II
Banning nuclear weapons, prohibiting
the use of poison gases, or outlawing germ warfare will not remove the root causes of war.
However important such practical measures obviously are as elements of the peace process,
they are in themselves too superficial to exert enduring influence. Peoples are ingenious
enough to invent yet other forms of warfare, and to use food, raw materials, finance,
industrial power, ideology, and terrorism to subvert one another in an endless quest for
supremacy and dominion. Nor can the present massive dislocation in the affairs of humanity
be resolved through the settlement of specific conflicts or disagreements among nations. A
genuine universal framework must be adopted.
Certainly, there is no lack of recognition by
national leaders of the world-wide character of the problem, which is self-evident in the
mounting issues that confront them daily. And there are the accumulating studies and
solutions proposed by many concerned and enlightened groups as well as by agencies of the
United Nations, to remove any possibility of ignorance as to the challenging requirements
to be met. There is, however, a paralysis of will; and it is this that must be carefully
examined and resolutely dealt with. This paralysis is rooted, as we have stated, in a
deep-seated conviction of the inevitable quarrelsomeness of mankind, which has led to the
reluctance to entertain the possibility of subordinating national self-interest to the
requirements of world order, and in an unwillingness to face courageously the far-reaching
implications of establishing a united world authority. It is also traceable to the
incapacity of largely ignorant and subjugated masses to articulate their desire for a new
order in which they can live in peace, harmony and prosperity with all humanity.
The tentative steps towards world order,
especially since World War II, give hopeful signs. The increasing tendency of groups of
nations to formalize relationships which enable them to co-operate in matters of mutual
interest suggests that eventually all nations could overcome this paralysis. The
Association of South East Asian Nations, the Caribbean Community and Common Market, the
Central American Common Market, the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance, the European
Communities, the League of Arab States, the Organization of African Unity, the
Organization of American States, the South Pacific Forum -- all the joint endeavors
represented by such organizations prepare the path to world order.
The increasing attention being focused on some
of the most deep-rooted problems of the planet is yet another hopeful sign. Despite the
obvious short-comings of the United Nations, the more than two score declarations and
conventions adopted by that organization, even where governments have not been
enthusiastic in their commitment, have given ordinary people a sense of a new lease on
life. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, and the similar measures concerned with eliminating
all forms of discrimination based on race, sex or religious belief; upholding the rights
of the child; protecting all persons against being subjected to torture; eradicating
hunger and malnutrition; using scientific and technological progress in the interest of
peace and the benefit of mankind -- all such measures, if courageously enforced and
expanded, will advance the day when the specter of war will have lost its power to
dominate international relations. There is no need to stress the significance of the
issues addressed by these declarations and conventions. However, a few such issues,
because of their immediate relevance to establishing world peace, deserve additional
comment.
Racism, one of the most baneful and persistent
evils, is a major barrier to peace. Its practice perpetrates too outrageous a violation of
the dignity of human beings to be countenanced under any pretext. Racism retards the
unfoldment of the boundless potentialities of its victims, corrupts its perpetrators, and
blights human progress. Recognition of the oneness of mankind, implemented by appropriate
legal measures, must be universally upheld if this problem is to be overcome.
The inordinate disparity between rich and poor,
a source of acute suffering, keeps the world in a state of instability, virtually on the
brink of war. Few societies have dealt effectively with this situation. The solution calls
for the combined application of spiritual, moral and practical approaches. A fresh look at
the problem is required, entailing consultation with experts from a wide spectrum of
disciplines, devoid of economic and ideological polemics, and involving the people
directly affected in the decisions that must urgently be made. It is an issue that is
bound up not only with the necessity for eliminating extremes of wealth and poverty but
also with those spiritual verities the understanding of which can produce a new universal
attitude. Fostering such an attitude is itself a major part of the solution.
Unbridled nationalism, as distinguished from a
sane and legitimate patriotism, must give way to a wider loyalty, to the love of humanity
as a whole. Bahá'u'lláh's statement is: "The earth is but one
country, and mankind its citizens." The concept of world citizenship is a
direct result of the contraction of the world into a single neighborhood through
scientific advances and of the indisputable interdependence of nations. Love of all the
world's peoples does not exclude love of one's country. The advantage of the part in a
world society is best served by promoting the advantage of the whole. Current
international activities in various fields which nurture mutual affection and a sense of
solidarity among peoples need greatly to be increased.
Religious strife, throughout history, has been
the cause of innumerable wars and conflicts, a major blight to progress, and is
increasingly abhorrent to the people of all faiths and no faith. Followers of all
religions must be willing to face the basic questions which this strife raises, and to
arrive at clear answers. How are the differences between them to be resolved, both in
theory and in practice? The challenge facing the religious leaders of mankind is to
contemplate, with hearts filled with the spirit of compassion and a desire for truth, the
plight of humanity, and to ask themselves whether they cannot, in humility before their
Almighty Creator, submerge their theological differences in a great spirit of mutual
forbearance that will enable them to work together for the advancement of human
understanding and peace.
The emancipation of women, the achievement of
full equality between the sexes, is one of the most important, though less acknowledged
prerequisites of peace. The denial of such equality perpetrates an injustice against
one-half of the world's population and promotes in men harmful attitudes and habits that
are carried from the family to the workplace, to political life, and ultimately to
international relations. There are no grounds, moral, practical, or biological, upon which
such denial can be justified. Only as women are welcomed into full partnership in all
fields of human endeavor will the moral and psychological climate be created in which
international peace can emerge.
The cause of universal education, which has
already enlisted in its service an army of dedicated people from every faith and nation,
deserves the utmost support that the governments of the world can lend it. For ignorance
is indisputably the principal reason for the decline and fall of peoples and the
perpetuation of prejudice. No nation can achieve success unless education is accorded all
its citizens. Lack of resources limits the ability of many nations to fulfil this
necessity, imposing a certain ordering of priorities. The decision-making agencies
involved would do well to consider giving first priority to the education of women and
girls, since it is through educated mothers that the benefits of knowledge can be most
effectively and rapidly diffused throughout society. In keeping with the requirements of
the times, consideration should also be given to teaching the concept of world citizenship
as part of the standard education of every child.
A fundamental lack of communication between
peoples seriously undermines efforts towards world peace. Adopting an international
auxiliary language would go far to resolving this problem and necessitates the most urgent
attention.
Two points bear emphasizing in all these issues.
One is that the abolition of war is not simply a matter of signing treaties and protocols;
it is a complex task requiring a new level of commitment to resolving issues not
customarily associated with the pursuit of peace. Based on political agreements alone, the
idea of collective security is a chimera. The other point is that the primary challenge in
dealing with issues of peace is to raise the context to the level of principle, as
distinct from pure pragmatism. For, in essence, peace stems from an inner state supported
by a spiritual or moral attitude, and it is chiefly in evoking this attitude that the
possibility of enduring solutions can be found.
There are spiritual principles, or what some
call human values, by which solutions can be found for every social problem. Any
well-intentioned group can in a general sense devise practical solutions to its problems,
but good intentions and practical knowledge are usually not enough. The essential merit of
spiritual principle is that it not only presents a perspective which harmonizes with that
which is immanent in human nature, it also induces an attitude, a dynamic, a will, an
aspiration, which facilitate the discovery and implementation of practical measures.
Leaders of governments and all in authority would be well served in their efforts to solve
problems if they would first seek to identify the principles involved and then be guided
by them. |
Bahá'u'lláh forbids:
