Non-violent Solidarity – A Strategy for Life in Peace Wolfgang R. Schmidt 1
edited by Nancy Chng, Singapore
I met Sulak Sivaraksa for the first time in the early 1970s. Since we became friends mainly because of our religious and ideological understanding that transcended divisions, and our practice of solidarity in working for peace, Sulak invited me to present a paper in a Conference held in Bangkok, 10-13 February 2002 on “Peace and Insecurity in the 21st Century” in preparation for “Bandung II, 2005.” Parts of the paper went into my summary of Memoir in Dialogue (Seoul-Hong Kong, 2002, pp.421-438). However, I am very happy to dedicate these reflections for the public celebration of Sulak’s 70th birthday. May we be allowed to continue our dialogical pilgrimage towards new experimental dimensions of the fullness of life on this globe.
Summary
The end of the Cold war sees the US laying claim as the world’s hegemonic successor. Transforming an ultra-conservative Christian value system into a strategy of a global “just war” against international terrorism, the US is attempting to implement a globalised hegemonic militarised system in which it seeks to manipulate the world community of nations and peoples.
This US position is contrary to what UNESCO and the UN General Assembly articulated in their 1998 declaration: “Towards a Culture of Peace.” According to the inherent holistic vision, a culture of peace is the set of values, attitudes, traditions, modes of behaviour and ways of life. It reflects, inspires and seeks: (1) respect for life and all human rights; (2) rejection of violence in all its forms; (3) prevention of violent conflicts by tackling the root courses through dialogue and negotiation; (4) participatory and equitably meeting the (economic, cultural, environmental etc.) needs of present and future generations; (5) implementation of equal rights and opportunities for women and men; (6) recognition of the rights of everyone to freedom of expression, opinion and information; (7) devotion to principles of freedom, justice, tolerance, solidarity in difference, pluralism, cultural diversity, dialogue on all levels and sectors of individual and life in society. This vision encompasses the absence not only of war and open violence but at the same time also the absence of structural and indirect violence, at present manifested by the inequitable mono-polar distribution of power and resources.
What is to be nurtured is the existing multi-polar solidarity – a movement for life in peace which was born by the community of many peoples in all parts of the world and which will gain strength “from below.” Asia has a long tradition and successful recent experiences of national peaceful conflict resolution carried out by various human rights, women rights and peace organisations. To deal with insecurity in the 21 st century, an Asia-wide strategy of solidarity for life will be supportive to prepare and create peace in the region, not only within communities, but also at the level of intra-Asian security politics.
1. Universality of Peace and the Doctrine of a “Just War”
The colossal loss of lives from the horrific terrorist attack of 11 September 2001 was most terrible and shocking. Regardless of the twisted rationale behind such an act, the result is an affront against humanity, human civilisation and human culture.
Unsurprisingly, the immediate reaction by the US to this horrific event was to declare the “first war of the new century.” Washington quickly made it clear that it wanted to involve the entire world in its mission against the perpetrators. This retribution is well known in the Christian tradition since the days of Ambrose of Milan (339-97), who introduced the doctrine of a “Justified War” – coined by the Latin philosopher Cicero in 43 BCE – to Christian theology. It was the beginning of the re-alignment in the 4th century, which abandoned the uni