I’m old enough to remember seeking cover under my desk in elementary school. Apparently, it never occurred to the administrators at the New Lebanon School that in the event of a nuclear detonation our flimsy writing tables just might not fully protect us. But under the desks we went.
It is perhaps hard for those of us living today to imagine, or remember, the fear and anxiety that gripped our world in the 50s and 60s relative to “the bomb.” It was a topic on everyone’s lips.
With the advent of the “space age” and its technological advancements, particularly with respect to weapons delivery systems, the possibility of a “nuclear holocaust” had become real, one with the potential to wipe out tens of millions of people in a matter of moments. Worse still, we appeared to be on a collision course with our mortal enemy, a nuclearized Soviet Union.
I’m also old enough to remember the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 along with the pleading calls for peace. Fortunately, unbeknownst to the public, President John Kennedy and Soviet Premier Nikita Krushchev, fearing mutual destruction, opened up a secret backchannel of communication.
In these private correspondences, they wrote to each other poignantly of the awesome power they possessed, capable of wiping out entire peoples, as well as their sense of responsibility in trying to avoid it. Both were contending with military and intelligence hardliners who were pushing for “first strike capability.” Thus, the secrecy of their communications. Mercifully, as it turned out, the world was spared a deadly showdown.
I’m also old enough to remember the peace protests surrounding the Vietnam War. They were so intense, in fact, that they played a major role in President Lyndon Johnson’s decision not to seek re-election in 1968. I also remember the equally intense ongoing push for peace during Richard Nixon’s term.
I’m old enough also to remember the strident calls for peace and the protests against President George W. Bush’s “endless wars” in Iraq and Afghanistan. The howls of outrage filled the evening news broadcasts and newspaper headlines.
But something strange seems to have happened. While the U.S. government recklessly pushes for an ever-expanding war in Ukraine, the peacemakers are nowhere to be found. It’s crickets.
Why is that? Is it because we’ve become so tribal that we will accept whatever policies “our team” pursues? A proxy war against a nuclear Russia? No problem. Send more military hardware and tens of billions more dollars? Check.
Get ‘em, Get ‘em! Get ‘em!
Why are there no calls for peace? Former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett reportedly made efforts at the start of the war in 2022 to get both sides to the negotiating table.
In the weeks following the invasion, Bennett said he spoke with both Putin and Zelenskyy, and even made a secret trip to Moscow, in an effort to negotiate an end to the conflict. At the time, Zelenskyy himself noted that the Israeli prime minister was “trying to find a way of holding talks,” a fact for which “we are grateful.”
Bennett also went on to suggest (but has since partially retracted his statement) that the United States rejected this opportunity for peace.
Whether true or not, I continually scratch my head wondering why no one is calling for peace negotiations. How come?
Meanwhile, thousands are being slaughtered in a slow war of attrition reminiscent of the bloody trenches of France in WWI. U.S. General Mark Milley estimates that a total of 200,000 combat troops have already been killed (both sides combined), along with another 40,000 Ukrainian civilians.
Not to mention the destruction of lives, homes, places of work, and infrastructure. But at least the military-industrial complex is making hand over fist. And, according to Zelenskyy, companies like BlackRock and Goldman Sachs are waiting in the wings to “help” rebuilt Ukraine (my language, not his).
There doesn’t seem to be any end in sight.
Again, why? I drive around my town and see all sorts of Ukrainian flags being flown by neighbors I seriously doubt have ever picked up a rifle much less fought in a war. They all seem blithely unconcerned about this unfolding tragedy and our open-ended, blank check funding for a country many might not actually be able to locate on a map.
Why?
And then you turn on the TV. With sickening regularity, one hears casual discussions about the possibility of “limited” nuclear strikes. Ho hum. No hiding under the desk for these stalwarts.
Why?
I can’t help but conclude that the U.S. government wants this war, presumably to take out Putin. Hard question: Who would replace him? Thomas Jefferson?
And don’t get me started on U.S. involvement in the color revolutions within Ukraine in 2004 and again in 2014, with the CIA’s fingerprints everywhere. This, despite assurances by the U.S. in the 90s that the West and NATO would never encroach on Ukraine, that it would remain a neutral country. But that was then, I suppose.
I’ve heard that Russia is a major threat to take over Europe. Yet nobody seems to realize we no longer are fighting the Cold War and that Russia is no longer the Soviet Union. In fact, Russia today has an economy the size of Italy’s. It’s even been referred to as a “gas station with nuclear weapons.” It certainly has lots of the latter, though.
Perhaps worst of all, the war and the aggressive nature of American interests (its headlong pursuit of a neoliberal world order) has pushed Russia into the arms of our only real geopolitical threat, the Chinese Communist Party. What a brilliant strategy!
As I write, Chinese President Xi Jinping is meeting in Moscow with Vladmir Putin. Isn’t it great to have this meet-up of the CCP and the KGB? This is, in my view, a direct result of U.S. policy regarding Ukraine and Russia. (Let us not speak, however, of the blasting of the Nord Stream gas pipelines!)
And for what? What’s the end-game? Nobody can tell us. Or bothers to. Why not?
Adding further to this delightful situation is the efforts of Russia, China, Iran, and Saudi Arabia (to name but a few) who appear to be actively seeking to replace the U.S. dollar as the world’s reserve currency. Recent moves suggest it be replaced by the Chinese yuan. If our currency were ever to be replaced by another, we become Venezuela. The only thing allowing us to borrow, spend, and print trillions of dollars is that we are the world’s reserve currency. Without that, the dollar loses its value. We become the Weimar Republic. Think wheelbarrows. No more free lunch.
So, is it me or do we seem to be sleepwalking into WWIII? Perhaps we’ve been so powerful for so long that we can’t imagine a world different from what we’ve always known.
Take, again, the reserve currency as an example. For a long time, the British pound held that august distinction. Until 1944, that is. That’s when the Bretton Woods Agreement was signed by a prostrate Europe. The U.S. dollar was now king – the world’s new reserve currency. Long live the king!
All empires, historically, fall. It’s only a matter of time. What makes us think we’re necessarily immune? Did the Romans ever really think their world would end? But since, as I say, we’re so accustomed to being top dog, financially and militarily, we seem to ignore any and all threats. It’ll all work out, we say to ourselves.
And maybe it will. I certainly hope so. But we seem to be on a reckless path, testing our historical invulnerability.
Meanwhile, we push for war – and more war still.
I’m old enough to remember when this wasn’t so, when the “amen” chorus for war wasn’t so overwhelmingly dominant and uncontested. Which, sadly, seems to apply to our mostly silent churches as well, which tend to offer up only vague, listless prayers “for the people of Ukraine.”
So where have all the peacemakers gone?
Well said, my friend. In order to be peacemakers we have to ask each other difficult questions – and then we need to listen, and listen carefully.