As the course of World History enters a new millennium and the 20th Century draws to a close, we look back at a century of war: World War I, World War II, and the "cold war"; it has been the most devastating century of all time.
In this century man walked on the moon and unleashed the power of the atom to hold the sun in our hands; it has also been the century of the greatest technological revolution of all time with enormous promise for good, enormous risks of evil. Perhaps the most defining moment of the 20th Century was the great victory of the Allied powers over a militant German-Japan "Axis" in 1945 midway through the century. It was resort to the atom bomb, August 6 and 9, 1945, that accelerated the surrender of Japan after Germany had already surrendered.
It was the power of American productivity and American ideas and the sacrifice of its soldiers that turned the tide for the victory in both world wars. It was American power leading the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), that brought about the collapse of Soviet communism in 1989. The 20th Century has fittingly been called the "American Century."
With great power comes great responsibility. The peace and security between and among nations in our world today depends in large measure upon the leadership and power of the United States, the world's one remaining superpower.
There are three options open to us in the exercise of our power, each one of them subject to the lessons of history. We can withdraw into isolation and turn our backs to the world; we can go it alone in unilateral action under our own terms; or we can combine our armed force in multilateral action within the framework of a universal and recognized collective security system. Only the third option is viable for America in today's world, as shown by lessons of history which follow. I hope we have truly learned these lessons. The philosopher-historian George Santyana warned that we ignore history at our own peril; that those who ignore history are doomed to "relive" it.
The United States was drawn into the first world war to the side of the Allied powers by the aggression of an autocratic Germany when in 1917 their submarines closed down the seas and sank our ships. In President Wilson's words we went to war to "make the world safe for democracy." At the conclusion of the war President Wilson conceived of and helped to establish the League of Nations. The United States did not join. Henry Cabot Lodge Republican Senator from Massachusetts led the fight in the U.S. Senate against ratification of the League Covenant in 1920.
This was evidence of an isolationism that prevailed down to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, December 7, 1941. I believe the League of Nations with the United States could have stopped the aggression of Germany in 1939 and also Japan. It took the attack on Pearl Harbor to end the illusion of American isolation, but by then Germany and Japan stood astride almost the entire world.
President Roosevelt was determined that we would not repeat our failure to have supported the League of Nations in 1920. Twenty-six nations joined Roosevelt's Declaration by United Nations signed at Washington, January 1, 1942. Representatives of fifty nations signed the Charter of the United Nations at San Francisco June 26, 1945 even before the end of World War II. The U.N. is essentially the League with improvements, a confederation of sovereign states. Ratification of the U.N. Charter by the Senate was virtually unanimous. The U.N. Headquarters was established in New York City, further evidence of our commitment.
Under the Charter, the United States is one of the leading or "permanent" members of the U.N. Security Council, together with Britain, France, Russia, China. Each of these five permanent members of the Council must agree on decisions. This is the so-called "veto," and it is the only limitation to majority voting under the U.N. Charter, however the preferred U.N. operating mode for voting is agreement by consensus.
Today there is virtually universal membership with 185 members as of September 1998. There are seven principal organs of the United Nations organization itself plus 21 autonomous associated "specialized agencies," many other conferences and commissions, and over 1,000 non-governmental organizations (NGO's) which are registered with the U.N. including American Field Service Intercultural Programs. All aspects of human need and endeavor are addressed.
Recently our participation in the United Nations and our foreign relations have been subject to some obstructionism. There has been action by our Congress over the past three years to block payment of assessments to the United Nations; our U.N. arrears are more than $1 billion dollars. There have also been reductions in our funding for all foreign assistance, which is now less than 1 percent of the Federal budget.
These actions by the majority party of both Houses of Congress may reflect an isolationist or insular bent among a new generation of post-war Congressmen who have had little experience with or exposure to the outside world. An editorial in the International Herald Tribune (October 6, 1998) identified some 17 to 25 members of the Republican "right" as "dangerous obstructionists." A New York Times editorial (July 11, 1999) "A Need for Foreign Aid" concluded that "Congress's effort to trim back the meager funds is a shortsighted national shame."
These actions by our Congress, although disturbing do not represent a rebirth of isolationism in the United States. They have been resisted by our President and criticized by editorials such as I have quoted. In our world of instantaneous communication and networks of world-wide trade and finance, global "interdependence" is a fact like it or not. Eliot Richardson in his book Reflections of a Radical Moderate (NY, Pantheon, 1996) has written: "Sweeping across national boundaries and overwhelming the capacities of sovereign states, the worldwide impact of social, democratic, economic, technological and environmental change is the most striking phenomenon of our times." Richardson calls this "interaction."
Based on the lessons of history, and the reality of global interdependence, isolationism is not an option for America in the world today. Our underlying commitment to and participation in the United Nations as its leading member is evidence of this.
A second option for America in the world is unilateral action, that is to keep and enforce the peace as we define it and on our own terms. This is not an option for us in today's world. It is not an option because there must be a sharing of risks and responsibilities, although ours may be the biggest share. It is not an option because of the lessons of history leading to our treaty commitment for collective security under the U.N. Charter. We have wisely decided to use our power within the framework of a world organization committed in principle to a rule of law. Unilateral Action can not build such a world.
We tried essentially unilateral armed action for ten years in Vietnam, 1965-1975. President Johnson turned our engagement in Vietnam into an American war. It didn't work. It destroyed his Presidency, divided our nation, never had the support of our people, the people of Vietnam or the world: a dramatic lesson of history.
In 1991, at a meeting in Japan then Secretary of Defense Robert MacNamara blurted out "My God I was wrong. I was wrong." He makes this confession in his book, The Tragedy and Lesson of Vietnam (1995). To his credit, he was the only cabinet officer to accept responsibility and admit error.
This is an important lesson of history, and we did not make the same mistake when Iraq invaded Kuwait. President Bush organized the coalition of nations that liberated Kuwait in 1991 under the authority of the United Nations.
Eliot Richardson concludes, "unilateral commitment of American units in retaliation against some similar act of aggression is not an option for any future president."
The third option for America in the world, the only viable option in today's world, is multilateral action when armed force may be involved; that is peacemaking and peacekeeping under the United Nations, or "regional arrangements" in accord with Article VIII of the Charter. To be sure, such action may depend upon the threat or use of American power, as in the Iraq case. Our armed force, however, is best used in concert with other members and under the authority of U.N. sanctions and mandates.
There are five elements to our power: our military, economy, technology, culture, and ideas. Ours is the finest voluntary armed forces in the world by land, sea and air backed by the most advanced "hardware" ever known; our economy is the envy of the world in terms of productivity, employment, steady growth without inflation; our technology creating an instantaneous web of finance, trade, knowledge is the engine of our economy and to a considerable extent of the world's economy. The computer should well become a symbol of the next century as the atom bomb has been for our present century.
Our culture is also the envy of the world. We are the land of opportunity, the land of the "American dream." Ours is the creativity of a diverse, emancipated and free society. We are a leader in fashion, drama, music, art, literature, the cinema; but also the "pop" aspects of culture. Unhappily there is a dark side. We lead the world in distribution of guns, domestic violence. crime, racism, drugs, single mothers. Recent writings and commentary posit a moral decay following the so-called "sexual revolution," the "counter-culture" and ferment of the 1960's leading to excessive individualism, cynicism, irresponsibility, erosion of family values. In response, a backlash is now evident in defense of family values.
Our ideas, the fifth and in my view the most important element of our power are to be sure a function of our culture; they are indeed the core values upon which our culture rests. These core values can be summed up in two words "constitutional democracy," values to which all peoples can relate. They embrace the sanctity of life, the rule of law, civil and human rights, separation of church and state, freedom of speech and press, elected governments responsible to a universal electorate, a free but regulated market system based upon private property. They are embodied in our Constitution and Bill of Rights, a living body of law and practice rooted in principle but responsive to change. Together they best represent the American dream to the world.
Our constitutional democracy is the model for the developing world seeking prosperity and freedom. This struggle is being expressed by reforms against entrenched tyrants and in support of free markets, privatization of industry, free press and free speech, fair elections, support for literacy and universal education, the formation of a viable middle class. Most important for economic and democratic development are equal rights for women and minorities. That women in many developing cultures are second-class citizens or worse is quite possibly the greatest obstacle to responsible development.
Democratic nations are the essential building blocks for world peace. Constitutional democracy is of course well established in North America and western Europe; is spreading into East Europe, and to almost all the countries of the East Asia rim. Every government in the Western Hemisphere is elected except for Cuba. Almost half of the countries of Africa are moving towards genuine democratic institutions, and one of the best examples has been the Republic of South Africa under President Mandela now retired.
Retired American Ambassador Robert Ryan, who also served as Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations, wrote (in 1995): "...today's world is freer, more secure, healthier, better educated and more democratic than anyone could have hoped 50 years ago." This reflects the moral influence of America in the world, of American culture, ideas and values; also the participation of the nations of the world in the United Nations system as well as foreign assistance by the United Nations and other donors including the United States.
In this process, I do not suggest a homogeneous American-dominated worldwide culture, and the imposition of our ideas upon the world; indeed the opposite. In John Kennedy's words (1963): "If we can not now resolve all our differences, we can at least make our world safe for diversity..." There is a creative cross-cultural current going on between "East" and "West" integrating conventional and alternative medicine, and involving language, life-styles, spiritual values, foods, dress, music, manners. In this process, core values are developed and shared.
A consensus of values in support of democracy must be developed within a nation, it can not be imposed from the outside. It can be assisted by foreign aid, international communication and trade, interpersonal exchanges. Participation in this process has become the role and the mission of AFS Intercultural Programs in the post-war world and for the next century.
Through the continuous interplay of diversity, consensus is created, refined and recreated. It is consensus reconciling diversity that is the basis for our own United States constitutional system of majority rule and minority rights. It is consensus that helps the United Nations to "work."
The United Nations system in the world is not world government. The U.N. is a confederation of sovereign states which operate on the basis of shared values and a sharing of burdens and risks, and who enter into treaty obligations within the framework of the U.N. Charter.
Peace is more than absence of war, and the U.N. is more than a peacekeeping and peace-enforcing agency. Peace is the absence of those factors that are the breeding grounds of war: poverty, hunger, disease, discrimination, destruction of the environment, tyranny, the elimination of freedom.
Our world is more complicated than during the cold war against the Soviet Union. An editorial in the San Francisco Chronicle (1995) held that "the struggle facing the U.N. is greater than the paralysis imposed by the cold war." The U.N. is taking on the most difficult political, social, economic, financial, environmental problems of our world. Dozens of U.N. agencies cover every aspect of life on our planet.
Our world is a dangerous place. Multilateral action by the U.N. is essential to make and keep the peace in scores of bitter regional aggressions and ethnical atrocities in many corners of our world. During this final decade of the 20th Century, the United Nations Associations of the United Nations reported 25 U.N. missions at an annual cost of $3 billion engaging 85,000 personnel military and civilian. These missions impose and monitor cease-fires, defend human rights, support elections, train civilian police, help in nation building.
In two extreme cases, the horrendous atrocities of "ethnic cleansing" by the Bosnian Serbs in Bosnia and Herzegovina and by Serbia itself in Kosovo, and acting under U.N. authority and sanctions, armed forces of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) have been called upon to expel Serbian forces, and to police for as long as it may take accords to rebuild secure and viable communities. Hopefully also indicted war criminals will be brought to justice by the International War Crimes Tribunal at the Hague. United States power has been a major factor in both actions, especially to end Serbian atrocities in Kosovo.
There has been a lot of misinformation about the costs of foreign assistance and our assessments for the United Nations. Our entire foreign assistance budget has been steadily reduced to less than 1 percent of the Federal budget, and of this only a fraction, one-tenth of one percent, is projected for the United Nations system. This comes to about seven dollars annually for each American for the United Nations.
This is the context of our present failure to pay our assessments for the U.N. basic budget and U.N. peacekeeping operations, which makes it all the more "a shortsighted national shame." In the words of former Cabinet Officer Elliot Richardson: "Being the United Nations' foremost deadbeat undercuts U.S. national interests..." Senator Biden, senior Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee (speaking in the Senate October 21, 1998) made the same point: "Our status as a deadbeat is hurting our interests not only at the U.N. but with leading allies ... in U.N. peacekeeping ... for which we have not yet paid."
We invented the United Nations. We get more out of it than we put into it. Our soldiers together with those of our Allies put their lives on the line in World War II out of which the U.N. Charter was born.
Action by our Congress to withhold our dues has been a temporary setback, and must be reversed in due course; it can not terminate our commitment to the United Nations based upon the lessons of history. At risk, however, are the viability of the many U.N. components for which our support is essential and upon which we in turn depend to share in the burdens and the building of "One World."
Neither isolationism nor unilateral action by the United States are options for us in the present world and for the foreseeable future, as shown by the lessons of history. In the conduct of relations between states, bilateral diplomacy is the conventional method. Resort to "multilateral diplomacy" through the United Nations supplements bilateral action and helps America to project its vast power and influence in today's world especially when resort to armed force is called for. Peacekeeping and enforcement by collective armed "police action" within the framework of the United Nations system is the last resort after. bilateral or multilateral diplomacy may have failed.
Collective armed force captures the headlines as in such situations as the Gulf War following Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, in the enforcement of the Dayton Accords (December, 1995) in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and in the defense of Kosovo. Less dramatic but equally essential is continuing action by scores of U.N. organizations in concert with like-minded national and private agencies across the spectrum of political, social and economic problems and pursuits involving the rich diversity of life on this planet.
In all these things, America's ideas and influence are essential to maintain international peace and security and to help build viable democratic nations as the building blocks for peace and prosperity. This is the real meaning behind President Wilson's promise in World War I "To make the world safe for democracy." In addition to "collective security" Wilson strongly advocated "self-determination" of nations. Wilson's League of Nations was intended to be the League of Democratic Nations. As constitutional democracy advances in our world, the United Nations may well become in effect the United Democratic Nations.
Fittingly, attention has been focused by the United Nations upon a complex of problems affecting our world's environment and its degradation. "Global warming" is happening. The U.N. has taken the lead on this issue which in Eliot Richardson's words affects "not only every form of life on this planet of ours but also the earth itself."
The U.N. Environment Program (UNEP) organized the largest conference ever held: the U.N. Conference on Development and the Environment, the first "Earth Summit" meeting at Rio de Janiero in 1992. Representatives of 175 nations participated including 100 Heads of State; also many NGO's. Problems were defined, and several conventions were drawn up and member states were called upon to prepare plans for eventual implementation.
On the fifth anniversary of the Rio meeting the U.N. organized a follow-up Conference on Climate Change held at Kyoto, Japan in December 1997 with 150 member states and 1200 delegates. A third meeting was held at Buenos Aires in November 1998. At these last two meetings specific targets were proposed for both developed and developing nations to reduce their "greenhouse gas" emissions below 1990 levels by the years 2008-2012.
"Global warming" is happening. America leads in the emission of the greenhouse gases" which cause it. We also lead in the invention of environmentally friendly technologies. The example and leadership of America is vital on this "most far-reaching" of issues, but the United States has not as yet ratified the Kyoto Protocol. A few of our largest industries have abandoned their opposition to emissions reductions, a promising sign.
According to the poet Robert Frost, "Some say the world will end in fire, some say in ice." I do not believe we are doomed to follow the fates of our two neighbor sister terrestrial planets, Venus (fire) and Mars (ice) --- at least without putting up a fight. One thing is sure that our humankind which has probed the outermost reaches of the cosmos and the innermost secrets of the atom will not sit idly by while either of these two alternatives take place as a consequence of uncontrolled global warming.
On this fundamental issue which overwhelms all the other issues, America in the world must lead the way to do more in basic research, to develop alternative environment-friendly technologies and energy sources, and to help eliminate the practices of all nations which pollute even destroy the slender life-supporting ecosystems surrounding our planet without which there can be no life at all. At the very least, we can postpone the day of reckoning with fire or ice and in the process make our lives on this planet a great deal healthier. We have the knowledge. We must find the will.
The United Nations system in the world provides our humankind with methods to control our destinies in all matters except those factors in global warming beyond our control which flow from nature and not from man. But even here man's actions affect and condition nature and we are not entirely at the mercy of blind fate.
As regards the heart and soul of America in the world and the American dream, I quote from words of another poet Emma Lazarus: "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses longing to be free ... I lift my lamp beside the golden door." This torch, although tarnished at times, burns bright and it must continue so for the next millennium.
For the final words about America in the world we need only turn to the wisdom of Ben Franklin at the time of our struggle for independence more than 200 years ago, when he warned: "Unless we hang together we will surely hang apart." This lesson of history is especially pertinent as we seek to fulfill the vision of "One World."
In all things America is instrumental in the world for better or worse. Indeed, America is the principal "player" on the world scene together with its invention the United Nations and associated regional organizations and NGO's. In the slow patient process of building a world community "of laws and not of men" America may well become the world in the sense of being the nucleus from which a community of diverse but harmonious constitutional democracies may have evolved under the U.N. umbrella.
The United Nations in the world is a confederation of sovereign states. It operates by and through the agency of member governments which in turn directly or indirectly affect the peoples of those governments in a variety of ways. To build a world community for international peace and security, "of laws and not of men," requires nation-building" assistance programs of the United Nations and associated donors.
Also involved in this process are interpersonal or "people to people" relationships of a non-governmental nature world-wide. Such relationships foster cross-cultural understandings and the nurture of a common core of values making possible a consensus for democracy. At the level of trade, finance and industry the "privatization" of economies and the many international conglomerate enterprises cutting across national boundaries assist this process. As a result, the thousands of employees at management and technical levels of these enterprises on long-term assignments overseas share in this culture regardless of nationality. This is one aspect of today's "One World."
Intercultural relationships at the "grass-roots" are equally important for this process. Student exchanges for the full academic year or more are one of the most effective forms of such relationships, especially when scores of nations from every continent and culture are involved. Thousands of exchanges each year on a continuing basis supported by families, local communities and volunteer committees are essential for impact.
This is the mission and the method of AFS Intercultural Programs which were initiated over fifty years ago out of the AFS experience in World War II.
The American Field Service Intercultural Programs Inc., known world-wide simply as "AFS", has been concerned with the quest for peace since the inception of AFS International Scholarships in 1947. The 1997 AFS World Congress reformulated the AFS "Statement of Purpose" to include the goal of "a more just and peaceful world." This goal embodies the hopes and dreams of the AFS Drivers of World War II who were present at the creation of AFS International Scholarships in 1946.
In these final pages of my memories as an AFS Driver in World War II, I hope to correctly and fairly evaluate the remarkable growth, method and achievement by AFS in the final 50 years and more of our 20th Century as a new millennium draws near. I also hope to correctly explain the AFS relationship with our American government and with the United Nations in the quest for peace.
In its 1998 Annual Report, AFS proudly claims to be "The most experienced student exchange organization in service for over 50 years," as well as "one of the largest volunteer-based organizations." AFS of course is not alone. Section 3 above of this Part X outlined America's leadership in the world in pursuit of peace based upon our power and principles and in concert with the United Nations.
American and U.N. Agencies operate in the realm of public policy and action. AFS operates in the private sector at the "grass roots" where people affect the conditions within nations which in turn support peace. In short, the actions of the American government and the United Nations on the one hand, and AFS on the other are complementary. Public policy and action are of course vital, but there is a growing appreciation of the importance of "people power" to support policy and action for a more just and peaceful world.
The quest for perpetual peace within and between nations and peoples has intrigued saints, philosophers, statesmen since the dawn of history. And so the search involves moral, ethical, legal, political, popular dimensions.
The book of Genesis records that God initially bestowed Eden upon mankind made in His image, but to no avail. Isaiah prophesied a time when "nation shall not lift up sword against nation neither shall they learn war any more," thus far in the realm of prophesy only. In the words of the Prince of Peace it is "the peacemakers" who are numbered among those who are "blessed"; unhappily they have been out-numbered too often by the war-makers.
Plato called upon an enlightened monarch to undertake this quest for peace, affirming that "until philosophers are kings and kings are philosophers there can be no end to our troubles." Our troubles continue.
Thomas More (1478-1535), knighted and sainted, conceived in his book Utopia an idealized social order of reason and communal sharing where harmony would prevail. The name or concept remains, an utopian reality eludes.
In my view the philosopher Immanuel Kant (born in Prussia in 1724) comes as close as any to resolve this riddle in his work Perpetual Peace. He affirmed that governments that respect the rights of their own citizens within the nation, as vested in fundamental law, will not covet by acts of war the rights and properties of those of other nations. According to Kant such state governments must be representative republics and subject to a "law of nations founded on a federation of free states."
In short, Kant held that constitutional government was. a precondition for achieving perpetual peace. In this Kant had introduced a cultural dimension, the culture of constitutional democracy which builds and is based upon a consensus of core values, mutual understanding, unity and diversity, held by free citizens and developed in the fullness of time ---a significant mission of AFS "working for peace and understanding in a diverse world" (AFS Annual Report, 1998).
Kant's profound insight on conditions for peace was more in the realm of theory than of the practice in his day. Constitutional democracy was little known, although there had been Greco-Roman and Common Law precedents. In 1789 our "Founding Fathers" in America brought forth a "more perfect union" of thirteen states, a union now 50 strong. At the time of Kant's death (1804) this union was emerging in America into what would eventually become a constitutional democracy that would become the model for this form of government and would lead the world in the quest for peace.
Our Constitution and Bill of Rights today form the oldest written constitution on earth, and are in turn rooted in principles and practices centuries old. The core values, the "consensus" upon which these documents rest, were reaffirmed to the world by our Declaration of Independence. In Jefferson's words, they are "self-evident" truths such as equality, "inalienable rights," government based upon "the consent of the governed." These "truths" have become a clarion call for all nations in our world today which would be free, independent and self-governing. These "ideas" constitute the most significant aspects of our power.
These core values form a consensus upon which the creative diversity of our pluralistic American society rests making possible "majority rule and minority rights." They include the rule of law, human rights and fundamental freedoms, separation of church and state, the military under civilian control, representative governments, a free market system --- in short, the culture of constitutional democracy. Although at the outset our United States was not in all respects a constitutional democracy, the principles and procedures embodied in our Constitution and its amendments, and the courage of our people in the quest for democracy, made it inevitable. The bloodiest episode of our history was brought on to eliminate the curse of human slavery from our land.
Consensus building for democracy takes time. In this generational process our constitutional democracy has become the model for nation building for all peoples around the world. Currently the world-wide sweep of popular democratic movements seeking to break the chains of tyranny and dictatorship, some led by students as in China and Indonesia, is one of the most encouraging developments of our time.
The lead article on "Global Culture" of the National Geographic, August 1999 identified in our "technology-based culture around the globe ... many changes, such as the growing demand for democracy and human rights..."
Woodrow Wilson, when he brought America into World War I in order to "make the world safe for democracy" doubtless intended that it was democracy that would make the world safe. He was the world's spokesman for "self-determination of nations." In Kant's and Wilson's exegesis, democracies may be the building blocks for peace, but the defense of "international peace and security" also requires concerted action through international organization such as the United Nations. Kant himself had suggested "a federation of free states."
Wilson's Covenant for a League of Nations, drafted at the Versailles Conference following World War I in 1919, was an initial attempt by a statesman to bring all nations into a confederation under treaty obligations, a putative "rule of law" to resolve international disputes. President Franklin Roosevelt, who had served on Wilson's Cabinet, was the driving force behind the formation of the United Nations. Its Charter was approved by 50 states (June 26, 1945) now with virtually universal membership of all states, 185 members (1998). The United Nations is essentially the League reborn with improvements.
These two of America's greatest statesmen were the architects of what has become our world's first world-wide confederation of states committed by treaty obligations to the principles and methods of "collective security" as set forth in the Charter of the United Nations. It was no accident that the Charter was initially signed at San Francisco, and that the United Nations Headquarters is in New York City.
In the previous Section 3 of this Part X I have commented on the growth and universality of the United Nations system in the world not only in terms of numbers but also in terms of the enormous scope of its outreach into the principal issues and problems political, economic and social which confront our planet. The U.N. has taken on the most difficult problems and made it possible to keep the peace although unresolved problems abound on many fronts. Our American power within the United Nations "multilateral" system has often been the best way, sometimes the only way, to control and resolve such problems in the perpetual quest for "perpetual peace."
As noted above, the quest for peace is a two-way process involving on the one hand the United Nations system and member governments employing if needed the sanctions of armed "police action" for peacemaking and peacekeeping, and on the other hand the private "people to people" organizations such as AFS changing the world by changing people and creating conditions for peace from within. The relationships between these two systems are mutually supportive.
While the United Nations may be the principal player on the world scene in the quest for peace, it is not the only player. In Kant's dialectic, each member nation of a world community is duty bound to respect the well-being and the rights of its own citizens as well as those of their neighbors. There are also hundreds of citizens' organizations within and among our nations of the world concerned with all aspects of the quest for peace where people and "people-power" are involved. So much so that United Nations Agencies have established affiliations with the Non-Government Organizations (NGO's) which conduct operations on their own and which are invited to participate with the respective U.N. agencies in matters of their concern.
Ironically these developments in the quest for peace grew out of the most devastating of wars, World War II, which included within its years the unspeakable holocaust and was terminated by the use of the atom bomb which threatens the very existence of life on our planet. The risks of failure to establish perpetual peace have never been higher.
One may properly ask what does the above have to do with AFS, and specifically AFS Intercultural Programs? Ironically, the AFS Intercultural Programs grew out of two world wars, principally World War II. In the Front Matter above I touched on the beginnings of the "American Ambulance Field Service" in 1914 (pp. 11 - 12) as well as the founding of what was then the "AFS International Scholarships" in 1946 (pp. 20-22), only one year after the birth of the United Nations.
The manifold cross-cultural experiences of AFS Drivers in World War II out of which AFS Intercultural Programs was born under the leadership of our Director-General Stephen Galatti have been reported in this story, based upon my own experiences and experiences of others of my fellow Drivers especially John C. Cobb.
The growth of what is now "AFS Intercultural Programs" has been little short of phenomenal. In its first operating year (1947-48) only 52 students came to the United States from 11 countries; for the 1997-98 year there were more than 10,000 student exchanges involving the United States and more than 50 other countries around the world. These countries have become full-fledged AFS "partners" each with its own headquarters and organization providing intrastate leadership; all participate in the AFS World Congress. Both China and Russia are included on the roster of AFS partners, a unique achievement for AFS. The partnership system was initiated in 1989.
In the first decades of the program all participants from overseas came to the United States. With the development of the partner organizations exchanges or "flows" take place between respective partners themselves enhancing cultural interchange.
AFS/USA located in New York City took responsibility at the outset for the program world-wide. It is now one of the partner organizations; its leadership role has been replaced by an International Headquarters also in New York City.
Initially two former AFS Drivers, our Director-General in World War II Stephen Galatti followed by Arthur Howe who had commanded AFS 567 Company, headed the program through 1971. They were assisted by a dedicated staff from the war years. AFS Drivers continue to this day on the Board of Trustees. Inevitably executive, management and other staff positions at the top became filled by qualified and experienced professionals.
All in all, from inception through 1997 there have been a total of 248,072 student exchanges. AFS manages student exchanges of this magnitude thanks to over 100,000 volunteers each year at the "grass-roots" level of student, family, school, and community where authentic long-term intercultural relationships mature.
Impressive as these figures are, they do not begin to tell the real story behind the AFS numbers. Each one of those 248,072 student exchanges through 1997 represents in turn a score of the most caring most enduring of relationships known to us humans. Each AFS student participant becomes brother or sister, son or daughter of a new family; a new family linked in turn to his or her own family back home; each participant forges bonds of friendship with fellow school-mates and with teachers. This is the human side of what AFS really is. These human bonds have become a vast ever growing network of relationships bridging the generations and crossing the seas and boundaries that can divide us no more.
When Ward Chamberlin, one of our most respected, loved and decorated Drivers and Officers in World War II now an AFS Life Trustee addressed the 1993 AFS World Congress, he concluded with the following story as reported on p. 72 The AFS Story... 1914-1947-1997 (1997 AFS Norge ... ): "I remember when Dr. Barnard made his first heart transplant in South Africa, I thought: 'That's nothing unusual, we in AFS have been transplanting hearts for years.'"
In its far-flung endeavor, AFS is supported by hundreds of corporate and other donors world-wide helping to finance an annual budget of US $90 million (1998). In addition to its signature "Year Program," AFS has added programs for Community Service, for Teacher exchanges, for a single Semester, and to intensively address specific local needs.
AFS Intercultural Programs Inc., known simply as AFS, celebrated its first 50 years in 1997. During the first weekend of August 1947 AFS was the toast of New York City having conducted a spectacular 50th anniversary program. Participants came from around the world, many arriving from Norway on the QE2. George Broch, National Director AFS Norway, served on the Organizing Committee and was also Editor of the definitive beautifully illustrated and bound The AFS Story, Journeys of a Lifetime, 1914-1947-1997 (1997, AFS Norge ... ).
Although one of a multitude of private organizations concerned with the issues and problems of peace, AFS Intercultural Programs Inc. is unique in its focus on the high-school student in a full-year program; on the hosting by families to forge life-long relationships; on the schools and communities at the "grass-roots" in a variety of settings urban, suburban, rural. All of this depends upon volunteers who now include generations of AFS "alumni" returnees.
Some returnees occupy senior positions in the respective partner countries, and indeed helped to establish partner organizations. Other returnees, including a recent President of AFS International, serve at AFS International Headquarters. AFS returnees have advanced to senior levels in governments including Foreign Offices, schools and universities, business and finance, the professions. One returnee became elected President of his own country. All have a special link with AFS and therefore with each other.
As indicated by its name "Intercultural Programs" AFS is concerned with "culture." As technology shrinks our world and its peoples interact, cultural factors take center stage. Kipling's quip that "East is East and West is West and never the twain shall meet" has suffered the fate of the dinosaurs.
Symptomatic of this is the entire August 1999 issue of the National Geographic Society's magazine devoted to Global Culture. The lead article explains that "we are in the throes of a worldwide reformation of cultures, a tectonic shift of habits and dreams called... 'globalization'." In this the author states that some social scientists are convinced that "Western, often equated with American, influences will flatten every cultural crease..." Let us hope that the rich variety of cultures in our multicultural world will not be entirely "flattened." Indeed there is a fruitful blending and reinforcement of cultures "East" and "West" now taking place for mutual benefit.
This comment by social scientists on the impact of "Western influences" seems to bear out concepts advanced by Arnold Toynbee's monumental A Study of History (Oxford University, abridged, 1956). Finding in "challenge and response" the dynamic of history, Toynbee traced the rise and fall of the world's leading "civilizations" down to our present "Western Civilization" more dominant than the others,. and ever more so in the march of today's "globalization."
There is a rich diversity of distinct cultures worldwide ranging from primitive to advanced. An indicator or measure of this diversity are the 6,000 spoken languages reported by the Global Culture story. Many of these are limited to small and even vanishing populations of which it is estimated one-half will be gone within the next hundred years. Most of the remaining 3,000 languages are estimated to represent at best small populations also for the most part in decline.
Many of these populations and cultures are said to be primitive or traditional; they are composed of hunters, gatherers or planters rooted in a symbiotic relationship with nature. Their habitats, as for endangered animal species, are being swallowed up in the march of an urban-oriented technology-driven global culture.
The practices of these traditional, even primitive cultures can be beneficial in a number of ways such as for healing and use of herbal remedies; the preservation of threatened environments and endangered species; the defense of habitats such as the tropical rain forests that harbor biodiversity, absorb carbon, replace oxygen.
These cultures also enrich the art, dance and music of our world, and are the creators of exquisite crafts such as carpets. We Americans have learned at long last to respect the lifestyles of our own Native Americans. However, there are also practices of such cultures coming to light such as ritual or honor murder, stonings, enforced child marriage, slavery, female genital mutilation, scarification, polygamy which the more advanced or "Western" cultures do not tolerate.
On the other end of the culture spectrum, ten languages represent more than half of the world's population. Seven of these top ten are "Indo-European," and for one-fifth of the world population English is the first or second spoken language becoming a lingua franca of the world. These are measures of the commanding role of cultures which are Western oriented. This also confirms the Toynbee thesis of over half a century ago on the dominant position of Western Civilization in the world. It was Western Civilization that gave birth to constitutional democracy.
In its "Statement of Purpose" AFS has defined itself as an "international, voluntary, non-governmental ... organization that provides intercultural learning... to help people develop the knowledge, skills and understanding to create a more just and peaceful world." The reference to a "just and peaceful world" represents new wording adopted by the 1997 AFS World Congress.
AFS has also identified "Core Values and Attributes" essential for the fulfillment of its purpose whereby "AFS seeks to affirm faith in the dignity and worth of every human being ... It encourages human rights and fundamental freedoms without distinction as to race, sex, language, religion, or social status." In this way AFS "enables people to act as responsible global citizens working for peace ... in a diverse world."
AFS works with and through people at the "grass-roots" of family, school and community to bring about change and forge long-term interpersonal bonds. This Purpose, these Values, this method fittingly reflect the goals and beliefs of our AFS Drivers and the "way" of their fellow "soldiers" in World War II in the defense of freedom and for a better world.
By its "Statement of Purpose" AFS has emphatically joined in the age-old quest for peace. As AFS works with people at the grass-roots, this inevitably complements the role of the United Nations system in peacemaking and peacekeeping at the level of the nation-states of the world. The AFS encouragement of "respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms..." touches upon basic "core values" upon which constitutional democracy rests.
By means of AFS "people-to-people" relationships, popular consensus for the core values of constitutional democracy is defined and strengthened and the quest for world peace enhanced. We are joined full circle here with Kant's Perpetual Peace: and to some extent with Woodrow Wilson's League of Nations reborn as the United Nations. It is to be remembered that democratic nations are the building blocks for peace.
The 55 AFS partner nations (1998) reflect an emphasis on interchanges with and between democratic nations in the global outreach of AFS consistent with the importance of the values of democracy for world peace. Twenty-four of the partners are advanced constitutional democracies.
Twenty-eight of the partners have turned the corner towards democracy with some democratic elements in place such as written constitutions, elected governments, curbs on the military; however significant elements for democracy among them are often missing or ill-formed such as the rule of law, freedom of speech and press, separation of church and state, a viable free market system.
To its credit AFS has developed partner arrangements with China and with Russia, two of the principal nations of our world. Both have permanent member status on the U.N. Security Council. One is a former superpower still possessed of thousands of atomic warheads; the other embraces one-sixth of the world's population and seems determined to achieve superpower status. Russia has been accepted into the councils of the top seven industrial nations, the "G-7"; China seeks to qualify for membership in the World Trade Organization.
Both China and Russia have democratic elements and aspirations; each have undertaken reforms but from opposite ends. Russia, in my view, has correctly emphasized political reform together with some economic reform, but faces the almost impossible task to replace a failed communist system. Its shaky government requires substantial amounts of foreign aid.
China has experimented with the introduction of elements of capitalism comparable to 19th century laissez-faire while maintaining dictatorial political power at the top capable of the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989 of student-led demand for democracy. China has a demonstrated capacity for advanced missile technology, and also in the technology for producing atomic weapons.
The well-being of the populations of these two huge countries, world peace itself, depends in good measure upon the success of democratic reforms in each. Foreign assistance by United Nations agencies and donor nations, as well as the importance of keeping open trade and communications have helped to nurture this process. AFS Intercultural Programs at the very least has a "foot in the door" in China and Russia and has established good interpersonal relations involving teachers and students.
These contacts can make a difference over time. Russian students are now coming to the United States on the Year Program. After fifteen years of the AFS Visiting Teachers Program with China, the Chinese Ministry of Education endorsed for the first time in 1998 sending their high-school students abroad on the AFS Year Program. This is a significant achievement by AFS.
There is reverse evidence of the importance for peace of AFS "Core Values and Attributes," the values of constitutional democracy; this evidence is found in the behavior of nations where these values do not exist or the practice of them is curbed such as in Iran, Iraq, Serbia, Rwanda, Congo, Cambodia, Afghanistan, Syria, Somalia.
It is the power-grabbing corrupt dictatorships, fundamentalist fanatics, tribal overlords of these nations committing atrocities upon their own people and their neighbors that have brought on the regional wars and massacres of our time with risks of wider conflagration,
These risks have been contained thus far and in most cases by action of the United Nations and its principal partner and creator the United States of America. The most notorious of these situations in the final decade of the 20th Century has involved the Balkans of southern Europe where centuries of ethnic hatreds abound to be exploited by militant warlords.
These are failed states or communities kept under the heel of empires or dictatorships. They have never been able to establish a rule of law, develop respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms or for the processes of peaceful change. In this region constitutional democracy never had a chance.
First in Bosnia and Herzegovina, then in Kosovo the Balkan Serbs and Serbia engaged in "ethnic cleansing" of other nationalities in mass murder of men, women and children as odious as the genocide of Hitler's Nazis.
Under authority of the Security Council of the United Nations, the 19 member North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) led by the United States occupied Bosnia (Dayton Accords of December 1995), and then Kosovo to put an end to these atrocities and begin the slow process of reconciliation and humanitarian assistance for democratic nation building. It took 72 days of bombing by NATO led by USA before Serbia was forced to withdraw from Kosovo (June 4, 1999) and accede to a NATO peace-keeping force of 50,000 under Security Council resolutions.
The perpetuators of these atrocities, notably President Milosevic of Serbia, stand indicted by the International Tribunal of the Hague as war criminals for the violation of fundamental human rights. What is significant about the action by the U.N. and NATO in Kosovo and Bosnia is dramatic evidence of an emerging conscience of a world community which supports the core values of "human rights and fundamental freedoms." To repeat, these values are essential for constitutional democracy.
Based upon its purpose, values and method it follows that AFS Intercultural Programs has little to do with the thousands of primitive even traditional cultures of the National Geographic's Global Report.
AFS does affirm the "dignity" and "worth" of "all nations and cultures" and it is conceivable that AFS might arrange "outreach" for or with such primitive or traditional peoples in the processes of adaptation, even modernization. These cultures operate within the boundaries of sovereign states; they are not on their own. However in future AFS program expansion consideration may be given to small states and cultural entities entering the AFS -network as chapters within larger partners.
There are benefits from understanding and supporting such cultures. For example, the indiscriminate cutting of the trees and poaching of the animals in their habitats adversely affects all of us. These practices must be understood and controlled; people to people contacts are important to this end.
Thus far in its more than 50 years, AFS Intercultural Programs has been firmly established within and between the advanced constitutional democracies. This is consistent with the AFS commitment to "create a more just and peaceful world" and to the core democratic values essential for this. According to the 1998 Annual Report of AFS/International more than half of all participants in 1998 (5,253 of 10,149) were hosted in Western Europe (2,728) and the United States (2,525). The others were the Americas and the Caribbean (2,626); hosted in Asia, Pacific and Africa (2,069); and Eastern and Central Europe (201).
The AFS partners in 1998 included almost every nation of the Western Hemisphere, also Australia, most of the nations of Europe, six of the principal nations of Asia, but only three partners in Africa. Notable drop-outs have been India, Pakistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Jordan.
I am not privy to the policies and plans of AFS International, or proposals by the latest World Congress of the partners as AFS enters the next millennium. One thing is sure, as a dynamic organization AFS will not stand still.
There will certainly be an expansion of member partner countries and of participants. This is already under consideration for Africa where exchanges with advanced constitutional states can assist nascent democracy. Former members of the Soviet Union in Eastern Europe and Central Asia which are now independent states are potential targets; hopefully also there may be conditions for former partners to return. Questions concerning attainable numbers of participants, programs, and partners for feasible growth and maximum effect will have to be addressed and resolved.
Pertinent to questions of impact, AFS-USA conducted a survey in the United States reported in March 1999. As regards hosting of students for example, the findings were encouraging: nearly half of American adults know of a host family, one in ten families is interested in hosting, sixty percent of high schools are involved on some program, twenty-eight percent of the 20,000 high-schools in the U.S. are interested in increased hostings; when informed, nearly one-fifth of teens are interested in taking part in student exchange. AFS-USA reported a total of 1,200 local volunteer teams around the country
On the face of it, it would seem that AFS could readily surpass in its next 50 years the number of 55 partner nations to date. As regards numbers of student exchanges, AFS-USA in. its "Strategic Plan 1999-2001" hopes to achieve a three to five percent growth in hosting, and a seven to eight percent growth in sending.
This raises the important question of priorities. Keeping in mind the AFS commitment to "create ... a more peaceful world," the concentration of almost half of all participants each year (4382 out of 10,149) coming from the advanced constitutional democracies of Western Europe and the United States would appear to have less impact upon democratic institution building than higher concentrations coming from the less developed countries.
It follows, therefore, that an AFS expansion into Africa, Eastern Europe, the Balkans, and Central Asia with incremental programming for the Americas, Russia and China involves participants from states in various stages of democratic development. Increasing the numbers of participants each year from these states into the United States or other advanced constitutional democracies supports the process of forming democratic nations as the demonstrated building blocks for world peace. More needs to be done in those "front lines" where the people are in the beginning stages of democracy.
To be sure, there are important educational and other advantages to cross-cultural experiences which involve the rich heritage of Western Civilization. As the United States and Europe increasingly integrated by commerce, technology, language and culture lead our world into its next millennium Western Europe and the United States will always be popular locations for students and other AFS participants.
Clearly there will be refinements and improvements by AFS for existing programs, the introduction of new ones, and increasing professional interaction by AFS with its U.N. affiliates and other private organizations sharing in the elusive quest for peace. The 1998 AFS World Congress addressed the theme "Shaping our Vision for the Future." At this Congress "AFS's Three Year Plan" and "Defining our Vision for 2010" were two of the principal topics as reported by the AFS Journal The Janus (January, 1999).
To repeat, I am not privy to the councils of AFS where policies and priorities are formed based on the evaluation of past experience, present needs and opportunities. Whatever the future may bring, AFS Intercultural is secure in its dreams, its hopes, and its achievements far beyond the wildest expectations of the AFS Drivers of World War II many of whom together with "Steve" Galatti were present at its creation.
Our world is a dangerous place made so by ethnic and religiously-sanctioned fundamentalism, tribalism, extremism compounded by power-mad regional dictatorships committing atrocities against human rights and with access to weapons of mass destruction. These are dangerous ebb-tides which must be contained, and they must not deter the development of constitutional democracies in all regions of our world grown interdependent by technological advances fueling economic growth.
To build these democracies within the framework of our now virtually universal United Nations, there must be a consensus of core values as well as respect for cultural diversities and intercultural exchanges. This process requires defense of human life and civil rights, the rule of law within and between nation states, elected governments subject to constraints of free speech and press, the separation of church and state, free and open markets and productive investments subject however to regulations and controls to address problems of health, poverty and the environment. Only in this way will there be diversity and unity, the unity of world peace.
AFS Intercultural Programs world-wide which operate on a people-to-people basis of student and other exchanges at the grass-roots of the advanced and developing nations, builds understanding of and consensus for the core values upon which democracy and world peace depend. In its world-wide outreach together with like-minded organizations and its United Nations affiliates, AFS complements the challenging peacemaking and peacekeeping operations of the United Nations and its associated "regional arrangements" such as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) associated with it.
The United States of America, our world's only remaining superpower, has the responsibility of leadership to secure peace among the nations, while using our power within the framework of the United Nations collective security system global and regional. Fittingly the American Field Service Intercultural Programs with its international headquarters in New York City and partner nation organizations worldwide is sharing mightily in America's leadership responsibilities.
From small beginnings more than 50 years ago, "AFS" has become the world's most experienced student exchange organization and one of the world's largest volunteer-based organizations changing the world through changing people. As in World War II, AFS operates in the "front lines" at the cutting edge where the people are. It is the generations of gifted AFS participant students, apostles of the AFS world view, who will lead the way to shape our world's destiny along the paths of peace.
Many of our gifted, courageous AFS participant students, now graduate "AFSers," have already assumed leadership roles in their respective countries. Building upon their own experience as "AFSers," they have also built Partner organizations and encouraged the growth of AFS worldwide as the number of AFS Partners continues to grow.
Also most importantly the numbers of AFS volunteers at the "grass-roots" and at all levels of organization continues to grow, although of course AFS now relies upon dedicated professionals for senior administrative positions.
The statistics about our AFS volunteers are staggering and cold: there are now over 100,000 volunteers each year worldwide and counting. But the reality is warm and inspiring, putting a human face on all that AFS does and is. It is the volunteers at the community level and for regional and national support that make AFS "work." There would be no families to host students, no local and regional organizations and non-corporate donations, no AFS World Congress without the action and spirit of the volunteer.
We Drivers were also called volunteers; we were given a small allowance and had no post-war benefits although some of us also fulfilled Selective Service obligations as Drivers. There were only 2,196 of us in World War II in contrast to the 100,000 AFS volunteers in communities worldwide in the final years of the 20th century. We few made a difference --- think what 100,000 can do!
The spirit of the volunteer is the spirit and reality of AFS. As I conclude my commentary on AFS Intercultural Programs I wish to pay tribute to today's AFS volunteer by example of the services of one volunteer well known to me at the community level. In my view, there can be no better example of the AFS volunteer than Carol (Mrs. Richard) Norman of Centerville Massachusetts; she is currently Cape Cod Representative in the AFS Massachusetts Bay Area.
An educator, Carol was a founder of the Town of Barnstable AFS Committee in 1969 and has been its President off and on and leading spirit ever since. In 1973 the Normans hosted their first AFSer from Austria in the Year program; they recently visited her in Austria, and they have hosted three others among the more than forty that have come to Barnstable over the years since 1969.
In 1978 Carol Norman became AFS Representative for the entire Cape Cod District, one of seven Districts of the Massachusetts Bay Area organization; all are volunteers. Massachusetts Bay area is in turn supported by the AFS Northeast Regional Service Center located at Springfield Massachusetts. This is one of a number of nation-wide regional components of AFS-USA. The Cape Cod District, led by the historic towns of Barnstable, Chatham, Falmouth, Orleans has hosted hundreds of AFSers over the years. Carol assisted by two other outstanding volunteers, has personally met and counseled many of them; she also participates in orientation sessions for all the students.
Carol is the living face of AFS. Tireless, dedicated with husband "Dick" at her side, she lives for AFS day and night, weekend and weekday. Her activities for AFS are numberless; they include garage sales; intercultural dinners; encouraging and backstopping host families; counselling and troubleshooting; taking students on excursions; organizing cook-outs and special events for our AFSers, their families and friends; presentations of gifts and awards at the conclusion of the student Year programs as well as the administrative details of managing a local and district entity. The Norman home is home away from home for AFS.
I first met Carol 20 years ago after I had retired from the U.S. Foreign Service. Appropriately, it was during an evening adult education class at the High School. She was raising funds for AFS by sales of coffee and donuts during our class "breaks." After I confessed to having been an AFS Driver she nabbed me. I have been on the Barnstable Board ever since --it is impossible to say "no" to Carol Norman.
Modest, unassuming, asking nothing for herself, giving all for AFS, what is most remarkable about her never-ending service as a volunteer for AFS is the never-ending joy, the radiance, the sunshine she radiates wherever she goes; there could not be a better "model" for my tribute to the AFS volunteer without which the exchanges among more than 50 countries around the world for more than 10,000 courageous AFS participants annually could not take place.
Thanks to Carol Norman and the 100,000 and more AFS volunteers in communities throughout our world, and thanks to the 10,000 courageous AFS student participants they support each year, "Perpetual Peace" is now less dream and more reality. The engines of war are being contained by those who man the ramparts of peace.