Rethinking Revolution: Lawfare
Recently, Palestinian ‘Freedom Riders’ conducted direct action non-violent assaults on Israeli checkpoints. This mounted land maneuver is a continuation of a non-violent strategy of intervention that hopes to invoke memories of the civil rights Freedom Riders maneuvers to Mississippi in 1961 and the naval confrontation with Israel during the Flotilla Raid in 2010. These actions are deliberate.
When illegal political groups lack resources, ability or will to employ violence, they historically employ lawfare and other forms of non-violent resistance to force change.
Shane Bilsborough’s Counterlawfare in Counterinsurgency examines these events from the viewpoint that since one group is going to conduct lawfare, we must develop counterlawfare and really devise a way to beat the other groups at their own game.
Anne-Marie Slaughter’s War and law in the 21st century: Adapting to the changing face of conflict approaches these types of conflicts from the idea that the world has changed now because it is faster due to new technology, and we need to adapt to face these threats.
As we zoom into the Civil Rights movement throughout this series applying a military lens to traditional political science theory, I hope that we can begin to differentiate changes in tactics between changes in the nature of revolution. That is, while Slaughter is correct that new technology will change the way communication happens, the events of today are nothing new. From a military theory lens, this is the difference between war and warfare. In Bilsborough’s argument, with a better understanding of revolution, perhaps we will conclude that we do not have to necessarily counter it in the same fashion.
For example, one could look at the early rise in Christianity and Islam and see illegal political groups conducting non-violent maneuvers to force change.
So, why did six Palestinians activists call themselves “Freedom Riders” get on a bus, head down to an Israeli checkpoint, and hope to get arrested?
The answer and understanding behind the history of the group’s name is an important one.
Editor’s Note: This should be the last primer in the series. Next up, Doug McAdam’s Political Process and the Development of Black Insurgency, 1930-1970
