AFTER VIOLENCE: 3R, RECONSTRUCTION, RECONCILIATION ...

Orchestrated violence, as exercised by armies, requires
unconditional obedience, with a very asymmetric chain of command
(as opposed to a guerilla movement). On the other hand there is a
difference in risk-taking, higher for the soldier in the combat
zone than for the ranking officer in the bunker, not to mention
the politicians back home setting the parameters for the war. This
was one reason why the soldiers revolted; another that neither
side was winning. It was a drawn-out stalemate on French soil with
the blockade wrecking the German economy at home.
At stake for the military commands on either side was not
only victory vs defeat but the legitimacy of warfare, challenged
by the soldiers. Only by bringing the World War to an end could
warfare be saved. The Germans certainly did both jobs. N rnberg
and Tokyo did not change that: they are in bello, not ad bellum.
We make this point in order to indicate that even if some
violence survives in one form or the other, warfare is not only a
social institution, but a vulnerable one. Knowledge of visible and
invisible effects, including the opportunity costs to social
development, may hasten its demise. But in the meantime we still
have to deal with the problem of closure. In the next chapters we
shall take up two examples, first how not do it, the Nanking
genocide, then a possible way out: South Africa.
5. Auschwitz, Gulag, Hiroshima, Nanking: Who/What is Guilty?
We are now talking about genocide, mega-violence, the
intended, massive, extermination of categories of people, defined
by nation, class, or otherwise, beyond strategic military
consideration, in this horrible 20th century we are about to leave
35