His Holiness the Dalai Lama believes that unless people change their attitude and realise the ultimate futility of war and the use of force in solving our problems, it is difficult to expect the world to be peaceful and free of violence. Unfortunately, such a change takes time and can only come about on the basis of understanding and conviction, but when it does take place we can expect to live in genuine and long-lasting peace.That is why His Holiness has been making efforts for many years to create and develop such an understanding or attitude among people from the grass roots level.Not only to be able to stop or avoid one specific war or act of violence but to slowly change the views of human beings so that we have a better chance of avoiding war and violence of any kind in the future.
Peace is not something which exists independently of us, any more than does war. Those who are responsible for creating and keeping the peace are members of our own human family, the society that we as individuals have helped create. Peace in the world thus depends on there being peace in the hearts of individuals. Peace based merely on political considerations or prompted by other compulsions will only be temporary and superficial. Unless the basic causes of violence are addressed, sooner or later violence will recur. This is why for many years His Holiness has been encouraging people wherever he goes to appreciate non-violence, tolerance and compassion.
His Holiness the Dalai Lama is very concerned about the impending threat of war against Iraq. However, this is a very complicated matter and there are limits to what His Holiness can do, particularly in view of his special responsibilities to the people of Tibet. At a time when both sides in this dispute are making military preparations, it is also necessary to consider whether it is really practical or beneficial for His Holiness to go to Iraq.
He has always believed and has repeated publicly that violence is not the solution to any problem, including the Tibetan people’s struggle for freedom. His Middle Way approach entails taking into account the interests of both sides, working through dialogue for compromise.
His Holiness has endorsed and supports the statements issued by the International Committee for Peace Council, Madison, Wisconsin, USA and the Nobel Laureates of the USA are attached below along with his statement on the occasion of the first anniversary of the events of 11th September, 2001.
His Holiness very much appreciates the efforts of all those people who support a peaceful resolution of the international dispute with Iraq and offers prayers that ultimately peace may prevail.
Best wishes,
OFFICE OF HIS HOLINESS THE DALAI LAMA
International Committee for the Peace Council, Madison, Wisconsin, U.S.A.
October, 2002
We the members of the Interfaith and International Peace Council are opposed to wars of all kind on moral, spiritual, and practical grounds. Similarly, a war between the United States and Iraq would do nothing to resolve the tensions in that region in the long run. It will make them worse. The costs in human suffering – especially for the women and children of Iraq – would be overwhelming.
The situation is very complex and there is certainly no guarantee that a war against Iraq will bring stability and security to either Iraq or the United States. On the contrary, a war would fuel frustration, extremism and fanaticism, and may even create new blocs that would increase the likelihood of continuing violence and terrorism.
We call upon our fellow members of the world community to make every effort to halt such a war before it begins, through creative diplomacy and non-violent means, and to work peacefully together to remove the root causes of war and terrorism.
American Nobel Laureates’ Position on a Unilateral, Preventive Attack on Iraq
January 2003
“The undersigned oppose a preventive war against Iraq without broad international support. Military operations against Iraq may indeed lead to a relatively swift victory in the short term. But war is characterized by surprise, human loss, and unintended consequences. Even with a victory, we believe that the medical, economic, environmental, moral, spiritual, political, and legal consequences of an American preventive attack on Iraq would undermine, not protect, U.S. security and standing in the world”.
MESSAGE ON THE COMMEMORATION OF THE 1ST ANNIVERSARY OF SEPTEMBER 11, 2002
The 11th September 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon were deeply shocking and very sad. I regard such terrible destructive actions as acts of hatred, for violence is the result of destructive emotions. Events of this kind make clear that if we allow our human intelligence to be guided and controlled by negative emotions like hatred, the consequences are disastrous.
How to respond to such an attack is a very difficult question to answer. Of course, those who are dealing with the problem may know better, but I feel that careful consideration is necessary and that it is appropriate to respond to an act of violence by employing the principles of non-violence. This is of great importance. The attacks on the United States were shocking, but retaliation that involves the use of further violence may not be the best solution in the long run.
We must continue to develop a wider perspective, to think rationally and work to avert future disasters in a non-violent way. These issues concern the whole of humanity, not just one country. We should explore the use of non-violence as a long-term measure to control terrorism of every kind. We need a well-thought-out, coordinated long-term strategy. I believe there will always be conflicts and clash of ideas as long as human beings exist. This is natural. Therefore, we need an active method or approach to overcome such contradictions.
In today’s reality the only way of resolving differences is through dialogue and compromise, through human understanding and humility. . We need to appreciate that genuine peace comes about through mutual understanding, respect and trust. Problems within human society should be solved in a humanitarian way, for which non-violence provides the proper approach.
Terrorism cannot be overcome by the use of force because it does not address the complex underlying problems. In fact the use of force may not only fail to solve the problems, it may exacerbate them and frequently leaves destruction and suffering in its wake. Likewise, acts of terrorism, especially involving violence, only make matters worse. We must condemn terrorism not only because it involves violence but also because innocent people fall victims to senseless acts of terrorism such as what the world witnessed on September 11th.
Human conflicts do not arise out of the blue. They occur as a result of causes and conditions, many of which are within the protagonists’ control. This is where leadership is important. It is the responsibility of leaders to decide when to act and when to practise restraint. In the case of a conflict it is important to take necessary preventive measures before the situation gets out of hand. Once the causes and conditions that lead to violent clashes have fully ripened and erupted, it is very difficult to control them and restore peace. Violence undoubtedly breeds more violence. If we instinctively retaliate when violence is done to us, what can we expect other than that our opponent to also feel justified retaliating. This is how violence escalates. Preventive measures and restraint must be observed at an earlier stage. Clearly leaders need to be alert, far-sighted and decisive.
In today’s world expectations of war have changed. It is no longer realistic to expect that our enemy will be completely destroyed, or that victory will be total for us. Or for that matter, can an enemy be considered absolute. We have seen many times that today’s enemies are often tomorrow’s allies, a clear indication that things are relative and very inter-related and inter-dependent. Our survival, our success, our progress, are very much related to others’ well-being. Therefore, we as well as our enemies are still very much inter-dependent. Whether we regard them as economic, ideological or political enemies makes no difference to this. Their destruction has a destructive effect upon us. Thus, the very concept of war, which is no longer relevant.
Similarly, as the global economy evolves, every nation becomes to a greater or lesser extent dependent on every other nation. The modern economy, like the environment, knows no boundaries. Even those countries openly hostile to one another must cooperate in their use of the world’s resources. Often, for example, they will be dependent on the same rivers or other natural resources. And the more interdependent our economic relationships, the more interdependent must our political relationships become.
What we need today is education among individuals and nations, from small children up to political leaders to inculcate the idea that violence is counterproductive, that it is not a realistic way to solve problems, and that dialogue and understanding are the only realistic way to resolve our difficulties.
The anniversary of the tragic events of September 11, 2001 provides us with a very good opportunity. There is a worldwide will to oppose terrorism. We can use this consensus to implement long-term preventive measures. This will ultimately be much more effective than taking dramatic and violent steps based on anger and other destructive emotions. The temptation to respond with violence is understandable but a more cautious approach will be more fruitful
September 1, 2002
