International Day of Peace: A dream no one can say is closer

The Day is dedicated world peace, including the cessation of war and violence, which has always looked achievable but this remains all but a mirage.

Too bad, experience shows that nations all over the world will gladly walk into war and destruction rather than “risk losing face or dignity” by buying the political compromise option.

There is something in popular management called a ‘win-win’ situation, which few of those who spend time in strategic studies or political analysis will admit really exists at the level of competitive politics or where economic interests are at issue.

All ‘win-win’ situations usually involve secondary matters where nothing is really contested, which often stalls progress or at times even leads to outbreaks of violence.

UN write-ups show a whole series of ceremonies linked to the commemoration of World Peace Day, with some countries devoted to observing it more than others on account of history.

For instance, Japan suffered untold destruction in 1945 made possible by an atomic bomb and has for decades anchored its institutions in a peaceful outlook in global order.

But this situation is under threat from newly emerging competition in the Far Eastern seas and nuclear weapons proliferation in the Korean Peninsula.

The US is still providing a nuclear umbrella in the zone, otherwise Japan would likely be rapidly scaling up its nuclear preparedness.

There is something that the UN calls the ‘culture of peace initiative’, but it hard to say at what point nations will durably choose a culture of peace and to what extent.

No country avowedly wants war – and even the most deliberate aggressors during World War II had grievances as to the right to living room, or uniting different peoples.

Hard-won peace in South Sudan is now breaking down owing to factional fighting in the ranks of the weaker party in the unity government, while Somalia is bogged down in president vs prime minister contests – amid a guerrilla war.

Following insurgency-induced problems in parts of Mozambique, there is a new agenda by the Southern African Development Community (SADC) for security there.

Meanwhile, Tanzania’s own participation in peace building efforts in Democratic Republic of Congo and the Sudan have proven of monumental use and relevance.

There is a rather similar scenario with respect to the IGAD intervention in war-ravaged Somalia, while the recent US departure from Afghanistan is a reminder of the futility of some invasions or wars.

Tanzania has every reason to cherish the much happier times it has enjoyed over the decades relative to many other countries, including just across its borders.

The cases we have touched on show that breaking up a nation is much easier than building it, as a tiny spark can trigger an inferno – no matter the status of that nation and hence the need to treasure the unity, peace and security we boast.