Why Peace (and not war)?

If the girlfriends and wives and mothers of the soldiers sent off to war by their “leaders” were to have the final say about the necessity of offensive war, they would almost always oppose it with tears, with sighs, with remonstrances, with pleadings and with sophisticated arguments about the possibilities of peace.

On the other hand, if all wars were only defensive and fought only to prevent murder, rape and pillage of one’s own people, there would be a grim yet cheerful, even patriotic mobilization of the general population. And then, of course, those tearful scenes popularized in our movies of mass farewell in train and bus stations - the trembling embrace, the quivering lips, the passionate kiss, the nation’s flags tucked into the elbow or timidly waved, all these could be a justified prelude to a war for one’s very survival.

But alas for the soldier, alas for humanity, alas for the women in those train and bus stations, very few of us ask the essential questions. Is this an offensive war of greed, hubris, evil intention - or a defensive war? And more importantly - can we have peace instead?

In the days when Kings and Princes actually led their troops to battle, it would have been interesting to do the kind of “press interview” of leaders that is common nowadays. What if they were asked the ridiculous question posed with nauseating regularity by our TV journalists, “how do you feel on the eve of battle?”

The King (or Prince) would probably have the journalist’s head chopped off for asking nonsensical, impertinent questions!  Even were he a more benevolent ruler, he would likely have been too full of sorrow (or misplaced joy), too jittery, too full of the matters of war (and his own survival!) to give any kind of coherent, intelligible “press interview.”

On the other hand, our rulers nowadays, glibly talk for hours on TV about how X must be defended from Y by an offensive war that will kill thousands of people, except themselves! The X and the Y are often interchangeable, depending on the motive - greed, avarice, evil desire or distraction.  And for the people at home, the wars are allowed to be fought on TV screens, hundreds, even thousands of miles away.

Without any evidence at all, and mostly by lying to the people, these rulers claim that “we have to fight them over there, so that we don’t have to fight them over here!” Or, even more disingenuously that, “we cannot let X nation (or group) down in their fight against Y nation (or group).” 

What they really mean of course, is, “we cannot let down the arms manufacturers on whose boards we have just served or hope to serve.” Or, “when we fight them over there, we can test out our latest weapons, such as  depleted uranium bombs which we cannot  test on our people here.” Or, “our bombing and killing of men, women and children ‘over there’ will breed ever increasing cycles of violence and generational hatred against us- but by then, I’ll no longer be the leader!”

Soldiers, even their generals, are pawns in this cynical game that the powerful nations play against the weak. The stories of their extraordinary bravery, courage, tactics and sacrifice that are the stuff of legend in our books and movies are often genuine and true stories; and the soldier usually richly deserves his honour and the medals that await him. The dead soldier’s posthumous honour is even more richly deserved. 

It is the soldier’s leaders and their handlers who must be tried in criminal courts for crimes against humanity - and against their own people. Time after time, it is the propaganda press that stops this from happening - and then gets ready for the next big dose of propaganda, for the next big war of choice.

In my essay, “Why A Free Press,” I wrote about the illusion of a free press that is foisted upon the population in our Western societies. This dangerous illusion is immeasurably helped along by fake debates on either side of a very narrow spectrum of permitted narrative and opinion. For example, the BBC may host a debate in which one side argues for the aim of the propagandized war being the annihilation of the “enemy’s” army + the overthrow of the enemy’s leader; whilst the other side of this fake debate will be another “expert” who claims that overthrowing (assassinating) the leader would be unacceptable and a step too far and that the destruction of the enemy’s army (country) should be quite enough for now!

The really vital questions are hardly ever debated - what is the premise that made war inevitable? Why not talk peace? How many of our soldiers are likely to die or be maimed or psychologically crippled for life? Will women and children be killed by our bombs? How about non-combatants - do they deserve to die? What will be the aftermath of this war - will it make our children safer?

Once the war starts, its true horrors are concealed - lest the carefully crafted narrative falls apart. The actual images of severed limbs, smashed skulls, bullet ridden and young bodies, seared and burning skins, eviscerated bowel from abdominal wounds and red blood darkening streams and rivers - all these are ubiquitous in every one of our wars; and all these are hidden from our TV screens and press dispatches.

The coffins of American soldiers coming home were regularly shown to the American people during the Vietnam war - it was also the last war in which journalists were telling anything approaching the truth. 

More than 50,000 American soldiers were killed in the Vietnam war. But as many as 2 million Vietnamese men women and children were also killed; including more than 80,000 children. When Seymour Hersh broke the story of the My Lai massacre of civilians including women and children in 1972, it did receive wide publicity in the press and media; it did enrage and energize the anti-war movement; and it did help to bring about an end to the slaughter. 

The rulers and their handlers learned their lesson. No longer was the press allowed to cover the coming home of American soldiers in coffins. Virtually all the major newspapers and news media were concentrated in a small, tightly controlled ownership structure; and the neo-conservative propaganda position of never ending war became accepted by the majority of the public.  

The anti-war movement has all but completely disappeared and the old “left” in politics is as pro-war as the “raging right.” The astonishing inuring and numbing of our people to the suffering our leaders inflict abroad and on our own people is now largely complete.

What of the soldier who survives the war, but returns home a wreck? Why is suicide such a common cause of death in the veteran? In 2019, the average American veteran suicide rate was 17 veterans per day. 

Should not these soldiers have been grateful they “fought for their country,” and returned home to tell the tale? Ah but ‘tis a sordid tale to tell, a tale that repeatedly brings up the widow, the fatherless child, the children killed by his bombs - all at the behest of his leaders and their handlers. Again and again, before him there arises the ghost of the “enemy” soldier who lived, moved, felt, loved and breathed exactly like him - and like him, the victim of some other leader, some other handler. 

I wrote a poem about the returned veteran and his “Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.” It appears in my book of poems, published in 2021:

From “To A Nurse Friend Weeping - Poems by Francis Christian” page 25:

P.T.S.D.

The “enemy” blundered into his bullets

looked but once into his eyes, once only

he saw his little brother’s eyes -

soft eyes, moist, misting over, cheeks

ruddy beneath those eyes he knew,

now unblinking open wide on the cold grass.

And so the sobbing soldier summons sleep,

speaks softly to it, calls it sweet names …

thinks his feet is off the grieving grass at last;

wills the canopy of shade cover his soul -

then wakes and shouts and weeps aloud,

and screams and swears and cowers.

“At the going down of the sun and in the morning” and every Remembrance Day, we must remember them, we will remember them. We don’t often remember the numerous veterans who die at home of PTSD and suicide - but we must remember them too.

And we must remember especially, those who risk their lives for peace - those like the heroic Australian journalist Julian Assange, who must also receive accolades, honours and medals now reserved only for those who do battle at the behest of the criminal leaders.

I wrote about these mighty warriors for peace in my sonnet, “Remembrance Day 2015:”

From “To A Nurse Friend Weeping - Poems by Francis Christian” page 103:

REMEMBRANCE DAY 2015

Fewer far than the famous names

that speak of severe battles won

with sword and spear and of games

of war played with real shot and gun,

- are the warrior names of Peace

written across the sky in blood

of young men not spilled and lease

of life returned where once death stood.

Deep gashes sewn back tenderly

bleeding hearts their beats returned;

even severed heads replaced gingerly

and invite to death and glory spurned.

Their stars are pinned not on starched shirts,

but soar in the skies and spawn a million births.

Those of us who continue to yearn for peace must never lose heart, since we are the ordinary soldier’s only hope. We must continue to support independent journalism, continue to lobby for peace, continue to expose the crimes of leaders and their “think tanks.” Without our restraining influence, all of planet earth is only one, short step away from nuclear annihilation. 

The Samizdat (underground) press continues to bravely fly the flag of honesty and truth - and journalists like Assange, John Pilger, Max Blumenthal, Aaron Maté and Robert Parry are courageously exposing the lies and deceit of our leaders and their handlers. 

These valiant journalists together with all of us who do the hard work of peace are the “peacemakers” of Christ’s sermon on the mount - “Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.”