Previous editorials

Current editorial

February 2021

December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020

December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019

December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018

December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017

December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016 (supplement)

December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015

December supplement
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014

December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013

December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012

December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011

December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010

December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009

December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008

December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007

December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006

December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005

December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004

December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
July 200
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002

December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000

16 Ravensdene Park,
Belfast BT6 0DA,
Northern Ireland.
Tel: 028 9064 7106
Fax: 028 9064 7106

This is an archive of material
mainly from 1992 until December 2020.
Please go to our CURRENT WEBSITE
for material from January 2021 onwards.
What's new?

Billy King


Nonviolence News



These are regular editorials produced alongside the corresponding issues on Nonviolent News.

Number 221: July 2014

[Return to related issue of Nonviolence News]

On Iraq and self-fulfilling prophecies

The success by Isis, the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant militant Islamist grouping in Syria and Iraq, in pushing out Iraqi government forces from northern or north-western Iraq is staggering. It means that the US-UK-'western' intervention in Iraq in the invasion and war of 2003 was a complete and utter failure. But it is much more than that; the US-UK invasion created the militant Islamism which is now 'coming home to roost' – if hawks can be said to come home to roost. Once more 'the west', and especially the USA, has created the very forces which it says it was opposing. It is a spectacular and total failure in any language, a complete and utter disaster from start to finish (so much like most of US and UK meddling in the affairs of other countries).

Of course, looking at it from an historical point of view, we cannot put all the blame on the 2003 invasion and war – but we can say it is the immediate cause of the current situation. George W Bush and Tony C L Blair bear an inordinate amount of the responsibility. But we have political systems in place which allowed them to do what they did, and they ignored mass protests. However the majority were proved right and the leaders wrong, oh so wrong. Bush and Blair ignored the cardinal rule of politics, in this case conducted through war; not to make things worse. Foreign interventions also fomented Sunni – Shia sectarianism.

The conquest by Isis of northern Iraq has been aided by the fact that Sunnis feel left out in the cold by the current, Shia dominated, government led by Nouri al-Maliki in Baghdad. That is certainly a very considerable part of the problem. Whether this is effectively the unravelling of the boundaries of Iraq and the move to de iure as well as de facto Sunni, Shia and Kurdish autonomous areas remains to be seen. The state boundaries were set by imperial powers Britain and France during the First World War, setting 'lines in the sand' as to how the Ottoman Empire would be divided up.

President Obama recently sought to downplay the role of military intervention in US policy and then along came Isis triumph in Iraq and we were back, very speedily, to military intervention, although military strikes from the air by the US have not yet happened. Military intervention is a crude reaction which tends to have within it the seeds of the next conflict – and that has certainly been the case in Iraq. Encouragement of military action – as with 'the west' encouraging military resistance to Assad's government in Syria but not getting substantially involved – is another heinous crime. Syrian rebels were led up a garden path but the civil war has been full of deadly thorns and Assad has been unmoved and the country brought to a terrible state. And Isis is thriving in the conflict.

The alternative to military intervention should not be to do nothing. There are plenty of other options for engagement in troubled area of the world; mediative interventions of many different kinds, humanitarian assistance, dialogue, even, dare we mention it, nonviolent interventions of various kinds. Military interventions in such situations are self-defeating and create self-fulfilling prophecies as the above clearly demonstrates. It is time for a different approach. The myth of redemptive violence is well past its sell by date.

- - - -

A useful site for understanding the history of the situation in Iraq through to the current day is the US 'Vox' site with 27 maps, right up to date.

- - - -

Quiet and not so quiet peacemakers
The selection of over thirty 'Quiet Peacemakers' for an exhibition of oil paintings by the Belfast artist Susan Hughes brings to mind many things, not least the comment by Malachi O'Doherty, in launching a north Belfast showing of the portraits (which will also be shown elsewhere around the North), that the celebratory element of the exhibition is quite rare. This is quite true. We are not usually very good at celebrating our successes, or work done. We are probably better at mourning and moaning when things go badly.

Of course there are many peacemakers, and many different kinds of peacemakers. In, and in relation to Northern Ireland, many have stood up through thick and thin, some (e.g. Corrymeela) even before the Troubles began, some throughout, and others for particular periods. Some peacemakers are deliberately quiet – some in Northern Ireland had to be to survive and even still it can be dangerous to put your head around certain corners or up above a parapet. Some peacemakers are people who were warmakers for a period. There are literally thousands of people whose work could be celebrated.

Some peacemakers are invisible not because they want to be but because society does not regard their work as 'newsworthy'. These peacemakers are not trying to be quiet, perhaps anything but, however their message is not seen as relevant, or they may be considered impractical or off beam, and the media may ignore them. But still they keep on moving.

'Peace' is of course a very flexible concept, and there is unlikely to be anyone who will say they are not trying to establish 'peace', even if they want to massacre everyone around them. So there is a judgement call as to what peace really is. In most places there would be common sense definitions. It is not just about community action or community service, though that can serve the cause of peace. It is about a conscious attempt to use peaceful means to advance the wellbeing of humanity and harmony and a society without violence, either internally or brought and exported externally.

But INNATE, as a nonviolence network in Ireland, has a deeper definition of peacemaking than many. Building peace between Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland, and dealing with the legacy of the conflict, is part of it. But then so is opposing, within the boundaries of the United Kingdom, the British Army and its role in international wars, and a nuclear-weaponed Britain. So is resisting US military use of Shannon, opposing the militarisation of the EU and closer Irish (Republic) links with NATO, and building nonviolence at a personal level (as with the Alternatives to Violence Project which is about to have its big international gathering in Ireland). There are many different levels to it. We could expand this list exponentially, e.g. global warming (see INNATE poster) is setting up woeful conflicts for the future, so efforts to avoid climate change are essential for peace.

This different focal points possible within peacemaking is recognised in one of the INNATE workshops: 'Violence/Nonviolence Spectrum' This is not telling people what is violence and what is nonviolence. Rather it is inviting people to explore the whole range, and, through doing so, and ranking the results, to decide for themselves. Of course as individuals, or even as INNATE, we might say that nonviolence is this or nonviolence is that, but we come back to the fact that it is individual's own definitions that are important. And, if you have a similar definition to ourselves, or to others, then there is the invitation or imperative to act on it, to become active on nonviolence, to move beyond passivism, to be whatever kind of peacemaker you feel is important.

INNATE is a small organisation but nonviolence and peacemaking is our game. If you think you may be able to help us, or that we can help you, e.g. to explore how you can work on an issue imaginatively and nonviolently, please let us know. That's part of what we are here for. Informing you about what other people are doing, so you can link in with them, is also an important part of our work; if we remain isolated and fail to build our networks and power, then we are unlikely to succeed.

Peacemaking is a quiet profession, even most of the time for the few who have had a high profile. For all of us, the work goes on and any achievements are built by many hours of low profile struggle and effort. There is no alternative. Of course appreciation and support are needed but anyone going into peacemaking for material rewards would not last long. May the road rise to meet us, may the wind be at our backs.

- - - - -

Larry Speight brings us his monthly column –

We Don't Destroy What We Love

Although we are one of the more recently evolved species, and came close to extinction on a number of occasions, we have become the most dominant life-form on the planet with an impact greater than the largest herd of dinosaurs or meteorite to hit the Earth. Our impact is not confined to a single ecosystem but embraces the entire biosphere; coral reefs, forests, mountains, rivers and deserts, the Arctic and Antarctic and species of every kind from whales in the deep oceans to micro-organisms in the soil. Extinction is forever, which means that many degraded ecosystems will not revert to their prior health and equilibrium. Much of the damage we are doing will be visible and measurable millions of years from now. We have become like a demented god of destruction reconfiguring the Earth in a brutal and grotesque manner in order to feed desires which substitute for a sense of meaning and purpose.

Judging by our treatment of the natural world we are a species that does not feel at home on Earth. In fact, environmentalists and theologians describe our relationship with nonhuman nature as one of hostility and war. Certainly many people prefer to spend their leisure time in a shopping mall rather than in a leafy park and many are so accustomed to noise they fear the quiet that allows us to hear the beating wings of insects. In parts of the world smog and artificial light prevent us seeing the stars in the night sky.

In the course of a few thousand years we have become alienated from the living Earth. Except for a small number of societies living beyond the sphere of the industrialised world, and some communities who have elected to live in an eco-sustainable and equitable way, our culturally prescribed way of appreciating and valuing the natural environment is akin to a form of entertainment and often serves as a means of self-aggrandizement.

Our intelligence, inventiveness and organisational skills have enabled us to do what no other species has done, which is revolutionize our relationship with nonhuman nature, changing it from one of immediate dependency by means of hunting and gathering to a position where billions of people have never picked a berry, planted a seed or killed for supper. Our world has become so complicated that most of us can't make or mend what we use on a daily basis and depend on food that has originated from all over the world. We are no longer a soft-skinned, slow moving, poor of hearing and smelling species but through technology have become a super-creature that never sleeps and never ever feels satiated. We are eating the world.

Given our emotional and psychological disconnection from the biosphere that sustains us, and the fact that the tipping point has yet to be reached in the use of nonviolence to resolve inter-personal, inter-group and international conflict, are there grounds to believe we can learn to feel at home on the Earth and live well with each other? Might it be delusional to believe we can? Although we have many negative traits we are at root social beings that place a high value on safety and security, and wellbeing that is founded on health and education. It also seems that most people want to leave the world in a better place than they found it and society values legacy as grand buildings, museums, art galleries, educational institutions, literature, national parks, nature reserves and memorials of all kinds testify.

Although it often seems otherwise we learn from our mistakes, one can see this in hygiene and medicine for example It is the positive in our nature that gives humankind hope and as there are bad news stories there are also good news ones. I will conclude with three regarding the environment. An article in New Scientist, 14th June 2014, quotes Changhua Wu of The Climate Group think tank in Beijing as saying that Premier Li Keqiang has declared a "war on pollution" and that his leadership has drawn up a philosophical framework called ecological civilisation, which aims to "bring everything back to the relationship between man and nature". This is significant as China is the biggest emitter of carbon dioxide. Earlier in the month the US Environmental Protection Agency took the first step towards reducing emissions from existing power plants by 30 per cent by 2030. Power plants in the USA, as New Scientist, 7 June 2014, reports account for 40 percent of US emissions. One of the worst environmental disasters has been the destruction of the Amazon rainforest. The good news is that the rate of deforestation has declined from 2005 when 19,500 square kilometres were cleared to 5,843 square kilometres in 2013, a fall of 70 percent. It is thought that destruction of the forest for farmland might have ceased by 2020. (New Scientist, 14th June 2014)

The onus is on all of us to make a positive difference. A good place to start, if you have not begun the journey, is to be more mindful and observant of the living Earth around you, for as the adage goes we don't destroy what we love.

Copyright INNATE 2021