International Perspectives on Engagement and Disengagement in Support and Suppression of Antiwar Protests

Abstract

The research summarized here provides encouraging evidence that the right to protest against war is a widely accepted global norm. Very few of the participants in the seven regions of the world that were studied explicitly disagreed with that right. Active agreement with that right ranged from close to eight in ten in East Asia and Russia and the Balkans, to around nine in ten in South and Southeast Asia, the Middle East, and the UK/Anglo region and was highest in Western Europe and Latin America. The right to protest was justified most widely by the national laws that protect that right in most regions, although study participants in Latin America, South and Southeast Asia, and East Asia tended to offer the justification that protest is a universal human right. Another theme frequently expressed in agreement with the right to protest was the moral responsibility to act, particularly by men in the Middle East and persons who had taken part in antiwar protests in Russia and the Balkans. The suppression of antiwar protests was widely condemned, and most study participants stated that they would actively oppose the beating of protestors, e.g., by asking the government to protect them and by calling the suppressive acts to the attention of mass media. The lowest level of active opposition to the use of violence to suppress antiwar protests was expressed in Africa, where study participants cited helplessness as a justification for their lack of engagement. Generally, support for the right to protest and opposition to the suppression of protest were greater among women than men. Overall this research shows that antiwar protests are strongly supported worldwide, both as a legal and human right and, particularly among those who engage in protest, as a moral responsibility.