introduction

This article introduces Raymond Aron's statement that "peace is impossible, war is unlikely" in the context of the nuclear weapons era, and analyzes the complex state of "no war, no peace" in the world under nuclear deterrence. Arong explored the internal logic of martial arts and peace, as well as the dialectical relationship between non war and discord. Under the deterrence of nuclear weapons, countries tend to upgrade their weapons and adopt nuclear deterrence strategies, both yearning for peace and fearing war, forming a fragile balance in international relations. Aron emphasized the importance of the principle of prudence, delving into the root causes of war and exploring feasible ways to achieve peace, in order to help the international community overcome the dilemma of neither war nor peace and build a more just and peaceful world.

1、 Why is' Shangwu '' peaceful '?

Thoroughly explored Raymond Aron's comprehensive exploration and detailed discourse on the pursuit of peace in the nuclear weapons era. Aron defined peace as the sustained suspension of violent forms between political units, and divided peace into three categories based on power relations: balanced peace, hegemonic peace, and imperial peace. He pointed out that the emergence of nuclear weapons has changed the mode of war, and peace based on terror has become a new principle, which is to achieve peace through mutual fear caused by weapons of mass destruction capable of destroying each other. Aron analyzed the different arguments of seeking peace through fear in the nuclear weapons era, believing that the extreme version of the spread of thermonuclear weapons is the least likely to come true, while the moderate version of nuclear armed countries not using thermonuclear weapons due to fear of retaliation is the most likely. He emphasized that the emergence of nuclear weapons directly affects the political decision-making and behavior of countries, maintaining a delicate balance among nuclear armed states. Aron also proposed a theoretical model for the future world, believing that a world controlled by four or five countries with thermonuclear weapons would actually be more peaceful. Overall, it elaborates on Aron's profound insights and theoretical contributions to the pursuit of peace in the nuclear weapons era.

2、 Why 'not fight' and 'not'?

Thoroughly explored Raymond Aron's analysis of international relations in the thermonuclear era, particularly his concept of "martial peace". Aron believes that under the deterrence of nuclear weapons, the possibility of a full-scale war decreases, but it does not necessarily mean the arrival of peace. He discussed the concept of "peace based on satisfaction" and pointed out that universal satisfaction and trust between countries are prerequisites for lasting peace, but in reality, conflicts of status and interests between countries make it difficult to achieve such peace. The chapter also analyzes three versions of "seeking peace through disarmament": abandoning arms, reducing arms, and limiting arms. Aron believes that these methods have many problems in practical operation, such as difficulties in supervision, the possibility of triggering new arms races, and serious consequences of violating treaties. He emphasized that the existence of nuclear weapons actually provides security guarantees for nuclear armed countries, and eliminating nuclear weapons may lead to the escalation of traditional wars. Aron's viewpoint is that peace is the result of politics rather than an end, and the interests and power struggles between countries are factors that cannot be ignored in real international relations.

3、 How does' prudence 'become a' virtue '?

Explored Raymond Aron's exposition of prudence as a core principle in international relations and national decision-making in the context of the thermonuclear era. Aron believes that in the absence of a superpower that can gain overwhelming war advantages, ideological opposition and international anarchy make it difficult to guarantee world peace. He quoted Romini's words to emphasize the uncertainty of war and pointed out that permanent peace is difficult to achieve in reality. Aron proposed the principle of "prudence", which means taking action based on specific circumstances, limiting violence, and pursuing concrete and achievable goals, rather than pursuing unlimited or meaningless goals. He criticized the overly "benevolent" principles in previous national decision-making, believing that these principles were actually condoning the enemy and an "idealistic fantasy". He particularly criticized "ideological idealism" and "legal idealism", believing that these concepts are detached from reality and cannot serve as the basis for national decision-making. Aron emphasized that in the face of the threat of nuclear war, national leaders should make cautious decisions to avoid the radicalization of war. He pointed out that although nuclear war is unlikely to occur, peace is still out of reach, so military force will still play an important role in resolving international conflicts. Aron believes that in the era of thermonuclear energy, national leaders should flexibly respond to international affairs based on their own interests and the international situation, pursuing the minimum harm in decision-making and the maximum possibility of achieving goals. He emphasized that the goal of the prudence principle is to limit violence and establish goals that conform to the rules of international relations, rather than pursuing absolute justice or establishing a permanently secure world. Aron believes that even under the threat of nuclear weapons, the primary goal of national decision-making should still be to avoid exacerbating conflicts, rather than blindly pursuing justice. He emphasized that an unexamined life is not worth living, and similarly, waging wars for transcendent goals without scrutiny is also unethical. Aron advocates that the state should be guided by the principle of prudence, adapt to the true appearance of international politics, and make the best decisions.

4、 Does' war 'have an' end '?

Explored Raymond Aron's views on war and peace issues. Aron believes that the root of war lies in human nature rather than animal nature, and war is a way to express human aggression. He pointed out that the irrationality of the system of war stems from humans arrogantly believing that they have gained power similar to divine power, which in turn triggers complex feelings of crime and anxiety. Aron believes that competition and the pursuit of glory are important components of the martial arts mechanism. If both sides recognize equal status, war will be a competition rather than for the sake of victory. In the era of thermonuclear warfare, the instrumentalist rationalization of war has made it more severe than ever before, and weapons themselves carry the risk of eliminating all survivors of the game in the martial arts mechanism. Aron proposed that the three necessary conditions for peace between countries in the industrial age are: narrowing the development gap between developed countries and third world countries; Mutual recognition within the international community; End the ideological confrontation between the two camps. He emphasized that in order to achieve peace, efforts must be made to reduce development gaps, promote fair trade relations, support the economic growth and social progress of developing countries, and promote the transfer of technology and knowledge. At the same time, it is necessary to mutually recognize sovereignty and legitimate rights and interests on the basis of equality and mutual respect in order to resolve international conflicts and confrontations. Finally, we must go beyond ideological confrontation and seek mutual understanding, cooperation, and win-win outcomes. By establishing mechanisms of mutual trust, we can promote cultural exchanges and people to people contacts, eliminate misunderstandings and conflicts, and push the world towards peaceful development. Aron believes that these three issues are often intertwined, with the core being the coexistence of "legal homogeneity" and "material heterogeneity" between countries, as well as the heterogeneity of the international system arising from the opposition of two ruling ideologies. This makes international peace difficult to achieve, as a common development goal divides humanity, and globalization built on development gaps and sustained competition inevitably leads to conflicts.

conclusion

Aron's theory of 'Valiant Peace' provides a new paradigm of international relations theory that differs from the views of Machiavelli and idealists. This theory reveals the unbalanced power relations brought about by nuclear weapons and points out that in the current global crisis, seeking a balanced strategy between national security and world peace has become urgent. Aron believes that although thermonuclear weapons will not trigger World War III, they cannot bring permanent peace, and relations between countries will change in the alternation of war and peace. Peace is the art of balancing military power and international cooperation, which requires finding a middle ground between humanity and interests. We should carefully assess risks, find the best balance between desires and actual situations, and actively create peaceful conditions to abolish nuclear weapons.