Welcome to Eureka Street

back to site

Is peace possible?

 

Peace is an elusive (some might sneer, illusory) concept. Certainly, while we are happy to exchange the sign of peace at Mass, thinking about what that might actually mean is harder. We are good at dissociating our everyday relationships from the broader world in which we  live.

It’s also tricky, because working for real peace means eschewing stereotypes of goodies and baddies. People usually have set views of conflicts based on their idea of history, their religious and cultural start points and often superficial media portrayals designed for headlines. As I and many others have elsewhere suggested, the conflicts in Ukraine, Syria, Georgia, Sudan and elsewhere have a lot more moving parts than Western media – often with their own agendas and tight deadlines and with little knowledge of the local languages and cultures – have the time or inclination to report.

In one case with very current relevance, while the groups which became Al Qaeda were the West’s good guys when they were attacking the Soviets in Afghanistan, they became rather less popular after the attacks in the US in September 2001. Once removing Bashar al Assad (once himself a torturer of choice in the US’ “extraordinary rendition” programme) became a US priority, however, Al Qaeda were (and remain) “on our side” once again. Nevertheless, you wouldn’t know any of this from the fairly superficial media coverage of the Syrian conflict which rarely alludes to any of this complexity.

This, of course, has its impact on peace organisations, which by definition, depend on mobilising public support against wars. Like anyone else, they run the risk of kneejerk responses to complex issues and can become unwittingly co-opted by one or other party to the conflict. So it is that while (some aspects of) the Ukraine conflict have been the focus of attention for a while, the conflicts in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Myanmar and Haiti have very rarely lit up Western human rights radars. Often, the best and safest course to peace is simply to try and persuade foreign governments to stop interfering – especially given the re-emergence (as in the Cold War) of the proxy war as a great power vehicle of choice to expand influence.

 

'In our day, where war, like all other profitable activities, are privatised, organisations of state and civic society are also implicated in questions of whether their contractual relationships impact their stance on matters of war and peace.'

 

Nevertheless, for people of faith, the fact that peace making is difficult isn’t an excuse not to try. Embarking on the process, however, does mean that we should be wary of pre-packaged narratives and open to understanding the complexities of situations and the long and often tangled roots of conflicts. Organisations like Pax Christi (of which, full disclosure, I am a member) emerged in the wake of World War II seeking to bring Christian spirituality to the complex work of reconciling divisions. Like the UN, they tend to see peace as something grounded not just in an absence of physical violence but also in the conditions of living that make peace workable – sometimes called “human security”. This embraces a vision of human flourishing which looks to ethical use and sharing of resources and an end to the exploitation of other humans or the natural environment. As such, peace is conceived as a much more holistic venture than merely silencing the guns.

Still, silencing the guns is very much a part of the enterprise in a world where war is extremely profitable. We live in an age where the catch-cry, “never again” after the Nazi Holocausts of disabled people, Jews, Roma and Slavs has instead become “over and over again” as various groups of people are once again expendable in wars of choice around the world. In our day, where war, like all other profitable activities, are privatised, organisations of state and civic society are also implicated in questions of whether their contractual relationships impact their stance on matters of war and peace: whether those organisations be academic institutions or federal or state governments.

One perennial conflict in which Australian institutions have chosen to invest, in every sense of the word, has been the interlocking wars in the Middle East. While these are as difficult as any to disentangle, a growing consensus as to the issues is emerging from Israeli civil society, the International Court of Justice, the International Criminal Court and elsewhere. Pax Christi Victoria (on whose committee I sit) has also spoken out on this, urging Australians to sign this petition suggesting more steps to assist both Israelis and Palestinians to a just peace. We welcome others to both sign the petition linked there and otherwise to join the discussion.

 

The Pax Christi petition calling for a just peace in Gaza and Lebanon can be found here.   

 


Fr Justin Glyn SJ, General Counsel of the Australian Province, was appointed by Pope Francis as consultor to the Dicastery of Laity, Family and Life.

Main image: Chris Johnston illustration. 

Topic tags: Justin Glyn, Peace, Conflict, Proxy wars, Media bias, Faith, Peacemaking, Global conflict, WarJustice

 

 

submit a comment

Existing comments

Are 'goodies' and 'baddies' stereotypes? In wars, horrendous crimes and indiscriminate brutality we are confronted with an immense reality; in the pages of newspapers, in bereaved people and in our encounters with each other we see the force of evil. We believe in the goodness of God but can feel powerless to stop the suffering we inflict on each other. When warring parties come to the negotiating table they must bring their vulnerability, honesty and yearning. Then peace has some sort of possibility.


Pam | 10 December 2024  
Show Responses

'Are 'goodies' and 'baddies' stereotypes?'

Yes, by looking at the systems of governance.

The last example of a proper democracy harassing a dictatorship was Ronald Reagan's invasion of Grenada in 1983. Probably because it could not been anything other than a slam dunk for the US. Even so, it was a good thing. But it doesn't happen enough.

To her shame, Margaret Thatcher opposed the invasion.

There's no need to wait for an example of a dictatorship harassing a proper democracy. It happens all the time. Sometimes, private dictatorships of militia with control over their portion of a state as recognised in international law, will harass a proper democracy, such as Hezbollah vis-a-vis Israel.

Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun, said a leader who never believed that governments should be subjected to short terms of office with free elections between. If he had so believed, he could still, correctly, have said the same thing, but without being a nuisance to everybody else. It's what's in the brain that controls the hand that holds the gun that matters.

And the matter is that proper democracies are reliably peaceful while dictatorships, public or private, are reliably feral.


roy chen yee | 11 December 2024  

Similar Articles

Friendship in freefall: Unpacking a crisis of civic disconnection

  • David Halliday
  • 13 December 2024

In 2024, a fifth of Americans reported having no close friends, and the number is growing, especially among those without college degrees. So what are the societal structures behind this crisis in loneliness, and how we can rebuild meaningful connections?

READ MORE

Climate finance still feels like charity, not justice

  • Damian Spruce
  • 10 December 2024

At COP29, the world’s wealthiest nations promised to confront climate change—but delivered only a fraction of the required funds, leaving developing countries with a trillion-dollar shortfall. As Pope Francis warns of a sick planet, the question remains: Who pays for the climate crisis, and who bears the consequences?

READ MORE
Join the conversation. Sign up for our free weekly newsletter  Subscribe