4 min readApr 1, 2023 11:21 AM IST
First published on: Apr 1, 2023 at 07:09 AM IST
There’s a war on terrorism, a war on poverty. A caste war, a class war. There are civil wars, religious wars. And, of course, cross-border wars. Someone or the other somewhere or the other is engaged in some war or another. At this moment. But Prime Minister Narendra Modi had declared that today’s “is not an era of war” and that has become a quotable quote across the world. From scholarly papers in foreign affairs journals to newspaper editorials, from German Chancellor Olaf Scholz to Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, from military men to diplomats claiming victory on the battleground of joint statement drafting, everyone is quoting Modi.
Modi was right, in a manner of speaking. India has said all along that the Russian invasion of Ukraine contravened the principles of the Charter of the United Nations that mandate respect for state sovereignty and territorial integrity of all states. In invading a neighbour’s territory, whatever the historical and sociological facts, Russia had indeed waged war. Albeit an “undeclared war” — a legalism and this is not the first case of an “undeclared” war. The US waged an inhuman war against the Vietnamese for over a decade and that too was an “undeclared” war.
However, the global popularity of Modi’s one-liner has little to do with its veracity and legal appropriateness. It has become a handy phrase to admonish Vladimir Putin. It has, not surprisingly, also been used to elevate NATO leadership onto a high moral pedestal of peace lovers. If indeed “this” is not an era of war, when did such an era end? When was the last time a country declared war when it waged one?
Many wars have been fought over the past three-quarters of a century that have not been called wars. When militaries become security forces, they are not in the business of waging wars, merely of providing security. It is not just about terminology or semantics. Nor about the legal status of state action. Modi’s speechwriters and foreign affairs advisors have internalised a western myth in coining that one-liner for the PM.
It is one of the tragic ironies of our times that so many who write on international affairs and contemporary history routinely and unthinkingly refer to the period after 1945 as the “post-War years”. How often have we all not read that term, used that term, come to accept that term? Was it the media that decided that Vietnam was a “war”, even though the US Congress had not declared it so? If the second half of the 20th century is indeed the “post-War” period, then what of all the “war heroes” whose death we mourn?
Between 1945 and 2000, bloody wars have been fought on all continents, save North America. And, of course, American soldiers have died in many of them. In the first two decades of the 21st century, wars have been waged across Asia and Africa. In Latin America, conflict has essentially entailed civil wars and drug wars. What is new about Ukraine is that war has returned to western Europe. Eastern Europe’s last war was in the so-called “post-War” era of the 1980s and 1990s.
While one understands the Japanese abhorrence of war, being the only nation devastated by a nuclear attack, it has not been consistent in its opposition to wars waged by the US and Europe in Africa, Latin America and Asia. The same can be said of all the so-called “peace-loving” Europeans who back the American arming of Ukraine. The US military-industrial complex makes the money. Ukrainians get killed. But then, the money for the Nobel Peace Prize came out of the profits earned from the sale of dynamite.
The writer is a policy analyst
What is new about Ukraine is that war has returned to western Europe. Eastern Europe’s last war was in the so-called “post-War” era of the 1980s and 1990s. (AP/File) 
Share
