バートランド・ラッセル『ヒューマン・ソサエティ－倫理学から政治学へ』第２部[「情熱の葛藤」- 第２章- Human Society in Ethics and Politics, 1954, Part II, chapter 9
* 原著：Human Society in Ethics and Politics, 1954* 邦訳書：バートランド・ラッセル(著),勝部真長・長谷川鑛平(共訳)『ヒューマン・ソサエティ－倫理学から政治学へ』(玉川大学出版部,1981年７月刊。268+x pp.)
『ヒューマン・ソサエティ』第２部「情熱の葛藤」- 第９章「 」n.4 |
Human Society in Ethics and Politics, 1954, part II: The Conflict of Passions, chapter 9: Steps topwards a stable peace, n4 |
|
|
What can be done to lessen mutual suspicion? For the reasons that we have just been considering, it is difficult for either the Communist or the anti-Communist bloc to take the first step. The first step must, I think, be taken by neutral Powers. They have two advantages: one of these is that they cannot be accused of cowardice, the other, which is even more important, is that they can speak to Governments without being suspected of hostility. In Western countries, public opinion is still a force. But to have any influence upon Russia, it is necessary to be able to persuade the Russian Government -- and only Governments can hope to do this with any effect. I should like to see the Government of India appoint a Commission, consisting solely of Indians, who should be eminent politicians, economists, scientists or military men, the purpose of the Commission being to investigate in a wholly neutral spirit the evils to be expected if the cold war became hot, evils not by any means confined to the belligerents but afflicting neutrals also, though probably in a lesser degree. I should wish the Government of India to present this report to the Governments of all the Great Powers, and to invite them to express either agreement or disagreement with its forecasts. I think that, if the work of the Commission were adequately performed, disagreement would be very difficult. It might in this way become possible to persuade Governments on both sides that neither side could hope to gain by aggression. I do not myself believe that at the present moment either side contemplates aggression, but each side suspects that the other may do so, and this suspicion does almost as much harm as if it were well-founded. What neutrals would have to achieve is to allay this suspicion and to persuade each side to a genuine belief that the other side will only fight if attacked. I do not know whether, in the immediate future, it would be possible to bring about this belief on both sides, but I think it would become much easier to bring about if it were backed by an authoritative neutral investigation demonstrating without bias how little either side could hope to gain by aggression. The arguments of self-interest are so obvious, so conclusive and so overwhelming that, if they were forcibly presented by a Power standing outside the conflict, they ought after a period of consideration to produce their effect both in the East and in the West. |