On Peace Through Strength
But what kind of strength?
The late comedian George Carlin famously said something to the effect that “fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity.” (He likely used an f-bomb there, but I’ll opt for a slightly softer version. You get the idea.)
In looking up that quote, the first page of Google results for “fighting for peace” had numerous entries saying if you want peace, prepare for war. This is the essence of “peace through strength,” which President Ronald Reagan talked about a lot and on which he based his foreign policy.
Reagan was not the only one who espoused the strategy of “peace through strength,” nor did he originate the phrase. It goes all the way back to Emperor Hadrian of the Roman Empire. Ancient Rome established what was known as Pax Romana, or the Peace of Rome. It wasn’t peace. It was brute force that kept everyone under its thumb. It was oppression.
If we look closer, we see peace through strength ideology in authoritarian parents who say, “Because I said so, that’s why,” who enforce their will with shouting and a belt. We see it in business leaders who like to keep their underlings afraid for their jobs. It litters toxic masculinity, but women aren’t immune from also employing it.
Peace through strength generally means just one kind of strength: the person or nation with the biggest and most guns wins. With the dawn of the nuclear age, that way of thinking came to be called MAD, or mutually assured destruction. Once the bombing starts, it’s a lose-lose for the whole planet.
Peace through strength means you have the personal or military strength to impose your will on others whether they like it or not. It’s rule by fear. On an individual level, we call people who do that bullies. On a national scale, we call people who do that authoritarians at best if not out-and-out dictators. They’re bullies, too, just with bigger playgrounds.
Fear does not lead to lasting peace between nations or in a community, nor can it create a loving family. Fear leads to distrust and coercion. It might temporarily keep you on top and others in line, but the day will come when either someone else gains more power than you or rebellion rises in those you’re ruling and they demand justice. And then you’re done, defeated by your own philosophy. That’s what just happened in Syria when they ousted the long-time brutal dictator Assad.
Don’t call it peace if it relies on fear. Call it intimidation. Call it oppression.
You can’t have true peace and treat other people, or other nations, like crap. You just can’t.
A different kind of strength is required for making authentic peace: a moral strength. A strength of character. Grit. Working for lasting peace takes more patience and courage than ruling through might. Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. highlighted this when he said, “Nonviolence is a way of life for courageous people.”
Peacemaking is different from peacekeeping. We need both.
Peacekeeping is temporary in a volatile situation. Making, respecting, and, if necessary, enforcing boundaries are important to peacekeeping. I’m not so naïve as to think we don’t need to protect ourselves and others who are vulnerable. But too often protection morphs into retaliation or murderous intent.
Peacemaking is about peace for the long haul. It takes it a step deeper, collaborating to create a lasting environment in which everyone can be safe and thrive, one in which justice prevails for all equally.
“Every moment of social tension needs a peacemaker. Otherwise, how can the human family get beyond the competition, domination, annihilation, and blind struggles for power that pass as defense even now? The truth is that only one thing can really bring peace: the commitment that we will not destroy other people’s sense of self, of dignity, of value in the name of truth.”
– Joan Chittister, in The Monastic Heart (2021)
Peacemakers relate to other people as fellow humans, which means they listen to understand their experiences, perspectives, and values, not just on the surface but layers deep.
Peacemakers negotiate to come up with some measure of a win-win solution to the conflict.
Peacemakers think beyond the binary, meaning they seek a third way when two conflicting ways are entrenched.
Peacemakers listen to people who usually do not have a voice to learn what harms they have experienced, what they need, and what ideas and strengths they bring to contribute to building a lasting solution.
Peacemakers aren’t swayed by money or power.
Peacemakers know they must build mutual trust first and are committed to that process, which isn’t quick, easy, or even necessarily linear.
Peacemakers take responsibility for their own trustworthiness and establish mutual accountability.
Peacemakers know you can’t have peace without justice.
In true peacemaking, all parties take responsibility for their own actions.
Peacemakers are humble enough to ask for input from people who know things they don’t and to admit when they were wrong.
Peacemaking is not one-and-done. It requires maintenance. As circumstances or people in leadership change, or especially if stated values are no longer held, the process may need to start over.
Lasting peace is hard work, but like anything else, the more it is practiced, the more natural it feels and the more skilled we can become at it.
Another name for peace is conflict management. It’s lifelong work. It’s uncomfortable work. It’s good work. Will you join me in it? Let’s explore how we can practice peacemaking, starting with our daily interactions.