[lit-ideas] On how not to create Peace
- From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "Lit-Ideas" <Lit-Ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 11:30:08 -0800
On page 255 of On the Origins of War, and the Preservation of Peace, Donald
Kagan writes,
"The peace they [the Romans] finally imposed on Carthage in 238 was of the
least stable kind: it embittered the losers without depriving them of the
capacity for seeking revenge and without establishing a system able to
restrain them - and then taking the trouble to make it work.
"So strong is our modern desire for peace that we tend to regard it as an
unalloyed good, but the arrangement imposed by the Romans raises serious
questions. Their behavior and the peace they forced on Carthage were, by
the admission of one of their own defenders, entirely unjust. To keep the
peace in those circumstances, to insist that its victims abide in it rather
than resort to war, is to perpetuate an injustice. We must recognize that
much of the time whatever international arrangement is in place has produced
an injustice somewhere, and a sense of injustice, warranted or not, among
many people. The result among people of conscience may be a serious
conflict of basic values between a desire for peace and a desire for
justice. It is hard to see how such conflicts can be avoided. . . ."
Comment: I realize that some would prefer keeping this discussion at the
abstract or at least bumper-sticker level. "Embrace Peace" says it all for
them, but when nations attempt to create peace, difficulties arise. The
Peace of 238 BC sounds quite a bit like the Peace of Versailles after World
War One. Of the latter, we know in retrospect that the Germans were
defeated. The German generals knew it, but that wasn't the predominate
impression in Germany after Versailles. They could have kept on fighting
until the actual defeat, much as it was in 1945, was established beyond any
doubt or denial, but the war was stopped short of that and then the Peace of
Versailles imposed penalties a substantial number of Germans believed were
unjust. Just as with Carthage, the Germans were not so devastated that they
were beyond plotting revenge. The Peace of 238 and the one of 1919 were
short-lived.
Peace with Japan and Germany after World War II has been preserved. Why?
Wasn't it because they were so thoroughly devastated that the Peace was like
a new birth?
One hesitates to draw the Draconian conclusion that one should always
continue on until utter devastation is achieved. We ought to be able to
quit a battle or a war when the other side surrenders, but we have some bad
examples before us to indicate that Peace is a tricky business. A war that
follows a bad Peace is often worse than the war that preceded it. The
devastation that follows is often worse than what might have been achieved
by the Draconian follow-through we instinctively draw back from.
Lawrence Helm
San Jacinto
Other related posts:
- » [lit-ideas] On how not to create Peace
