Surprising elements and the value of using statistical data for armed violence.

My initial understanding of armed violence was limited in scope to just acts of aggression committed in war. However, armed violence encompasses a much broader meaning and one cannot condone deaths and injuries in non- conflict and non- war settings. It is rather surprising that the number of deaths in non-war settings actually outweighs the ones in war settings. That 490,000 deaths occurred due to homicide in 2004 alone stands a testament to this. (Chapter 4, Global Burden of Armed Violence, 2008, p. 67). Armed violence also includes social and predatory violence like extrajudicial killings, kidnappings and gang violence. These are the forms of violence that are less conspicuous, although this does not mean that they are any less significant. The fact that these can be present in ‘peaceful’ societies makes it all the more important for them to be studied closely. An appreciation of the breadth of this subject only came to me as I progressed through the semester.
Owing to the multifaceted nature of armed violence, one cannot attribute its cause to any one given factor. Consider how armed gangs are formed as a means of ensuring mutual security in a time of disorder and chaos. In many cases, it is ironic that in the absence of any form of security formed by the state, armed gangs represent the only source of protection for the citizens. It is striking, perhaps even shocking, that there are at as many gang members in Central America as there are military personnel (Chapter 7, Global Burden of Armed Violence, 2008, p.129). Likewise, kidnappings are in large measure the culmination of economic conditions. Most of such incidents are ones that demand ransom, a clear sign of the economic incentive of the act. Extra judicial killings can also be used to corroborate that armed conflicts have diverse causes. Such incidents are most conspicuous in China where the state frowns upon any criticism leveled against the authoritarian rule. This form of political violence goes largely unreported as it is difficult to see how data is collected when the state, which is itself entrusted to be the provider of security, becomes the perpetrator of aggression. In this case, political oppression born out of the need to suppress freedom of speech and stifle opposition explains the acts of violence.
Given the conventional gender roles that relegate women to domestic roles, I found it surprising that women have actively participated in armed conflicts in at least 57 countries since 1990. Also, more than 30 percent of the fighters in different non-state armed groups like the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam and the Communist Party of Nepal were women (Chapter 6, Global Burden of Armed Violence, 2008, p.113). Although women are usually the victims of armed conflict, this does not mean that they themselves cannot be among the transgressors.
The indirect effect of armed conflict was a topic that I only became cognizant of during the course of the semester. I could never have realized that the consequences of war can be as bad as or even worse than the terrible act of war itself. The fact that the number of deaths in a post conflict setting can overshadow the ones in war took me completely by surprise. Evidence for this is provided in the International Rescue Committee’s series of mortality surveys in the Democratic Republic of Congo which found that 5.4 million excess deaths occurred between August 1998 and April 2007. Ninety percent of the deaths (4.8 million) were indirect deaths. (Chapter 2, Global Burden of Armed Violence, 2008, p.31). It needs to be stated that the indirect effects are more severe in underdeveloped nations as the already crippled infrastructure completely breaks down when violence ensues. The high amount of ‘preventable deaths’ are in large measure due to the worsened social, economic and health conditions in the conflict affected area. In the short run, disease and malnutrition account for a high proportion of deaths. In the long run, the cumulative effects of war on the economy and the infrastructure are responsible for the loss of lives. The loss of precious lives that could be saved in a post conflict society awoke me to the need to aid countries that have recently experienced armed conflict. One can do little to prevent war but it is possible to mitigate the effects by providing aid immediately after the termination of the conflict. This becomes all the more important in light of the fact that the burden of indirect deaths was between three and 15 times the number of direct deaths in the majority of conflicts since the early 1990s (Chapter 2, Global Burden of Armed Violence, 2008, p.32). The whole course was littered with violence and was devoid of any semblance of hope. I found reassurance and hope in this way, thus ensuring that I preserve my sanity after having encountered such a torrent of bloodshed and senseless slaughter.
One of the most important feature of conflicts is the high likelihood of their recurrence. The chance of previously terminated conflicts reemerging presents a frightening scenario. Consider how the year 2005 witnessed an upsurge in the number of armed conflicts, largely due to the increased conflict recurrences (Hewitt, Wilkenfeld, Gurr, p.30).This was also the largest annual jump since the end of World War 2, a clear indication of the severity of conflict recurrences. This statistic does not bode well for the future, given the high number of recently terminated conflicts that have a fairly good chance of igniting once again


Part 2
Although not devoid of blemishes, statistics are a very useful tool in the analysis of deaths arising from armed conflict. Statistics about armed conflicts can help us understand the severity of the issue at hand. By providing easy to understand numbers, one can discern the extent of the bloodshed in any armed conflict. Statistics can be easily understood by a wide audience, making them a potent research method. The fact that the results can be replicated give it more validity and reliability. This is particularly relevant to the realm of armed conflict where statistics can provide hard numbers on the number of deaths.
The pro seminar class has revealed how often statistics that we take for granted are incomplete or simply lacking the data that can help us reach a valid assumption. My initial propensity to accept data at face value has given way to a mild suspicion of how the data has been collected. This has resulted in my double checking of the facts stated in any report to find any packaging or measurement errors. The course has broadened my understanding of statistics which although by definition is an exact science, yet there is almost in all cases a room for doubt. In all the readings assigned for this course, one can pinpoint methodological flaws that render the research less valid. What is most striking is how the researchers themselves have a lucid understanding of the way the data is incomplete, yet this is followed by overarching theories that claim to accurately depict the social phenomenon under discussion. Statistics are never perfect which means that it is always sagacious to accept them with a grain of salt.
Statistical data mostly employ a definition that is used as a benchmark. This is intricately linked to the concept of ‘measurement errors’ where different results are gathered due to the particular choices made by the researcher. This is particularly evident in the study conducted by Uppsala Conflict Data program and the International Peace Research Institute, which includes only those conflicts that have accumulated at least 1000 battle related fatalities over the entire course of the conflict and at least 25 in the given year (Hewitt et al, p.27).This results in some conflicts not being included, a blatant example of how statistical data employed to measure armed conflict falls short of the exacting standards we normally associate with it. It really does not make sense that an intense conflict that has claimed 900 lives over a period of 6 months not be classified as an ‘active’ conflict.
The event databases collected on terrorism consider only transnational attacks, attacks in which nationals or groups from one country cross into another to commit acts of terrorism (Hewitt et al, p.51). This is a serious flaw as the number of domestic terrorist attacks outnumbers the transnational ones by as much as seven to one. Therefore, in limiting the scope of terrorist activities to just transnational ones, these data bases have not given a valid picture of the threat posed by terrorism.
Statistics concerning indirect deaths are naturally more difficult to quantify. Given the average ratio of 4 indirect deaths to one direct death, statistics lose their effectiveness as a means of measuring the global burden of armed violence (Chapter 2, Global Burden of Armed Violence, 2008, p.32). It is inconceivable to account for all the deaths that result in a post conflict setting due to the outbreak or malaria and malnutrition. This follows that statistics, are at best, merely estimates that cannot give us any amount of certainty. Also, attributing indirect deaths to the impact of conflict is problematic. How can we assume that the deaths that have occurred in a post conflict setting could have been averted without the incidence of war, given the fact that in poor countries there is already a high risk of deaths associated with malnutrition and other preventable diseases? This greatly diminishes the value of using statistics to measure armed conflict and war. Therefore, it is imperative to employ tactics other than statistics in our attempt to obtain a valid picture of the extent of the global burden of armed violence. Qualitative data can complement our knowledge by providing detailed data on how armed conflict happens in the first place. Direct interviews with the victims of war and the general population can reveal the underlying trend that can be easily missed by statistics. The detailed qualitative data gathered can enrich the researcher’s understanding of the subject, allowing him to arrive at a more valid estimate. In stark contrast to quantitative data, qualitative data such as interviews provides an explanation for the emergence of armed conflict, increasing our understanding the subject in a way that can help us avoid it in the future.
Qualitative data can also aid in the discovery of any latent aspects of any social phenomenon. This is particularly relevant when measuring armed violence against women as some cases of Intimate partner violence and rape go unreported. The strength of qualitative methods derives from the ability to obtain a detailed account from a diverse group of people. This broadens the vision of the researcher as he comes to appreciate various perspectives on the subject matter. Consider how honor killings, mainly prevalent in the Muslim world, tend to be covert in nature (Chapter 6, Global Burden of Armed Violence, 2008, p.120). This can also be extended to acts of rape, where the family, in an attempt to salvage their honor and dignity, do not report the incident. While quantitative data can wholly overlook this factor, qualitative data will appreciate the constraining factors on the victims that prevent reporting of such crimes. In essence, it is a combination of both qualitative and quantitative data methods that have the ability to provide the bigger picture.

Bibliography
Secretariat, Geneva Declaration, (2008). Armed Violence against Women. Global Burden of Armed Violence, 109-120.
Secretariat, Geneva Declaration, (2008). Lethal encounters: Non- conflict Armed violence. Global Burden of Armed Violence, 67-79.
Secretariat, Geneva Declaration, (2008). Other Forms of Armed Violence: Making the Invisible Visible. Global Burden of Armed Violence, 125-136.
Secretariat, Geneva Declaration, (2008).The Many Victims of War: Indirect Conflict Deaths. Global Burden of Armed Violence, 31-39.
Hewitt, Joe Joseph, Jonathan Wlikenfeld, and Ted Robert Gurr, (2010).Trends In Global Conflict. Peace and Conflict 2010, 27-31.