I've decided to do my research paper on child soldiers. My claim would be something like this: During times of war, several countries force children into the role of soldier, which conflicts with their human rights. Children are abducted from their schools and home and forced to become soldiers; others see it as the only alternative. When they become child soldiers, two of their rights become violated.
The first right violated is the 5th article of the United Declaration of Human Rights, "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment of punishment." The children are tortured, beaten and threatened into joining the army. Once in some are made to do suicide missions or to clear landmines. Girls are subjected to rape and sexual assault and are sometimes given to military commanders as wives. In addition to the physical abuse is also the mental damage from killing others and often times one's own family.
The second right being violated is article 26, "Everyone has the right to education." They don't have time for schooling when they are being put on the front line of the battlefield.
So what do you think? Should I be more specific with a certain country?
I really like this idea. I think that since you are using two different articles, it makes your argument stronger. I would use specific countries only to give examples toward the specific cruelties done toward the children. Which countries give young girls to their commanders? Which ones kill if children run from the draft? You're going to have to be careful in your defining of education for article 26, though. Just keep in mind what the UN means in saying education and what these countries may protest the denotative definition of education. Looking good!
ReplyDeleteI agree with Xany, I do not think that you need to focus on one country but you should definitely address several so that your readers know that there is good reason for your paper and to also show the wide variety of ways that these rights are also violated. It will provide a stronger argument. Have you decided about a philosopher? It think Mill would be a good choice since he deals with consequences and obviously this has very negative effects on the children. Kant might be a good choice as well because we cannot maxim that individuals can force any individual into being a soldier, whether they are children or not.
ReplyDeleteWhile this is a pretty clear cut human rights violation, you also need to address the other side of the issue. Playing devil’s advocate, in the poverty stricken areas where child soldiers are found there is not much hope for a good life and they could be doing something even worse than holding a gun. It’s hard for any of us to relate but think about how many relatives and friends around these kids have been killed and how hard it would be to accept peace and put down a gun where it’s the only thing that is keeping you alive. There is an argument saying that if child labor was strictly forbidden then the children would be required to sell themselves for worse things like sex trafficking. Despite the horrible things the militant leaders do to these children, the kids see it as protection; same philosophy of someone joining a gang. They can sit in their town thinking about a better life that they can’t afford or they can join a cause that they have to live with every day. If they weren’t soldiers what would they be realistically doing in an environment tormented with gunshots, rape, genocide, and disease? If you can tackle this, you will have a great argument against child soldiers.
ReplyDeleteI think it's important to remember that none of us have any sort of clear grasp on the issue of child soldiers. It's risky to approach a subject like this because what do we know of the lives of child soldiers? Probably what we've seen in movies and heard about in the news. It's probable that none of us have experienced this firsthand or witnessed instances of children ripped from their homes and forced into this practice. Therefore, I worry we might be blinded from the economic, gender, racial, ethnic, etc. elements that so largely shape the culture of child soldiering. I think this is a good topic because it is such a clear violation of human rights, but I would encourage you to be very careful of generalizing or simplifying the issue.
ReplyDeleteThere is an autobiography of a child soldier called A Long Way Gone. Ishmael Beah, the author, was a child soldier in Sierra Leone. It might be a good resource if you're looking for a concentrated source of personal testimony. It's horrifying, of course, but I was really glad that I read it. As Leanna noted, I think it's really complicated, especially from an outsider's perspective, but I think it's a great topic.
ReplyDelete