With a sense of humility and feelings of stupidity, I look back on my life with awareness how often I have been wrong about so much!
There was a time when I thought that I knew much about God! And now, I know how little I know and, even more, recognize that what I know may in fact limit my awareness of God’s presence. In short, knowing can get in the way of “being with God”.
There was a time when I thought that my work life was meaningful. Looking back, I know that I accomplished very little.
However, there is one interesting and positive point: I somehow or other spoke out for what I thought was right and true.
Within the context of priestly ministry, I worked hard to share with others the knowledge that I thought was the best available. Whether it was really helpful is questionable. However, it surely got me into trouble with the church’s hierarchy.
And then, in my work at the Veterans Administration, I never shied from sharing my views on our health system could be improved and noted when current practices were a problem.
When reading about the inability of military officers to get their honest views of the Iraq situation to the powers-to-be, I am aware that I could never have successfully functioned within the military structure.
And now, reading Carne Ross’ views about his diplomatic career (United Kingdom) points out how others were caught in a life that was essentially unreal.
As it took time for me to realize that I could not function as a priest within the structures as they were (and are!), so Carne Ross came to realize that the life of a diplomat is essentially dishonest.
The diplomat abandons the self for the sake of the impersonal “we” of the government. The ideas and statements do not represent either the reality of the citizen politic or the situations addressed. The public statements of the government represent only those of the few, e.g., the US government clearly states positions that were not approved by the public election in 2006. Positions taken on Iraq or Afghanistan do not permeate from the peoples of those nations as much as from the US government. And the people who write those briefings often are personally ignorant of the culture, history, and language of the peoples they are addressing, e.g., surely the thoughts regarding how the Iraqi people would welcome us portray grievous misunderstanding of the people.
Carne Ross’ book is essentially a confession. He tells how he wittingly or unwittingly was a part of process that was lacking reality. The world of diplomacy is devoid of the awareness that problems cannot be solved any longer between nations. The problems facing every nation are global in their implication. There is a need for a new type of problem-solving to address radical terrorists, global warming, AIDS, economic inequities. The United Nations, as currently structured, seems incapable of meeting the challenge.
Carne Ross’ recommendations for the future are very idealistic and virtually impossible. Essentially, he advocates a new system that would involve a global democracy. Nation-states would rise above its own interests to address the interests of all the peoples impacted by whatever the issue addressed. The goal of minimizing suffering is noble, but it is hard to conceptualize nations rising above their own interests.
“The Parliament of Man: The Past, Present, and Future of the United Nations” by Paul Kennedy discussed both the very impressive and positive achievements of the United Nations without minimizing the problems associated with its structural imbalance between the Permanent Five and other nations, especially the developing nations. His focus on the need to expand the Security Council and to give more weight to non-security issues do not result in specific recommendations as much a “problems to be addressed”.
Reading Ross’ insights into his false world of diplomacy at least give me hope that we can rise above our past and lead more honest futures.
No comments:
Post a Comment