[Previous entry: "Rubbish day"] [Next entry: "'Extremely serious anomaly'"]
21/01/2004: "Davos: playground for the military top brass"
Tonight, a panel composed of a military colonel, a cantonal police chief and two members of parliament (left and right) debated the issue of whether it was the Swiss military's job to provide security at the World Economic Forum in Davos.
The discussion was organised by the club of officers at uni and the public comprised many militia officers studying here. The debate took some time to warm up but became rapidly emotional and even personal. The discussion polarised itself with the right-wing majority arguing against the lone left-wing member of parliament (who happened to be one of the rare women in the crowd). But in my opinion, she argued better, was more objective and her thoughts were the most provoking.
The comments ranged from why the media allowed masked promoters of violence to "express" their "views" on TV when they had no views and weren't even able to express just that, to issues of subsidiarity (the military filling in for the overwhelmed police) or the left, by inciting violence, being responsible for the massive security display in the first place!
I found two items interesting:
- first, that the military top brass was not just fulfilling a political mandate but had a stake in the WEF: being involved in a cool job and talking about it in public is highly rewarding and pleasing (not so much for the poor militia people fearing having to confront unarmed demonstrators)
- and second, the calling to all of us to start questionning what is wrong in the system.
About the second point, ask yourself in which actors (who are themselves part of the problem) do we - all starry-eyed - place our hope of solving globalisation's minor miscarriages. In whose distinct interest are people participating in Davos? Specifically and concretely, who wins what?
