Monday’s mayhem

The 9 May bore witness to what many hope is ‘the worst that is to come’ of the current political crisis. The climactic falling out of the Rajapaksa siblings resulted in a vacant Premier’s seat; the unjustified and ineffectual violence that resulted had far dire consequences, with eight lives lost, over 200 injured and multiple properties and vehicles burnt. What remains is a hefty bill and plenty of blame to go around.

 From the leaders that instigated and orchestrated the event, to the peacekeeping forces that idly watched on, to those who took up arms- at the end of the day it was peaceful people, protestors, and pedestrians who unfairly bore the brunt of the beatings. While the dust settles on the incidents that unfolded, one cannot but feel frustrated, hopeless and even apathetic towards such violence. It came at an unnecessary cost that was easily avoidable.

The idea that war or destruction is a natural part of human conflict resolution is defunct. Similar to the broken window fallacy, conflict only distracts from alternative means of peacefully achieving prosperity. In an economic sense, money that could have been diverted to creating consumer goods and services is now used up to mend broken windows or to pre-emptively stop conflict, such as, by producing weapons. This same logic has been used to support military budgets and wars as a means of creating economic growth, yet ultimately, does not hold water.

According to the figures published by the Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP) in 2019, the total cost of violence the world over amounts to over $ 14.4 trillion annually. The total economic impact of this magnitude considers the opportunity cost of having to deal with violence, as opposed to, for example, investing in education or business development, and is estimated to be 11.2% of world economic activity. Syria was in the direst straits globally, with the economic cost of violence estimated at $ 28.9 billion, equivalent to 67% of gross domestic product (GDP).

The 9 May saw much damage caused to public and private property alike. Many stalls, medical equipment and food supplies were damaged beyond use at the protest sites. Several injured parties too would need urgent medical attention. Numerous buses were destroyed and either sunk or set ablaze. A 2011 model Ashok Leyland Bus is estimated to cost upwards of Rs. 4 million in the second-hand market, contributing significantly to the losses that keep piling up. This is not accounting for invisible costs that are hard to quantify, such as the impact to the already bleeding tourism industry. Violence begets violence and in economic parlance a vicious cycle is now being created.

As peaceful means for conflict resolution deteriorate and fewer viable alternatives exist, anyone with their proverbial back up against the wall, would use violence as a pragmatic last resort. Conflict ensues, and with it, the cost of addressing violence and conflict resolution is now added to the bill. This depletion of resources means even less being available for economic growth and development; a probable cause of more future conflict and violence.

The IEP report provided that every death from violent conflict is on average, indicative of 40 times as many people injured. While the powers at play created this mess, the damages, wounds borne and blood spilled on 9 May should not be a buck passed on to the people who were allegedly paid amounts ranging from 2,000 to 13,000 to support a cause, nor should it be settled from tax coffers. As the world watches and hopes that justice is swiftly dealt with the bill settled, violence has undoubtedly won the battle. The struggle for peace continues.