McNamara: Lessons from War and Peace Perspectives

Robert McNamara in the previous blog featured in a documentary called the Fog of War depicting his recollections of pivotal wars in US history.  It appears to me to be an honest account and retrospectively drawing upon his own lessons that he learned from mistakes.  I feel from his experience he is able to offer a way that leads to peace.  In the end I feel he became a peacemaker.  He found his destiny.

He is correct to say we all make mistakes but what separates us from a primitive culture and an advanced one, is learning from mistakes and not repeating them in the future.  This is the time we have to move on from violence and find our true purpose to live on this planet in peace. Peace is not a fluffy term it is the highest discipline, it is the deepest truth and it is unrelenting in universal laws, if you do not learn the virtues of peace, you will suffer.  Peace is the end of suffering in truth.  When we are ready to embrace peace, joy and honesty hope will be present at the table.

 Here are the lessons McNamara listed from his experience.  I will add comments and reflection underneath, as a lay person with a peace orientation.  This is my contribution to democracy.  Mine will be in italics.

R.S. McNamara’s eleven lessons of war

1. Empathize with your enemy  – Empathy requires standing in the others shoes, to imagine feeling their feelings. It is a technique of conflict resolution.  If this is done from all perspectives, particularly from the perspective of civilians, could bombs be dropped?
2. Rationality will not save us – This is a true statement. When people think through rationally they disengage from the feeling side. Emotional intelligence connects people to intuition which if engaged as part of leadership training would steer away from inhumanity. As a poet I find when I am in the stillness of no thought, truth arises, it is not in thinking it is in being.
3. There’s something beyond one’s self – This for me alludes to our connection to other humans and our responsibility as citizens. To serve society is the realisation of a greater purpose. Mystical experiences happen in life which take us out of Self to understand we are intimately connected with life, beyond the Self (ego), hence a spiritual dimension.
   
4. Maximize efficiency– I would bring in Byron Katie here, her statement is war is inefficient, if you wish to maximise efficiency put all conflicts down on paper and inquire into your own thinking. That would save trillions of dollars. Imagine if we invested in peace education, we would not need to go through blind beliefs, nationalism and fear in order to find wisdom, we would have learned from the past. War doesn’t work if peace is the goal.
5. Proportionality should be a guideline in war – I think of mother’s here, tell a mother that two men on this side were killed and two on the other, for her, her peaceful world is gone as the death of her children plagues her in every thought. Is an eye for an eye proportionate? Is it possible to kill fairly? Proportionality is also the use of excessive force where weaponry obliterates once side over the other, the death toll is disproportionate. The disproportionate approach comes from the desire to win at all costs or to get it over with quickly. The idea of a just war or fairness disappears in conventional warfare. Does anyone deserve to die because of their nationality and given government policy?  The numbers of civilians killed is breathtaking compared to military.  Who is the enemy is my question?  What is the enemy?  Is there an enemy or is it Self created?
   
6. Get the data– The real data is the cost of military spending on economies. Albeit the opportunity cost of spending on peace. The data to focus on is who profits and what are the real costs of war. As an analyst quantitative research will never give you a picture of the emotional devastation of war and the ugliness of inhumanity. Go into the heart, that is where the real data is.
7. Belief and seeing are often both wrong – Yes this relates to projection.   Psychological projection or projection bias is a psychological defense mechanism where a person subconsciously denies his or her own attributes, thoughts, and emotions, which are then ascribed to the outside world, usually to other people. Thus, projection involves imagining or projecting the belief that others originate those feelings.    Denial (also called abnegation) is a defense mechanism postulated by Sigmund Freud, in which a person is faced with a fact that is too uncomfortable to accept and rejects it instead, insisting that it is not true despite what may be overwhelming evidence  (wikipedia).  These are the pillars upholding distorted beliefs.   The power of seeing for example reds under the beds exemplifies distorted belief and reality, so many people were persecuted in the US as communist sympathisers.  McCarthy saw enemies within.  We saw that with the war on terror all muslims are terrorists.  Yet the actions of terror were both sides.  When the belief in freedom, democracy or maintaining our way of life is repeated as a mantra, people feel the violence is justified, when they are scared they hand over power needing to believe the government is right.  Any beliefs counter to the dominant paradigm are quickly demonised as traitors, remember Freedom Fries (instead of French Fries) as the Europeans did not want to be involved in the wars. The issue of oil was concealed.  Bush stated you are ‘with us or against us’ this sends the signal that any other belief is treason.  Same happened in Australia with the 1919 sedition laws.  Freedom of speech and questioning (democracy) was not encouraged as the belief is that the government is right. It is considered disloyal at a time of war, many peace oriented people are seen as anti-government, when they are seeking to show another way. Critics are your teachers in truth. When people collect and analyse data from a certain perspective with outcomes in mind, data changes e.g. military seeking the enemy and ways to defeat, analysis and focus go there. If the belief is peace then naturally military will seek for peaceful solutions, negotiation, de-escalation, disarmament as peacekeepers, a different energy(feel) and outcome. If the belief is war and winning is the objective, then energy goes there and the results are clear, the ends justifies the means. When beliefs are negative they are in error, when they are based on say the Universal Declaration of Human Rights or the right to life, liberty and happiness, then they are in alignment with truth. Beliefs out of alignment with truth and justice, lead to suffering.
8. Be prepared to re-examine your reasoning – Inquiry, as Byron Katie states, is the end of war. War starts in every human when they believe negativity is true (they believe their thoughts) and create a story of an enemy, that then justifies cruelty and violence. She indicates defence is the beginning of war. When we no longer believe the stories we tell ourselves, we find love beneath the drama, the war is over. Personal responsibility and self inquiry become the focus of truth, as that will lead to happiness.  When the objective is truth all reasoning will naturally be examined.  The wisest statement you can make to yourself is ‘I could be wrong’. That is not a failure or diminishment of self, it is the beginning of honesty where the mind opens to possibilities. I often say that as I know there are other ways of seeing, I could be wrong.
   
9. In order to do good, you may have to engage in evil – Peace pilgrim is a good example she states ‘overcome evil with good, falsehood with truth, and hatred with love’. Some may say in order to save the many, a fewer number may die in a just war. There is truth in that providing the intent is good ‘the end of war’.  However, in reality the wars will not happen if people are not drawing conflict to them through the law of attraction. Thus to learn peace is to learn about what we create through our thoughts, words and actions.  When you think positively all challenges will be met with a positive intent, you will never weaken to hate anyone but focus on solving the problem, this is central to conflict resolution.  We can create peace as easily as we create war. It is a simple choice between a positive and negative thought, a threat or an opportunity, a problem or a challenge? It is a question of what do you truly want? War or peace?
10. Never say never – You cannot control life, challenges will come. If you do not learn lessons they will return to you in some form. They will continue to come until you learn them.  If you identify a mistake then commit to not making it again, in this case you can say ‘never’. As we grow our awareness expands and we will learn to handle problems in a different way. They then soon disappear.
    
11. You can’t change human nature – Human nature is pure love, violence is negativity that is unconscious. When we take full responsibility for group think, biased data, us versus them and move into we are one and recognise that what we see in another is ourselves, then negativity subsides. As we question for truth, we realise we are mistaken in our judgements. That is the first step on the path to wisdom as peace. Human nature is love. LOVE is the energy which expands, opens up, sends out, stays, reveals, shares and heals. That is why disclosure of all information is the highest love governments can offer their citizens.

Ten additional lessons from R.S. McNamara

These supplement the documentary; they are in the DVD’s special features.

1. The human race will not eliminate war in this century, but we can reduce the brutality of war—the level of killing—by adhering to the principles of a “Just War,” in particular to the principle of “proportionality.” 

We can definitely eliminate war when we educate for peace.  In each moment we choose war or peace.  When we keep choosing peace, a new world is seen.

2.  The indefinite combinations of human fallibility and nuclear weapons will lead to the destruction of nations.

This I feel is true. Weapons do not win wars, that is clear from Iraq and Afghanistan, the will of the people wins wars, as they hate it.

3. We [the U.S.A.] are the most powerful nation in the world—economically, politically, and militarily—and we are likely to remain so for decades ahead. But we are not omniscient. If we cannot persuade other nations with similar interests and similar values of the merits of the proposed use of that power, we should not proceed unilaterally except in the unlikely requirement to defend directly the continental U.S., Alaska and Hawaii.

The US are losing pole position economically and militarily. There has been a falling from grace as values proported by the United States as life, liberty and happiness as virtues of freedom are not lived as a truth. Corporate values have overcome true national interests. This is reflected in other countries who worship money rather than culture, happiness, cooperation and peace

4.  Moral principles are often ambiguous guides to foreign policy and defense policy, but surely we can agree that we should establish as a major goal of U.S. foreign policy and, indeed, of foreign policy across the globe: the avoidance, in this century of the carnage—160 million dead—caused by conflict in the 20th century.

Morals are learned from society, universal values are intrinsic (innate), as leaders typically analyse facts without a healthy balance of emotional intelligence or indeed equal numbers of women (with emotional intelligence) in leadership, without the feminine the vision is narrowed and the ability to see into the human aspect is lost. Moreover, recruiting people with experience and wisdom would be a starting point. To avoid carnage is to adopt a national policy of nonviolence, not the cessation of violence but expanding positive peace (see Johan Galtung) and educating for peaceful behaviours to establish cultures of peace within countries. Establishing Departments of Peace to build conflict resolution into strategy to seek to work cooperatively with other countries, to understand other cultures and needs, to ensure peace as security and to develop and live values as indicated by the US founding fathers. The true power of any nation comes from virtues not projection of military power in the service of concealed business interests. These are false gods.

5. We, the richest nation in the world, have failed in our responsibility to our own poor and to the disadvantaged across the world to help them advance their welfare in the most fundamental terms of nutrition, literacy, health and employment.

Greed creates poverty. When we live in balance with nature (sustainability) and measure our success in our humanitarian commitments then we will see a rebalancing. We will learn to see the other as ourselves. This is empathy.

6. Corporate executives must recognize there is no contradiction between a soft heart and a hard head. Of course, they have responsibilities to stockholders, but they also have responsibilities to their employees, their customers and to society as a whole.

Business people disconnect the social costs of their operations as they are private and social dimensions are public. They see rationality as primary and emotional considerations as a weakness. These are predomiantly masculine mindsets. Strategy is couched in military speak of marketing strategies of flank attacks, defensive postures as they see winning markets as the same as winning their wars. Still these old notions of leadership are bound up in ideas of masculine, no emotion, hard and uncompromising. Workplaces are autocratic they are not democratic. This is a significant point as most people spend time at work outside of a democratic framework. This autocratic ethos is to the detriment of business and the notion of a lived democracy in reality. Organisations are becoming increasingly off limits to the public good through erecting legal barriers protecting the privatisation of information through patenting and privacy. The business sector (particularly multinationals) are inhibiting the public’s right to know the truth of how products and services affect them and the ecology. The soft heart could be represented by a wholistic and progressive mindset exemplified by people such as Richard Branson who sees corporate responsibility intimately woven into social responsibility and living in harmony with the planet. This is the new leadership which will inspire generations.

7. President Kennedy believed a primary responsibility of a president—indeed the primary responsibility of a president—is to keep the nation out of war, if at all possible.

That is true, not an idea picked by George W. Bush or his father.  Thus it is critical that violent men are not able to win the Presidency, there has to be criteria which enables all people access to this role with the right qualifications and balance of reason and emotional intelligence to ensure wise decisions. When corruption enters office the nation loses its power as has been seen.  The candidates must be vetted so there are no vested interests or agenda’s for personal gain.

8. War is a blunt instrument by which to settle disputes between or within nations, and economic sanctions are rarely effective. Therefore, we should build a system of jurisprudence based on the International Court—that the U.S. has refused to support—which would hold individuals responsible for crimes against humanity.

This is clearly evident in respect of the oil issues that were discovered to drive the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and other wars where governments seek to create war to take resources. That should be considered a war crime. The current situation in Syria is a prime example of a war crime in progress. Moreover, the Responsibility to Protect civilians should be enshrined as law in the United Nations so that all nation states take responsibility and intervene rather than talk. Political and governmental criminals must be removed from office immediately if they are engaged in war crimes. The International Criminal Court must be supported by an International Peace Force to ensure compliance to international laws. Any country refusing to support international justice is respectfully delisted from the UN as they are unable to adhere to principles and laws.  Other nations will not isolate them but they will be encouraged to join again in harmony with international principles and laws for the highest good of all.  Moreover, no members can be profiting as arms sellers, particularly when all are charged to uphold peace and security.

9.  If we are to deal effectively with terrorists across the globe, we must develop a sense of empathy—I don’t mean “sympathy,” but rather “understanding”—to counter their attacks on us and the Western World.

Absolutely correct, the term terrorists are those we don’t agree with outside of formal military, those who are freedom fighters are those we agree with and sympathetically support. Language is used to demonise others but not solve the problem. If people are using arms to be heard, then democratic mechanisms need to be created to diffuse tension and give an opportunity for grievances to be heard. It is not to be seen to be but to truly resolve underlying issues. Israel comes to mind and the conflict with Palestinians. This has not been resolved and there has been no empathy shown for the impoverished and suffering Palestinians, their grievances are not addressed. They never agreed to the formation of the State of Israel is the central issue, they have increasingly been marginalised and the diaspora dispersed. Their rights are less than Israeli’s these are clear violations and a subject for international conciliation. This would happen whereby a Justice resolves the situation through international law. The ongoing problem fuels Arab/Israeli hatred which locks them into a unwinnable situation. Israel has 200 nuclear weapons which makes it a flashpoint given tensions. This is not in the interests of either people. The objective is to create a situation of rebalancing power, restoring rights, removing labels and meeting at the table as equals to resolutely resolve differences. More women with emotional intelligence need to enter this situation to bring a humanitarian perspective and female intuition as it is about families against families, or indeed cousins in this case. To learn to live together with respect, equality and honour is the lesson to be learned, that is why it hasn’t gone away. Unity within diversity is the next level. Last point, there are no terrorists, only those engaged in using terror to get their way. Any being in this category is not building peace or solving inner wars with responsibility and honesty. Until they face themselves (inner conflict, negative emotions, same scripts), the war doesn’t end and resources are drained and needless deaths occur. Most importantly people are not feeling happy and secure, they are stuck unable to learn from the rich well of diversity. This occurs when open to ‘what works’ and a willingness to ‘allow peace’ to unfold.

10.  One of the greatest dangers we face today is the risk that terrorists will obtain access to weapons of mass destruction as a result of the breakdown of the Non-Proliferation Regime. We in the U.S. are contributing to that breakdown.

This is argument alone for DDR – Disarmament, De-mobilisation and Reintegration. I would see this as 100% disarmament with peace education across the world and Departments of Peace establishing. Moreover, all disputation should be put to mediation, conciliation or arbitration in judicial courts of law. Murder should be illegal at the international level as it is in the domestic sphere. Hence, disbanding militaries and militias (armed groups) around the world. Retain a global peace force representing all nation states like a international police force with rotating leadership.  To inspire a global community that minimises conflict through positive communication and de-emphasise the discrimination generated by national identity (nation state) in favour of the collective peace, our shared humanity and shared interests. Thus, loosening national boundaries so nationalities can integrate with others and those differences become blended, as we see how similar we really are. For example I’d be interested in living in Bhutan because of its national emphasis on Gross National Happiness. So I would like to choose the country that most reflects my values. It is the illusion of difference as a threat that causes fear to escalate. Divisions of ‘them and us’ group people and pitch them against others, this is easily manufacturered by those with a vested interest in conflict. To find a higher consciousness of ‘us’ and an awareness that what we do to others returns to the self leads to unity. To remember that love is the greatest strength and that peace is not a weakness but reflects our true nature. Other measures would consider de-escalation of violence in the media and by government rhetoric and the recognition of cooperation, honesty and understanding (empathy) as central pillars of problem solving. Establishing a Global Truth and Reconciliation Commission highlighting the true history of our planet and awareness of what has worked and what does not. Moreover, finding forgiveness for the past, some cultural grievances go on for hundreds and thousands of years. Thus, to learn to let go of personal hate and cultural hate as a means of not holding the pain nor condoning actions but letting go of the negativity which keeps people locked in disputes. Anything is possible when our inner wars are acknowledged and ended. We either end them or we end ourselves, that is the choice both economically, militarily and ecologically. We are on the threshold of a choice – the planet or the gold bar? Oneness or Greed?

Moreover, equality will remove grievances as all are treated with respect and resources shared fairly as a model of global society. There will be those who violently oppose dropping their arms as they feel vulnerability in the absence of spiritual knowing but as consciousness shifts on the planet, another way will be seen without fear. As has been said our happy destiny is unavoidable.

Eleven lessons from the Vietnam War

The documentary’s lessons-learned concept is McNamara’s eleven-lesson list of In Retrospect: The Tragedy and Lessons of Vietnam (1995).

1. We misjudged then — and we have since — the geopolitical intentions of our adversaries … and we exaggerated the dangers to the United States of their actions.
2. We viewed the people and leaders of South Vietnam in terms of our own experience … We totally misjudged the political forces within the country.
3. We underestimated the power of nationalism to motivate a people to fight and die for their beliefs and values.
4. Our misjudgments of friend and foe, alike, reflected our profound ignorance of the history, culture, and politics of the people in the area, and the personalities and habits of their leaders.
5. We failed then — and have since — to recognize the limitations of modern, high-technology military equipment, forces, and doctrine. We failed, as well, to adapt our military tactics to the task of winning the hearts and minds of people from a totally different culture.
6. We failed to draw Congress and the American people into a full and frank discussion and debate of the pros and cons of a large-scale military involvement … before we initiated the action.
7. After the action got under way, and unanticipated events forced us off our planned course … we did not fully explain what was happening, and why we were doing what we did.
8. We did not recognize that neither our people nor our leaders are omniscient. Our judgment of what is in another people’s or country’s best interest should be put to the test of open discussion in international forums. We do not have the God-given right to shape every nation in our image or as we choose.
9. We did not hold to the principle that U.S. military action … should be carried out only in conjunction with multinational forces supported fully (and not merely cosmetically) by the international community.
10. We failed to recognize that in international affairs, as in other aspects of life, there may be problems for which there are no immediate solutions … At times, we may have to live with an imperfect, untidy world.
11. Underlying many of these errors lay our failure to organize the top echelons of the executive branch to deal effectively with the extraordinarily complex range of political and military issues.