Chapter 1: Why “Property” - Foreign Military Studies Office - U.S. Army

isky enterprise if conflict resolution is the goal. Challengingcharacteristics of a real property regime at its base may constitute themost direct cultural confrontation, even while simple formalization ofproperty may not. Issues about who can own what indeed challenge theessential makeup of many societies. That said, formalizing suchproperty regimes bears witness to cultural aspects that, for all thetolerance one might have toward another culture, expose what twentyfirstcentury Western measurement could only classify as unjust.Even within the highly formalized regime of real estate rules inadvanced economies, broader social influences play in the ownershipenvironment for land. If a would-be landlord, even with littledocumented evidence of ownership, gives an eviction order to anoccupier, and that occupier does leave, the event shows an exercise ofmutually acknowledged power, if not formal ownership. “Possession,”as they say, may still be “ninety percent of the law.” If the power andarrogance of the taker are sufficient that others do not care to somehowchallenge the seizure, or cannot, the new possessor (even having takenpossession illegally) can eventually become the legal owner. Thispossibility serves as a reminder that legal ownership is related to theforce necessary to support a claim. It is a fact of acquisition that mayseem to condemn the entire edifice of records and procedures that weare advocating as a civilizing tool. Indeed, the assertion is emphaticthat without formalized property the less-developed countries havelittle chance of internal peace, but the opposite was not claimed. Justbecause property records are created and courts established does notmean that peace or freedom is necessarily secured. A government benton tyranny and control can replace any records with its own, and canbuy or threaten courts. These events are occurring today in somecountries that were on their way toward more formalized propertyregimes.This is not a cynical declaration that ‘might makes right,’ but anobservation that the enjoyment of rights associated with domesticproperty is not perfected without some basis of enforcement. Legalownership, whether by title, contract, deed, government regulation or39