I just want to clarify. When General Dallaire says "we", he means the Roméo Dallaire Child Soldiers Initiative. We have a set of scenarios we walk through, 12 interactions, one of them specifically being a checkpoint scenario, for example, much like the case you are highlighting. That's what we build up. What do you do in that particular context?
We have interaction charts we walk through. We give the options out. There are a host of things that you didn't put in your scenario that we would put in for information, but for example, even knowing that's a possibility and finding ways to de-escalate the situation are examples we would put out there.
We would also have a clear understanding of what the rules of engagement were. There's a critical area here that many forget. When it comes to children, you have to understand how a child thinks, and that is much different than preparation for an adult in that situation, understanding that element, recognizing that there may be different postures to take, different types of language you would use or smiling. Soldiers aren't used to being told to do that.
There are basic elements of that nature that are a key part to all of the kinds of elements of the training that we conduct. We're not saying that every scenario is going to work out perfectly, but we can give a lot better options than we're currently employing and, if that's the case, then we can find ways to reduce the PTSD as well as the negative outcome for both the children and the soldiers who are in those situations.