February 24 marked the four year anniversary of a full-scale invasion that Russia launched on Ukraine. As of writing, the fighting there continues without an end in sight. War has ravaged other parts of the world, in areas of land as small as Gaza, or as large as the Democratic Republic of Congo and Sudan. Increasingly, other parts of the world ratchet up their defenses, and displays of military might – from greater military spending in Germany, to the U.S. engaging in lawless imperialist escapades, to China seemingly biding its time (for now) while its nuclear arsenal expands and sights on Taiwan narrow.
Why, exactly, does it all have to be like this? I think M. Gessen’s recent article in the New York Times about Ukraine tries thoughtfully to answer this unanswerable question. In some ways, the heroism and patriotism of war promote a grand purpose and camaraderie, powerful things in a human existence that can sometimes feel lonely and insignificant. In others, war showcases creativity and ingenuity — something that can drive up profits and lead to innovations that later make their way into society in less destructive forms. And ultimately, growing up in places that idolize war and national pride can beget more suffering — Putin, for instance, came of age with USSR education that celebrated its “everything for victory” in World War II (or, to them, the Great Patriotic War), which killed some 10 million Soviet soldiers and civilians. Ideologues will not give up easily.
But, seriously, at what cost? Mass death and destruction, in the end, affects us all and our posterity. We lose many people we love—the most painful loss—but also many scientists, artists, leaders, comedians, innovators, doctors, and nurses. Even for those who live, their passion and creativity is spent on the war effort. Gessen interviews many people in the article, wondering how their energy, enthusiasm, kindness, would be used in times and places of peace instead.
In this peace, we for sure can still find ways to make all those advances of war—technological, patriotic, civic—without having to ravage a city, raze natural landscapes, and build ever more resources for the sole purpose of harming other humans. Would it be so unreasonable to use these resources instead for building houses? Improving infrastructure and healthcare? Funding public spaces and preserving nature?
Call me crazy and naive, but I do not think this is impossible. Treaties and policies in the past have ensured lasting peace, prevented nuclear proliferation, brought aid to the most acutely suffering — and why not call for all this again? It begins with speaking out against violence perpetrated by the state, in both domestic and foreign theaters — we have an exceptional responsibility to do this, given the U.S.’s largest military and police force in the world. This is not to shame any of those dutifully serving our country — instead, a call to reorient society’s appetite for destruction, so people can lead lives without worry of whether they will need to harm someone else in their line of work.
And on the world stage — never discount the need to call for peace. By this, I mean a true peace, where fighting ceases and neither side licks its wounds resentfully before the chance to resume fighting again. Binding countries to this, and teaching peace rather than conflict, will eventually bring about the day when violence is the aberration.
“The thin-lipped armorer,
Hephaestos, hobbled away,
Thetis of the shining breasts
Cried out in dismay
At what the god had wrought
To please her son, the strong
Iron-hearted man-slaying Achilles
Who would not live long.”
– W.H. Auden
This article is dedicated to Captain Thomas R. Beall, Ph.D.
