The League of Women Voters (LWVUS) has been considering the idea of a U.S. Department of Peace since their 2008 national convention. It was presented again in 2010 and 2012, but made little headway. It is all together and most proper of LWVUS members to be considering such advocacy. League founders, especially Carrie Chapman Catt, were at the forefront of worldwide marches and meetings that insisted on peace. Really, what they and thousands of other social, political and church organizations were promoting was the outlawing of war.
The 20th century is full of warfare. Results and responses to these wars are most instructive in highlighting the key leadership role of LWVUS. Pundits often say, “History repeats itself.” Others have pointed out, if not repeated there are sure some similar sounding anthems and verses. The League was still advocating the right for women to vote as World War I started. That war nearly derailed their efforts and led to direct confrontations in front of the White House with verbal challenges to President Woodrow Wilson. On Aug. 26, 1920, their efforts succeeded. Thus every Aug. 26, since Congress established it, “Women’s Equality Day” is celebrated across our nation for this achievement. Less known, but intimately related to the non-violent success of U.S. women is the date of Aug. 27, 1928. That is the day 67 nations agreed to the Kellogg-Briand Pact which outlawed war as an instrument of international relations.
Women worldwide became intimately aware of the then unprecedented horrors of war on combatants and civilians. A global public movement grew and grew, from the armistice that ended World War I on Nov. 11, 1918, to culminate in this international treaty — confirmed by our U.S. Senate — that outlawed war. The complexities of international relations during this time included what was the ultimate failure of an effective League of Nations. Our Senate never ratified membership for the U.S.
Looking back now, we can see two most positive accomplishments in humankind’s struggle for lasting world peace. After World War I, an international treaty outlawed war. After World War II the United Nations was established and continues to be housed on U.S. soil. On the other hand, we can see three negative episodes, WWI, WWII, and the “Cold War” that spawned and perpetuated countless local civil and nation dividing little wars. Like the globally successful advocacy for the Kellogg-Briand pact, historians have catalogued the world wide demonstrations and public protests that made sure we did not have a nuclear war. Survivors of WWII clearly recall the “Ban the Bomb” demonstrations of the 50s and 60s. Some nuclear weapon researchers believe it was these global demonstrations that indeed prevented nuclear war.
Now, as much as ever, our war-weary world and especially our children — all children — need global and successful discourse, demonstrations, legislation, forums, marches, political, civic, secular and religious organizations to join together and bring sufficient public pressure to restore and actually follow the Kellogg-Briand Treaty that outlawed war. While there are those who will remember to celebrate Aug. 26 for Women’s Equality, it may appear a smaller number will know about the significance of Aug. 27. I believe that common folk in all nations long for true peace. Our goal has to be much more than a U.S. Department of Peace. What we need is lasting peace. What we need now — in the early 21st century — is a third public expression to follow the two paradigm shifts of the 20th Century: 1.) an international treaty by 67 nations which outlaws war and 2.) a functioning United Nations with a peace inspiring, pale blue flag that flies over the dust and smoke of on-going “little wars.” We must convince our national and international leaders to enforce the Kellogg-Briand pact. We must speak up that we the people are fed up with the killing and waste of all wars. Our children, all children, really need this, now more than ever.
• Brown lives in Douglas.





Comments (16)
Add commentI can see how W.W.I, 'the war to end all wars', made the
perfect environment for an international treaty outlawing war.
But world wars are a little tricky to referee when every U.N. member is shooting at the other.
Couple of questions:
1. Does Dr. Brown feel we should take an 'isolationist' view of world conflicts?
2. What would be the consequences of breaking this 'peace pact'?
Things would look a lot different today had we let Britain and Europe 'sort out' W.W.II.
And how would the United Nations' "peace inspiring, pale blue flag" flying over the on-going little wars do any better than it is doing now?
The U.N. needs a better track record before I'll be betting on that horse.
But I would pay to see the Department of Peace and the Department of Defense go head to head.
"Jeremiah...
...was a bullfrog..."
Dr. Brown:
I’d advocate “global and successful discourse” for our heirs. Why not? But how can you call an international treaty outlawing war a positive accomplishment? Or the UN? Do you recall the last UN action against a rogue nation-state? Korea –that was a US-led misadventure that ended in a draw that this generation inherited.
War is nothing short of a failure on the part of diplomacy. Sometimes diplomacy is an empty proposition from the get-go, which then NECESSITATES armed conflict – but what’s the alternative? Concessions, appeasement, subjugation & enslavement.
Outlawing war is an empty gesture. Your starry-eyed infatuation with the UN does not recognize the exploits of these hooligans we cant defuse diplomatically that then come to NYC and spout off to the world about American meddling, American aggression, American subjugation, and even gain sympathy in our own backyard. With its 60+ yrs of US-backed bungling from one regional conflict to the next, what makes you think the UN should be the peace-enforcer to keep the world’s ratbastards in check?
I’m ignoring the gibberish about a US Dept of Peace.
Seems to me...
...that the Cold War was the war that ended (forestalled) more wars than any other. Looking through post WWII history we saw Ban the Bomb, SALT1 and SALT2, Glasnost which portrayed a semblance of openness when the Soviet Union fell apart, followed by START1 and START2. With the superpowers' alleviation of the 3-way Mexican standoff came rogue post-bloc countries with residual arms and proliferation in smaller "third world" countries. Seems to me that the end of the Cold war ended a great deal of deterrence to open war. Just an opinion, but, I think the movie Canadian Bacon had the right idea when the White House proposed to Russia to pick up the Cold War again (albeit as a facade). Of course Gorbachov refused. "are you kidding? We have McDonalds"
Seems to me...
That if we outlaw war, only outlaws will have war.
@rc - yes...good
@rc - yes...good question.
Big bad America, right Dr. Brown?
Does anyone else get the feeling that he was front and center in the 60's "demonstrations" and "marches"?
Yes please. Let's do this.
Yes please. Let's do this. I also propose the disarming of all my neighbors. Especially those with really nice houses and lots of toys in the garage.
hmm, I seem to be in an exceptionally factitious mood today.
Violence is declining
In fact, we may be living in the most peaceful era of our species' existence. It hasn't been smooth and there are horrible pockets of insanity here and there, but violence is declining.
The 20th century was a violent century, yes. But a century is 100 years and the fifty years following the first two world wars are now being called a Long Peace. Democracies are not waging wars with other democracies.
Over the last thousand years, statistically, violence is actually declining across the world. Pacifying influences across millennia include commerce (former enemies to partners), government(states over tribalism) and cosmopolitanism (technology allowing an expansion into an ever widening support system). And since the Enlightenment we see more protection of women's rights, children's rights, homosexual acceptance, racial equality, animal welfare, etc., having all contributed to this decline in violence. I might add, Big Religion (with their people-of-faith foot soldiers) has fought these advances almost at each step and still does!
For those who don't believe me, feel free to read the compelling evidence for this claim in the gargantuan book, The Better Angels of Our Nature by Steven Pinker released this past year.
However, there is no guarantee that the Long Peace will continue, only that violence in the world has shown a steady decline to date. We need to savor this accomplishment.
That's where Dr. Brown's article comes in. A Dept. of Peace sounds like an excellent idea to me. We must maintain the decline in violence. Thank you for the article.
Mike
The United Nations is a wonderful idea. But the application
of U.N. forces rely upon a united front of nations. Not necessarily the same thing, or the right thing.
I recommend a viewing of 'Hotel Rwanda': "Best Motion Picture-Drama", "Best Actor-Drama" (Don Cheadle), co-starring Nick Nolte.
"the kind of film that can change the world" (Joel Siegel, Good Morning America).
I have seen little change coming from the United Nations.
(See Darfur).
Humanitarian and self-preservation does not count in this dialogue.
I take Mike at his word...
that global violence has declined in the post-WWII world. But only because we have gotten more precise, better at targeting, and more discriminating about who we visit with violence. By "we" I mean the US. We are still the biggest stick.
An era of Peace though? Not hardly. Peace comes with security, and security has taken on a new meaning in this nuclear age. Now more than ever alliances need to be formed and cultivated with like-minded nations, and peace can only be leveraged by its alternative.
PEACE AT ANY PRICE?
No Thank You!
Do you really want to have this conversation NewLife?
I'll let you have your opinions of my character. What I'm more interested in is any refutation, any refutation at all, of my claims.
I notice you didn't call me a liar.
Good day.
Mike