After the end of the Cold War it became clear that the free world has become stronger than totalitarianism. When totalitarianism was stronger, it had never hesitated to use weapons against those who decided to depart from totalitarian principles. The Soviet invasion of Hungary in 1956, and Czechoslovakia in 1968, was the result of these countries’ attempt to do away with censorship and the one-party system. By the way, history shows that the world had seen a curious example of totalitarian intervention as far back as in the early 13th century. At those times there happened to be a true democratic society in Languedoc County (or the Toulouse County), known for its pluralism of opinion, religious freedom and rich culture of troubadours. When the Toulouse leader, Count Languedoc, refused to yield to the Catholic Church demand that the religious group of Katharos be eliminated, the Pope declared a war, a crusade, against Count Languedoc. Crusaders turned once a blooming and prospering area into ruins, and when some of them asked the Pope’s legate should they spare Catholic believers living there, he would say, “Do kill them all. God would make his own pick on the other side.” Having gone back on a Jesus Christ behest, “unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’; and unto God the things that are God’s”, and having assumed autocratic functions, the Church had, for ages, acted as a totalitarian power. The commanding position of freedom, which became a reality last century, has no precedence in world history. The world rejoiced at the emerging chance to get rid at last of all sorts of despots and blood-thirsty fanatics. Now people could be saved and released, and their enslavers and murderers punished and brought to justice. And that is being done: Human slaughter has been stopped by force in Bosnia and in East Timor, and in Kosovo an ethnic war conflict has been prevented. The Taliban has been toppled in Afghanistan, and “safety zones” have been established in the Iraqi Kurdistan. Special international tribunals have been set up to deal with war crimes in Yugoslavia and Rwanda. And the international criminal court has been created.
But let’s face the truth. If Iraq had not attacked Kuwait, Saddam Hussein would have still gassed Kurds and, without being bothered by UN weapons inspectors, would have been building up his arsenal of nuclear weaponry. And if the Taliban had given up Osama ben Laden, they would have still continued to inflict appalling suffering upon the Afghan people. It looks as if, each time before taking strong measures, the international democratic community waits for something particularly horrible to occur to justify the use of force. It would be sensible, if the matter did not concern living human beings. The question arises shall we wait further until Iraq will use its chemical weaponry against Israel, or until Iran and North Korea will come into possession of nuclear bombs. True, the democracy should not be as aggressive as the totalitarianism. However, is it not likely that any prolonged period of indecision will result in the loss of, yet available, advantage which, as history shows, is quite unique.