Future Conflict and Urban Resilience

Future Conflict and Urban Resilience

Kilcullen (2015) gives a detail of his experiences in the Iraqi war, and how major cities can be saved from adverse effects of war. He focuses on how the lessons from war can be incorporated with community policing to prevent extreme violence in urban areas. The research question included whether the public safety system has the capability of keeping people safe, whether service charters and security agreements could prevent violence in cities, and whether the community would agree to such agreements. Some cities were identified to already have such security systems in place. London, for instance, has a top-notch security surveillance system with TV surveillance in the streets. There were, however, complains about the public not cooperating with the move to have surveillance or urban disruption (Kilcullen, 2015).

The book looks at various cities and what methods of security they have put in place, their effectiveness, and the acceptance by the urban population. In Central Paris, for example, the architecture ensured that surveillance was easy. The streets were straight and could accommodate a cavalry squadron’s width. Buildings were constructed in a way that ensured that corners were open to adequate light, making it hard for barricading by demonstrators. Many individuals oppose the authoritarian nature of regulation such as construction impositions, even though they realize the security advantages that come with them. The research, therefore, seeks to identify whether it is possible to impose a security system that prevents extreme violence as witnessed in Baghdad, while ensuring that the population does not feel oppressed by the authorities, as in the case of Paris.

Kilcullen (2015) seeks to identify a solution that would keep cities free from insurgents or militia, and keep the military from flooding and consequently causing destruction in a city affected by insecurity. He looks at how militias had held captives in Jamaica, demanding money from relatives in the United States and other regions. Drug trade also provided funding for these gangs. The city was turned into a war zone, with the US wishing to end the militia gangs. He also tries to determine how future wars will occur, and how the aspects will be different. Wars will be concentrated in urban areas with a large population, through the use of gangs, snipers, security groups etc. this is because cities break military force easily, and are difficult to handle. Coastal cities are the most likely places to be affected by war, as a result of population growth, connectedness, and urbanization.

Conclusion

Security systems give people the bravery of working in urban centers that may be prone to violence. These security systems may be regarded as unfair to the population, but the alternative of having the military flood into a city is far much worse. Kilcullen’s (2015) study came with the advantage of showing people opposed to security systems and community policing that it is the best way of ensuring their protection and safety. The study may be continued, to answer the following questions: Do all urban centers respond well to community policing and security impositions by the authorities? Are criminal gangs and insurgents scared away by security features in major cities? Can the efficiency of security features in cities be measured?

References

Kilcullen, D. (2015). Out of the mountains: The coming age of the urban guerrilla.