Is it naive of us to talk about peace when every television radiates the devastation of Iraq, the birth place of civilisation?

Is it childish to hope to create a peace consciousness in a world when all available historical evidence shows human beings are by nature violent and vicious?

In denial

Arthur Miller has observed that human beings have such a profound longing for meaning and purpose that we find it almost unbearable to think that society, its leaders, and world governments have lost their minds - so we deny the evidence.

The record of human behaviour overflows with continuous violence. People idealise ancient Greece and its great civilisation and thinkers, yet the majority of Greeks were barbarians, sexist, believed in slavery, and threw handicapped children to the lions.

Human beings have been racist, bigoted, ethnocentric, and tribal throughout history. We are the o­nly species that has devastated the ecological balance of the planet.

We have committed murder in the name of god. We have created weapons of mass destruction. The most powerful countries have used missiles coated with depleted uranium, which can cause leukaemia in children.

Plutonium, a by-product of our nuclear industries, seeps daily deeper and deeper into the soil and will soon enter the food chain. And these are but two of many dangerous chemicals that threaten us. How can we be naive enough to say: ''We are going to create a peace consciousness.''

What we see o­n CNN and the other news networks is reality TV competing for ratings. Were it not for the fact that hundreds of thousands of people are going to be affected by the war and many hundreds will die, including children, we might as well all make popcorn and enjoy the show. This is what our culture has become.

Looking at interishness

As long as the policies of governments across the world are based o­n self-interest and greed there can be no hope. The nations at war and their leaders may appear to be enemies but they are in fact implicit allies: they are allies in the destruction and devastation of humanity and the propagation of misery and suffering.

In this situation no amount of angry activism against war is going to help because angry activism is still anger and o­nly adds to the turbulence of the world.

If we recognise that consciousness is a field which modern science is just beginning to understand, there may be some reason for hope. More than 2,000 years ago Buddha said: "We are inter-beings that inter-arise in the interishness, and there is o­nly the interishness."

If we cannot see our inter-beingness but think o­nly in terms of me and mine - my economic interests, my safety - then no amount of military power can provide security. The idea that military strength can bring security in simply wrong.

The opposite is true: the greater the military strength, the greater the insecurity, which is a product of fear. True security comes from an expanded sense of self in which greed is replaced by sharing, arrogance by humility, aggression by nurturing, demands by conciliation.

This can happen o­nly if our leaders emphasise service and not profit-making, co-operation and not competition, open hearts instead of open markets; when violence and fear are replaced by compassion, humility, peace, and social justice and we identify with the human family instead of the nation or the tribe.

If we join forces then maybe it is not so naive to hope that we can change things.

If the media, entertainment industry, and educational institutions start to focus o­n building a peace consciousness that will render military power irrelevant and make the merchants of death and destruction the pariahs of society, then we will see things change.

Perhaps we can create an environment where nationalism itself becomes an out-moded idea. The philosopher Krishnamurti said 50 years ago, ''Nationalism is tribalism.''

Einstein said, ''Nationalism is an infantile disease; it is the measles of humanity.'' Eric Fromm said, ''Nationalism is our form of incest - it is our idolatry, and patriotism is its cult.''

These would be dangerous statements to make in today's environment, yet they were spoken by figures held in high esteem by society and civilisation.

Interesting experiment

Perhaps we can create a consciousness where to tell the truth is to be a true humanitarian, where we can go beyond national identity and see ourselves as members of the human race and children of this planet, where different nationalities and tribes are considered not as reasons for conflict but as parts of an indivisible eco-system.

Then perhaps we will understand that the way we treat others is the way we treat ourselves.

An anthropologist friend of mine said that if insects disappeared from the planet, all life here would cease in five years, but if human beings disappeared, life would flourish in five years.

Perhaps Mother Earth is saying, ''You know, this human being, it was an interesting experiment, but it didn't work. Let's move o­n.''

Maybe that is our fate. Maybe it isn't. The world waits with bated breath for the lovers to lead us out from this nightmare. - IPS


DEEPAK CHOPRA is founder of the Chopra Center, member of the board of directors of the Alliance for the New Humanity, and author of How to Know God.