Round table

[Pi]

So I have been invited to a round table by the archbishop here in Luxemvourg about security in general.
The audience are mostly scholars participating in a catholic council called "Justice & peace", coming from all over Europe.
Subject was free to choose. Here are my 7 minutes :
Monsignor, Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen,



Thank you very much for having me here tonight giving me the opportunity to share some personal thoughts with you, based on my experience as officer of the Luxembourg Armed Forces.

The Luxembourg Army likes to see itself as a reflection of civil society: based on the same democratic values and composed by members of this society it is sworn to protect.

Certainly everybody can agree on society having foregone some dramatic changes over the last decades as it seems becoming increasingly individualistic and focused on individual freedoms. Individual comfort takes precedence over the needs and expectations of the community

Therefore I think our focus should be how this individualization impacts our communities, our internal and external security and social peace and if we will be able to maintain the moral contract between generations and different parts and groups that compose our society (young and old, locals and migrants, rich and poor)?

I, for my part, noticed a significant change in the behavior of young men and women who join the armed forces:

-Lack of general rules that guide the actions of young people. They are too often disoriented, overlooked or neglected in their attitudes and behavior vis-à-vis others.

-This lack of rules and frameworks is followed by a thirst for recognition, feedback and reactions to their behavior

The risk of failing to train able soldiers and form a homogeneous group, apt to carry out military tasks and handle combat situations is more important.

From a pedagogical point of view it is more difficult to form a group out of individuals from a society which is rather narcissistic. This requires more educational maturity of the instructors

Personally I discovered a higher acceptance as well as a swifter and more thorough execution of my orders when explaining the reason as well as the policies and political decisions leading to these orders.

Understanding the reason, moral and political justifications, allows to bind the members of the group to a more abstract idea than the simple fact of belonging to a group can.

Thus it is important for me to explain to the soldiers why we are committed in armed conflicts

Self-defense or the defense of the sovereignty of a state has been the most justifiable reason of "ius in bello" as a legal and moral reason leading to approval acceptance and support by the population.

But since the 70’s we have experienced an increase in military interventions based on the priority of defending human rights (even if sometimes it was a cover for purely political or economic reasons).

It is undeniable that a society is generally opposed to wars that are not self-defense ones. Clearly it is more difficult to explain that the defense of the country takes place in the Hindu Kush even if the moral reasons are valid. Even the Global War on Terrorism is not easily understood and accepted among the population as it is very abstract and seems far away.

Yet the identification with the mission and the motivation of the young soldier is in a strong correlation with society’s acceptance of the commitment and military missions. Honoring his commitment to risk his life for his peers, his group, the army, his nation and even a rather abstract idea that could be the human rights in a hick town in Afghanistan, is of paramount importance in order to be(come) a positive and active member of civil society, and certainly helps in the reintegration of the soldier into civilian life.

This recognition by others and the pride of soldiers to serve others and a just cause can be prominently observed in France and Belgium following the recent terrorist attacks and the presence of the military in the streets of the capitals and cities.

The reasons are :

-justification of the commitment as soldier, “to protect the nation/society”

-positive reactions from the different levels of society

-fulfillment of the social contract between the armed forces and civil society

In conclusion I would like to highlight the importance of the reason, the “why” to the generation Y and Z. The search for meaning in their actions and in their life is a major concern of the youth.

I must point out that it is not the role of the military to form, shape or even discipline the youth of a society and I finally would like to highlight the risk of failure in doing so as a society.

Not only will we continue to strengthen the individualization of our society, putting social peace and every generational contract at risk, but we leave room for dangerous splinter groups who will become the moral authority vis-à-vis our youth, as religious and political fundamentalists have already done.


What do you think? Does it seem to have a logical thought? Does it make sense to you?
And yeah, the English may sound europeanish...