Case study 04 –Group 05 (Rashika,Tissa,Shanika,Aruna)
Discuss the similarities and differences in the recruitment experiences of the children in the three scenarios described above? Similarities:1. All situations filled in a vacuum targeting vulnerable persons.
All three groups of recruiters are taking advantage of the vulnerabilities of the children, their families and their communities. Government recruiters are taking advance of lack of security, breakdown of family and community structures, lack of understanding of the consequences of war on children, lack of basic needs for children (such as food, shelter, water) and economic opportunities, and the sense of loss of family members.
2. In the first two scenarios the armed forces took on an active role to encourage volunteer recruitment through connecting to national/cultural identity.
A second similarity is that despite the differences in methods of recruitment, all children are ultimately brainwashed in a culture of violence and survival which has detrimental consequences for their development. They all go on to experience various degrees of violence, either as witnesses or direct participants in it. 3. The armed forces in the first two scenarios provided an opportunity for civilians to have more control over their environment through direct participation.
Differences:1. All three scenarios filled different political, community and cultural vacuums.2. One group used forceful recruitment vs. the other groups that used voluntary enlistment. The voluntary enlistment manipulated cultural, social and political needs in the community
What kind of impact do you think the differing recruitment experiences might have on children associated with an armed group in terms of future development? 1. Children who took on an active role maybe less traumatized then those forcible recruited due to their perception of control in initiating their time in the armed force. However, the outcome of the conflict/war may influence their reception back into their community/ society as well as their own psychological adjustment (i.e. guilt for volunteering to participate/active role).2. Children in scenario three could be viewed as victims and the community maybe more forgiving and accepting of the situation. Whereas, children who actively engaged in the conflict they could be unwelcome in their community.3. Children who volunteered to participate in the conflict may not see the benefit of being removed from the environment in which they enlisted. This would create challenges in effective reintegration into civilian life.
What do you think of the descriptions of children who ‘joined voluntarily’? 1. The lack of resources, social networks and general security play an influential role in motivating children into joining armed forces.2. Familial roles and a sense of belonging play an integral role in encouraging children to volunteer. For instance if family and friends are part of the armed group they may seem less threatening and attractive to children in creating a sense of security and protection.