To reduce the dangers of war, nations need a definition of national interest that differentiates essential goals from desirable ones. Several components of national interest can be identified: the capacity of each state to fulfill its internal goals; the security required for this and for survival; relations with other states that maximize the benefit of one’s own. These interests can be interpreted in widely varying ways. How a nation maximizes its benefits depends, for example, on whether it desires peace and cooperation more than power and dominance. It depends on whether its world view makes peaceful cooperation seem possible.
Minimalism in the relations of nations
In the long run it is possible to create changes in individuals, cultures, social organizations, and the systems of relations among nations that will reduce group violence. Until then, we must strive to further minimalism in order to make genocide and war less likely. This means (1) a limited definition of national interest as a guide to foreign policy, (2) foreign policies toward other nations guided in part by the extent they fulfill essential, “minimal” values, and (3) the practice by nations of “persistent minimalism” in their relations.
Minimalism requires that nations respect the human rights of their own citizens, their right to life and freedom from abuse by authorities. Less imperative but also important is respect for civil rights. Nations must also respect the security and legitimate interests of other nations. Minimalism is antithetical to expansionist ideologies or an expansionist nationalism. Minimalism also requires that nations act as responsible, active bystanders. By influencing one another, so that each acts on the basis of the “essential” values, nations can both serve their own interests and fulfill their obligation as members of the community of nations. Apart from its focus on essential values, minimalism allows heterogeneity in political and economic systems.
The above principles should be expressed in the practice of persistent minimalism, which relies on the power of bystanders. Nations should be unwilling to accept a nation’s mistreatment of its citizens. They should protest and, if necessary, limit trade, aid, and cultural exchange to stop the mistreatment. Only as a last resort should nations break their relations with an offending nation, since they can exert more influence in the context of ongoing relations. Nations should respond to other nations’ positive actions (and minimalist practices) by expanding relations. The more nations practice persistent minimalism, the more stable the world order will be. Great powers such as the United States have a special obligation, because they are especially influential.
Experience shows that minimalist practice by nations and international groups can have powerful influence. International pressure, including pressure by human rights organizations and the policies of the Carter administration, helped to reduce torture in South American countries. For a long time it had little effect on the Soviet practice of diagnosing and treating dissidents as mentally ill.22 But there was inconsistency in opposition and pressure. For example, the International Medical Association was extremely slow to condemn the Soviet practice.23 This applied to Iran: it had been pressured by some nations to stop its war with Iraq, while receiving arms and support from other nations. Unequivocal minimalist practice by nations and organizations, which is extremely rare, is likely to have great influence on state violence at home or abroad. The earlier such influence is exerted, the greater its chance of effectiveness.d
Toward positive reciprocity
An important source of war is the perception either of the need for self-defense or that a conflict cannot be peacefully resolved. People must become aware of individual and group processes that cause biased perception and must learn to test perceptions and create strategies to resolve conflict peacefully.
Reciprocity, for example, is a profound law of human relations, so universal that some sociobiologists argue it is part of our genetic makeup. We harm those who have harmed us and help those who have helped us. Thus a friendly initiative directed at a supposed adversary may lead to better relations on both the individual and the international level, especially when the power of adversaries is balanced.24 This is one way to test the intentions of a supposed enemy.
Positive reciprocity is unlikely when ideologies of antagonism and a conflict mode are dominant. First, to initiate positive action requires some trust that the other will reciprocate in kind. Second, to reciprocate a positive act, the actor’s intention must be judged benevolent. The greater the mistrust between parties, the less is it possible to test another’s intention by unilateral positive acts. Research shows that individuals, at least, will not reciprocate a kind act if they see its motivation as selfish (including the desire to gain benefits by inducing reciprocation.)25 Correspondingly, they will retaliate less or not at all if they perceive a harm-doer as having acted thoughtlessly or the harm as an unintended by-product of some action.26 Alternatively, parties may justify their unwillingness to reciprocate positive acts by expressing mistrust, when the real reason is that their true motives conflict with the positive acts required to reciprocate. Mistrust was the stated reason for the U.S. refusal to stop testing in response to the Soviet suspension of nuclear tests in the mid-1980s; the United States claimed that the Soviet Union stopped only after a long series of tests that gave it an advantage.
To change a malignant mode of relating, nations must begin a process of positive reciprocity starting from the most basic level. They must move from diplomatic contact, to tourism and cultural exchanges, to cooperation in joint enterprises, to mutual help. Over time, motivations that support conflict should diminish, and the desire for cooperation and peace should increase.
Having identified the cultural preconditions for
