Baha’i Perspectives

nadim February 18th, 2008

…and they think that they do well, and that they are harbored in the citadel of security. The matter is not as they suppose: tomorrow they shall see what they [now] deny.

(Abdu’l-Baha, A Traveller’s Narrative, p. 79)

History has demonstrated that mankind’s capacity to develop increasingly powerful and sophisticated weapons has been exceeded only by it’s willingness to use them. Each time we hear of a new weapon, we hear that it will “only be deployed under exceptional circumstances”, yet the mere fact that it is developed presupposes its eventual use. If humanity is going to break the cycle, and avoid the wasted bloodshed that results from it’s own continued negligence, it needs to re-examine seriously the goals of world peace and disarmament in light of recent history.

The goals of world peace and disarmament are fundamentally linked, in that disarmament would never succeed without a governing authority that is empowered, as well as universally supported, to ensure that the provisions of a disarmament treaty are enforced.

In attempting to push the agenda of disarmament, whilst ignoring the imperative for a world authority to oversee the process, the following options have been suggested in the past:

1. Unilateral Disarmament: On the surface this appears like a noble option, however on further reflection it’s impracticality becomes evident:

   No nation can follow a peace policy while its neighbour remains warlike. There is no justice in that. Nobody would dream of suggesting that the peace of the world could be brought about by any such line of action. It is to be brought about by a general and comprehensive international agreement, and in no other way…

   (Extracts from interview with newspaper reporter, quoted in “‘Abdu’l-Bahá in Canada” (Thornhill: Bahá’í Canada Publications, 1987), pp. 34-35)

2. Disarmament to anything above Deterrence Levels: In his book, “World Government and World Peace“, J Tyson puts it eloquently: “Who will find comfort in the knowledge that there are now 6,000 nuclear warheads pointed at his country, simply because the number was previously 10,000?” Our mutual destruction, although delayed, would still be assured.

3. Disarmament to below Deterrence Levels: Whilst reducing their severity, disarmament to below deterrence levels would increase the likelihood of wars, as nations would have less fear of reprisal.

4. Full disarmament: This is unlikely to happen, considering a nation’s duty to provide a sense of security for their citizens. Also, there is no guarantee that a neighbouring nation wouldn’t secretly develop weapons, starting the cycle of conquest all over again.

For disarmament to truly be effective, it has to be carried out within the context of a larger framework, one that would make nations answerable to their actions. This, in turn, requires some ceding of the current rights to do with national sovereignty. The Kellogg-Briand Pact of 1928 demonstrated to the world the ineffectiveness of treaties that do not address the issue of national sovereignty in relation to the common good; that don’t impose strict punishment on nations acting in violation of the agreed terms. Sixty-two nations, the majority of the world at the time, signed a treaty “providing for the renunciation of war as an instrument of national policy.” As it turned out, within ten years the treaty had already been broken by Japan, Italy and Germany, who all went ahead and invaded other nations.

Ultimately, since the Pact did not make any provisions for a united response to any acts of defiance, it proved ineffective in achieving it’s primary aim.

The time must come when the imperative necessity for the holding of a vast, an all-embracing assemblage of men will be universally realized. The rulers and kings of the earth must needs attend it, and, participating in its deliberations, must consider such ways and means as will lay the foundations of the world’s Great Peace amongst men. Such a peace demandeth that the Great Powers should resolve, for the sake of the tranquillity of the peoples of the earth, to be fully reconciled among themselves. Should any king take up arms against another, all should unitedly arise and prevent him. If this be done, the nations of the world will no longer require any armaments, except for the purpose of preserving the security of their realms and of maintaining internal order within their territories. This will ensure the peace and composure of every people, government and nation.

(Baha’u'llah, Gleanings from the Writings of Baha’u'llah, p. 248)

Part 3 to follow (in the meantime, your comments are welcome).

Tags: disarmament, unity

• Baha'i Concepts , News & Current Affairs
• Comments(1)