Yesterday the government asked wives, mothers and sisters of young men who might be considering going out to Syria to do their best to dissuade them. It would seem to me that this is far too big a responsibility for any individual or their family to do on their own. Whilst it will never be possible to fully understand the dilemmas and decisions in other peoples lives, we are all, I believe, part of humanity with a shared responsibility to help in what ways we can.
Some years ago, the son of one of my closest friends confided in me his ambition to join the army. Though knowing that I am a Quaker with a peace testimony, I think he was a little surprised that I didn't immediately throw up my hands in horror. Instead I recalled how at one time his father was expecting to be sent to Iraq. He was in the army, had been training all his adult life for such a time as this and believed there was now a genuine threat from weapons of mass destruction. Having been provided with the skills and opportunity to do something, this professional soldier was now prepared to give up his life to protect even conscientious objectors like me. At the time I could not believe that anyone could be so generous towards those who might so easily judge him. It made me feel very small.
There is undoubtedly love in war. Each year at the Remembrance Day services, I find it very hard to believe the degree of sacrifice from those prepared to defend ideals,their families, friends, communities and even people they do not know. This would seem to be a major problem about having a peace testimony. Throughout history some totally incredible people who unquestionably deserve our respect, don't believe it.
How should we respond? There is the option of considering each war as being a separate case to be judged on its individual merits. Others approach every conflict as a matter of negotiation to determine their degree of participation. Such tactics do not tend to make very effective soldiers. I will own to having considerable sympathy for New Model Army officers when Early Quakers in their ranks considered themselves entitled to choose their campaigns. In all these different responses, I do not believe we are entitled to ignore the situation or judge others as being any less a person through having a different perspective to our own.
At times there may be a temptation to argue the case against war on intellectual grounds. It may be observed throughout history that the absolute elimination of your enemy is virtually impossible, such achievements tend to be short-lived and that diplomacy followed by treaties are the usual methods anyway to resolve war. This approach may be quite correct although may not include how it feels to be caught up in conflict. Whilst providing considerable incentive to resolve difficulties early, I could never consider myself entitled to tell anyone that they should learn to appreciate the wider picture and try to think long term. To me, pacifism without understanding or compassion is worth nothing.
It may seem at times as if the reasoning has already been done for us. There is now a traditional Quaker peace testimony besides a long track record of some quite incredible individuals who in their different ways have all made a stand against war.
My grandfather for example was a conscientious objector who served as a stretcher bearer during the First World War. Whenever there was a lull in hostilities he would go forward with a companion into no-mans-land to retrieve casualties. They would duck to evade shells, negotiate so much mud, shell-holes and barbed wire, then carry bodies alive or dead, back some distance to the dressing station. Throughout my adult life I have been aware of my grandfather's example. Whilst there will be many opportunities for me as a Quaker to attend peace vigils and protest marches, it is as if he is telling me, "War requires so much more of us than an opinion."
Those of us who have had the privilage of working with young people will know they are also Seekers of Truth, generally have very little patience for half-truths, and will be requiring absolute honesty from us. We may attempt to cite Scripture, that crucial commandment for example "Thou shalt not Kill," only to have other apparently conflicting instructions perhaps from the Bible, or through other faiths, thrown back at us. Perhaps they may say that we are too selective anyway of those commandments we choose to follow and so challenge us again.
War often requires great bravery, although it would seem to me the struggle for peace is also not an easy option. Since war involves a struggle for power there is a particular objective in mind. Participants might well be motivated by the prospect of being triumphant. For peace there is never an option of winning. You act through a belief in the worth of all humanity, using all your strength at times to forgive whether or not you lose.
It may be necessary to start very small, using all your strength and courage to act well beyond the point of reason and forgive. With such weapons I believe, we build the Kingdom of God.
Although I cannot believe myself entitled to kill another human being, there is still a great deal that I do not know. Instead of sending our children to war, I think that I would like to say to these young potential volunteers that it is a very brave and selfless undertaking that they are considering and for this I respect them. I admire their honesty and courage. They are a challenge to question and go on questioning whether holding a peace testimony really is the right option.
For us all however, right now there is a opportunity. I believe even in war there is still hope for mankind because although our views on this issue may be very different, the things we do for love last forever.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete