US EMPIRE PROMISES MORE OF THE SAME

By Leonardo Boff Reprint | | Print |

This column is available for visitors to the IPS website only for reading. Reproduction in print or electronic media is prohibited. Media interested in republishing may contact romacol@ips.org.

RIO DE JANEIRO, Nov 1 2004 (IPS) - Throughout the recently concluded US presidential campaign, the world has looked on in fear as violence raged in Iraq and President Bush responded with bellicose declarations, with his adversary Kerry not far behind, perhaps a shade less warlike. This violence is an integral part of the imperial spirit deeply rooted in western culture, which has always shown itself to be imperialist, imposing itself on all \’\’others\’\’, those who are \’\’different\’\’. The re-election of Bush assures the continuity of this tragic policy if not an intensification of it, writes Leonardo Boff, a Brazilian theologian and environmentalist. In the name of national security, constitutional rights that were an integral element of the US are being suppressed. Those accused of terrorism are arrested and kept in secret locations, sometimes outside of their own countries, without access to family, lawyers, or even the International Red Cross. And as if this weren\’t enough, the superpower now practices pre-emptive military actions and cooperates with only those international organisations that serve its ends. This is the return of the-state-as-Leviathan envisioned by Hobbes, visceral enemy of any strategy for peace. His logic admits no future either for peace or for humanity.

Throughout the recently concluded US presidential campaign, the world has looked on in fear as violence raged in Iraq and President Bush responded with bellicose declarations, with his adversary Kerry not far behind, perhaps a shade less warlike. This violence is an integral part of the imperial spirit deeply rooted in western culture, which has always shown itself to be imperialist, imposing itself on all ”others”, those who are ”different”. The re-election of Bush assures the continuity of this tragic policy if not an intensification of it.

It is part of the imperialist logic that one sad day it will be ”internationalised”; that is to say placed in the service of the interests of the new globo-colonisers. Given its globalised interests, it will be capable of anything, from occupation to even wars of conquest to take over scarce natural resources.

These days, lamentably, there are few lovers of peace — and many obsessed with war. The world desperately needs new sources of inspiration for peace. One of the most consistent was formulated by Immanuel Kant in his essay from 1795 suggestively entitled, ”Perpetual Peace” (Zum ewigen Frieden). Kant proposes a world republic founded on world citizenship, the primary characteristic of which is ”general hospitality”. The reason for this, the philosopher argues, is that all humans share the same planet and without exception have a right to live on it and visit its places and peoples who live on it as well. The earth belongs to all equally.

This citizenry rules itself by law and never by violence. Kant calls for the suppression of all armies, since as long as they exist, the strong will threaten the weak and tensions will emerge between states, destroying the foundations of any real peace.

The rule of law and diffusion of hospitality must create a culture of rights and generate a ”community of peoples”. The conscience of this community will be able to grow to the point that the violation of a right in one place will be felt in every other — an idea that would be repeated later by Ernesto Che Guevara. Addressing the pragmatists of politics, who are generally lacking in any ethical sense in social relations, Kant emphasizes, ”World citizenship is not a fantasy but a necessity imposed by lasting peace.” If we want a perennial peace and not merely a truce or momentary pacification, we must live with hospitality and respect the rights of all others.

The ethical-political vision of Kant established a paradigm for globalisation and peace. Peace is a consequence of the rule of law and juridically ordered and institutionalised cooperation for all states and peoples. For the philosopher, rights are the ”the apple of God’s eye” and ”the most sacred of all that God placed on earth”. Respect for rights nurtures the growth of a community of peace and security that puts a definitive end to ”odious war”.

The vision of the other theoretician of the state and globalisation, Thomas Hobbes, stands in stark contrast to that of Kant. For him peace is a negative concept: it means the absence of war and an equilibrium of intimidation between states and peoples. This vision served as the foundation for a paradigm that predominated for centuries and that has vigorously reasserted itself since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The US decided to fight terrorism with war, pushing aside the perspective of peace. It established a regime of national and international security animated by a perverse logic: everyone is suspect. Simply being an Arab or Muslim makes one an eventual terrorist.

In the name of national security, constitutional rights that were an integral element of the United States are being suppressed. Those accused of terrorism are arrested and kept in secret locations, sometimes outside of their own countries, without access to family, lawyers, or even the International Red Cross. And as if this weren’t enough, the superpower now practices pre-emptive military actions and cooperates with only those international organisations that serve its ends, as we saw with the United Nations and the Security Council.

This is the return of the-state-as-Leviathan envisioned by Hobbes, visceral enemy of any strategy for peace. His logic admits no future either for peace or for humanity. (END/COPYRIGHT IPS)