16 War

In history of the world, there have appeared two classes of > thinkers who hold two distinct opinions on war. One class of thinkers accepts war as a historical necessity, and even justifies it: the other condemns it and even looks forward to a time when there will be no war. In the first decade of the twentieth century, there arose in Germany a number of philosophers, notably, Bernhardi and Treitschke, who tfeought that war was a biological necessity. These philosophers of Sermany based their conclusion what they found in the animal world. In the animal world, there was the constant, ceaseless struggle for existence, the stronger animal pushing the

weaker to the wall; and therefore, so they argued, nations and peoples must fight one another till eternity. Now the question is: whether war is avoidable or unavoidable. In 1936, a widely read monthly of England, invited the opinions of the worlds greatest thinkers on this problem. The thinkers and men of letters whose opinions were sought included. Chinese man of letters, Lin Yu TAng, author of My Country and My People. Lin Yu TAng contends that war is inevitable because men are nationalists at home and internationalists abroad and because men at the present day are only half-thinking and half-feeling animals. War certainly leads to great destruction of life and property. A continual writer, speaking on the effects of the first world war of 1914-18, remarked that thousands of hospitals and educational institutions could have been built out of the enormous amount of money that was actually spent on the conduct of the war. The Second World War also, as everybody knows, has led to destruction of life and property on a gigantic scale. Whole towns have been devastated; for instance, towns and cities like Rangoon in Burma, Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan, Amsterdam, Koenig berg, Naples and other important towns of Europe have been razed to the ground. Besides, whole populations have had to be evacuated from cities threatened with destruction. The methods of warfare differ from age to age. In ancient times, war were fought with bow and narrow and other crude weapons such as the spear. In the Trojan War, described by Homer in The Iliad, the Greek heroes fought with the Trojans with these weapons. Competent scholars have proved, from the study of old records, that archery had been practised in war by the ancient Egyptians, the Jews, the Assyrians and the Greeks. It was perhaps in the time of Edward In that archery reached its perfection in England. The student of English history should remember that the great battles of Crecy, Poitiers and Agincourt were all fought by the best bowmen of England. The introduction of fire arms and artillery naturally led to the decline of archery as an instrument of war, though even today the savages in the different parts of the world still practise archery with pride. It was about the time of Babe; >,< tne history of subcontinent that fire-arms and heavy artillery were used on the battle-fields of subcontinent. The three Battles of Panipat and the famous battle of Plassey were fought not with bow and arrow but with guns and cannons. The modern methods of warfare, displayed in the two world wars are a vast improvement on all the older forms of war technique. In the world war of 1914-18, submarines played a more important role than aircraft, while in the second World War, battles were fought in the three Continents - Europe, Asia and Africa - with weapons hitherto undreamt of by our forefathers. Modern warfare is conducted with scientific precision and accuracy. In the Second World War, rocket-bombs and atom bombs were used for the destruction of the enemy; coastal waters were heavily mined and radar rays were employed to locate the enemy submarines. Ancient warfare was always marked by the exhibition of personal prowess. We read in Greek history how Leonidas defeated the superior forces of Persa in the Thermopylae pass by showing personal bravery. Modern war is, on the other hand, a war of brains, not of brawn. The collapsed of Germany bears testimony to it. In recent times, there have arisen many thinkers who condemn war and advocate peace. They are called pacifists. Norman Angell, in his famous book, The Great

Illusion, tries to prove that war is essentially an evil and that it does harm in the end to both the victor and the vanquished. The pacifists are often scorned as idealists and their dream of world peace is described as a figment of fancy. In our view, there is no doubt that human nature at the moment is dominated more by the possessive instincts of an animal. But we look forward to the day when the moral law will prevail in the world and mens passions and instincts will be purged and ennobled by the loftier ideals of the spirit. It is true that the League of Nations which had been set up after the first Great War could not stop the Italo-Abyssinian or the Sino-Japanese conflict. But man is a born idealist; and the United Nations Organisation - the historical descendant of the League of Nations - armed by a living faith in world peace and in the possibility of maintaining it by a strong international force has justly inspired in the minds of men a hope for a new order, ruled not by hatred but by love, not by the spirit of competition but by the spirit of fellowship.