The impact of war on populations arises both from the direct effects of combat and from the indirect consequences of war, which may occur for several years after a conflict ends. The armed conflicts between warring states and groups within states have been major causes of ill health and mortality for most of human history. A conflict obviously causes deaths and injuries on the battlefield, but also health consequences from the displacement of populations, the breakdown of health and social services, and the heightened risk of disease transmission. Despite the size of the health consequences, the military conflicts have not received the same attention from public health research and policy as many other causes of illness and death. In contrast, political scientists have long studied the causes of war but have primarily been interested in the decision of elite groups to go to war, not in human death and misery.
Nowadays, in this globalized world where monitoring and evaluating the impact of interventions has become a priority, looking at the conflicts as causes of health problems, mental diseases and disabilities is fundamental to plan better strategies in advance and preserve military’s wellbeing.
While some variation of damages is to be expected from conflict to conflict, none should be left apart. On the contrary, soldiers, developmental specialists, analysts and politicians should work together in order to prevent the most severe consequences and avoid waste of human and financial resources.
Unfortunately the effects of conflicts on health do not only happen during the war but even afterwards when landmines still destroy people’ lives.
Finding ways to appropriately measure the potential health consequences of conflict may provide the much needed evidence base on which to undertake risk assessments. Political scientists have to forecast international and intra-national conflicts through monitoring and evaluating the masses’ preferences and movements; the migrations from rural to urban areas; and the creation of societies which are culturally mixed. Anticipating the conflicts and their impacts on the populations could prevent disasters. Also, accurate assessments of the magnitude of the possible consequences would raise the possibility of preventing the health damages.
Since political scientists have long studied the causes of war discovering the effects of deterrence and the pacifying effects of democracies in the international system, a collaboration between political scientists and public health researchers could provide a firmer basis for attempts to prevent conflicts. Unfortunately, the two professions seem to have little connection. Combining their research would give both sides a more complete approach and would help focus the attention of the international community on efforts to protect populations from the consequences of conflict.
Concluding, better forecast of war are also needed and human security should be considered a priority because its protection means assuring a better future.
You must be logged in in order to leave a comment