Rethinking The Causes of World War II
As we approach ANZAC remembrance in New Zealand, thoughts will be turning once again to war, and in particular, New Zealand's involvement in World Wars I &II, along with lots of smaller actions since the Korean War to which New Zealand has contributed soldiers.
We have been ruminating once more on whether World War II could have been averted. Now, a disclaimer is required: hind sight is always 20/20 vision, which means that it is speculative to one extent or another. But the matter has assumed more relevance, given that Hitler turned out to be the wild-card which led Europe into armed conflict. In our days, we face similar kinds of threats. Replace Hitler with Kim Jong-un and we all get the point.
Therefore, re-thinking how Britain failed to avoid the conflagration which exploded when Hitler unleashed his legions, is not as academic today as it was three or four years ago. Historian Robert Tombs provides a list of some things, which, in hindsight, Britain got wrong during what he calls the "Twenty-Year Truce" between the two world wars. These become potential lessons for the future.
Showing posts with label War and Peace. Show all posts
Showing posts with label War and Peace. Show all posts
Monday, 24 April 2017
Wednesday, 4 January 2017
Global Changes
Wish Lists From Reflections Over the Holiday Season
What are we hoping for from the United States Department of State under Rex Tillerson's leadership? Several things. We express these hopes acknowledging they do not arise from any insider's information or insight. They are, rather, just wishes arising out of what we would argue to be sane, Christian principles of relations amongst nations.
Firstly, it is fundamental not to presuppose any nation to be a threat, let alone to be an enemy. In stating this, we are not espousing some kind of latter day Quakerism, or pacifism. On the contrary, every nation ought to have a realistic view of possible threats, military or otherwise. But there is a world of difference between competition, on the one hand, and military attack, on the other.
Therefore, it is prudent to follow Teddy Roosevelt's advice: when it comes to other nations, talk softly, but always carry a big stick. No nation should be presupposed to be an enemy--particularly those whose own "stick" is substantial and could do much damage.
Trump has "made noises" which suggest he may be willing to see the United States adjust its foreign and defence policies along these lines. But it is far too early to tell.
Secondly, it is prudent not to get wound up by nations which appear bellicose and a real threat to their immediate neighbours, and even more distant nations.
What are we hoping for from the United States Department of State under Rex Tillerson's leadership? Several things. We express these hopes acknowledging they do not arise from any insider's information or insight. They are, rather, just wishes arising out of what we would argue to be sane, Christian principles of relations amongst nations.
Firstly, it is fundamental not to presuppose any nation to be a threat, let alone to be an enemy. In stating this, we are not espousing some kind of latter day Quakerism, or pacifism. On the contrary, every nation ought to have a realistic view of possible threats, military or otherwise. But there is a world of difference between competition, on the one hand, and military attack, on the other.
Therefore, it is prudent to follow Teddy Roosevelt's advice: when it comes to other nations, talk softly, but always carry a big stick. No nation should be presupposed to be an enemy--particularly those whose own "stick" is substantial and could do much damage.
Trump has "made noises" which suggest he may be willing to see the United States adjust its foreign and defence policies along these lines. But it is far too early to tell.
Secondly, it is prudent not to get wound up by nations which appear bellicose and a real threat to their immediate neighbours, and even more distant nations.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)