Limitation of Urbicide
Urbicide
is explained as the destruction of infrastructural, cultural and heritage
sites, affecting the mundane components of built environment. As importance it
is to know the definition of this term, it has never been a more contested
political, social and geopolitical issue.
 |
| Hiroshima. |
 |
| Atomic Bomb in Tokyo |
He further asserts urbicide, as a concept with a distinct form of
political violence, which is not limited to the ‘revenge of countryside’ but
spreads to its material environment. He asserts that the whole point of
destroying a built environment is not limited to terminating culture
confrontation but targets the spaces such cultures represents. Politics of
exclusion is also related to the concept of urbicide. It is manifested in such
a manner that it is responsible for ethnic nationalism. Coward explains that
the limitation of urbicide by targeting a particular ethnicity is no different
than genocide as ethnicity is closely linked with a territory (making the
former drawing upon notions of historical attachments).
David Campbell andStephen Graham have explained urbicide by comparing the concept with
other inter-disciplines like sociology, political theory, geography,
international politics etc. They described urbicide as a combination of violent
politics and metropolitan existence. They assert that urbicide is responsible
for destroying a network of identity or a difference a particular community
enacts on a terrain, and rebuilding houses on the very terrain of the
community, develops an antagonistic attitude towards governments.
Urbicide is
closely related to the destruction of identity or a symbolic representation of
such identities. The cultural heritage sites falls into such category. One such
example is the destruction of Stari Most, a 16th century Ottoman
bridge.
 |
| Stari Most Bride |
 |
| Destruction of Stari Most |
The bride is
in the city of Mostar in Bosnia and Herzegovina, it connected the two parts of
the river Nereteva. The bridge was an important cultural site, which stood
there for 427 years and was destroyed in 1993 during the Bosnian war. The Stari
Most, not only connected the two sides of the river but made people communicate
and connect with each other. It was a symbol of cultural acceptance, and
showcased harmony between the two cities. It was the most remarkable landmark and one of
the exemplary pieces of Islamic architecture. Urbicide against Stari Most
illustrated violence against the Bosnians and their heritage. Urbicide therefore
is not limited only to the destruction of built environment but targets
connective thread between people and their cultural spaces.
 |
| Ariel photo of Jenin Camp |
One can understand
the limitation of urbicide by considering the recent example of destruction of
Jenin refugee camp by Israel in April 2002. Israel claimed that the invasion
was purely targeted towards the terrorist organisation behind the Palestinian
suicide attacks. But when looked at the use of bulldozer by the Israel
government on the Jenin camp, the story seemed different. Instead, the whole
purpose was to destroy the urban, civil and infrastructure foundations of the proto-Palestinian state. And clearly, the strategy used was “Urbicide”. Stephen
Graham asserts that urbicide does not just inflict destruction of a city but
aims at denying people their collective, individual and cultural rights to the
destroyed city, where they have enjoyed and cherished memories.
Urbicide can also
be called as “infrastructure warfare” alternatively. Infrastructure warfare is
destruction in a broader context of systematic infrastructural planning thereby
preventing resettlement of people through the tool of fear. Clearly, urbicide
was used as a tool to undermine the Palestinian people from the hope of
building their territory or infrastructure again.
There
are various limitation of urbicide, which explains the increasing role of
cities in our globalized world and the reason of them becoming the dominant
sites of destruction, terrorism, insurgency and violence.
 |
| The World Trade Centre |
Recently, the
concept of urbicide was re-invoked, when the World Trade Centre in New York
were attacked on September 11th 2001. Michael Rafier regards the
“destruction of these buildings as a deliberate attempt to erase a structure
that represents a certain kind of identity or way of life”. Scholar like Jane
Jacobs asserts cities of capitalism (New York) are easily vulnerable to the
attack on their architecture as they represent a distinct form of violence
against urbanity. Destruction of the two towers was an attack on the identity
of the New York City. It terrified people and the empty space is a reminder of
that horrifying day. The aftermath of urbicide is the constant reminder of the
unfortunate event that took place, forcing people to go back in time and
re-live the moment.
Urbicide destroys
the cities, identities and the courage of rebuilding. As a tool of warfare,
urbicide is one of the most destructive one. Previously, battles were fought in
open grounds, where houses and market places were not affected. The day-to-day
life was not interrupted. But today wars are fought in living rooms, schools
and supermarkets. Marshall Berman asserts that as long as people have lived in
the cities, they have been haunted by the fears of urban ruins.
Graham andCampbell have explained concept of urbicide with three folded impacts. Firstly,
the development of war with urban impacts, results into a production of spatial
distribution of population hence showcasing politics of exclusion by urbicide.
Secondly, common examples of urban wars, conducted within a specific theatre.
Thirdly, they explain that urbanity has a symbolic purpose of violence i.e. by
population transfer, ethnic cleansing, symbolic destruction of material
culture, exceeding the conventional understanding of what purposive and
strategic war was. City, urbanity and war need to be understood as processes
than just fixed terms. Urbicide is an emerging conflict responsible for
refiguring geopolitics and requires to be considered as an operating concept
responsible for destructions deeper than buildings.
Recent example of Urbicide.
No comments:
Post a Comment