Is "Just War" an Oxymoron?

BOOKS-US:

Mark Weisenmiller

TAMPA, Florida, Jan 29 (IPS) - The author of a best-selling "biography" of cod and a world history of salt has taken on the weighty theme of nonviolence movements in his latest book -- why some thrive and others fail, and why the concept is so "profoundly dangerous" to the powers that be.

"Nonviolence: Twenty-Five Lessons From the History of a Dangerous Idea" by Mark Kurlansky (Modern Library Chronicles, September 2006), who also worked for many years as a journalist at the International Herald Tribune and other outlets, includes a foreword by the Tibetan Dalai Lama.

Kurlansky notes at the beginning of the book that "nonviolence" has "no word for it... while every major language has a word for violence, there is no word to express the idea of nonviolence except that it is not another idea, it is not violence."

As he guides the reader on a chronological tour of nonviolence movements from early Christianity (described as an "anti-war cult") through the activism against U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Kurlansky shows that, for a variety of reasons, human beings, and especially governments, tend to ultimately undermine pacifist systems.

Most of the notable people affiliated with nonviolence movements, "when they at first became prominent, were more interested in political causes than their religious beliefs," Kurlansky told IPS. "Two examples that immediately come to mind are (Mohandas) Gandhi, whose chief cause was the independence of India from the British, and (Reverend) Martin Luther King Jr., whose first priority was civil rights for blacks (in the United States)."

No one country or continent has been a leader in nonviolence, according to Kurlansky. Intentionally designed nonviolent states -- such as Quaker William Penn's colony in what is now the state of Pennsylvania in the U.S., and Kenneth Kuanda's dream of a peaceful South Africa free of the horrors of apartheid -- "have been undermined by outside influences," Kurlansky said.

"Because of the British Empire, regarding Pennsylvania, and the violent tactics of the ANC (African National Congress) in South Africa, these planned nonviolent states failed," he said.

Kurlansky presents a series of "lessons", such as once a state takes over a religion, the religion usually loses its nonviolent teachings; a propaganda machine promoting hatred always has a war waiting in the wings; and violence does not resolve problems -- it always leads to more violence.

Religion is usually thought of as being a necessary aspect of pacifism -- although "not always," Kurlansky noted -- and a discussion of how the four oldest of the world's religions stand on nonviolence is the main theme of the first chapters of the book.

Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism and Judaism are all examined by Kurlansky, who observes that "Hindus often repeat the aphorism 'ahimsa paramo dharmah,' nonviolence is the highest law, but this is not an unshakable principle of the religion."

"Nonviolence," the book, has in-depth examinations of the lives of Mohammad, Jesus and Buddha. Also given prominent mention as pacifists are the Quakers, which began in England, and the Anabaptists, whose land of origin was Switzerland.

Kurlansky argues that the United States' long history with violence and slavery derives from the fact that the country's early history is so closely tied to bellicose England.

Yet most countries have some type of violence in their histories. "Mexico has had an incredible history of violence and Canada was drawn into the violence of its early days by its colonialism with England. No country in Europe would qualify as having no violence," Kurlansky said.

Gandhi in the 1930s and Rev. King in the 1960s were the leading proponents of nonviolence in those decades. Who is the 'star leader' of nonviolence in the first decade of the 21st century? "Probably the Dalai Lama or Desmond Tutu," answered Kurlansky. "Currently, there are organisations for both the Israelis and the Palestinians that have large non-violent groups in them," he added.

Unlike most Western writers, Kurlansky does not beatify Gandhi in "Nonviolence." Gandhi, who was once memorably described by the late U.S. journalist John Gunther as "an incredible combination of Jesus Christ, Tammany Hall (the Manhattan building which became the headquarters of the New York Democratic Party), and your father", is presented as a man whose actions and beliefs do not comport to the mores of the century in which he lived. However, Gandhi's love of nonviolence is given due credit by Kurlansky.

The author told IPS that military veterans have had interesting reactions to his book.

"I have a lot of friends who are veterans and they agreed with many things in the book. Some of the strongest, most vocal organisations in the U.S. that are now protesting the American involvement in Iraq are Gulf War veterans groups and Vietnam War veterans groups. But veterans aren't the problem -- governments are," he said.

Kurlansky cited former U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower as a rare case of a military man who condemned violence. "In 1959, he (Eisenhower) said 'I think people want peace so much that one of these days governments better get out of the way and let people have it.' That's an amazing statement, considering that the military was such an important part of Eisenhower's life," Kurlansky said.

What does the author foresee for the future of nonviolence? "That's tough to answer," admitted Kurlansky, "but I do know that all anti-war people agree that the next six months (of the U.S.'s current involvement in Iraq) are critical because if the Democrats in the new Congress don't start to try to stop the war, they may never do it."