Victims Compensation

Solution

   The international community should impose a standardized procedure for awarding victims compensation which also acts as a deterrent for future conflicts.

   For example, the latest Israel-Hamas conflict may have been prevented if the international community had granted victims compensation for their previous conflicts. In other words, every time that the Palestinians had caused harm upon Israel (and vice versa), the offending nation would be required to pay for their damages in return.

   Whether the reason was due to repeated invasion attempts, the kidnapping of citizens, or the thousands of munitions that were fired into each other's regions, the offender should be required to pay for all the damages that they had inflicted upon their neighbor. If other nations got involved in the conflict (such as Lebanon, Yemen, and Iran that fired missiles into Israel), they likewise would be required to pay for the damages caused by their actions in order to nullify their act of aggression.

   The monetary award by the international community should be substantial enough to discourage nations from harming again (e.g., $25 million USD per person injured/killed plus any structural damages including the cost of the victimized nation defending against such action). If monetary compensation is not feasible then property (land) forfeiture may suffice for the corrective measure.

   This policy should be enacted prior to sanctions being imposed by the international community, and before military action is considered by the UN Security Council. Again, the monetary amount needs to be substantial enough to nullify the act of aggression, and to serve as a means of deterrence against such future action. That way, the offender will learn that it is not worth being the aggressor, nor will they benefit in any way, if they were required to pay more in damages than what they had inflicted upon the other. It is important to impose such measures early in the process to prevent further hostility between the nations.

   Another example that qualifies for victims compensation is Afghanistan who was repeatedly invaded by the Taliban over the years. If the international community had gotten involved early on and imposed claims against the offender, which is Pakistan since they gave the Taliban safe harbor and were responsible for their behavior (similar to how a dog owner is responsible for any damage that their dog inflicts), Pakistan may have moved their military forces along the border to prevent such attacks into Afghanistan. This would have saved many lives over the years and the eventual conquest by the Taliban.

   Another example that qualifies for victims compensation is Iran's use of improvised explosives against American forces in Iraq. Once America showed the evidence of Iran's involvement, the international community should have held Iran responsible and awarded monetary damages that was substantial enough to discourage them from causing further harm. The earlier that the international community had acted in the matter, the more lives that would have been saved by the measure.

   Victims compensation may also be awarded for non-military situations as well. As with China's theft of intellectual property. If the international community had awarded compensation to the various parties involved, China may have been discouraged from conducting in such a manner rather than continuing with their behavior for years.

   In general, this measure should not only be considered for future events, but also to rectify past occurrences as well (as those mentioned above among others). Otherwise, offending nations may not learn that their errant behavior will not be tolerated by the international community.

   When this policy is combined with the establishment of a pure democracy within every nation (which removes the power and authority from egoistical leaders), both improvements together will reduce the chances of unnecessary military conflicts from occurring in the world.