In the name of War
When W.George
Bush, launching his war against terrorism, gave the message to the nations that
‘either you are with us or with terrorists’, he divided them into two
distinct categories: friends and enemies. This language of war and
categorization into ‘us’ and ‘them’ is not new. It echoed what the Roman
emperor Caesar writes in his book Bello Gallico. He regards any war
between the Roman and other nations as a conflict between good and evil.
The sense of justice gave the Roman soldiers moral boost to fight and wipe out
evil. The Muslims fighting against the hostile powers also followed this binary
division. They called themselves ‘holy warriors’ believers’ and
‘righteous’, while the others were depicted as ‘polytheist’ infidels’
and deceitful’. This division of right and wrong and evil and justice provided
a moral justification to fight and lay down their lives for a cause, a cause
that was greater and higher than their lives. In the medieval
period, religion played an important role in fighting a war. Whether the war was
between the Christians and the Muslims or an internecine war between two
religious sects and groups. In all such cases, each believed that his religion
or sect was right and God was on his side. During the European colonization, the
mission for civilization took place of religion. The non-European powers were
subdued and brought under control because they were barbarians and needed to be
civilized. When the European states became secular, the cause for war also
became non-religious. For example, in the first and second world wars the
slogans were democracy, liberalism, and human values against expansionism,
Fascism, totalitarianism, and Nazisim.However, in all cases, whenever there was
war, emotions for patriotism were exploited to unite people for support to their
respective governments. It is a fact
that throughout history ruling classes glorified war and warriors. Those who
fought were given high status in the society; in case of their death, they were
called martyrs if they survived, they were idolized as heroes. On the contrary,
those who opposed war and preached for peace were ridiculed and satirized as
coward and passive. Sometime they were called traitors, enemies and agents to
foreign powers. In the history books we also find conquerors and victors as
great men while those writers, thinkers, and philosophers who preached for peace
are marginalized. The building of
monuments further glorifies war. The characteristics of these monuments were
different from country to country. For example, in France, the inscription on
the monuments is’ in memory of dead’, while in Britain, Germany and Austria,
they call them simply as’ war memorials’. These monuments were built in
graveyards, squares of cities, and as a part of important state buildings. The
purpose was to remind people of the greatness of their nation and how bravely
the soldiers fought and heroically died on fronts. In this way, they became a
link between people and war. Besides monuments, the states have also established
war museums in which war weapons are displayed to show to the people the power
and strength of their state. The result is that these edifices and memorials
perpetuate war in the minds of people. However, with
the passage of time the concept of war has changed. There was a time when war
was fought in a battlefield. Then
it followed the capture of cities and plundering looting which affected the
population. Sometime, citizens surrendered and concluded a peace treaty with the
victor. In the modern period all has changed. . The scope of war has widened.
With the emergence of new technology, soldiers as well as citizens both are
involved in war and suffer equally. We have seen that how in the First and
Second World Wars cities were destroyed and millions of innocent citizens lost
their lives. Moreover, the
whole concept of war has also changed from the medieval to the modern period.
There was a time when enemies used to fight face-to-face and appreciated each
other velour and bravery. For example, Akbar was much impressed by two Rajputs
who fought bravely during his siege of Chittor and died in fighting. After the
war, he ordered that their statues should be carved and placed at the gate of
Agra fort. In medieval Europe, there was the concept of chivalry that
represented the fusion of Christian and military concepts of conduct how to
behave in a war and how to preserve knightly values. All these medieval values
of the East and West have changed with the advent of new technology and new
weapons. There is no need to fight your adversary face to face. Now, there are
planes that fly for bombardment and pilots do their jobs without seeing the
enemy. Same is the case of shooting missiles from a distance and destroy
enemy’s target. The job is done without any feelings. The enemy remains
invisible. therefore, easy to wipe him out without any remorse. Recently, a new
language is evolved to describe the war activities. For example, it is said that
the plane hit targets. The target is an abstract item that evokes no emotions.
When the American plane bombed a caravan mistakenly in recent Afghan war, the
Pentagon spokesman said that it was good target. No mention that how many people
died as result of this and what about those who lost their dear ones? Sometime
they say that they regret loss of life. That’s all’ Similarly, a new word of
‘collateral damage’ is coined describing the killing of civilians and
destruction of their properties. It evokes no emotions and sorrow. War not only
destroys cities and kills people but also culturally changes societies. Human
values that are nurtured by poetry, fiction, art and music, decay during war and
in its place artists, poets, and musicians involve in justifying war and
mobilizing people’s emotions. Hate, prejudice, and hostility are created
against enemy. Not only this, but fundamental rights and civil liberties that
have been achieved as a result of long and strenuous struggle are suppressed in
the name of national interest. Culturally, society become bereft of moral and
ethical values. This is the tragic result of war. When war comes
to end, people ask question about the results. This is beautifully portrayed
after the First world war, when a French filmmaker, Abel Gance, screened a film J’accuse,
in which a wounded soldier comes to his village and narrates his dream to his
fellows that he saw dead soldiers came out from their graves wrapped in tattered
bandage with upraised arms. They left their graves and walked down in the lane
of their village to see if their sacrifices had been not in vain. What they
found: the pettiness of civilian life, infidelity of their wives, and
selfishness of their friends, they were shocked and found their sacrifices
useless The villagers were so horrified by seeing dead among them that they
mended their way. Seeing this, the dead returned to their graves with
satisfaction that their mission had been fulfilled. After telling this dream,
the wounded soldier accessed the sun standing idly by watching the war go on.
Giving this message he died. The film stunned people and the question was asked
about that why should people sacrifice in war when they fail to change the
world. It remained the same in spite of their sacrifices. |