Peace, War and Consciousness

TRANSCEND MEMBERS, 20 May 2024

Robert Kowalczyk and Dr. Klaus Schlichtmann – TRANSCEND Media Service

The Normative Current of Peace
(AAPI) Applied Amplified Peace Intelligence

By Robert Kowalczyk

18 May 2024 – From 20 Jan 2020, when the COVID virus was first identified in Wuhan, China, through the start of the “New” Ukraine War on 24 Feb 2022, followed by armed conflict between Israel and Hamas-led Palestine on 7 Oct 2023, to the recent headline on The Guardian website, The Destruction of the Human Experience, a shocking, eye-catching news advertisement; all these events have kept our world holding its breath. While the once hopeful ideals of “Peace” continue to be devalued and dimmed as a most essential concept, hope, and cure for ills of the current chaotic world we share.

As the short advert video above clearly demonstrates, both words and worlds are crushed to death to enhance further corporate profit and power, all part of the New Normative Current of “Greed is Good” — a creed of the global Neoliberal Capitalist movement.

Where is there any hope for diplomacy and agreement, or for a much-needed cessation of continually more freshly printed money to create more advanced armaments — the sly Pied Piper for a now partially awake, confused, apathetic, highly endangered world.

Over the past two years, Transcend Media Service has published a series of articles based on “The Normative Current” and “(AAPI) Applied Amplified Peace Intelligence.” These thoughts were shared and composed by Dr. Klaus Schlichtmann and Robert Kowalczyk. These articles appeared in this chronological order: The Normative Current transcend.org/tms/2023/05/the-normative-current/ , Peace, War and Consciousness transcend.org/tms/2023/12/peace-war-and-consciousness, Threading Peace Together transcend.org/tms/2024/02/threading-peace-together/. This current article is the fourth.

From feedback on these articles, we’ve been asked a number of both interested, interesting and significant questions, including, “What does consciousness mean for you?” Perhaps this central query is best answered with a painting by Pierre Nagley, followed by a number of related thoughts found below the image.

Searching For Consciousness – Pierre Nagley

“We live as we dream, alone.” — Joseph Conrad

As both the painting and Conrad’s words express, each human has both a shared, but also uniquely individual consciousness. Some are much more fully aware of the realities we all need to share, many others less interested in the world outside of their own dreams, and some, particularly among those with ever-increasing or established Power, are “non-conscious” — purposely unaware / apathetic.

The Apathetics are those who simply don’t get it, and don’t care to try. Many of our current global politicians easily fall into this category, a fact that enhances the wealthy and powerful until they fall, bringing down many others and eventually the whole stage. A great part of this is due to an essential and sinister part of the information revolution we’ve all been going through over the past 20 years or more.

While deeply intrigued by that search for consciousness, our world seems to have become more separated and less caring about the Other, whether that may be within the embrace of one’s partner, family, community, or country, as technology makes life both much easier and more sinister at the same time.

The creation of Artificial Intelligence was conducted by humans and since it can be focused on all factors of the human mind and consciousness, perhaps it can be used to promote us all towards a safer, more stable, and less aggressive world. A renewed and refreshed home where Power itself has no place, and is no longer the golden key we have been taught to find. Thus, making the diplomacy, cooperation, and sincere appreciation and care of our environment and societies a true reality.

The United Nations highly favors this road forward shown by its program of A.I. for Good with Secretary General Antonio Guterres being one of its main promoters. The involvement of a great number of experts and countries in this effort has demonstrated these issues have been well debated and assessed, and now wait to be employed. These factors are proof that, aside from the seemingly less focused, less serious national efforts, the United Nations is leading the challenge to transform the fear of A.I. into the great promises it offers our world.

Thus, Klaus and I have focused our efforts on an enhanced effort of peace restructuring and rebuilding titled AAPI (Applied and Amplified Peace Intelligence). A more in-depth explanation follows below.

Dr. Klaus Schlichtmann has shown this through The Normative Current that flows through history clearly establishing a humanity that has been on a search for peace for centuries and has from time to time come closer to that goal.

That search includes the recognition of a world federation built on the peace clauses in main constitutions, such as Japan’s Article 9, Germany’s Article 24, France’s Constitutional Preamble of 1948, and Italy’s Article 11, along with countless other countries that have articles and passages towards the possibility of building a world federation of peaceful relations among nations. These would be more in synch with our modern times and challenges than is our current United Nations with its as yet unrealized potentials.

Dr. Schlichtmann also points to evidence of The Normative Current in a long variety of historical quotations from luminaries, such as:

• Erasmus of Rotterdam (c. 1466/1469 – 1536): “The most disadvantageous peace is better than the most just war.”
• John Amos Comenius (1592 – 1670): “We are all citizens of one world, we are all of one blood … Let us have but one end in view, the welfare of humanity…”
• Víctor Hugo (1802 – 1885): “To love is to act … Peace is the virtue of civilization. War is its crime.”

In addition, the Normative Current offers a list of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDG), which clearly point toward a more peaceful and balanced world. See the links above.

All these achievements and more have earned Dr. Schlichtmann the honor of twice being short-listed for the Noble Peace Prize. This attention has come from his lifetime work, with a focus on Japan’s war-abolishing Article 9 as the way that other countries can follow, as described above and in the listed links. His efforts have also led to the articles in this series. Dr. Schlichtmann has also done some interesting work with both a past and the latest online version of Chatbot, simplified models of our AAPI, which he will now comment on in the next section.

____________________________________

By Klaus Schlichtmann

I have tested some apps like ChatGPT 3.5 and 4.0. The former is free and slightly simpler than version 4.0, which can only be used once a day and for a single question. But version 3.5 also does its job very well and I find it to be absolutely trustworthy. However, achieving optimal results depends heavily on how the question is worded, how detailed it is, and how much the questioner already knows about a particular topic. To give an example, I asked the following question (performed using the less sophisticated version of ChatGPT):

Q: In 1949 the US Congress passed a Resolution calling for the development of the United Nations into a world federation. Did they know that the new West-German Constitution provided for a means to start the process?

A: In 1949, the US Congress passed a resolution advocating for the development of the United Nations into a world federation, while emphasizing the need for stronger international cooperation and governance structures to ensure peace and stability. This resolution, known as Senate Concurrent Resolution 56, reflected the aspirations for a more unified global order in the aftermath of World War II.

Regarding the new West German Constitution (the Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany), which came into effect in May 1949, it included a provision that allowed for the possibility of transferring sovereign powers to international institutions. Article 24 of the Basic Law states that Germany may transfer sovereign powers to international organizations, a provision intended to facilitate Germany’s integration into international and supranational structures.

It is likely that U.S. lawmakers were aware of this provision in the West German Constitution, as the drafting of the Basic Law was a significant international event, and its content was closely monitored by the Allied powers, including the United States. The inclusion of such a provision in the Basic Law would have been seen as aligning with broader efforts to promote international cooperation and governance, as advocated by the U.S. Congress in their resolution. Thus, the development of the United Nations into a world federation would have been consistent with the provisions of the new West German Constitution, which allowed for the transfer of sovereign powers to international bodies.

In this way, the UN security system (collective/common security) would be implemented. The German diplomat Ernst von Weizsäcker (1882-1951) agreed. In 1950, Russia proposed Security Council Resolution 85, tabled by Andrei Gromyko, aiming to implement Article 106 of the UN Charter to achieve genuine UN collective security to be able to adequately address the conflict in Korea. When this was rejected and the United States acted unilaterally, the USSR changed sides. And in May 1953 Great Britain wanted to pass a resolution similar to the American one and with practically the same wording: “In the opinion of this House, it should be a fundamental object of the foreign policy of Her Majesty’s Government to support and strengthen the United Nations. and to strive for its development into a world federation…” But it was too late, a military NATO was already on its way and preferred.

Q: How did the preference of NATO and the failure to confer primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security on the UN endanger the peace of the world?

A: The preference for NATO over the United Nations and the failure to confer primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security on the UN had several implications that could potentially endanger the peace of the world:

1. Bypassing the UN framework: By prioritizing NATO as a security alliance over the United Nations, there was a risk of bypassing the established international framework for collective security. The UN was created with the primary goal of maintaining international peace and security through multilateral cooperation and diplomacy. Neglecting the UN’s role in favor of regional military alliances like NATO could weaken the effectiveness of global efforts to prevent conflicts and promote peaceful resolutions.
2. Undermining international cooperation: Overreliance on military alliances like NATO at the expense of the UN could undermine broader international cooperation and consensus-building. The UN serves as a platform for dialogue among nations and a forum for addressing global challenges through diplomacy and peaceful means. By marginalizing the UN’s role in maintaining peace and security, there is a risk of diminishing the importance of international cooperation and diplomacy in resolving conflicts.
3. Heightened tensions and conflicts: Depending heavily on military alliances like NATO without strong backing from the UN could potentially exacerbate tensions and conflicts in regions where different alliances and interests intersect. Regional military alliances may have their own specific agendas and priorities, which could lead to diverging approaches to conflict resolution and peacekeeping. This lack of unified international action under the auspices of the UN could contribute to increased instability and the escalation of conflicts.
4. Erosion of the UN’s authority: Failure to confer primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security on the UN could erode the authority and credibility of the organization as the preeminent global body tasked with promoting peace and security. If powerful nations prioritize regional alliances over the UN, it may weaken the UN’s ability to fulfill its mandate and address global security challenges effectively.

In conclusion, the preference for NATO over the UN and the failure to uphold the UN’s central role in maintaining international peace and security could undermine global stability, weaken international cooperation, increase the risk of conflicts, and erode the authority of the United Nations as the cornerstone of the international system for peace and security.

Since the general public knows little about the intricacies and the possibilities which the UN Charter offers, the following question should be of interest:

Q: The UN Charter in Article 106 provides for the transition from the present state where all nations are armed to a state where nations have disarmed to the minimum stipulated in Article 26. It was assumed that, once it was initiated, the transition could take about 5 years. In these five years nations one by one would have to confer primary responsibility for the maintenance of International peace and security “by law” on the UN Security Council to start the process and define its policing powers.

A: Article 106 of the UN Charter indeed outlines a provision for the transition from a state where nations are armed to a state where nations have disarmed to the minimum stipulated in Article 26. This transition was assumed to take approximately five years, during which nations would confer primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security “by law” on the UN Security Council. This would entail defining the Council’s policing powers to initiate and oversee the disarmament process.

Furthermore, Article 106 also states that the Security Council may also call upon member states to assist in the enforcement of its decisions, including the use of armed force if necessary. This provision underscores the importance of member states’ cooperation in achieving global disarmament and maintaining international peace and security.

It is clear from Article 106 that the United Nations recognizes the need for a structured and coordinated approach to disarmament in order to prevent conflicts and promote peace. By giving the Security Council the authority to oversee and enforce the disarmament process, the UN aims to ensure that nations adhere to their commitments and obligations to reduce their military capabilities.

In conclusion, Article 106 of the UN Charter provides a framework for the gradual transition towards global disarmament and the maintenance of international peace and security. By upholding the principles outlined in this provision, member states can work together to create a safer and more peaceful world for future generations.

A priority for all UN-Member states, according to a 1968 General Assembly Resolution, should have been the “Teaching in schools of the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations…”

If politicians do not take measures to educate their public about peace and how the UN works, and if they are incapable of organizing peace in a meaningful way, perhaps A.I. can help. Here is another Q&A, using ChatGPT 3.5, that points in the right direction:

Q: Can artificial intelligence be used for peace, finding existing laws and legal solutions which the UN-Charter and national constitutions propose, but which have not yet been implemented?

A: Yes, AI can be utilized to analyze vast amounts of legal data from the United Nations Charter, national constitutions, and related legal documents to identify existing laws and provisions that have not been fully implemented. By employing natural language processing and machine learning algorithms, AI systems can sift through legal texts, identify discrepancies, and suggest potential solutions. However, the implementation of these solutions would still require human oversight and decision-making, considering the complexities of legal and political contexts.

Interestingly, the UNO supports the use of AI for peaceful purposes, including achieving the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). On July 18, 2023 the UN held the first Security Council Meeting focussing on “Opportunities and Risks for International Peace and Security” regarding AI. The event has been recorded. A two-hours video is available at https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1j/k1ji81po8p.

At the meeting António Guterres, Secretary-General of the United Nations, compared AI to the invention of the printing press, observing that—while it took more than 50 years for printed books to become widely available across Europe—“ChatGPT reached 100 million users in just two months.”

Among others, Zeng Yi, Professor and Director of the International Research Center for AI Ethics and Governance, Institute of Automation, Chinese Academy of Sciences in Beijing, at the meeting suggested to use “AI for Biodiversity, Climate Actions, and AI for Peace,” saying: “As an essential pillar of SDGs, we should push AI forward for international peace, and reduce, not enhance, security and safety risks.” Zeng Yi also suggested that, ”the UN Security Council consider the possibility of having a working group on AI for peace and security … The United Nations must play a central role to set up a framework on AI development and governance, to ensure global peace and security.”

The best approach, António Guterres said, would be to address existing challenges while also creating capacity to respond to future risks. He underlined  the need to “work together for AI that bridges social, digital and economic divides—not one that pushes us further apart.”

_____________________________________________

Robert Kowalczyk is a member of the TRANSCEND Network for Peace Development Environment. He is former Professor and Chair of the Department of Intercultural Studies in the School of Art, Literature and Cultural Studies of Kindai University, Osaka, Japan. Robert has coordinated a wide variety of projects in the intercultural field and is currently the International Coordinator of Peace Mask Project. He has also worked in cultural documentary photography and has portfolios of images from Korea, Japan, China, Russia and other countries. He has been a frequent contributor to Kyoto Journal. Contact can be made through his website portfolio: robertkowalczyk.zenfolio.com

Dr. Klaus Schlichtmann is author of numerous scholarly articles and several books, including Japan in the World. Shidehara Kijuro, Pacifism and the Abolition of War (Lexington 2009), and A Peace History of India. From Ashoka Maurya to Mahatma Gandhi (Vij Books 2016). Born in Hamburg, in the 1960s he traveled overland to India, and returning to Germany he became a peace activist and environmentalist. As a world federalist and a member of the International Peace Research Association (IPRA) he participated in many international conferences. Having received a scholarship to do research in Japan, his Ph.D. dissertation on Shidehara and Article 9 was published in German in 1997.  He can be reached at kschlichtmann@law.email.ne.jp  Contact: klaus.san@gmail.com

This article originally appeared on Transcend Media Service (TMS) on 20 May 2024.

Anticopyright: Editorials and articles originated on TMS may be freely reprinted, disseminated, translated and used as background material, provided an acknowledgement and link to the source, TMS: Peace, War and Consciousness, is included. Thank you.

If you enjoyed this article, please donate to TMS to join the growing list of TMS Supporters.

Share this article: email mastodon facebook 🔗 copy link

This work is licensed under a CC BY-NC 4.0 License.

There are no comments so far.