Is the assassination of a dictator justified?
Posted in GD Topics | Email This PostBackground: Assassination is generally is defined as the targeted killing of an individual due to political reasons during peace time. It can be undertaken by the agents of another state or the individual citizens and takes place without any legal process. Historically the issue of assassination was considered in context of dictators like Hitler and Stalin but it gained attention again when leaders like Saddam Hussain and Slobodan Milosevic threatened international peace. The debate became heated with the recent US air strikes aimed at killing Saddam Hussain, Osama bin Laden and Muammar Qaddafi.
Arguments in favor of:
1. If a tyrant dictator has come to power through illegitimate means and is engaged in suppressing and killing the citizens of a country, such dictator loses the right to continue in office and if it becomes impossible to remove such dictators through subtle means of democratic voting and opposition, the only way left could be to assassinate such a dictator. In these cases the assassination can certain be can justified.
2. If a dictator is contravening social welfare, the assassination of such dictator can be justified as these regimes are highly personal in nature and by removing the dictator by assassination the force behind regime is removed and the regime may collapse.
3. In certain cases the assassination of a dictator can be the only way to bring changes in a country where the oppressive policies of the state do not allow any kind of internal opposition. When there is no other means left for bringing the tyrant dictator to justice, the assassination of such dictator could be the only way available. Such assassination may also act as a deterrent to other dictators in future.
4. Sometimes the alternatives that are available in place of assassination may take years to produce result and the dictator will continue in office for a long time. The people will be forced to suffer under the oppressive regime and the policies followed by such dictator may also cause irreparb1e harm to the economy of the country.
5. As the assassination of the dictator is carried out for the ultimate good of the society and many deaths and suffering can be prevented by the assassination of one man, the greater good demands that this single evil act has to be done, especially when this one act would prevent immediate and certain danger of greater evil. Moral scruples should not prevent us from following greater good and it may not be possible to oppose the evil deeds effectively. Dictators place themselves beyond the protection of law when they ignore international conventions and ethical standard. Assassination of a dictator can also be justified when the dictator has become a threat to international peace and not only for his own people. There is a common tendency among the dictators to attack other countries so that they can divert the attention of their people from their illegal actions at home. In such event the assassination can be justified as it can prevent a terrible war in which countless lives may have been lost.
Arguments Against:
1. Killing a dictator will not always result in the fall of a regime. Not much can be achieved by killing and individual and as the dictators are a part of the ruling elite, someone else having the same autocratic values can take the place of the assassinated dictator. Such successor can use the assassination as an excuse for the oppression of the people.
2. A failed assassination attempt can result in the strengthening of the position of the dictator. The tyrant may become more paranoid and start taking further measures aimed at strengthening his grip on power. The supporters of the tyrant and even the fence-sitters can come out in the support of the tyrant and unite behind their leader. Therefore assassination attempts carry great risk of back firing.
3. The assassination attempt could become counterproductive as the external enemies or the inter minorities are rightly or wrongly blamed for the act which can cause rallying feeling around the repressive regime. Such feeling can also be the result of an unsuccessful attempt of assassination. Furthermore as there are alternatives present now which allow the dictators to be brought to justice, this itself could act as a deterrent for the future tyrants.
4. Economic sanction or constructive engagements are much more likely to produce the results in the form of the liberalization of regime although such effects are slow to come. These changes can be achieved with help of popular action and without causing great violence.
5. It is highly questionable that evil can be prevented by assassination. It is not necessary that the figure head of the government is also the lynchpin of the regime therefore assassinating the dictator alone could not necessarily result in the fall of the regime.
6. Murder can never be justified and if we also become executioner without the support of the law, there will not be much difference between us and the dictator. The government which is formed after the assassination of the dictator will not have the moral and legal legitimacy which may result in the lack of support for such government and ultimately its fall.