Children At War

[The following is an excerpt (the conclusion) from my dissertation- 'Children At War'- for the PG Diploma in Journalism from the Asian College of Journalism.]

The use of children in military warfare can be traced back to the medieval ages, where the idea of a Children’s Crusade in 1212 took stronghold and which allowed the entire family to participate in the social realm. Napoleon had children in the opening ranks of his organization. Hitler Youth was an organization that looked to turn its members into fascist fanatics of sorts, during World War II. The Soviet Union used children during the Great War too, only not as prominently as the Germans did. Thus, to say that the use of child combatants in battlefields is a 20^th century or a Third World phenomenon would be ignoring all this.

If David assisted King Saul as a child in warfare in the Bible, this phenomenon had been taken for granted for a long time, and it wasn’t until the concept of Human Rights came in, that the idea of children fighting it out became appalling to sensibilities. The difference between child recruitment then and now is that of economy, not principle. Children become an asset, because of their vulnerability, their cost- effectiveness and their immaturity, which translates into obedience and acceptability of their violent surroundings. Says the secretary general in his report, “children are easily manipulated and can be drawn into violence that they are often too young to resist or understand. They are most likely to become child soldiers if they are poor, separated from their families, displaced from their homes, living in a combat zone, or have limited access to education.”

As such, the living conditions in Third World countries make the children accessible to warring parties that might want to recruit and strengthen their ranks. The enlistment entails a certain level of ‘education’ of the child- an acquaintance with the cause being fought for and apprising the enthusiasts of their roles and what means and weapons they would be using for war. Those who do not come voluntarily or resist aren’t too hard to break into, since after all, they are just children. If violence is a way of life, and the child has volunteered his life into the setup, out of a sense of revenge or dedication, then the teacher’s job becomes easier.

Beyond this, armies of the Third World do not find it worth their time and money to provide the tots or teenagers with bare sustenance. They are treated harshly, being subject to physical and mental abuse, in addition to harsh weather and unhealthy, risky surroundings. There are also the psychological effects that make rehabilitation and reintegration of former child soldiers into normal society very difficult, since they lack basic survival skills. It is also important to keep in mind that as long as a conflict exists, the use, or abuse, of children in it will also continue.

The fact that international law has only recently begun to really chastise this approach to warfare and human life, problematises the entire situation. The criminal aspect of this phenomenon is yet to impress itself upon the psyche of war torn nations and communities. It can be argued that it is yet early days for people to understand the idea of human rights fully. Especially in a social setup where the cause that one is fighting for rules the lives, the days and the nights, the worthiness of human life is grossly undervalued. ‘Children make the future’ can also be interpreted as ‘They will carry this battle to our victory’. As such, the conception of children’s rights will take its time to kick in.