- The damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave and certain
- All other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective
- There must be serious prospects of success
- The use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power of modern means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.
The third condition requires the military of "our" side to constantly improve the efficiency of killing apparatus and mechanisms so that the serious prospect of success remains ever present. Now if this is not in conflict with the utopian vision of everlasting peace then, what is? Pax Romana was basically an attempt to maintain law and order by beating everyone to submission under the sword and law of Rome. Is Pax Americana or Pax Talibana any different?
Now if you have suffered loss yourself or if you talk to the families and loved ones of killed or injured soldiers and civilians rather than politicians you will become convinced that investing on the increasing of killing efficiency is not the way to make peace. 30.9% of Vietnam veterans in one study had developed PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) during their lifetimes. Today 79% Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans suffer from PTSD. Isn't it time we considered if using war to achieve peace ever worked?
One of the oldest writings on this subject of ways of achieving peace is the Bhagavad Gita, from India. Here, the utopian vision of a static peace is considered a mirage and unattainable as a permanently stable state of affairs. War or conflict is seen as inherent in the human condition. Peace is seen here as a state of mind totally independent of external conditions. In this elevated state of being a person experiences inner peace and there is respect for all others without any desire for harm or malice to anyone. An individual is seen as having achieved clarity of vision when one has seen the tapestry of life without value judgements or own colouration. This clarity and inner peace is possible even amidst the fog of war.
Many contemporary Western peace thinkers like Wolfgang Dietrich and Wolfgang Sützl question the popular single and all-embracing vision of peace. They advocate a plural definition of peace beyond the "absence of war" or "presence of justice" theory. In Africa, in the area around Lake Tanganyika, western Lake Victoria, and lakes Kivu, Edward and Albert the word for peace, kindoki refers to a harmonious balance between human beings, the rest of the natural world, and the entire cosmos. Interestingly, in this vision, similar to the Bhagavad Gita, peace is not an imposition of order from outside by victors. In both visions, humans can achieve peace while being true to their nature. This peace is not something humans might achieve some day in the future (e.g., when all the terrorists or people of the wrong faith and mindset have been killed), but we can create and expand peace in small ways in our everyday lives, and peace evolves constantly. Thus, peace becomes the way rather than the goal.
