1 From a State of War to Perpetual Peace

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1536-7150.2007.00496.x
• Author: Edward Demenchonok
• Published date: 01 January 2007
• Date: 01 January 2007

PART I: GLOBAL JUSTICE,DEMOCRACY,

AND UNIVERSAL DIALOGUE

1

From a State of War to Perpetual Peace

By EDWARD DEMENCHONOK*

ABSTRACT. This essay examines current debates in political philoso-

phy regarding the problems of war and peace and of human rights

protection. Two contrasting approaches are analyzed: one represented

by “democratic peace” theories, and the other by the movement for a

cosmopolitan order. At the heart of both approaches are conflicting

interpretations of Kant’s political philosophy, especially his project of

“perpetual peace.” An analysis of M. Doyle’s recent conception of

“liberal democratic peace” shows the flaws in his justification of the

tendency of liberal states to be war-prone toward nonliberal states.

Alternatively, the development of Kant’s ideas in the theories of

“discourse ethics” (K. O. Apel and J. Habermas) and “cosmopolitan

democracy” confirms the relevance of Kant’s cosmopolitan ideal to

current discussions about peace and human rights. The analysis also

affirms that the true solution to the problems of securing peace and

protecting human rights can only be achieved by peaceful means,

based on international law with the United Nations as its legitimate

political representation.

I

Introduction

THE PROBLEM OF WAR AND PEACE is of primary importance in our time,

especially after the devastating wars of the 20th century. In a nuclear

*Edward Demenchonok has worked as a senior researcher at the Institute of Phi-

losophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, and is currently a Professor of

Foreign Languages and Philosophy at Fort Valley State University in Georgia. He is a

vice president of the International Society for Universal Dialogue. His numerous books

and articles are in the fields of the philosophy of culture, social philosophy, and ethics.

American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Vol. 66, No. 1 (January, 2007).

© 2007 American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Inc.

age, war threatens the future of humankind. There is also a growing

concern about the violation of human rights in the world, primarily in

underdeveloped countries with authoritarian regimes. These two

problems of paramount importance—securing peace and the global

enforcement of human rights—are at the center of current academic

debates regarding the status of international law and the role of the

United Nations as its political representative.

In the broad spectrum of these debates among philosophers and

political theorists, one can identify two main currents: one represented

by “democratic peace” and “just war” theories, and the other by the

movement toward cosmopolitanism. Both share the normative goals

of peace and democratization, but they differ in their views on peace

and democracy as well as on the best means for achieving these goals.

To support their respective positions, the advocates of these views

often appeal to Immanuel Kant’s political philosophy, especially his

philosophical essay “Toward Perpetual Peace.”

In what follows, I shall explore these two currents of thought and

their complex relation to Kant’s philosophy. First, I will analyze the

theories of “democratic peace,” in particular Michael Doyle’s influen-

tial conception of “liberal peace.” I will then examine the development

of Kant’s cosmopolitan ideas in the theories of “discourse ethics”

(Karl-Otto Apel, Jürgen Habermas) and “cosmopolitan democracy”

(David Held and Patrick Hayden, among others). My analysis will

confirm the ongoing relevance of Kant’s political philosophy to

current discussions about the future of peace and human rights. It will

also affirm that the only lasting solution to the problems of securing

peace and protecting human rights globally can be achieved, not by

force or unilateral actions, but only by peaceful means, based on the

rule of international law and the United Nations as its legitimate

political representative.

II

“Democratic Peace”: A Paradoxical Alternative to Perpetual Peace

THE THEORY OF “democratic peace” represents the specific view that

peace and human rights depend on the global “spread of democracy”

by Western states. This concept first emerged in the context of liberal

26 The American Journal of Economics and Sociology