Commentary : Writers Give Peace of Their Mind

Recently, with the collaboration of a group of Orange County residents, I helped conduct the first of three competitions in the $30,000 Quest for Peace Writing Contest, a nationwide opportunity for informed participation in our democracy sponsored by the Center for Global Peace and Conflict Studies at UC Irvine.

The task for contest entrants was to write to the candidate of their choice for President of the United States, indicating what actions the next President should take, both domestically and internationally, to enhance the prospects for a more enduring peace.

I think there is no more fundamental legacy we need to improve than the one we are leaving for the 21st Century on the problem of peace and security. Those who entered the contest shared my concern about that shortcoming.

One of the recurrent themes in the letters from the top winners about the responsibility of the Presidency and creating a more enduring peace was that as a society we can do far more than we currently are doing to create a safer 21st Century. A second theme was that the person chosen to be the next President can make an absolutely fundamental contribution to the creation of a more enduring peace.

Singled out for emphasis was the need for presidential leadership in providing a global perspective on issues of security and social justice, and in identifying peace in the nuclear age as one of the most critical issues for both our democracy and the world.

From that general consensus, some people urged specific, direct presidential actions, such as appointing more women to positions in the national security establishment. Another suggested fireside chats in the tradition of Franklin D. Roosevelt on peace themes that redefine and revitalize the values of self-determination and social justice, and respect for the world rule of law and national sovereignty.

The writers also had definite ideas on what policies the next Administration should develop. They urged greater attention to the problems of nuclear non-proliferation, conventional and nuclear arms reductions, a moratorium in the arms race, and more systematized summitry at all levels of the military and foreign policy domains of the United States and Soviet governments.

The purpose of increased summitry among government officials and citizens is to further an atmosphere of mutual trust and cooperation. Several authors also suggested an expanded business relationship with the Soviet Union that would involve a wide range of approaches to expanding existing commerce, as well as creating new joint ventures.

The important linkage of education to peace is an area where the role of the federal government is shared with state and local government. Progress will, of necessity, occur at a number of levels. Among the ideas suggested were:

Establishing a bilateral system of U.S.-Soviet universities, located in Washington and Moscow, with eventual branch campuses in other city pairs such as New York/Leningrad or Los Angeles/Kiev. Such an “International Peace University” would be an educational tool for both nations and a physical manifestation of our interdependence.

Endorsing programs similar to the Children’s Creative Response to Conflict, which stresses cooperation, communication, affirmation and conflict resolution. Given the potential for forming new beliefs that lies with elementary and preschool children, efforts should be made to help children express and deal with their feelings when they are exposed to violence.

Peace studies should include a broad, unbiased study of other countries’ histories and belief systems; nuclear arms studies, fundamentals of nonviolent conflict resolution and harmonious human relations; with workshops on coping with the stress and despair of the nuclear threat. Rather than adding “bits to the curriculum,” the goal should be providing children and adults alike practice in applying any given piece of knowledge in socially constructive ways and personal empowerment to work for peace.

There are other topics important not only to the President, but to all citizens. They included addressing the relationship of world environment and ecology to peace, and the need to abandon outmoded doctrines.

What legacy might the next U.S. Administration leave behind? Mentioned in letters to presidential candidates were: an improvement in the East-West climate in Europe, a further improvement in U.S.-Soviet relations and a further reduction in the probability of nuclear war.

In a letter to Vice President George Bush, one writer, making a point about peace in the nuclear age, recalled the wise words of World War II Gen. Omar Bradley, who said: “We have grasped the mystery of the atom and rejected the Sermon on the Mount. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants. We know more about war than we do about peace. We know more about killing than we do about living.”

Those are words worth remembering. In any political campaign it is always problematic what influence individual ideas can have. But someone once thought up the idea of the Peace Corps. And someone proposed an INF arms-control-type treaty. So good ideas can get into the political process. That’s what I hope the Quest for Peace Writing Contest will help bring about.