From War to Peace: A
Guide to the Next Hundred Years by Kent D. Shifferd. McFarland & Co,
2011.
Transition to Peace: A
Defense Engineer’s Search for an Alternative to War by Russell Faure-Brac.
Open Book Editions, 2012.
War No More: The Case
for Abolition by David Swanson, 2013.
Shift: The Beginning
of War, the Ending of War by Judith L. Hand. Questpath Publishing, 2014.
“Armies can be
resisted; ideas cannot be resisted.” Victor Hugo
Over the last few years, a number of compelling books have appeared that address the question: Can war be abolished, like slavery? If so, how? As these authors make abundantly clear, there is a growing consensus among experts that ending war is not a naïve fantasy, but a real possibility as well as an urgent need. In May, 2014, David Hartsough, well-known Quaker peace activist who helped start the Nonviolent Peace Force, convened the authors of these books along with seasoned peace activists for a strategy session at Ben Lomond Quaker Center to explore how we could launch a campaign to abolish war. I took part in this historic gathering, organized by World Beyond War, and was deeply impressed by the quality of people involved, particularly the writers.
All of these writers agree we must
dispel the myths that make ending war seem unrealistic or impossible.
1) War is part of human nature and therefore
inevitable. Evidence shows this is simply not true. What scientific
research reveals is that war is a “cultural invention,” not something
biologically ordained. Violence and aggression are hardwired into our human genes,
especially in males, but so are cooperation and compassion. We human beings
have choices about how to express our natural impulses. Some cultures (like the
Romans and the Huns) were extremely war-like, while others (like the Hopi) nearly
pacifist. And cultures change: the Vikings once were fiercely war-like, while
their descendants, the Norwegians, are relatively peaceful. The Iroquois
nations once fought each other in bloody wars; they eventually formed a
Confederacy that insured peace and stability for many generations. The European
Union has forged a similar kind of peace system based on economic cooperation
and shared security, reducing almost to nil the possibility of war. Prior to
the Agricultural Revolution that took place around 4000-10,000 BCE, human
beings lived in small nomadic bands of hunter-gatherers that tended to disperse
rather than fight when conflicts arose. These
early humans did not engage in warfare as we know it. They were too busy
hunting and trying to survive. Considering that there were no armies during
40,000 of the past 50,000 years or so of homo
sapiens, we see that warfare is a fairly recent invention. It can and
should become obsolete.
2)
War
is a “necessary evil” and can be justified. The cost of war vastly
outweighs any supposed benefits, as we have seen most clearly in recent times. Trillions have been spent on wars in
Vietnam, Central America, Iraq and
Afghanistan, with few positive results. David Swanson documents with numerous
examples how pointlessly costly wars can be, compared with the alternatives.
For example, according to a transcript of a meeting in February 2003 between
President George Bush and the Prime Minister of Spain, Bush said Saddam Hussein
offered to go into exile rather than fight, if only he could take a billion
dollars with him (see Swanson, p. 38). Having deployed troops and being eager
to become a “War President,” Bush refused this offer. Although letting a brutal
dictator escape with a billion in loot seems unfair and politically risky, it
is certainly better than the carnage that resulted from war—in which over a
million Iraqis died, with trillions of dollars in damages. The Afghan war could
also have been avoided, if the US had been willing to negotiate with the
Taliban for the extradition of Osama Bin Laden. These have been called “preemptive
wars” or “wars of choice” rather than just wars. But as Swanson points out, if
we look honestly at how wars are fought, and the number of innocent people who
are slaughtered or maimed for life, the concept of “just war” is a
contradiction in terms, like “benevolent rape.”
3) War is such an entrenched institution it
cannot be changed. The same was said about slavery, dueling, and depriving
women of the right to be treated as equals. Attitudes change, and so do
institutions. Sometimes changes occur with remarkable and unexpected rapidity,
as was the case with the fall of the Soviet Union.
Given these facts, the question is
not whether it is desirable or possible to abolish war, but what are the best
practices to make this happen. Experts agree that ending war will not be easy.
Warmongering is extremely profitable, and the war system deeply rooted. But the
cost of war has grown so staggeringly expensive and destructive of life—both
human and non-human—people of the world are becoming increasingly open to
exploring alternatives to the current war system. Ending war will require a
massive campaign of reeducation, nonviolent resistance, and organizing both
globally and locally. The World Beyond War website lists dozen of ways to begin
conversion from a war system to a peace system, including ending the
international arms trade, strengthening the UN and World Court, creating
Departments of Peacekeeping, encouraging cultural exchange, promoting
nonmilitary foreign aid and crisis prevention—a Global
Rescue/Aid/Friendship/Marshall Plan, etc, etc. We know how to end war. We just
need the political will to do it.
I will be reviewing the rest of these books in subsequent posts....
No comments:
Post a Comment