May 5, 2003
WASHINGTON - Five ethicists of differing perspectives
voiced grave concerns about the concept of pre-emptive war as foreign
policy and spoke specifically on the conflict in Iraq.
"Wars rarely bring freedom, justice and peace,"
observed Gerald F. Powers, director of the Office of International
Justice and Peace of the U.S. Catholics Bishops Conference. He cited
Afghanistan as an example.
The Churches' Center for Theology and Public
Policy organized the May 1 symposium, "Ethical Issues Raised by
Pre-emptive War." The ecumenical research center is supported by
several denominations, including the United Methodist Church.
More than 80 people, including area pastors,
seminary students and others, attended the daylong event at Wesley
Theological Seminary, one of 13 theology schools affiliated with
the United Methodist Church.
Center director Barbara Green said the program
was to help participants understand their responsibilities as Christians.
Drawing on a paper prepared by the Rev. Alan Geyer, founding director
of the center and a United Methodist, she cited The National Security
Strategy of the USA, published Sept. 20: "America will act against
... emerging threats before they are fully formed." That, she said
was codified legitimacy for pre-emptive war; it means "we do not
wait to be attacked."
"The United States and the global community have
a moral responsibility to address threats," Powers said. But in
trying to apply the tests of "just war" tradition, which can be
traced back to Catholic theologians including St. Augustine in the
fourth and fifth century and Thomas Aquinas in medieval times, Powers
asked, "Why now?" This war was "not based on actual threat but on
speculation as to what that threat might be in 2004, 2005 and beyond."
Iraq did not become a greater threat between
September 2001 and March 2003, but the terrorist attacks of Sept.
11, 2001, made people in the United States feel more vulnerable,
Powers said. Since then, the country has developed a policy of what
he calls "muscular unilateralism."
The U.S. Catholic Bishops Conference said the
war in Afghanistan fit the just-war criteria, but the conference
has said it did not see Iraq "as a clear and present danger," he
noted.
"Preventive force undermines international law,"
said Powers, who teaches a course in international law, ethics and
conflict at George Washington University. What if India or Pakistan
follows the United States' example - or Japan and Korea, in their
longstanding conflict? he asked.
The political legitimacy of using preventive
force might be justified, he commented, but such action is harder
to justify by Christian moral standards.
"There is no single just-war theory," said James
F. Childress, a professor of ethics and medial education at the
University of Virginia. Rather, it is a living tradition with many
roots, and it provides a framework for a moral discussion to justify
and limit war. Making just-war theory credible for the 21st century
is a major task for communities of moral discourse, he said.
When the war on terrorism was declared after
Sept. 11, it "created psycho-social conditions for a real war,"
Childress said. In a war, military force is the first presumption
rather than the last resort, he observed.
"In much of the world, we appear to be a rogue
nation," he said. The way the Bush administration has asserted a
right to a general first strike creates a precedent.
Beverly Miller agreed with Powers that the Bush
administration's pre-emptive strike in Iraq did not meet the criteria
for a just war and is not likely to be considered legal under international
law. A Baptist laywoman, she teaches church history, theology, African-American
religious history and human rights at Wesley Theological Seminary
in Washington.
"Christians need to study war less and focus
on things that make for peace in the global community," she said.
"Re-examination of America's role on the world stage is justified."
Bush's militarism is not solving the problems
of the "two-thirds world," she asserted. It does not address poverty,
malnutrition and disease.
"Militarism does not work toward our security
but toward our collective insecurity," she stated.
Christians "must advocate for disarmament, peacemaking
and peacekeeping." She urged thinking of America's power as a positive
opportunity "to break the cycle of violence."
"Imagine the difference this nation could make
in the world if we celebrated the invention of smart vaccines rather
than smart bombs." Even small efforts at peacemaking would leave
everyone better off than they are now, she said. "The struggle for
peace demands the transformation of values." And, she insisted,
"peacemaking is part of our call to discipleship."
Elizabeth Bounds, a Presbyterian laywoman who
teaches Christian ethics at United Methodist-related Candler Theological
Seminary of Emory University, said Christians need to find a sense
of security in their own lives to serve as a foundation for taking
this security out into the world.
"We need to understand why we feel so insecure,"
she said. The world is not a secure place, but the economic slump
has added to the stress. She also pointed to reduced public participation,
a diminution of public space and increased stratification in how
people live. People need to understand their "perceived sense of
powerlessness."
Bounds urged churches and seminaries to find
new ways to develop leaders who can help people express their stories
of pride and pain and who can address the broader world about peacemaking.
She noted that human beings under stress put barriers around themselves
for protection, and some of these barriers are a way of trying to
make sense of the world because thinking of the human cost of war
is quite painful.
She spoke of the pain U.S. soldiers undoubtedly
feel at having had to shoot women and children who were used as
shields by Iraqi forces, and said that kind of experience needs
to be acknowledged in order for healing to occur.
The Rev. Max L. Stackhouse, a professor of Christian
ethics at Princeton Theological Seminary and a clergyman in the
United Church of Christ, acknowledged that it is not the job of
the church even within the Beltway to instruct government. But he
does hold the churches responsible to shape the ethos of the people
so they hold their rulers accountable.
The church has the duty to be a prophetic voice
and to call for peace, he said, but Christians also are called to
be priests to one another, to speak courage and comfort.
"Ignoring the need to make a serious case (for
the war in Iraq) is most troubling," Stackhouse said of the administration.
That omission has left the world suspicious, he explained.
He cited polls in which few Christians reported
hearing their clergy preach on the issue of the Iraq war. They need
guidance in how to view the war and in how "to repair the inner
fabric of our society," said the author of God and Globalization
and many other books. He expressed a desire for renewed interest
in the Protestant doctrine of work as "a calling."
"How do we minister through our worldly vocations?"
he asked. People have careers now, but a career is an achievement
of the self. Through a calling, he explained, one serves the community.
United Methodist News Service
|