Pacificist Moderation

To the editors:

As a recent alum, I’m particularly interested in the responses of Harvard undergraduates to events of national and international significance. I’m writing in response to an article about last week’s peace rally (“Rally Promotes Peace Despite Terror Attacks” , News. Sept. 21), to express my disappointment with the knee-jerk reaction of several undergraduates to the Sept. 11 tragedy and the American retaliation that will follow.

Last week’s New York Times carried a picture of a Harvard undergraduate protesting the anticipated military response to the terrorist attack. This week’s New Republic refers to the Harvard Initiative for Peace and Justice as organizing “vigils and letter-writing campaigns against military action.” The comfortable moral absolutism that fuels such reactions is so absolutely out of touch with any possible policy option that it makes Harvard student opinion entirely irrelevant and to some extent laughable.

As of this morning, 92 percent of Americans favor some sort of military action against those responsible for the attacks. Whether we like it or not, this overwhelming support guarantees that action will be taken—should President Bush ignore such demands for a forceful response and eschew military strikes, he and his party will commit certain political suicide. Those students demanding absolute nonviolence at this time turn a blind eye to the vicissitudes of policy-making in a democracy and merely make their voices all the easier to ignore.

It is essential that Americans vocalize their opinion and participate in the shaping of American foreign policy, especially at this moment. A calming of the bloodlust shared by perhaps a majority of Americans is welcome, and I hope that those of us interested in human rights and concerned about the lives of innocent civilians can soften hawkish and immoderate calls for war. However, demanding absolute peace is absurd. A more intellectually and morally nuanced reaction by Harvard students would acknowledge the almost unanimous support for military action but demand that strikes be conducted in accordance with international humanitarian law so as to diminish the risks to the innocent as much as possible. We can soften the impact of the violence to come, but the thought that we can convince policymakers to forego a military response is quixotic at best and morally irresponsible at worst.

David Marcus '98
New Haven, Conn.
Sept. 25, 2001