| Leaders
who advocate war often proclaim their longing for peace. They are driven
to war sadly, they say, for they have exhausted all alternatives.
Can we trust those who cry, "Peace,
peace, but first we must wage war"? Here are four things such leaders
could do to win our trust:
- Commit to compassionate care of
"enemies."
Rev.
Brian McLaren proposes that our president publish the death toll
of enemies, not as a mark of victory, but of the cost of war.
McLaren further proposes we promise to spend two dollars rebuilding an
enemy's country for every dollar of damage caused by our weapons. We
will know our leaders are serious about peace when they spend more for
restoring enemies than for destroying them.
- Invest in institutions of peace.
Humanity has invested more in preparation for war than in any other
activity. We recognize that success in war requires long preparation
and ongoing practice. We pay, massively, to hire and train soldiers
and to build arsenals of weapons. And we get what we pay for - war. If
we are serious about peace, we will invest in it. Massively.
We know far more today than 50 years ago about causes of violence and
how to prevent it, how to develop strategies for peace and nonviolent
change, how to build bridges between hostile communities, how to
empower internal advocates of peace, how to avoid needless
misunderstandings, how to teach skills and attitudes that foster
longterm cooperation, how to find middle ground without compromising
deep values.
Over the last 25 years, millions have benefited from skills of
peacemaking that have played a key role in seemingly hopeless
situations: Northern Ireland, South Africa, Sri Lanka, eastern Europe
as well as in conflicted churches, organizations and communities in
the United States and elsewhere.
People worked doggedly over long periods of time for peaceful change.
If we multiplied by ten or one hundredfold the number of people
skilled and funded to do this work, peace would begin to become a
reality rather than a dream.
We will know leaders are serious about peace when they match every
dollar spent on preparing for war with equal funding for human needs
and institutions that equip people for building peace.
- Act in the timeframe of peace rather
than war. The timeframe of war is short, limited in focus, and voiced
in a petulant tone. Advocates of war obsess on destroying an enemy,
but ignore the long-term costs of war and the requirements for
building a stable and just peace after the enemy is deposed. They
presume to foresee the results of war and assure doubters that good
results will outweigh the bad.
Most wars do far more harm than good. One side wins, never two. Thus,
at least half of those fighting are deluded in their belief that war
could bring them good. And even those who win usually suffer horribly.
Peace is the result of a complex web of human cooperation in many
spheres: economics, social relations, politics, science, etc.
Constructing such a web is never achieved in a week or a year. My
colleague John Paul Lederach quips, "It may take as long to get out of
a conflict as it took to get into it."
People of faith might look at history through the eyes of God. From
this viewpoint, we count time in generations and centuries. We are
skeptics of strategies promised to bring changes through the shortcuts
of war. When leaders demonstrate awareness of the vast costs and
dangers of war, and patience in pursuing peace, they may earn our
trust.
- Broaden the scope of attention
to include the well-being of all, rather than only those of their own
country. The call to demonstrate care and restraint towards all,
including the enemy and the stranger, has been present in
Christianity, Judaism and Islam for millennia. Today, mere pragmatism
points in the same direction.
Two people living alone on opposite ends of a small island can ignore
each other without imperiling themselves. Fifty people in the same
space is more difficult. Five hundred have no choice but to work
carefully to meet the needs of all if they are to enjoy peace.
In our lifetime we have become that island of five hundred. Our
numbers have multiplied. Our weapons have grown so small, cheap and
portable that a few angry people can destroy thousands.
From now on, this trend will get rapidly worse until we see all as our
own family, equally in need of our concern. We will know leaders are
serious about peace when their speeches, their strategies and their
budgets take the needs of people in other parts of the globe as
seriously as their own.
How will we know ordinary people are
serious about peace? When they insist that leaders take steps like
these, thus laying foundations of peace for their children.
|
