Through our collective actions — be it enmity or environmental degradation — we create chances that lead to our self-destruction
By B Maria Kumar
As the ongoing deadly conflict between Russia and Ukraine sharply intensifies and the violent tensions between Hamas and Israel escalate further, the situations in both regions are becoming alarmingly severe. The dangerously provocative rhetoric from all sides is amplifying global concerns, heralding potentially apocalyptic consequences. These developments bring to mind a conversation I once had with my longtime friend and colleague, Ashok Dohare, during an informal gathering many years ago. Ashok, a distinguished alumnus of IIT Delhi and IISc Bengaluru, made a profound assertion that has stayed with me. Each day, as I sift through the latest war reports, his intriguing words resonate with me.
Suicides by Proxy Ashok proposed that the ultimate culmination of human existence might closely resemble suicide. He clarified that he was not referring to suicide in the traditional sense. Instead, he suggested that through our collective actions — be it through enmity, reckless accidents or environmental degradation — we inadvertently create circumstances and chances that lead to our own self-destruction. These actions, according to him, are essentially suicides by proxy.
As I peruse the latest news headlines in the mornings, I invariably find myself compelled to include warfare on top in the list of these self-destructive behaviours. Many soldiers, driven by a passionate sense of patriotic duty, position themselves on the front lines, willingly making the ultimate sacrifice. These acts, in both their intent and execution, represent in a way mass suicides Durkheim’s altruistic model. Reflecting on Ashok’s perspective, I perceive a significant degree of truth in his observations. From a Sartrean perspective, his statement implies that in our blind pursuit of various unnecessary objectives, we often deceive ourselves through bad faith and orchestrate our own destruction. Then, does this mean that Hades, the god of death, dances in the moody shades of our choices? This introspection not only deepens my understanding of capricious human behaviour but also strongly influences how I identify and interpret contemporary geopolitical confrontations.
Nuclear Sounds
As talk of nuclear strikes resounds nowadays on an almost daily basis from Eastern Europe to the Middle East, it seems that scientists are among the few who are taking these dangerous trends seriously. When the Ukraine war began, it was the scientific community that first sounded the alarm about the potentially catastrophic repercussions of nuclear fallout. Our world has already been grappling with multiple human-made disasters — from climate change and epidemics to rising infertility — all of which are pushing humanity rapidly towards extinction. Empirical data on rising temperatures across our lands and oceans indicate that Earth is on a trajectory to resemble Venus, where surface temperatures are so high that lead melts instantly.
Pollution is flourishing unchecked, raising the spectre that carbon dioxide could dominate our atmosphere, displacing oxygen, within a few millennia. As the doomsday clock ticks ominously faster, scientists warn that detonating thousands of atomic payloads could be the quickest way to seal humanity’s fate, should current AI-powered clashes turn into a nuclear Armageddon, either deliberately or accidentally.
Leadership minds should think and act benignly, not ruinously — the sole mantra capable of keeping the world safe
Yet, the scientific community has its own paradoxes, especially when considering their humanitarian impact. It might surprise some to learn that it was the philosopher-scientist Albert Einstein who urged the American President Roosevelt to initiate the atomic bomb project. It was also the spiritual scientist J Robert Oppenheimer who developed the bomb. Even the peace-loving philanthropist Alfred Nobel profited from inventing and selling the menacing dynamite long before the 20th century dawned. Having witnessed the bloodstained corridors of history, we are still taken aback by the scientists who continue to develop increasingly sophisticated and sinister weaponry, potentially to be used by humans against their own kind. Is this a manifestation of a suicidal trait, or a Samson option? Whatever the future holds, as my friend Ashok postulates, the human instinct for self-destruction marches on eccentrically. What then is the solution to this existential peril?
Most Effective Strategy
Recently, during a visit to Delhi, I had an occasion to discuss some of these issues with Ashok at his home in Noida. He expressed concern that the world desperately requires a structural reset in its ethical framework, which seems to have been overshadowed by a one-sided techno-economic drive.
Prominent global minds insist on the immediate need to explore viable judicious techniques for humanising top-tier international diplomatic affairs. Freud introduced the concept of libido as the life energy that fuels our existence and essence, while also warning of the death instinct in his psychoanalytic model, which Edoardo Weiss termed “destrudo.” Given that the human mind is hardwired for self-defence against both imaginary and real threats, destrudo often takes a dominant role in decision-making unless intervened in time. This dynamic might explain the high-risk rhetoric being used by parties on both sides of current conflicts — a move that only serves to exacerbate already volatile scenarios.
Amidst these frictions, even nations that are not parties directly and are known for their high quality of life, equality and happiness begin to show signs of aggression and anxiety previously unseen. But Freud was optimistic about redirecting such impulses from deathly thoughts to existential delights through sublimation, shifting focus to aesthetic, benevolent and artistic pursuits that highlight life’s beauty. Drawing on the valuable lessons of reconciliations that safeguarded human lives following the past world wars, the most effective strategy for ending the present wars might be for all parties to embrace ego-effacing diplomatic mindsets. This approach prioritises the safety of humanity and acknowledges the vital necessity for mutual coexistence, essential for the survival of all.
A few days ago, during our regular phone call, Ashok made a captivating remark. He quipped, “Leadership minds should think and act benignly, not ruinously.” And that is the sole mantra capable of keeping the world safe.
(The author is IPS (Retd) and a winner of National Rajbhasha Gaurav Award for the year 2022-23)