By: Alexandria Addesso
It is easy to fall into the bleak reality of the status of the world today. Currently 29 countries are actively engaged in wars as well as wars involving militias-guerrillas, terrorist-separatist-anarchic groups that are not official states. World peace has long been preached about, and for a long time viewed as an achievable goal but how probable is it in a world where so many weapons of mass destruction, that could end all forms of life many times over, exist?
There are currently 15,375 nuclear weapons on this planet, in the possession of nine different countries; Russia, the United States, France, India, Pakistan, The United Kingdom, Israel, and North Korea. The U.S. and Russia own the vast majority of the world’s nuclear weapons, with 6,970 and 7,300 respectively with a combined amount of 1,800 on high status alert ready to be detonated in a matter of minutes. For many who spend a lifetime working towards achieving peace, this accomplishment cannot be reached when any nuclear weapons still exist.
"As long as we have nuclear weapons on this earth, one could claim that no real life is actually thriving on the earth. We do not have life actualizing its fullest potential as long as there are nuclear weapons,” said the former Mayor of Hiroshima Tadatoshi Akiba, during his acceptance speech for the 2004 World Citizen Award.
With a ridiculous amount of nuclear weapons, many militarized states, and violence being glorified even to children in every form of entertainment possible, is world peace a realistic goal or a pipe dream? Is the glass half empty or half full? Perspective can definitely dictate how one answers that question, for some further militarization is a way to ensure “peace”, but to most logical people that premise must seem ridiculous. But is there any way that peace advocates can make a difference? In 1980 the Ploughshares Movement, which is an anti-nuclear weapons and Christian pacifist movement that advocates active resistance to war as well as direct actions usually via damaging or vandalizing weapons and military property, began. The name came from the Bible verse Isaiah 2:4 “..they will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not take up sword against nation, nor will they train for war anymore.”
“We spoke out, committed civil disobedience, and went to jail because the peace hangs senselessly and precariously upon weapons costing billions to build and billions to improve — weapons which become more useless as we add to their destructive force,” said Fr. Daniel Berrigan, an American Peace Activist and Catholic priest. “With this money we could have fed the world's people. Half the children on earth go to bed hungry — millions more have retarding and stunting protein deficiencies. Instead of building the peace by attacking injustices like starvation, disease, illiteracy, political and economic servitude, we spend a trillion dollars on war since 1946, until hatred and conflict have become the international preoccupation."
Is this type of resistance enough? Is more political action needed? Before any mass movement to achieve peace is made it most first take place within the individual. Peace must become as necessary as air is to live. In places like Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and the Democratic Republic of Congo this need is real for civilians just trying to exist. Where unmanned drones rain bullets on children and bombs are dropped daily, peace is prayed for unceasingly. Does this level of destruction need to happen in every city around the world for change to happen? Hopefully not, but as long as economic and military success takes priority over life anywhere and everywhere, peace will remain far away.
It is easy to fall into the bleak reality of the status of the world today. Currently 29 countries are actively engaged in wars as well as wars involving militias-guerrillas, terrorist-separatist-anarchic groups that are not official states. World peace has long been preached about, and for a long time viewed as an achievable goal but how probable is it in a world where so many weapons of mass destruction, that could end all forms of life many times over, exist?
There are currently 15,375 nuclear weapons on this planet, in the possession of nine different countries; Russia, the United States, France, India, Pakistan, The United Kingdom, Israel, and North Korea. The U.S. and Russia own the vast majority of the world’s nuclear weapons, with 6,970 and 7,300 respectively with a combined amount of 1,800 on high status alert ready to be detonated in a matter of minutes. For many who spend a lifetime working towards achieving peace, this accomplishment cannot be reached when any nuclear weapons still exist.
"As long as we have nuclear weapons on this earth, one could claim that no real life is actually thriving on the earth. We do not have life actualizing its fullest potential as long as there are nuclear weapons,” said the former Mayor of Hiroshima Tadatoshi Akiba, during his acceptance speech for the 2004 World Citizen Award.
With a ridiculous amount of nuclear weapons, many militarized states, and violence being glorified even to children in every form of entertainment possible, is world peace a realistic goal or a pipe dream? Is the glass half empty or half full? Perspective can definitely dictate how one answers that question, for some further militarization is a way to ensure “peace”, but to most logical people that premise must seem ridiculous. But is there any way that peace advocates can make a difference? In 1980 the Ploughshares Movement, which is an anti-nuclear weapons and Christian pacifist movement that advocates active resistance to war as well as direct actions usually via damaging or vandalizing weapons and military property, began. The name came from the Bible verse Isaiah 2:4 “..they will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not take up sword against nation, nor will they train for war anymore.”
“We spoke out, committed civil disobedience, and went to jail because the peace hangs senselessly and precariously upon weapons costing billions to build and billions to improve — weapons which become more useless as we add to their destructive force,” said Fr. Daniel Berrigan, an American Peace Activist and Catholic priest. “With this money we could have fed the world's people. Half the children on earth go to bed hungry — millions more have retarding and stunting protein deficiencies. Instead of building the peace by attacking injustices like starvation, disease, illiteracy, political and economic servitude, we spend a trillion dollars on war since 1946, until hatred and conflict have become the international preoccupation."
Is this type of resistance enough? Is more political action needed? Before any mass movement to achieve peace is made it most first take place within the individual. Peace must become as necessary as air is to live. In places like Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and the Democratic Republic of Congo this need is real for civilians just trying to exist. Where unmanned drones rain bullets on children and bombs are dropped daily, peace is prayed for unceasingly. Does this level of destruction need to happen in every city around the world for change to happen? Hopefully not, but as long as economic and military success takes priority over life anywhere and everywhere, peace will remain far away.
