Global Development: Views from the Center
« Former Mozambique President Joaquim Chissano Wins the $5 Million-Plus Mo Ibrahim Prize Partly for NOT Seeking a Third Term | Main | We're Ignorant About Migration And Development -- But We Can Do Better »
October 29, 2007
Former Child Soldiers: Pariahs or Productive Citizens? Why Our Hype Can Harm
Posted by Chris Blattman at 01:05 PM
This week, Congress is debating a Child Soldiers bill that would place limits on U.S. support to countries that do not disarm, demobilize and rehabilitate child soldiers in state forces. We should not be surprised. The past 18 months has seen a flurry of advocacy and especially media attention to the issue of child soldiers, especially in Africa. There have been articles and editorials in major U.S. newspapers, a bestselling memoir of a boy soldier (endorsed by Starbucks, no less), a major motion picture, and a novel of child soldiering that made the New York Times' 100 most notable books of the year. Perhaps never again will we be able to buy a child soldier's memoirs alongside our decaf, low-fat, grande mochaccino.
Such media portrayals of child soldiers are animated by two powerful and now familiar images. One is the senselessly brutal and criminal rebel force, or "warlord-led drives whose essential goal is plunder," in the words of a recent New York Times report. The second icon is the drug-crazed teenager, wielding an AK-47, assured of his magical immunity from enemy bullets.
The most common and painful image, however, is that of the troubled return to civilian life. "They are walking ghosts," mourns a recent New York Times editorial, "damaged, uneducated pariahs."
How fortunate for all of us (and especially for the youth in question) that these images contradict the reality of most formerly recruited children. Indeed, an emerging body of research is dispelling many of these child soldering myths. Unfortunately, these same myths continue to dominate and distort policy aimed at preventing child recruitment and reintegrating children associated with armed groups.
Over the past two years I have worked with a psychologist, two human rights researchers, and several NGOs on studies of war affected youth in northern Uganda, the findings of which challenge conventional wisdom and policy. In a recent book chapter, we use survey data from hundreds of former child soldiers to show that, at least in Uganda, adolescent recruitment is a product, not of barbarism, but of rational calculation by the rebel group. Young adolescents were disproportionately targeted for three reasons: because they were overrepresented in the population; because they were more effective guerrillas than younger children; and (perhaps most importantly) because they were more easily indoctrinated and disoriented than young adults. Children who were orphaned at the time of abduction were also much more likely to stay with the rebel group once abducted, suggesting a fourth determinant of child soldiering: the quality of the life to which one can return.
These findings have important implications for the way the international community moves forward to end the use of child soldiers--implications that I outlined in a recent blog posting.
Perhaps most importantly, however, our study also challenges the portrayal of former child soldiers as damaged, traumatized pariahs who pose an ongoing security threat after war.
Such pessimistic views are endemic. The UN envoy for children and armed conflict recently relayed her fear that these children, untreated, "could grow up to become a lost generation of migrant professional killers." Meanwhile, the former French foreign minister recently lamented that they are "lost children… lost for peace and lost for the development of their countries."
While such alarming assertions attract attention and money to the rehabilitation of former child soldiers, they seem based on the most sensational interviews rather than general experiences. Credible evidence to support these statements simply does not exist.
Quite the opposite, in fact. Our 2006 report on boys and young men in northern Uganda suggests that they are psychologically resilient, peaceful, and enjoy significant support from their families. Only a minority exhibit symptoms of serious emotional distress, and there is no evidence of increased aggression. They live not as marginal people or criminals but as mothers, fathers and citizens.
Material suffering is raised by youth far more often more than nightmares and rejection. Juma, 28 years old, had been abducted by the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) for four years as an adolescent. "What hurt me most," he said, "is that they stopped my education." Indeed, losses of education and work experience are the largest and most prevalent impact of child soldiering among males, but largely because of time away rather than violence and brutality.
The trouble with the view of former child soldiers as time bombs and emotional cripples is that it leads us to regard reintegration into civilian life as hopelessly idealistic. Yet the real solutions--access to schooling, a leg up in livelihoods--are ones we know how to provide.
The results of a similar survey of female abductees in Uganda will be presented this week in presentations in Washington and New York . Look in the CGD blog and my personal site in the coming weeks for updates on the impact of child soldiering on girls, and the implications for the ongoing peace negotiations and DDR (demobilization, disarmament, and reintegration) programs in northern Uganda.
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1004
Comments
Chris - Fascinating study. I was telling a friend about your research and he drew an interesting parallel to some research on the pain experienced by soldiers shot on the battlefield, and civilians in rich countries shot in other situations: crimes or domestic disputes, for example. Evidently the soldiers are much less likely to experience severe pain and to ask for pain relief than the civilians. One possible explanation is that the soldiers expected that things would get better after they were shot--they get to do home--whereas the civilians, already being home, saw no upside to their trauma. For them being shot brought no prospect of an improvement. As an unmitigated disaster it brought more pain.
The situation with former child soldiers is different in many respects. The broad point is that experiences that would traumatize people in one population may not traumatize others in very different situations. The extent to which we suffer trauma from a particular experience depends very much on the context.
I'd be interested to know what you think of this, or whether you have other explanations for the evident resilience of the former child soldiers you have met.
Posted by: Lawrence MacDonald at October 30, 2007 12:38 AM
Chris,
I worked with a group of former child soldiers this past summer at the Buduburam refugee camp in Ghana. They are really a unique bunch of guys (and girls). When they realized that they were not going to be given the opportunity to participate in a formal DDR program, or receive any kind of assistance to reintegrate, they came together and decided to provide opportunities for themselves. The Veteran Child Soldier Association of Liberia was founded in order to provide this particular group of former child soldiers with the opportunity to reintegrate, create their own support network, provide scholarships, community programs, and medical care for their members.
Ishmael Beah's book (however it may play into the child soldier myths), illustrates that reintegration and rehabilitation is possible. Why should they (or we) aim for anything less?
This past summer I was impressed by the members of this organization, their hope for the future, and their commitment to each other and the community. They have started a study class for children (a kind of pre-school as well as an after school homework aid program), they have conducted clean ups of the refugee camp through their sanitation department, they have provided scholarships and education opportunities for their members... they have helped to found an art school for the children at the refugee camp in order to help facilitate healing and creativity...
The trauma and psychological damage incurred by years of fighting in undoubtable, but not insurmountable.
I have enjoyed reading your work, and continue to look forward to reviewing your findings.
I'd love to chat with you sometime regarding your findings on reintegration...
I've been working at the Ford Institute for Human Security under Dr. Simon Reich, as well as working on some independent research with Vera Achvarina, and trying to establish a reintegration program for this particular group of former child soldiers at Buduburam through Mediators Beyond Borders... I think I saw you at this summer's Exercise Prodigal Child at the KAIPTC in Ghana... but I'm not sure. I know I saw Mike Wessels...
Posted by: Penelope Bissett at October 30, 2007 08:38 PM
Hi Chris
Child soldiers are a very interesting topic. A couple of papers I read seemed to use Western constructs of PTSD to argue that these child soldiers from N Uganda and Sierra Leone had witnessed or participated in traumatic events, but I wonder about the power or strength of evidence. I'm not a psychiatrist, so I'm not sure about whether the concept of PTSD is a a generalisable one.
I've read Peter Singer's book on Children in War, as well as read some of the papers to which he refers. I think that what happens in the mind of the child soldier kind of depends on where the war was, and their experience of it - one girl soldier in Sri Lanka joined the armed rebellion because she wanted to avoid a marriage against which she had protested: I understand that about 30% of child soldiers actually initiate their recruitment into armed organisations for many reasons, some of which (possibly most of which) are very very desperate circumstances, which may explain their ability to cope as well as their resilience. I think that people fail to understand this. Countries in Africa get a lot of sensational media attention, but it is probably highly likely that the picture is very skewed and we get shown the extremes.
I am also interested in the development of guidelines, if any, that other military forces (e.g. US, Australian) have in dealing with child soldiers. I would imagine that it's quite confronting to have your tank held up by what appears to be a bunch of kids playing in the street, and then suddenly have them open fire. I think that the rules of engagement are to retaliate, but I don't know of any published guidelines that prepare soldiers for the possibility of fighting a unit comprised of kids. (I think Mr. Singer is in the process of trying to come up with one?)
I would be very interested to learn more.
Posted by: Sarah Yong at October 31, 2007 01:49 AM
Dear Chris,
thanks for this piece of work!
Former Child soldiers are not pariahs, victims, desperate walking ghosts, but first of all they are children, persons! Myths and stereotypes are harmful. Young people in northern Uganda are resilient, peaceful, and enjoy significant support from their families. Myths and stereotypes are just prejudices, which are projections of our thinking, limited knowledge and at the end poor human experience...
How important is to offer the young people of northern Uganda education and job opportunities. They do not want our commiseration or empty, fashioned words, but company and support so that as free man and women they could build their future. A fascinating perspective.
Posted by: Filippo Ciantia at October 31, 2007 04:36 AM
Chris, Very interesting study, thank you.
I am struck by the results that "... challenges the portrayal of former child soldiers as damaged, traumatized pariahs who pose an ongoing security threat after war."
Your findings underscore the importance of understanding that there differences in experiences and context.That there are a variety of factors that may contribute to the experience of, as well as mitigate the impact and recovery from these experiences; experiences that one would consider traumatic by any defintion (and not just the DSM IVR). Is it likeley that their pre-soldier/baseline supports and functioning (family,development), education, the circumstances of their recruitment (joining voluntarily vs. forced at gunpoint), the activities they were subjected to during their active stage, and the support with which they were received upon release, are all factors that play a role?
While it may not be helpful to use western definitions of PTSD as if they are applicable everywhere, let us remember that we have a growing body of research on the impact of traumatic experiences on brain development that allows for a greater understanding of trauma in general. At the very least we have to begin with the idea that rehabilitation and re-integration are critical componenents. As you say, what form that takes will need to be different, may need to have a different emphasis of each component, depending on the context of the country's and children's experience.
I am a developmental specialist with a focus on trauma, so of course am struck by the incredible resiliency of the population in your study.
I had the opportunity to meet some young women ( recenlty returned child soldiers)in Sri Lanka returned by the Tamil rebels following the UNHCR negotiations. They were in a very good rehabilitation program and getting wonderful job skills training during the process. However, their sense of hopelessness about ever re-joing their families was significant. Some of them had been rejected by their families because of their experiences and the difficulties they were expeiencing. Some wished that the Tsunami had actually taken them away. Some feared the return and re-recruitment by the rebels. The families we spoke with also described recruitment at gunpoint. Very different circumstances and culture from the research you describe.
The impact of the Tsunami for some of them was not greater than that of their forced soldiering. In terms of resilience, many families spoke of the ongoing civil war actually immuring them to the ravages wrought by the Tsunami.
If I may digress but not completely, they were some of the bravest women I have met - mothers who had lost children to the civil war and whole communities to the Tsunami; mothers coming back to help others because "it must be done" and doing it while maintaining a sense of humor. Can we ever know enough about this kind of resilience?
It is very encouraging to read about the resilience they demonstrate- these peaceful 'mothers, fathers and citizens' of Uganda.
If anyone can lead me to more papers and publications like Chris'( data on the real impact and functioning in various populations) I will be very grateful.
Posted by: Prabha Sankar at October 31, 2007 12:24 PM
child soldiering should be completely eradicated because young children are losing their innocence by killing civilians.the way that mostly african children are nurtured determines the possible long life character.if he begins fighting in wars at the age of eight there is no way that child will stop that character.he will grow with a mindset of killing the rest of his/her lifetime.
so let the united nations visit on this issue or else the wars will never be reduced.let the innocence of children be respected.a child is to be protected not to be used to protect.let them grow and when they are mature enough then they can
Posted by: tatenda at May 15, 2008 08:54 AM