A couple of things as we move into the winter holidays for 2018.
First is Syria, a complex place, with warring factions, and two superpowers engaged as well. Now the US is pulling out its troops before a peace is negotiated, leaving a vacuum likely to be filled by forces it will be more difficult to contain later on.
Second is Jeremy Corbin. He is the leader of the Labor party, now out of power in Britain as the country tilts towards exiting the European Union like an unsteady Don Quixote on his horse. Jeremy Corbin has his political roots in the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, and if elected prime minister would likely advocate for, if not arrange for, a UK without nuclear weapons. This would be a remarkable shift for Britain. The question is, would unilaterally engaging in banning nuclear weapons by a country such as Britain make the world a safer place, a more peaceful place?
Countries with nuclear weapons all working together to draw those down, and work toward a world without nuclear weapons would be the ideal. Will that happen? In all likelihood, no.
The Jungian shadow is alive and well in the military industrial complex of countries who have permanent seats on the UN Security Council. Perhaps we should call it the UN Insecurity Council until we can get that Jungian shadow under some measure of control.
This is not a new conceptual framework for peace, but I thought it worth including on our site. In 2013 the Institute for Economics and Peace released a report on the Pillars of Peace. It provides an understanding of the factors associated with peaceful societies. The research is based on an analysis of over 4,000 data sets, surveys and indices; it’s an empirical framework aimed at describing the conditions correlated with positive peace.
The research defines 8 key Pillars that underpin peace:
- a well functioning government,
- a sound business environment,
- an equitable distribution of resources,
- an acceptance of the rights of others,
- good relations with neighbors,
- free flow of information,
- a high level of human capital,
- low levels of corruption.
The International Day of Peace (“Peace Day”) is observed around the world each year on September 21st. Established in 1981 by a unanimous United Nations resolution, Peace Day provides a globally shared date for all humanity to commit to peace, above all differences, and to contribute to building a culture of peace.
As we observe conflicts and war around the world, there are some good signs at this time coming out of the Korean Peninsula, where the leaders of North and South Korea are visiting each other’s capitals, and talking about wanting both countries to co-host the Olympic games in the future. Kim Jong-un wants, it appears, to have North Korea prosper economically. The best way forward for that is a strong and lasting peace.
Watch this short TED talk video by Sebastian Junger about why warring is so compelling, at times, for the people who are making war. The warrior is often part of a community, like a platoon, so supportive of its members, nothing comes close to that feeling of being loved and cared for by others. Advocating for peace is not enough. We need to build into our communities of peace the compelling togetherness that is usually missing, which makes war so attractive. JT
Ken Burns‘ excellent documentary on the Vietnam War, which is available to watch on Netflix. shows how Lyndon Johnson and his closest advisors knew from the beginning the war was not winnable. One of those advisors early on wrote a memo about reasons to stay in the war or escalate it, and the top reason was to avoid the embarrassment of leaving without a “victory”. To reflect on the more than 50,000 Americans who died in that war, and likely 10 times that many Viet Cong, North Vietnamese and civilians who died, it’s fascinating to think this was to avoid a certain level of embarrassment early on, when the US could have pulled out its military advisors, and avoided all that gratuitous carnage. Peace was in the balance, with war winning out to avoid embarrassment. Where was the psychologist or therapist in the Oval Office to say, “Guys let’s work out ways to cope with and recover from this embarrassment? Let’s move on to things where we can make progress…..establishing MediCare, MediCaid and HeadStart.” A therapist on the team of the President’s advisors. There’s a concept. JT
The meeting of Abiy Ahmed, Ethiopia’s relatively new 41-year-old prime minister, and Isaias Afwerki, the 71-year-old president of Eritrea, in Addis Ababa recently, left seasoned Africa observers gasping for breath.
“The pace of this is simply astounding,” said Omar S Mahmood, of the Institute for Peace and Security Studies in Ethiopia’s booming capital.
The meeting between Abiy and Isaias concluded an intense bout of diplomacy that appears to have ended one of Africa’s longest-running conflicts. “Words cannot express the joy we are feeling now,” Isaias said, as he had lunch with Abiy. “We are one people. Whoever forgets that does not understand our situation.”
Since coming to power in April, Abiy has electrified Ethiopia with his informal style, charisma and energy, earning comparisons with Nelson Mandela, Justin Trudeau, Barack Obama and Mikhail Gorbachev. He has reshuffled his cabinet, fired a series of controversial and hitherto untouchable civil servants, including the head of Ethiopia’s prison service, lifted bans on websites and other media, freed thousands of political prisoners, ordered the partial privatization of massive state-owned companies, ended a state of emergency imposed to quell widespread unrest and removed three opposition groups from a list of “terrorist” organisations.
Peace is possible, often based on a fresh vision and bold initiatives. Peacehenge pays tribute to the courage of Abiy Ahmed, Ethiopia’s new leader, who is at the forefront of positive change in East Africa. (Thanks to the Guardian newspaper, based in the UK, for much of the above information.) JT
In World War One, the Germans and the English stopped killing each other at Christmas and played a game of soccer. They they resumed the war. Ping-pong diplomacy helped open up the relationship between Communist China and the US. The combination of South Korean and North Korean female ice hockey players forming one team to play in the recent Winter Olympics helped make the breakthrough which led to the new kind of relationship between the two Koreas, and with the US. As we ponder the path from war to peace, and the path to avoid war in the first place, let us ponder the role of play. It is not to be underestimated.