, but the evidence clearly shows that nonviolence is a force more powerful than we often assume.

Notes

[1] Jack DuVall (2010) The Dynamics of Civil Resistance, recorded presentation. http://www.nonviolent-conflict.org/

[2] Maria J. Stephan and Erica Chenoweth (2008). Why Civil Resistance Works. The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict

[3] Seth G. Jones and Martin C. Libicki (2008). How Terrorist Groups End. Lessons for Countering al Qa'ida.

[4] Freedom House (2005). How Freedom is Won. From Civic Resistance to Durable Democracy.

Key Sources:

The Albert Einstein Institute. http://aeinstitute.org

The International Center for Nonviolent Conflict. http://nonviolent-conflict.org

Michael Nagler's UC Berkley courses on Introduction to Nonviolence and Nonviolence for Today available on http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4F8kJchX4I.

A Force More Powerful. A four-part documentary series on nonviolent resistance movements in the twentieth century. www.aforcemorepowerful.org.

Cambodia and the Way of Nonviolence

by Chris Baker Evens
April, 2010


In Cambodia rampant economic development is fuelling discontent and creating social, economic and cultural upheaval through forced evictions, loss of natural resources and an inaccessible legal system. Cambodians are fighting back using active nonviolence.

The reality of conflict (1) and violence (2) in Cambodia, especially over land and natural resources, but also within communities and families, is a daily reality for hundreds of thousands of Cambodians. Communities are frustrated with the lack of responsiveness by local, provincial and national authorities to listen and act on their concerns, resulting in a number of communities resorting to threats and violence. The subtext is, "we know we are going to lose, but we're not going down without a fight!"


In addition, there are a range of country characteristics (3) for Cambodia suggesting that a time of national choice will come, when the frustrations over structural violence will boil over the cultural values of maintaining relational harmony and respect for authority. The country is held together by a strongly centralised and authoritarian political structure that is more oligarchy than democracy. A recent report (Roads to Development, Meas Nee and Wayne McCallum, 2009) suggests that Cambodian authorities have been able to subsume the language of democracy and development into existing structures of corruption gaining international recognition as a successful post-conflict democracy and access to ongoing financial aid. 

Community Petition Parade

This morning at 6:30am 200 community "activists" prepared to walk the short distance from Wat Botum to the Prime Minister's offices in the center of Phnom Penh, Cambodia. Dozens of riot police were dispatched to prevent the action, designed to highlight the plight of Cambodia's many tens of thousands of people affected by unrestrained economic interests. Around the country economic and land concessions are awarded to national and international companies to "develop" Cambodia. In turn over one hundred thousand people are at risk of forced evictions, environmental degradation, loss of livelihood and cultural continuity.

While riot police attempted to intimidate the peaceful group, individuals, notably older women approached the heavily armed police and tried a sly nonviolent tactic called "rehumanisation". One woman implored a security officer to call her "mother-in-law" to show that they were both from the same Cambodian "family". In response his face turned bright red with embarrassment. The absurdity of the heavily armed response to a peaceful group armed only with a petition of 60,000 signatures obviously dawned on him.

In terms of "effectiveness" this action has several points worth reflecting. Any action that provokes a response has some intrinsic effectiveness as it is obviously pushing a button that the powers-that-be do not like to be pushed. If this issue or group of people were talking about a "politically safe" issue there would not have been the police response. On the other hand, Cambodia has tightly controlled protest regulations. While public protests are not technically illegal, municipal authorities demand groups arrange "permission" ahead of time. A public gathering, then, can simply be a statement of resistance to such a practice, not necessarily the issue being raised.

I am aware that officials from the Prime Minister's Office did in fact arrive to collect the petition (instead of allowing the group to march the less than one kilometer from the pagoda to their offices). This marks an important action-moment for the group. On the one hand officialdom has publicly acknowledged their grievance, on the other hand they have potentially removed the source of tension, depending on the group's demands and goals. Were they simply after the successful handing over of a petition? In which case they are successful but real change is unlikely. Or are they demanding real resolution to the raised issues that, unless acted on, will be followed up by further nonviolent actions until a full, transparent and acceptable response by the government has been made? In which case it's too early to say if there has been success. The history of nonviolent action in Cambodia so far is mixed. At the local level there have been some impressive successes. On the national level very few. However, this continues to provide an opportunity for Cambodian peoples of all ethnicities, religions and language groups to express their ongoing desire for protection of the land, natural resources and human, cultural and economic rights.

Photo by Moses Ngeth