“We must disarm words”. Once again, Pope Francis knows how to surprise us. From the Gemelli Hospital where he is staying, he sends a clear warning: our words reflect our soul, our feelings, our intentions, our projects. If they are words of war, they risk fuelling or spreading conflicts. Just a few hours after Bergoglio’s message, Ursula von der Leyen’s remarks at the Royal Danish Military Academy in Copenhagen yesterday resonated in a speech ahead of today’s ‘White Paper’ on EU security and defence. The Commission President said: “If Europe wants to avoid war, it must prepare for war.”
This seemed to recall the old adage, “Si vis pacem, para bellum”.
This statement is in line with the turn the European Union is taking, with the ‘ReArm’ project, €800 billion to finance the arms industry, the renewed ‘deterrence’ policy (another term used by von der Leyen), which is, of course, reminiscent of the Cold War years. “These are words, nothing but words”, one might argue. But where does a bellicose vocabulary end? What are the consequences of the hard-line, militaristic declarations of the leaders to whom we entrust our present and the future of the next generations? Furthermore, what course will the European Council – convened for Thursday 20 March in Brussels – take in the face of Russia’s concrete threats? What will be the consequences of Trump’s erratic attitudes on the world stage? Who will be responsible for alleviating the inhumane conditions in which the people of Gaza are forced to live? What can we expect from Syria or Iran? Who remembers the countless, heinous and bloody wars that continue to rage? What will be the relevance of autocrats like Turkey’s Erdogan or China’s Xi Jinping?
Von der Leyen – who, it must be said, is in a very difficult position in terms of the choices she has to make – said in Copenhagen: “The age of spheres of influence and power competition is truly back.”
So “we must act immediately”, “now is the time to act”
by setting out a detailed European roadmap for producing weapons and strengthening national armies. For “freedom is not a process. It is a constant struggle” in which “courage and the will to fight for freedom” go hand in hand and are “the duty of every generation.”
While the US president and the Russian autocrat are discussing on the phone the future of Ukraine (suggesting a division of the spoils), of the European Union, created from the ashes of the Second World War with a vocation for peace, it is only fair to expect more. We expect a new readiness for mediation between the warring parties, for politics and diplomacy to take precedence over missiles, for ‘peace talks’ to be held in order to agree on an immediate ceasefire leading to that promised, desired, necessary and no longer postponable “just and lasting peace”. Let us disarm the words and lay down our weapons.
