Why isn’t peace on anyone’s platform?
12.24.2011 at 02:04pm
Why isn’t peace on anyone’s platform?
by Nicholas Burns
The Boston Globe
IS THE word “peace’’ disappearing from our national conversation? Armies of talking heads, bloggers, and op-ed opinionators assault us daily on every subject . . . but rarely on peace. When was the last time we heard a national leader of either party, especially one running for president, put the goal of peace at the center of a political platform or place it among our highest national aspirations?
Have you heard of Ron Paul?
Many factors contribute, not least of which is that no candidate wants to be labeled as “weak” or “soft” by his competitors. I suspect this is what prompted President Obama to take his position to double down on Afghanistan as a counter to his position against our operations in Iraq.
Another factor is the the post Cold War concept that peace comes by “making others more like us” as described by Dr. Peter Feaver of Duke University. http://shadow.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/11/23/8_myths_about_american_grand_strategy
Unfortunately this means going around attempting to make people stop being like themself. And that tends to generate friction, which leads to conflict, which leads to war.
Perhaps it is time to once again become the country that stood for encouraging and allowing every one to simply be themself. That dusty phrase from our founding that we retired during the Cold War was “Self Determination.”
It’s true that candidates aren’t talking much of peace, but that’s not necessarily evidence of bellicosity. Their attention is elsewhere: this election will focus even more than usual on domestic policy.