Does Non-Violence Work ?

Does "Non-Violence" work ? Was thinking about this during my drive home from work today. Like all tricky questions the question should be first rephrased as - Whom does non-violence work against ?
I think "Non-Violence" primarily works against someone who knows the power of violence but thinks twice before using them. Take for example Mao, who said - "All power stems from the Barrel of a Gun". He's someone who understood the power of violence and I am sure Non-Violent movements would have probably worked against him. Similarly you have the British who understood the power of violence and consequently build a great navy and Airforce, and these have stood them in goodstead in many a war. Gandhian principles like non-violence can therefore only work on people who understand violence but are civilized enough to never actually use it.(Atleast not on a massive scale.)
Would Gandhian methods have worked if Germany under Hitler instead of Britian were ruling India ? I think not. Masses of Indians would have been just slaughtered and the freedom movement would have been over within a week is my guess. Similarly it wouldn't have worked for people fighting Idi Amin or Pol Pot both of whom had no moral qualms about the use of force. But it did work for Gandhi and MLK Jr. as they were fighting regimes which were unfair but were neverthless civilized and who had some basic respect for Human life. In conclusion I think choice between violence and non-violence should depend on who the enemy is rather than applying non-violence in some sort of "carte blanche" way.

Gandhi & Confucious ...

I was reading an interesting editorial piece in the "Hindu" today by Pallavi Aiyer wherein she talks about the resurgence of Confucian values in China. These same values were dismissed as outdated some 30 years back when China first began opening up it's markets & started it's foray into global markets. I started to link this story with the revival of interest in Gandhian values in India (after Lage Raho).
I think one can only conclude that turbo-capatilism (profit at all costs) is quite harmful to society and people sooner or later start looking for some core values to fall upon. In India those principles are Gandhian values and in China it's probably the teachings of Buddha, Tao, Confucious etc...
Interestingly I also thought about the US which lacks such firm guiding principles or fundamental principles that drives a society towards non-violence over violence. Sure they have Christianity but Christianity historically has never shied away from the use of force whether it be against Islam or anyone else. They have tradionally been the last one's to show restraint when push comes to shove.
So lets be prepared for some interesting battle between Western and Eastern idealogies in the coming decade and I am pretty sure the latter would appeal to a wider audience than the former.