Sample essay on If You Would Have Peace Prepare For War

Introduction:

It is paradoxical that when we speak of peace we do so in association with war and it is commonly perceived that to be prepared for war is the most effective means of preserving peace.

Development of Thought:

ADVERTISEMENTS:

The proverb appears to be true, for if a nation is well armed, other nations will be wary of attacking it and hence peace will be preserved. Conversely a weak nation-a nation unarmed becomes prey to a powerful neighbor.

But preparation of war does not really lead to peace. It only leads to war and more war. There are many examples to prove it. On the contrary peace can be achieved through negotiations and mutual give and take.

Conclusion:

Lasting peace can be ushered in only when the causes of war-the disparities in the world are eliminated.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

It is perhaps a commentary on man that, when one wishes to speak of peace, one must inevitably speak of war. The simple definition of peace seems to be the freedom from war and quietness of mind. War involves two or more hostile states in armed conflict, with one or more seeking a goal which is actively opposed by the others.

In seeking peace we are primarily concerned with the causes of war. In the era of superpower rivalry it was felt that to be prepared for war was one of the most effective means of preserving peace.

At first hearing, this piece of advice sounds plausible. It means that if a nation is well-armed and ready for war, other nations will be chary of attacking it. In this way it will avoid war and have peace. Whereas an unarmed nation will be an easy prey to any enemy.

No doubt there is an element of truth in this. In the present state of the world, no nation is safe that relies for its safety solely on the honor and good-will of its neighbors. Witness the fate of Belgium in the first Great War.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

In spite of our boasted civilization, and the fine sentiments expressed by governments, politicians and the press, the weak is still the prey of the strong, might is still right, and the final appeal is still to brute force. So long as this state of affairs lasts, any nation is foolish that is not prepared to defend its liberty by force of arms.

This is the policy followed by India and Pakistan. This was the policy followed by the US and former USSR and it is the policy which continues to be followed in many parts of the world.

But does preparation for war really make for peace? Let us examine this statement, as we would ring a doubtful coin. A tree must be judged by its fruits. In 1914 all the big nations of Europe (except, perhaps, England) were armed to the teeth.

Europe was an armed camp, fully prepared for war. What was the result? Peace? No, War the most widespread and devastating war in the world’s history.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

It was the enormous enlargement of armies and fleets, the crushing burden of ever growing armaments, and the mutual fear and suspicion engendered thereby, which finally resulted in the explosion of the first Great War.

The lesson of that Great War is that if you prepare for war you will have war- war, not peace. This has since then been proved time and time again in the second world war, in the wars between India and Pakistan, in the Gulf war. That method of securing peace has failed and failed lamentably.

Bertrand Russel in his “Which Way to Peace” pointed out: “The universal apprehension is itself a potent cause of war. Fear of war is used to justify armaments, armaments increase the fear of war; and the fear of war increases the likelihood of war.”

We must take another motto: If you would have peace, prepare for Peace. Let the nations prepare for peace, by cultivating mutual goodwill, by the amicable settlement of disputes by arbitration, by agreeing to universal disarmament, by friendly cooperation instead of suspicious rivalry.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

Thankfully the world is moving towards such a scenario. The collapse of the Id war era, the treaties of disarmament between the US and the former USSR, the signing of peace agreements between traditional foes the Jews and Palestinians; the end of civil wars in Cambodia and Afghanistan all seem to raid a new era of global peace, arrived at not by the use of arms but through a process of negotiations and mutual give and take.

Ultimately to preserve peace, the causes of war need to be eliminated. The disparities between the have and the have not’s, between the rich and the poor, between the powerful exploiter and the meek who is exploited, have to be eliminated. It is not arming oneself with weapons, but arming oneself with knowledge, development and belief in the unity of mankind which can herald an era of peace.