With the establishment of a United States Department of Peace, I will make peace- building my highest priority for just that reason. I will transform the culture of the State Department, re-aligning its mission with what I see to be the most important items on a peace-building agenda: diplomacy, mediation, support for democratic institutions and expansion of economic opportunities for women, providing educational opportunities for children, reducing violence against women, and ameliorating unnecessary human suffering. For when those factors are present, the statistical incidence of peace increases and conflict decreases. In a Williamson Administration, desperate people will be seen as a national security risk. For desperate people are more vulnerable to ideological capture by genuinely psychotic forces. Those kinds of things are not a matter of corporate profits, but they can well become a matter of life or death for millions of people”. Beautifu l description indeed. FDR has been a towering figure in US history because of his statesmanship, vision, diplomacy and above all embracing peace as his number one priority and denouncing wars. What we are witnessing today is completely opposite to the policy framework and parameters visualized by those leaders. This is a time in history unlike any other. A post-WW2 order that was built with great care and which mainly held for most of the last 75 years, now appears to be eroding. Heroic attempts are being made to shore it up, particularly in the light of the present American President’s failure to appreciate the role of a European Alliance in maintaining such an order. But be that as it may, and for whatever reasons, the templates have shifted underneath our feet and nothing is at all the way it was. The 20th Century is no more, and with it have gone not only the conditions that defined it but the attitudes that prevailed within it. A sophisticated observer of the world today is dealing with a much different set of questions than that which leaders in the last half of that Century faced. Leaders then were trying to discern what kind of world they wanted to create; leaders today must discern what kind of world will be habitable and survivable in another 50 to a 100 years.
November 2019 Buy CSS Books Online as Cash on Delivery | Call/SMS 03336042057 Page 128 20th Century leaders had nuclear bombs yes, but not many of them-while leaders today are dealing with a plethora of nuclear bombs, and criminals around the world who are working around the clock to get one into their hands. Both of those things represent historically different kinds of challenges. They also bring with them the necessity that we find new ways of dealing with those challenges, a new kind of problem-solving as different from 20th century problem- solving as are the problems themselves .Power in the 20th Century, and thus problem-solving in the 20th Century, was primarily an expression of brute force. In the 21st Century, it is not brute force that will save us, but rather soul force. It will
You've reached the end of your free preview.
Want to read all 130 pages?
- Summer '12
- Dr. James
- Jammu and Kashmir, Azad Kashmir, Kashmir conflict, Indo-Pakistani War of 1965