High-minded intervention hurts innocents

Published: 27th May, 2011

• A FEW pacifists invited to a conference this month at the Imperial War Museum discussed war and peace issues with older pupils from Highgate Wood School in Crouch End. The pacifists questioned whether many informative career advice talks encouraged school leavers to join the armed forces; they felt that in fairness objections to such employment should be included. 

The next day a group of conscientious objectors met in Tavistock Square for their annual meeting to remember past conscientious objectors and present ones imprisoned for their beliefs. They placed white flowers, each labelled with a conscientious objector’s name, by the bronze plaque set in a rough-hewn rock to honour their memory. Nearby stands a cherry tree planted in remembrance of Hiroshima. 

The proliferation of armed conflicts today leads one to think afresh about the growing number of victims of these wars. While the participants are frequently fighting in self-defence or for freedom from oppression, the motivation of those who intervene on one side or the other is more questionable. It may be from political or economic self-interest. The victims cannot tell whose bombs caused their deaths; both sides cause widespread destruction. 

It is sad that universally accepted moral standards in peacetime are abandoned in war situations. Assassinations such as that of Osama bin Laden are hailed as desirable victories rather than condemned as murders.

When perpetrated by “the enemy”, they are treated as crimes. We succumb to hypocritical double standards when judging the enemy’s actions differently from our own. 

Are interventions valuable, as an acceptance of moral responsibility to support the “goodies” and destroy the enemy “baddies” worldwide?     

However high-minded the motivation, the result is extension of the conflicts and the cause of suffering to ever greater numbers of innocent people on both sides. 
Angela Sinclair-Loutit 
Highbury Hill, N5