Will all remaining pacifists please stand up?
When I was young my worldview was formed around 9/11 and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. While many of my American classmates cheered victory with every bomb that dropped on the Middle East, I cried as I watched the TV, unable to ignore the lives extinguished in every flashy explosion. I never understood how one could shed tears over deaths in New York and Washington but feel nothing as Afghans met a similar fate.
From an early age I decided that I was against war, always. That was intuition, nothing more. No part of it was based on lofty, well-thought out political or philosophical ideals. I was a dumb teenager, who followed her heart. The interesting thing is that here intuition seems to have been a far better guide than experience, as I think most of the teachers and elders who criticized me at the time will now agree that at least those wars were a mistake. The same was true when rumors of torture and other crimes in the American ‘war on terror’ began to reach the broader world. While many tried to justify it, my gut was horrified. But in time the majority also began to see these acts as morally wrong, and they are now broadly condemned.
I think I might have become politically ‘left wing’ because I was so against the violence in the Middle East. Perhaps because of the long tradition of left wing leaders speaking out against war, or perhaps because in those days the one conducting wars was right wing Republican president George W. Bush. But today anti-war activism seems to have disappeared from the mainstream left along with other traditional values, like freedom of speech, strong democratic control, and anti-globalism. The day Russia invaded Ukraine most of my left-leaning, academic friends began glorifying the conflict in a way reminiscent of my time growing up in Texas during the early days of the war on terror.
I should not have to explain that if one is against all war, one is per definition also against invading countries. Therefore anyone who accuses pacifists of approving of the invasion of Ukraine proves themselves unable to understand simple logical reasoning that would not phase a six year old.
But it is also absurd to characterize Russia’s action as a completely one-sided aggression that occurred in a vacuum. If there is any sanity left in the world – and I admit that is questionable – this conflict may well go down in the history books as a senseless proxy war. The result of decades of complex geopolitical games and provocations that ended in two superpowers, the United States and Russia, settling their differences by destroying a third country. No matter where you stand on the spectrum between the US (and its allied states) versus Russia, I will never understand how anyone can cheer that.
It is equally absurd to claim that this will end in anything other than negotiation. Russia has never indicated it wishes to expend the lives and resources necessary to occupy the whole of Ukraine. And Ukraine defeating and occupying all of Russia is even more unlikely, even if the rest of Western Europe is drawn into this conflict. The current destruction is merely geopolitical positioning by those seeking to strengthen their hand at the negotiating table, or influence exchanges of oil, gas and currency. Is that really worth the loss of so many lives? That many Ukrainians do not want to fight this war would explain the increasingly severe measures required to conscript them into the army. And for what? Currently the ‘best case scenario’ (from our Western European point of view) is that this ends in an agreement that Ukraine will not enter NATO and that parts of Eastern Ukraine will gain autonomy. That is what Putin likely would have settled for to begin with. I am against war on principle, but even a pragmatist can see this needs to stop as soon as possible.
War is never a good thing, and in my lifetime it has never been the only option. I see a difference between when two countries fight a war and when an oppressed population uses violence in an uprising against their own government, although I also sincerely doubt the effectiveness – and therefore justification – of the latter. Wars on an international scale have always systematically generated profit for the extraordinarily rich, while the poor were sent to their deaths. And anyone that looks into the ties between those who choose to start wars and those who profit from them, will undoubtedly be horrified at what they find. All good reasons why the political left has traditionally opposed them. But today I can almost count on one hand the number of left wing politicians and activists who call out for negotiations to end the war in Ukraine. Instead we in Europe fan the flames by sending increasingly deadly weapons and pushing escalatory rhetoric, while America once again makes promises it has no intention of keeping.
Has the entire European left been convinced by the endless propaganda on our television sets, or are some just too scared to speak? Pacifists have historically always been vilified in times of war, but today it is even harder. Where social media were supposed to make it easier by showing you that you are not alone, they have instead created a culture of terror where one dares not speak out for fear of public humiliation or worse. Yet my intuition says that we still should, especially now that many on the left side of the political spectrum dare not speak their minds. And when it comes to wars, my intuition has yet to lead me astray.