George Santayana famously said, "Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it." Today, Richard Cohen, writing in the Washington Post, gives a bit of a history lesson.
In his upcoming book about the horrors of the 20th century, "The War of the World," the British historian Niall Ferguson has a chapter called "The Pity of Peace." It is about 1938, when World War II loomed, and Britain — especially and importantly Britain — did precious little to stop it. The warnings of Churchill — "believe me, it may be the last chance . . ." — were ignored, and the government under Neville Chamberlain obstinately pursued a policy that forever after made the word appeasement one of the most odious in history. Somehow, though, it looks like 1938 all over again.
The events in the Middle East are often compared to 1914 and the start of World War I. That war — the Great War, the war to end all wars — is actually the all-purpose war. It not only began for what seemed like a trivial reason (the assassination of someone who wasn't a head of state) but it was fought with tenacity and brutality for what now seems no reason at all. In the end, millions died and the world was utterly changed. Why?
In a sense, Cohen is correct. There are forces here that are in play that have a strong resemblance to the events leading up to World War Two. Some elements closely resemble the events of 1914. There are also elements that resemble many other times in history. That is the big problem with reasoning by historical precedent.
Now France is having second thoughts . . . or cold feet . . . or mere questions. If it is the last, that's understandable. The French military is said to worry about the command structure, since this was a problem with the U.N. force in Bosnia in the 1990s. Command structure, though, was not nearly the whole problem in the Balkans. After all, Dutch soldiers were on the spot when Bosnian troops massacred Muslim men and boys at Srebrenica. It is hard to this day to account for what happened.
If only questions about the command structure vexed the French, there would be little cause for worry. But there are ample signs that more is at work here than a table of organization. Maybe the French and other Europeans have just plain lost the political will. The upshot is that now there is no international force worth its name in Lebanon — certainly not one willing and able to shoot.
This inability of Europe to get its act together is what suggests 1938. Back then, Winston Churchill was hardly the only one who thought Hitler was intent on war. After all, the German leader was an ideological zealot and a murderer to boot. Still, England did little. Similarly, you don't have to have Churchillian prescience to see that what happened once in Lebanon can happen again. Hezbollah's avowed aim is to eradicate Israel. Listen to what it says. Pay attention. It will renew its attacks the first chance it gets. This is why it exists.
I have always thought that Santayana meant his famous words in the long view of history, over many centuries. It is also somewhat applicable in the shorter term, of course. So this may well be quite like 1938 right now, Cohen is not the first to see this possibility. It may be like 1914 as well. It could also be argued that it has aspects very like Vienna in 1683 for that matter.
Or it could be what we need to face up to today, remembering that which has passed before.
In a sense, Cohen is correct. There are forces here that are in play that have a strong resemblance to the events leading up to World War Two. Some elements closely resemble the events of 1914. There are also elements that resemble many other times in history. That is the big problem with reasoning by historical precedent.
Now France is having second thoughts . . . or cold feet . . . or mere questions. If it is the last, that's understandable. The French military is said to worry about the command structure, since this was a problem with the U.N. force in Bosnia in the 1990s. Command structure, though, was not nearly the whole problem in the Balkans. After all, Dutch soldiers were on the spot when Bosnian troops massacred Muslim men and boys at Srebrenica. It is hard to this day to account for what happened.
If only questions about the command structure vexed the French, there would be little cause for worry. But there are ample signs that more is at work here than a table of organization. Maybe the French and other Europeans have just plain lost the political will. The upshot is that now there is no international force worth its name in Lebanon — certainly not one willing and able to shoot.
This inability of Europe to get its act together is what suggests 1938. Back then, Winston Churchill was hardly the only one who thought Hitler was intent on war. After all, the German leader was an ideological zealot and a murderer to boot. Still, England did little. Similarly, you don't have to have Churchillian prescience to see that what happened once in Lebanon can happen again. Hezbollah's avowed aim is to eradicate Israel. Listen to what it says. Pay attention. It will renew its attacks the first chance it gets. This is why it exists.
I have always thought that Santayana meant his famous words in the long view of history, over many centuries. It is also somewhat applicable in the shorter term, of course. So this may well be quite like 1938 right now, Cohen is not the first to see this possibility. It may be like 1914 as well. It could also be argued that it has aspects very like Vienna in 1683 for that matter.
Or it could be what we need to face up to today, remembering that which has passed before.
