The Unorthodox Website Blog

War is no solution

28 Mar

War has been described in various ways. Barbaric would be the most apt description; a complete breakdown of humane and civilized behavior.

It has also, I believe,  been described as a continuation of politics by other means, and a way of solving international disputes when all else has failed. I would dispute these last two descriptions, and supplement: a way of making a lot of people very rich, shoring up the unstable capitalist system, culling people in an overpopulated world and of course gaining access to new lands and resources (i.e. imperialism, colonialism or neo-colonialism.) It also seems to actually excite certain people who actually enjoy playing war games and destroying things.

Looking at all the wars thruout history, I honestly can’t see that any have solved anything. They might have eliminated one problem, but they then create more. Basically all wars are a means of one country or group of countries exerting power over others. A way, in other words, of widening countries’ empires, spheres of influence or access to mineral and other resources.

Just take the big 20th Century wars for example. The First World War was clearly a traditional imperialist one involving the Kaiser of Germany and his kinfolk in the British Royal family seeking to widen or hold on to their respective empires or spheres of influence. Other nations joined in of course. The defeat of Germany led to the Treaty of Versailles which imposed reparation fees and re-drew German borders in favor of its neighbors.

This Victors’ Treaty led directly to the rise of Hitler and the Nazis, and to the Second World War. So much for the so-called ‘war to end wars’ as the First World War was described at the time; it actually directly created the most devastating war in human history to date.

‘Ah but the Second World War was a just war; it defeated Nazism’ people cry. Well as has just been seen, there would have been no Nazi Germany had it not been for the First World War and the unfair conditions imposed upon Germany. That’s the first point.

Secondly, Nazi Germany was only following in the footsteps of other brutal empires in the past, such as the British Empire for instance. Never let it be forgotten that the British invented the concentration camp, and executed ‘inferior races’ en masse if they opposed or resisted British rule.

Thirdly, Britain’s reason for going to war with Germany in the first place proved to be hollow. Czechoslovakia and Poland had both been annexed by Germany, and the latter was the pretext for the outbreak of war in September 1939. Six years later at the end of the War far from regaining their freedom, Czechoslovakia, Poland and a lot of other Eastern and Central European countries were handed over lock, stock and barrel to the dictator Joseph Stalin, then an ally of Britain and the USA.

This was agreed at various treaties between the Allied powers at Tehran, Yalta, Potsdam, etc. As in all wars, the victors carved up the spoils between them. The Soviet Red Army was already in occupation of most of Eastern and Central Europe at the end of the Second World War, and was not going to give up these newly acquired ‘satellite states’ as they became known in the West. It more than anything wanted a buffer zone of friendly client states in case Germany or some other power tried to invade the Soviet Union again. It also wanted to impose its own political system on its neighbors, rather than have capitalist states right on its doorstep again.

The USA and UK had similar aspirations. So two ‘spheres of influence’ were created in Europe. Nominally independent states became allied, thru NATO and the Warsaw Pact, to eiither the USA or the USSR. Germany was again divided and lost territory to neighboring countries, and Austria was also initially divided, but later the Soviets marched out on condition it remained neutral.

The Second World War thus led directly to the Cold War, the nuclear arms race between the USSR and USA, the division of Europe between East and West, and of course to the establishment of the Jewish state of Israel on Palestinian soil and all the wars, terrorism and trouble that has caused.

The six million or more Jews, gipsies, homosexuals, Communists, mentally and physically handicapped people and others who perished  in the Nazi concentration camps are cited as justification for the War, but the Final Solution was a direct result of the War and was only made possible by the War.

Hitler said long before war broke out, that if started the Jews would be punished. Even if he hadn’t said this, it is perfectly obvious that atrocities of the kind that took place in Nazi Germany – the gas chambers and all the rest of it – are made much more possible and likely in the atmosphere of all-out war. With soldiers and civilians being killed every day nobody had much time to worry what was happening to these various minorities in the camps.

Would we in Britain have known, and would many have cared anyway, what was happening to the German and other foreign nationals rounded up and incarcerated for the duration of the War in the UK? Had we gassed them, would Britons have been up in arms when they were more concerned about the nightly bombing raids on our cities? Would we have even known or bothered to find out about what went on in the incarceration camps?

Had the Allies got rid of Hitler by other means, had they accepted en masse the Jewish and other refugees in the 1930s, perhaps setting up a separate state for them in the vast, underpopulated areas of countries like the USA, the USSR and Australia (not in the tinderbox overpopulated Arab Middle East), then not only would the Holocaust have been prevented, but so would the Second World War and its consequences.

I see the Second World War as yet another imperialist one, whereby the rival empires of Nazi Germany, Hirohito’s Japan, Mussolini’s Italy, Brtain, the USA and Stalin’s Soviet Union all fought over territory principally. In the end the new empires were established, and most countries came under the domination, if not direct rule, of the two biggest super-power victors of the Second World War, the USA and the USSR. The concentration camp victims, the bombing victims on both sides (including those in Hiroshima and Nagasaki where the atom bombs were dropped), and the ‘cannon fodder’ (soldiers of both sides) were just casualties of yet another imperialist war which created as many or more problems than it ‘solved’.

There has to be found another way of dealing with dictators, of settling international disputes, of preventing genocide and torture other than all-out war which only really succeeds in profiting the arms manufacturers and dividing the spoils of the war among the victors, which in effect means the rulers of the victorious countries. Nobody actually wins wars except this relatively small ruling clique of politicians, arms manufacturers and other big businesses which gain access to mineral and other resources. The ordinary people of all countries lose heavily in all wars, not least in the civilian and military casualties which barely affect the ruling elite safe in their bunkers directing the mayhem.

The only long-term solution is some sort of permanent world security force under the auspices of the United Nations. This security force needs to replace national armed forces, and be stationed permanently in all countries. National sovereignty must take second place to world peace and the authority of the United Nations General Assembly, or to a confederal world government if that can ever be established.

I’m sure the independent kingdoms of England would have held up their hands in horror if told that the only way to stop the constant wars between them was a united England under one government, along with effective policing. Clearly, though, this is the way the world had to go and is in fact going slowly but surely. The European Union, while by no means perfect, is an example of nation states coming together for their common interests.

Eventually, or ultimately, the EU and similar groupings of countries must develop into fully federal entities, and they in turn must be policed and come under the overall authority of a confederal world government.

Safeguards need to be put in place to ensure that the whole system is democratic, and that powers are devolved down to national and regional levels. The United States is a pretty good example, where the Federal government in Washington DC has limited but effective powers, and the individual states of the Union retain a State legislature and a great deal of autonomy.

A new war between the States is now unthinkable. The same should be true of Europe, and one day, of the world if this federal/confederal approach is adopted.

Otherwise wars will continue indefinitely, and with the weapons now available we could easily destroy our planet and make it permanently uninhabitable.

3 Responses to “War is no solution”

  1. 1
    Anonymous Says:

    Britain should not have courted and appeased Hitler in the first place.There is some evidence that Hitler was actually a British agent.The Holocaust wouldmost likely still have taken place, except maybe by other means and probably in a much less open fashion.The Nazis would most likely install friendly satellite governments in the East that would follow similar policy.Also, their intentions to expand into the East would still be materialized. It is probably too soon to state that the emergence of the Nazi regime was only made possible by Germany’s defeat in the First World War. The Weimar Republic has existed for some 15 years, which is 3 years longer than the period of Nazi rule.Germany’s aspirations to expand into the East and get rid of the “minorities” were quite apparent long time before WWI had even begun.So basically the only difference that the WWII made is that it sort of fast forwarded the inevitable.However, the genocide of the Jews, Gypsies and others was never actually given as a justification for the war, because in fact many people in the Allied countries, particularly British aristocracy had actually strongly supported the it. The German atrocities against the Jews was actually exploited by the British press when it suited British interests, and in fact the British and other Allied governments took no steps to rescue them.So the British basically were fighting the war for their own imperial interests pretty much on the backs of the persecuted Jews and other unfortunate victims of the Nazi rule, but never once actually acknowledged it.

  2. 2
    Tony Says:

    Some interesting and thought-provoking comments, thanks for these. Appeasement was not a good policy to deal with Hitler’s expansionist ambitions, nor was the Nazi-Soviet Pact, though both may well have bought time for the future WWII Allies to get Jews and other threatened minorities out of the Germany and the countries it occupied, however as you say this was not their objective. It was certainly not to defend the independence of Poland or Czechoslovakia, as we see what happened to them at the end of the War. The War was, however, very useful for getting over the Depression by boosting the arms industries in Britain, USA and other countries. And a rival to the British Empire was not welcomed on mainland Europe either, so yet another imperialist war.

    But getting rid of Hitler before he became so powerful should not have been so difficult. Getting rid of the Nazis was a much more complex problem, but addressing genuine German concerns about the unfair Treaty of Versailles would certainly have helped, and might well have prevented the Nazis rise to power had these matters been addressed during the days of the Weimar Republic.

    If there had not been a war I imagine the Jewish ‘problem’ would have been solved by methods other than the Final Solution, probably by the establishment of Israel as a Jewish state on Palestinian soil, something the Zionists wanted for years and I’m sure Hitler would have found it a satisfactory solution if all Jewish people were to settle in Israel. This is assuming some other country with huge underpopulated areas such as the Soviet Union, Canada, USA and Australia hadn’t offered to set up a Jewish state, or better still a new country for refugees of all persecuted races and minorities.

    The Third Reich would have probably developed into something very similar to the European Union with a single currency, etc. The more extremist policies of the Nazis would have died with Hitler (if not before), as the more extremist Soviet policies died with Stalin. But I am convinced the most extreme policies, such as the Final Solution were made possible by the wartime situation.

    It should be remembered, however, that Stalin’s Soviet Union was seen as the main threat to Western capitalism by the USA, UK, etc., and so the rise of Hitler and the Nazis in Germany was not initially seen as a great threat, but as possibly a bulwark against the expansion of Communism westwards.

    In fact, of course, the Second World War led to precisely that.

    It does seem that when certain politicians, leaders, etc. are regarded as a ‘nuisance’ but a war is not thought desirable, other methods are found to remove them from the scene permanently.

    It is not a good idea to discuss such methods in detail on an open forum, but I can think of many ways this could be done, especially if the undesirable leaders can be arrested or whatever when out of their own country. It should not be too difficult to arrange such a scenario.

  3. 3
    Anonymous Says:

    What you are suggesting here still sounds like appeasement to me.The German “concerns” revolved mostly around retaking large swaths of Eastern Europe and probably parts of France, so it was not so much about the supposed “wrongs” of the Versailles Treaty as it was about German aspirations to become a European superpower, which was never going to be acceptable or fair to the other continental European countries, particularly the small mostly Slavic states in the East.Communism or not, I think that the war between Germany and Russia,(then USSR) would most likely been inevitable.USSR and Germany were two European continental superpowers that were bent on expansion beyond their borders.I think that the ultimate reason why the Nazis rose to power, is that their leaders, including Hitler were telling them exactly what they wanted to hear and were thus appealing to the previously hidden or sugarcoated extremist and racially motivated desires of all classes of Germans, such as the ones I mentioned in the previous post.The possible forcible removal all European Jews that you are referring to, would amount to ethnic cleansing, and would have been just as extreme and just as final, which is very similar to what had actually of happened anyway.There was no Jewish ‘proble’ in Germany, only Jewish people who were just as European and had just as much right to live in Europe and to have some sort of political autonomy as all other Europeans.The idea of “resettling” them in other parts of the world is just as morally unacceptable as the idea of “resettling” all Arabs outside of the boundaries of Palestine.

Leave a Reply

© 2015 The Unorthodox Website Blog | Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS)

Your Index Web Directorywordpress logo

Bad Behavior has blocked 288 access attempts in the last 7 days.