The Words of the Chowdhury Family
|
|
The Words of the Chowdhury Family |
Let me say at the outset how deeply appreciative we are -- not only the United Nations but the broader international community -- of the work that UPF continues to do for the cause of peace. I'm particularly happy to see on the agenda a session devoted to talk about the culture of peace, which I believe is the main objective of the international community to seek as we are in the early decades of the new millennium.
This immensely significant and timely event on international leadership focusing on building a world of peace and global solidarity is taking place on the heels of our celebration of the life and legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., ten days ago. And I should add also, of the inauguration of President Barack Obama.
At the 24th annual celebration of the Martin Luther King Day in Los Angeles, in the keynote speech there, I said, "I believe wholeheartedly that Mahatma Gandhi's principle of nonviolence, or ahimsa, has found a true reflection in Dr. King's own lifelong struggle for equality and justice." Mahatma had said that, "Nonviolence is the greatest and most active force in the world. One cannot be passively nonviolent. One person who can express ahimsa in life exercises a force superior to all the force of brutality." That was Dr. King in every sense of that expression all throughout his adult life. He considered his Nobel Peace Prize as "a profound recognition that nonviolence is the answer to the critical political and racial questions of our time, the need for man to overcome oppression without resorting to violence."
Here we see clearly in Mahatma Gandhi and in Dr. King the kind of leadership that the world desperately needs today for building peace and solidarity. It goes without saying that peace and solidarity at a global level can never become a reality unless the very efforts to achieve that are peaceful and without force. Elevating the principle to where it truly belongs, Dr. King affirmed that, "Admittedly nonviolence in the truest sense is not a strategy that one uses simply because it is expedient at the moment. Nonviolence is ultimately a way of life that men live by because of the sheer morality of its claim."
At this juncture in the history of human progress, we can safely assert the pivotal role that the human mind and human creativity has played in advancing prosperity, well-being, and welfare, and made the world a better place to live in. But there is another side to the human mind as well. That other side is capable of breeding intolerance, harboring hatred, and inflicting pain on fellow human beings. Our challenge today would be to prevent the human mind from getting consumed by ignorance, by fear, violence, and intolerance.
To be truly globally oriented, today's leadership needs to ensure that the relevance of nonviolence, tolerance, and democracy is inculcated in every woman and man, children and adult alike. It is in this context that I believe the flourishing of the culture of peace and nonviolence will generate a mindset that is the prerequisite for the transition from force to reason, from conflict and violence to dialogue and peace. It will provide the bedrock to support a stable, progressing, and prospering world -- a world that is at peace with itself.
I would like to affirm very strongly that peace and solidarity at a global level can truly flourish when the world is free of poverty, hunger, discrimination, and exclusion, when women and men can realize their highest potential and live a secure and fulfilling life. At the same time, I believe that peace and solidarity are not possible in the real sense unless and until each and every one of us contributes collectively and individually in building the culture of peace and nonviolence in our own lives. The leadership for peace and solidarity needs to focus on empowering the individual so that each one of us becomes individually an agent of peace and nonviolence. I would not have the credibility to aspire for world peace if I am myself not a true believer and reflector of peace and nonviolence in my own life.
As Mahatma Gandhi has said, "Nonviolence is not a garment to be put on and off at will. Its seat is in the heart, and it must be an inseparable part of our very being." Without individual commitment, global peace and solidarity is not possible, and is even meaningless. We have to succeed together, or together we shall perish.
I'd like to take the opportunity of addressing this gathering of individuals who are dedicated to the cause of the culture of peace to urge your understanding and support for an objective that has the potential of enhancing global peace and solidarity in a substantive and significant way. More than a decade ago, in 1998, on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, a group of civil society organizations launched a global campaign for the recognition by all of the human right to peace. They declared, "We are convinced that it is high time for the human right to peace." They elaborated by underscoring that the right to live is not applied in times of war. This contradiction and the undermining of the universality of human rights must be ended by the recognition of the human right to peace.
They called upon all to prevent violence, intolerance, and injustice in our countries and societies, in order to overcome the culture of war and to build a culture of peace. The international community over the years has been endeavoring to establish the universality of peace and human rights. I'm very proud to say that civil society organizations such as UPF have been the most forward-looking in advocating for the recognition of the human right to peace. They adopted a milestone charter in October 2006, The Luarca Declaration on the Human Right to Peace, that articulates very forcefully and in an effective manner the universality, interdependence, and indivisibility of the human right to peace and the overriding need to achieve international social justice.
I believe that global solidarity will not be achieved without the recognition and realization of what are known as the enabling human rights -- that is, the right to peace and the right to development. Although international law and politics acknowledge the prevailing interrelationship between human rights and peace, the recognition of the right to peace as an autonomous human right has not yet been achieved by the United Nations General Assembly. Nevertheless, I, and many like me, believe that the right to peace should be qualified as a right of solidarity, and therefore needs to be recognized in order to grant credibility in the work of the United Nations, and in particular as envisaged in the Charter.
International solidarity requires international cooperation, union of interest, and joint action in order to preserve not only the fabric and very survival of international society, but also to achieve its collective goals. All means used to achieve this global purpose are shared by the right to peace because the cooperation for the maintenance of international peace and security is an absolute necessity for the implementation of this right.
Once the right to peace is established as a new, self-standing human right, it would provide a solid basis for the culture of peace. Its recognition would also give fresh impetus to the struggle against violence and attitudes based on force, imposition, and gender discrimination. A worthwhile global leadership that truly reflects humanity's concerns should realize that the promotion of peace needs to be understood not only in the passive sense of the absence of war, but also in the positive sense of creation of conditions of equity, gender equality, and social justice.
Indeed, depriving people of their economic, social, and cultural rights generates social injustice, marginalization, and unrestrained exploitation. It follows that a correlation exists between social and economic inequalities and violence. Thus, the realization of the right to development is vital to reduce any kind of internal or external violence within society. It is therefore necessary to re-incorporate into the international agenda the issue of the right to peace, which has disappeared since the end of the Cold War.
The human right to peace is an attempt to respond to the perils of the modern, interconnected, interdependent world. Dismissing the human right to peace as vague and declaring that it offers nothing new is an exercise that misses the mark. The emphasis on a human right to peace is innovative and addresses a whole swath of new and interconnected global challenges.
Recalling Einstein's comment that peace cannot be kept by force, it can only be achieved by understanding, I quote my dear friend and colleague Federico Mayor, who has been the Director General of UNESCO, "We must understand today that if peace is the right of all people, then a culture of peace is the responsibility of all people."
The dawning of the new millennium gives us a scope to take lessons from our past in order to build a new and better tomorrow. Creating and nurturing a culture of peace is a social movement. Naturally governments that resist change are perplexed by it, because the culture of peace challenges the status quo. To achieve it, we have to build a grand alliance amongst all, particularly with the proactive involvement and participation of civil society and young people. No social responsibility is greater, nor task heavier than that of securing peace on our planet. Let us remember that the work for peace is a continuous process. Each of us can make a difference in that process.
I am confident that you will make every effort to rid yourselves and your fellow men and women of the evils of intolerance and prejudice, ignorance and selfishness that compel us to repeat the cycle of violence. Only then will the world be a better place to live in for us, for our children, and for our grandchildren. Seeds of peace exist in all of us. They must be nurtured, cared for, and promoted by us all to flourish and flower. Thank you.