Multi culture

When USA entered the first world war and sent soldiers to Europe, some Europeans were surprised that the American soldiers considered themselves to be American. They were not American. Many of them were fresh immigrants from different countries. But they were ready to fight and die under the American flag.

In Europe at that time nationality was an issue of life and death. For a french person it could mean death just to talk to a German.

These days things are different. Thanks to EU, Europe has had a long time of peace. Never before in the history of that continent has there been so much peace for so long.

We see that the ability to live together and accept cultural differences is not about culture or nations, but about mind.

Is it in accordance with human nature to live in peace? Well, yes and no. The no answer seems to be the most obvious. There has been a lot of wars during history,

But the yes alternative is stronger.´If we have a chance to choose, we are easily convinced of the advantages of peaceful cooperation.

But if we want a stable peace we have to look into the deepest recesses of mind. What will we find there? We did find Nazism not that long ago.

The factor that could cause war could be called a dirty will to power. We all have a will to power. But it is only when it is dirty and infected that it becomes a serious threat.

Dirt and infection in mind is always adventitious, according to Buddhist psychology. So there is room for optimism.

Dirt and infection in mind can be eliminated by being exposed to light and awareness. And in the modern world with a high level of education and information all individuals can take part in this enlightenment.

So globalization and the meeting of cultures could by itself be a peace supporting process.

Non violence 2

Why is it difficult to win the peace? It can be quite difficult, as we see in the Gaza, Iraq and Afghanistan.
It can also be easy, as we saw in southern Lebanon after the war between Hezbollah and Israel. As soon as the soldiers had left the area, the civilian population returned and the rebuilding started.
One reason for the difficulties in winning peace is the shamefulness of war. War is nowadays the same as organised unfairness. The strong beat the weak, and the weak use terror to kill anyone and in particular civilians who are not involved.
So the enemy is not the soldiers in the other kind of uniform, but we ourselves in our future role of modern, decent civilians. We fight for making difficulties for ourselves.
War is an old form of relating, and it might have been justified by lack. As the essential needs of food and housing could not be satisfied for all, conflict was used. These days the problem in food is abundance or surplus rather than lack, so war is obsolete by this reason also.

Side by side

Can the process that has taken place between nations also take place between individuals?
Between nations, there is more peace than it used to be. NATO used to be a military organisation challenging its opposite, the Warsaw pact. Now NATO internally is an organization for military cooperation, including many of the former enemies. Even EU is a peace organisation, the basis for a longer period of peace between the European countries than ever before in history.
So the question is: can this happen within countries also? Can we scale down police in the same way that the military defense has been scaled down?
Most activities in the nations are peaceful, but not all. The primary question is however: What is internal peace?
In the modern world we have to define again - to make clear - what should the individual do, what should society do, what should police do. These roles are changing because of circumstances, and misunderstandings can occur.
The second biggest problem is integrating new individuals into society - new generations and migrants. Integration is really a mind level activity, but the best practical way is to open up schools and the labour market. Theoretical integration without practical implementation is not good.

Afghanistan

What is the difference between Afghanistan and most other nations in the world? Why this war in Afghanistan?
It has taken longer time to create peace in Afghanistan than in Iraq.
One reason is that focus has been elsewhere, not on Afghanistan. That would have been acceptable if the solution for Afghanistan had been obvious. But the situation is the opposite, Afghanistan remains an unresolved enigma.
So what is needed is more of analysis, not more of guns and bombs.
The basic need for Afghanistan is respect. That is what we have in all peaceful nations. To impose an alien tradition with weapons is the opposite of respect.
But without NATO soldiers in Afghanistan, the militant Islamists will use their weapons to get power.
In order to overshadow this, more of respect is needed.

Giving

Spontaneously we often feel we can give criticism and sometimes even interfere with violence without being affected ourselves.
This is the calculation behind criminal activity and many conflicts including war.
But this calculation is wrong. We get what we give. If we give violence, we will get violence.
There might be time lap between the giving an the getting. But the relation is strict.
If this was generally known, the idea of war as some sort of conflict solver would be less popular than it is.