All values are negotiable in the face of reality, they need to be to function, and this includes pacifism. It is a principle. It is a guide. It sets a priority - the priority of the avoidance of the use of force. But we also have the duty of the protection of others, especially the weak and vulnerable. For instance, to stand by and watch a child being tortured and not to intervene because intervening would entail the use of force, would clearly be wrong.
Consider the Iranian Embassy siege in London in 1980. Once the hostage takers had started carrying out their threat to kill a hostage every few hours if their demands were not met by killing one of the hostages and throwing his body out of the building, then it became clear that the only way to save the remaining hostages would be by the use of force. To have continued the pacifist approach of negotiation after that point would have been a moral failure in the light of the duty to protect.
Values are not inflexible guides to action like iron rails laid across reality that require you to travel along them regardless of what is encountered. They are more like compass bearings that guide you in the right direction around the obstacles that are encountered.
For a pacifist force is the last resort, and the minimisation of its use is the aim. The inverse is the militarist, for whom the use of force, or the threat of force, is a sign of strength and for whom the maximisation of threat the aim. The pacifist negotiates, the militarist coerces or overawes. A pacifist is saddened by the use of force and feels that its use is the result of the failure of other paths. A militarist extols the use of threats and of force and feels justified, or even glorified, by their use.
The American Supreme Court has enshrined the militarist view by confirming the right of citizens to possess guns. The British have enshrined pacifism by outlawing their possession. Americans take it as their right to commit an act, that of possessing a hand gun, which would render their British counterpart liable to five years imprisonment should they even attempt to do so. A militarist version of liberty as opposed to pacifist version of liberty.
The real issue maybe where the default is set. For instance, the American police routinely carry guns, only setting them aside in special circumstances. The British police routinely do not have guns, only carrying them in special circumstances.
Likewise, many forms of self-defence rely on deflecting an aggressor’s force against them rather than on initiating the force. This is much of the basis of Judo and of Tai Chi amongst others. Aikido, especially, teaches special concern for the wellbeing of an attacker; their attack should be effectively repulsed and their efforts should be neutralised without any harm being done to them.
Likewise, I think there is a question of priorities of investment. Do we invest more time, effort and money in militarism or in pacifism? To which do we give the greater esteem? Which do we celebrate more in our arts and entertainment? Which path do we bring our young up to admire?
It is not that force is never necessary or that there is not some need for martial preparedness or training, or even occasionally intervention (Kosovo – where it was used effectively to stop ethnic cleansing: Rwanda – where, perhaps, it should have been used to stop ethnic cleansing but was not). It is rather a question of priority. The militarist makes much play by use of some cleaver double think that suggests that excessive military investment and preparedness is warranted by the very occasional necessity of resorting to the use of force. A case of massive over-preparation? That overspend necessitates a reciprocal massive underspend on what may be a far more effective and constructive use of resources.
Here is a site that may provide some food for thought.
A slight aside, but reflecting on the “Are there times when pacifism is not useful?” I wonder about the somewhat utilitarian perspective implied. The questions arise, useful to whom and useful to what end? Although, it does function to remind of the relativity of all values.
