Professor Wong begins the evening
November 5th I attended the Frank W. Woods Lecture on “Who Really affects Violence in Conflict? The Roles of Non-State Actors” by guest speaker Professor Deborah Avant.
Frank W. Woods is alum of the University of Toronto; his name is inscribed in the walls of the UC Junior Common room. Our guest speaker of the night, Professor Deborah Avant, holds a PhD from the University of San Diego, the same University of our very own Professor Wong! Professor Avant’s work orients around who has power to govern in global politics beyond the State. She has done numerous commentaries, engaged in policy debates and has presented her research in front of congress.
The Frank W Woods lecture reminded me a lot of PCJ260 taught by Professor Bertoldi. It’s a great lecture to hone in on the concepts we learned in class and applying it to real world scenarios. I feel this lecture would be especially beneficial to those in PCJ260, especially since it’s around midterm season. It served as a good refresher to key concepts.
Professor Avant addresses a question during the Q&A period
The most interesting topic I found was the conflict in Ukraine, which has many actors that have been consequential. The violence in Ukraine can be analyzed on a micro level. Civil groups were responsible for the civil unrest and the ousting of President Viktor Yanukovych. Regardless of the government’s agreements, armed militia continued the conflict. Residents in the city of Mariupol became tired of the conflict and “retook” their city. Civil protesters aligned themselves with steel organizers and worked with the police force in order to be able to walk through the streets and restore order. Civilians continued with their normal lives, and started going to the beach, making reservations at restaurants. According to Professor Avant “they reclaimed their city because they didn’t have time for the war”. Each example of how non-state actors affect violence is unique to its situation. The example in Mariupol may not be the best strategy in all scenarios. However, it is important to focus on how non-state actors and the non-violence strategies they employ affect violence and conflict.
This example in particular reminded me of the local dynamics back in Pakistan where my family is from. I would often read about the violence-taking place back there and be weary whenever I traveled back. My relatives would often laugh at my expense for being worried about going to crowded markets and cinemas, both of which often have bomb threats made on them. As long as a threat is not immediate, life does not stop just because the threat is present. My mother would often tell me that we can not live our lives in fear, because the minute we do, we have lost the overall battle and the threat has taken over and won. As an overall trend, certain areas of Pakistan have gotten worse and civilians have to take precautions, but the kids still go to school, weddings and births still happen, and life still goes on.