As the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) rolls across northern Iraq, facing little more than token resistance as it nears the capital city of Baghdad, American politicians have taken to the airwaves to play the blame-game. “It’s Obama’s fault. We shouldn’t have left so soon.” “No, it’s W’s fault. We should never have gotten into Iraq in the first place.” However you view the situation, it is truly sickening to realize that, after our nine-year military campaign in Iraq, during which hundreds of thousands of lives were lost or ruined, the government and military we helped to establish may be toppled by an extremist element every bit as brutal as the dictator we deposed.
I’ve listened to many different points of view about what is happening – not just from Congressmen and pundits, but also from retired military personnel, and what makes most sense to me is that the unraveling of the state of Iraq is the beginning of the final chapter of a 100-year-old Western project to contain sectarian tensions by establishing artificial political boundaries throughout the Middle East.
In an earlier post, I referenced a fascinating book about American history by Colin Woodard entitled American Nations. His basic thesis is that the United States has never been “one nation,” but has always been an uneasy coalition of several nations, which he defines as “distinct cultures with their own unique values systems.” The American “federation,” as he calls it, is often strained, but (except for the Civil War) has managed to hang together because of enough shared interest to overcome the divisions.
If you apply the same kind of analysis to Iraq, you can’t help but conclude that it is an artificial and ultimately unsustainable political state. Pieces of three different nations exist within its borders, and two of those nations extend beyond its borders into Syria and Iran. Since there is no shared interest or common vision
It seems very likely, then, that in the next few decades, the Middle East will be re-arranged to reflect natural cultural boundaries rather than imposed political boundaries. The only open question is how violent that transition will be. Current events are deeply discouraging. ISIS is a splinter group that has broken away from, and is now denounced by, Al Qaeda. Its leaders are totally committed to violence – including mass killings of fellow Muslims – in order to create a huge fundamentalist Islamic state stretching from the Mediterranean Sea to the Persian Gulf. I doubt they will succeed in the long run since their imposed boundaries would be just as disrespectful of distinct cultures as the current boundaries. But their destabilizing activity is likely to lead to years of civil strife.
What does a Christian perspective lead us to say about these troubling events? Initially, I am compelled to make these observations.
1) Violence always breeds more violence. A century ago, Woodrow Wilson optimistically characterized the “Great War” (later to be called World War I) as “the war to end all wars.” But surely there is no such thing. I’m not a pure pacifist. In the tradition of Augustine, I admit that there are instances, rare though they may be, when the use of military force is a lesser evil than the alternative of doing nothing to counter violent aggression or clear systemic injustice. But even the most high-minded use of force, while it may create a better situation in the short run, will ultimately breed more violence. Even when it is contained, targeted, and used reluctantly for a greater purpose, violence by itself never achieves true peace. At best, it creates an uneasy peace that has to be “enforced”; that is, maintained by the threat of more force. Sometimes, that is the best option we have, but that only means there are no truly good options.
2) Humanity in bondage to sin is inherently violent. Organized violent aggression has plagued the Middle East since the earliest days of civilization. Just read the Old Testament. We don’t have to look to the Middle East, of course, to find the evidence of humanity’s violent nature. Consider the increasing frequency of senseless shooting sprees across the U.S. (including 74 school shootings since the Newtown massacre just 18 months ago), as well as terrorist-type activity by U.S. citizens who promise a “revolution” to overthrow the federal government and secure their “right” to pretty much do whatever they want and protect their liberties by stockpiling weapons. What has changed over the last four thousand years is not how violent we are, but what kinds of weapons we use. As weapons have become more sophisticated and more murderous, the results of our violent tendencies have become more horrifying.
3) Because violence is ingrained in our sinful human nature, and because it never leads to lasting peace, it cannot be the ultimate solution to creation’s problems. It therefore is incompatible with the reign of God. This should be obvious to all those who espouse the Judeo-Christian tradition. The biblical descriptions of God’s fulfilled kingdom are consistently visions of comprehensive peace – a redeemed creation in which all people have enough, no one threatens to take away what others have, and all ethnic strife ceases. “The wolf and the lamb will lie down together” while toddlers are free to play with snakes because even the most venomous asps will cease to bring harm to anyone.
4) Visions of the end-times that celebrate God’s violent destruction of creation – including all those who are branded as God’s (our?) enemies – reflect our sinful human nature more than the justice of God. (I suspect those obsessed with the end-times are watching the events in the Middle East with glee rather than horror, interpreting them as fulfillment of biblical prophecy and the beginning of Armageddon.) When so-called biblical teachers twist obviously symbolic material (like the book of Revelation) to claim that creation will be fulfilled through an orgy of divine violence (which is really just human violence ratcheted up exponentially into cosmicide), they are perpetuating a lie. In the last volume of his “Left Behind” series, Tim LaHaye tells the story of “Mac” McCullum, a pilot serving the Global Community (the bad guys) who converts and becomes a Tribulation Force (the good guys) pilot. With no remorse, he slaughters twelve of his former colleagues with an Uzi, quoting the words of Jesus, “All who live by the sword die by the sword.” Ironic, isn’t it? But not to LaHaye.
God save us from our violent natures and redeem us with the power of your peace. Amen.
©2014 by J. Mark Lawson
Comments