How the Peace of Chris 7 Confronts the Wars of the Worl 4

2obert C. Johanse 4

THE rise of terrorist violence, drone Third, these changes suggest that both paci - killings in violation of international law, fists and people in the just-war tradition proliferating weapons of mass destruction, can, and should, join together with other and unending wars raise new questions ethically-sensitive people from all religious about how should respond to traditions to move the world toward a more armed conflict. These questions bear even sustainable just peace. more urgency because a new President of the United States and majorities in both houses of the United States Congress, SINCE their origins centuries ago, people inspired by self-centered nationalism and in the historic (the faith in military power, fervently hope to of the Brethren, Society of Friends, and make the United States “great” by spending ) have emphasized that they more for military preparedness, even simply want to follow . Jesus never though U.S. (United States) military expen - killed anyone. He recommended that his ditures already exceed the military spend - followers love rather than kill. He said that ing of all other major military powers com - peacemakers are blessed and “will be bined. New U.S. priorities also include called children of God.” 1 On the night he sharp cuts in allocations to abolish poverty, was arrested, he said “Peace I leave with uphold human rights, sustain a healthy you; my peace I give to you…. Do not let environment, and help the United Nations your hearts be troubled, and do not…be and other multilateral institutions, even afraid.” 2 Later that evening, he instructed though these initiatives would do far more Peter to put away his sword. 3 to reduce terrorism and war-fighting, peace The first thing Jesus said after the resur - research shows, than additional military rection was “peace be with you.” 4 Follow - expenditures. ing this lead for 400 years, Christians In addressing the question of how Chris - remained as nonviolent as Jesus, until Chris - tians should respond to armed conflict, it is tianity became mainstream when the politi - useful, first of all, to reassess the long-stand - cal leadership of the time adopted it. Then ing pacifist (Anabaptist-Pietist) position of Rome used to cement its politi - the historic peace churches on war and the cal power. From then on, the majority of main criticism of this position by Christian Christians accepted war. But Anabaptists realists. Second, recent changes in interna - have considered Christian endorsement of tional relations raise new questions about military power to be unfaithful. The peace what is most useful in maintaining peace. churches have repeatedly declared: “all war

SPRING/SUMMER 2018 1 is sin.” It is “wrong for Christians to support bat not only fails to produce what one or to engage in it.” 5 People’s first calling is wants. Even if one wins a war, military vic - to be faithful, which means, at the least, not tory often produces more of what one does killing anyone. At best, it means active lov - not want: hatred, revenge, terrorism, and ing of everyone. more war. Peace research shows that vio - The main criticism of Christian lence begets more violence, and terrorists has been that if people choose never to kill usually are motivated by a sense of griev - ance over violence inflicted on them or on people with whom they identify. Reople’s first calling is to be Christian realists never dealt with the pos - faithful, which means, at sibility that a country like the United States might acquire such high military prepared - the least, not killing anyon <. ness that it would be tempted to become a military aggressor. Nor did they deal with in war, they are not responsible when they the possibility that such a country might face a military aggressor. Reinhold Niebuhr, win a war, but the victory would produce perhaps the best-known Christian realist, something worse and more violent than emphasized the need to use military power existed before the war. Yet the U.S. attack to confront German militarism in the 1930s on Iraq in 2003 illustrates both. and Soviet policies after World War II. Superpower military strength led to quick Niebuhr acknowledged that pacifists were victory, but also to a defeat for peace. Iraqis more closely imitating Jesus than were oth - have not had one week of peace since the ers, but he said that refusing to kill could U.S. victory 14 years ago. And the disem - not be responsible because, if everybody powerment of Sunni Muslims led directly to became pacifist, good countries would be the growth of Al Qaeda in Iraq and the cre - overrun by militarily ruthless countries. In ation of ISIS in Iraq and Syria. Similarly, U.S. his view, and in the view of most Christians military victory in Afghanistan has not led to (who are not pacifists), killing the ruthless in peace or stability. For nine years in the order to protect the innocent is more 1980s, the fought a bloody responsible at times than to be loving war in Afghanistan, with nothing good to toward all people and to kill no one. show for it. Years of French and then U.S. In brief, pacifists say: Follow Jesus; do not fighting in Vietnam did not produce good kill; actively love; be faithful. Christian real - outcomes. In short, military power has low ists say: Follow our government to survive; utility for achieving desired outcomes. kill if necessary to protect people in just A second change is the growing recogni - wars; be responsible. tion of the utility of nonviolent direct action for achieving peace and democracy. Re- search examining all 323 resistance cam - AGAINST this backdrop, major changes paigns in the world since 1900, whether in international relations now require a re- violent or nonviolent and whether to oust assessment of Christian positions. The first dictators or to resist external domination, change is that the utility of military power shows that nonviolent campaigns succeed has become extremely low for producing more often than violent efforts. Neither vio - desirable outcomes. To be sure, military lence nor works 100 percent power has high utility for destroying, but it of the time, of course, but nonviolent cam - has low utility for achieving sustainable paigns are more likely to result in peace and peace and democracy. Often military com - ensure that peace is sustained at least five

2 BRETHREN LIFE & THOUGHT years after the campaigns have ended. Non - be addressed by better worldwide gover - violent campaigns are also more likely than nance , rather than as problems to be solved are violent campaigns to result in democra - by deploying military power . Military con - cy being established one or two decades frontations cannot bridge political divides later—even if a violent campaign succeeds as well as provide respectful give and take in its immediate goal of taking power, and in fair global processes for finding common even if a nonviolent campaign fails to take ground for law enforcement. power. 6 A third change in international relations is that more security threats are now arising Qeither violence nor non - from non-state actors than ever before. Ter - Fiolence works 100 percent rorist groups operate easily across national borders. They are not controlled by a single of the time, of course, but state. Yet, because our existing international system assumes that separate states will ?onviolent campaigns are manage security problems, this system can - not effectively address threats from non- more likely to result state, transnational actors, as we see con - firmed in the news almost every day. Only in peace and ensure that transnational law enforcement can provide effective protection against such threats. Zeace is sustained at least And only transnational initiatives to over - come global poverty, to reduce youth un- Wive years after the employment, and to end the unfair exclu - sion of oppressed peoples from decision- campaigns have ende V. making can reduce the extremism that gives rise to terrorism. The failures of the existing international Fourth, more security threats now arise system are evident in the rise of Al Qaeda, from non-military sources. Global poverty, the brutality of ISIS, the killings and kidnap - for example, is a security threat because it en - pings by Boko Haram, innocent deaths in courages political polarization, resentments, the thousands in South Sudan, 800,000 exploitation, oppression, and failing states. civilians killed in Rwanda, and over 12 mil - Pogge has demonstrated persua - lion people displaced or killed in Syria. The sively that the perpetuation of the existing in - existing international system, a militarized ternational economic system, largely by the balance-of-power, actually encourages wealthy countries, regardless of whether it mass murders and extremism international - is done with or without malice, is the most ly and domestically. massive denial of human rights in history. 7 A fifth change, usually called globaliza - Non-military threats also arise from envi - tion, creates both new problems and new ronmental destruction, water shortages, opportunities. One opportunity is that suffi - trans-border epidemics, immigration and cient global governance now exists to show refugee pressures, and the spread of chemi - that it is possible to initiate a more effective cal, biological, and nuclear agents for rule of law in the world— if enough people social disruption. These cannot be well insisted on it. With the help of satellites, we managed within the existing international are now able to see what is happening all system. All can be more effectively man - over the world as it happens; $1 trillion of aged if they are thought of as problems to currency transactions reliably cross borders

SPRING/SUMMER 2018 3 every single day; 24 permanent internation - extent of the security unit eventually needs al courts have arisen and produced more to become commensurate with the reach of than 37,000 binding rulings since the end modern weaponry, which is global. The in- of the Cold War; these promote new trans- ternational system also must be changed be - sovereignty working coalitions among gov - c ause it perpetuates poverty for and disen - ernmental and private actors; 8 and small- franchises half of the human race, causing scale vertical redistributions of national sov - 18 million unnecessary deaths each year. 9 It ereignty are occurring during the develop - also is not securing the environment. ment of international institutions like the As a result of changes in international International Monetary Fund, World Trade relations and military technology, to be Organization, the International Atomic “responsible” leads to different conclusions Energy Agency, the International Criminal today than were endorsed by Christian real - Court and other courts, and, despite its real ists in the past. A realistic grasp of security problems, the European Community. problems and opportunities today means A sixth change is more a matter of atti - replacing the role of military power with the tudes than the first five, but the new atti - role of international law, just as law eventu - tudes generate extreme danger when ally replaced the role of feudal monarchs’ expressed through the existing international armies in settling disputes among feudal structures that already have been failing to kingdoms as these were integrated into larg - provide peace or justice. These attitudes, er political units. enjoying a new-found popularity in the Transforming the militarized balance of United States, parts of Europe, and else - power system requires addressing not only where, combine a narrow, me-first national - the influences of the military-industrial ism for “us” with dismissiveness for “them,” complex in the domestic economy and wildly unrealistic faith in the ability of “our” political processes, which President Eisen - military power to do good and make us hower warned against in his farewell great while denying similar access to “great - address, but also changing the structure of ness” for others, bigoted stereotyping used the international balance of military power. to blame others as solely responsible for Yet without increased pressure from a conflicts, and blind refusal to pay attention worldwide coalition of civil society and to inconvenient truths. religious groups who explicitly withdraw What do these changes in international their support from killing in war and perpet - relations mean? First, they mean that the uating global poverty, more desirable current inter-state system impedes sustain - changes in the international system are able peace and security. It can be best unlikely to occur because powerful vested understood as analogous to the security sys - interests resist them. tem of feudalism in Medieval Europe. That Inspired by Jesus’ vision of the sacredness system was based on well-fortified castles— of all human beings, some Christians were until the invention of the cannon. Then cas - aware of what was needed following World tles quickly went out of the security busi - War II to establish a dependable peace with ness. The security unit expanded from the more justice. With hope that the United feudal kingdom to the nation-state. Today, Nations or its successor might become an the security unit must expand beyond the effective instrument of global governance, nation-state to provide enough global gov - the ’s Annual Meet - ernance to enforce rules able to make ing declared: “We urge our nation…to be peace dependable throughout the world, as the first to offer the surrender of our nation - it is now within stable national societies. The al sovereignty to a world government of, by,

4 BRETHREN LIFE & THOUGHT and for the peoples of the world….” 10 Those shows himself here not to be a revolution - who passed this resolution were not assum - ary who destroys the law in order to start ing that worldwide institutions would some - over. He is a pilgrim or pioneer in extend - how produce salvation that only God could ing the law and applying the law more per - provide, but they did recognize that some fectly. He fulfilled the law by saying, “You governmental structures are likely to work have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love better than others, and some are less likely your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I to kill than others. They sought to demilita - rize the international system and strengthen international law because the existing, mil - Mor people to be responsible, itarized balance-of-power system was less their support for the consistent with Jesus’ teachings and would thwart people’s faithfulness. Once aware of Uomestic and international the war-tendencies and poverty-proneness of this balance-of-power system, one can Aolitical orders must be no longer describe it as an instrument for being responsible , because the system has strictly limited in ways that not produced peace or justice. For people to be responsible, their sup - Gill bring systemic chang <. port for the domestic and international political orders must be strictly limited in say to you, Love your enemies.” 12 He did ways that will bring systemic change. Jesus not say that the law, in fact, said: “hate your understood this 2000 years ago when he enemy.” He said “you have heard ” that the exposed the false dilemma between being law said that. Apparently, he meant that faithful and being responsible. Political when you heard that, you heard the law realists of his day did not understand why being misinterpreted. It could have been he did not support violence against Rome. misinterpreted by realists—then and now. Yet he never supported the Zealots’ rebel - Jesus emphasized upholding the law; when lion aimed at gaining rights for Jews who correctly understood, it meant: “love your were victimized by Rome. He also never enemies.” endorsed joining the Roman legion to help Of course, Jesus also was not a legalist. Rome maintain the peace of the Empire, The spirit of the law is more important than even though at that historical moment, the letter. Yet “not one letter, not one stroke Rome was the policeman of the world. of a letter, will pass from the law….” 13 Similarly, religious realists of Jesus’ day When being asked further about what is did not understand why he was eating with most important in the law, Jesus spoke tax collectors, expressing friendship toward clearly: The first commandment is to “love Samaritans, and working on the Sabbath to God with all your heart,…soul, and… help people. They asked, in effect: “Why mind,” and the second is to “love your don’t you and your disciples follow the law? neighbor as yourself.” 14 He then again Why aren’t you more responsible?” emphasized the importance of this law: Jesus responded: “Do not think that I “On these two commandments hang all the have come to abolish the law or the law and the prophets.” 15 prophets; I have come not to abolish but to In addition to this , there was fulfill.” 11 In effect, he says that he is being the quite different law of the Roman responsible by fulfilling the law, even if his Empire. It was not Jewish and not God’s critics do not understand how he is. Jesus law. It expressed imperial power. It was the

SPRING/SUMMER 2018 5 international system of his day and the God’s law, which means not to kill and direct forerunner of contemporary interna - actively to love. It means supporting the tional law. Its role provided another oppor - state and the international system only up to tunity for realists to try to entrap Jesus. They a point, as Jesus did Rome, because one’s asked to whom and to what legal system uppermost call is to serve God, and second - Jesus was claiming to be responsible: “Is it arily the political order. When the political lawful [for Jews] to pay taxes to Caesar, or system renders to the state, which is our not?” 16 He responded: “Render to Caesar Caesar, that which belongs to God, that is the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the where people should draw the line and no things that are God’s.” 17 This statement sug - longer support the elements of the state or gests that it was acceptable for pagan Rome the international system that cause the con - to raise public revenue from Jews, as long tinued use of military power and perpetuate as Jews rendered to God what is God’s. poverty. ’s peace means protecting the What is God’s? It is God’s to have author - innocent from violence by upholding the ity over how we relate to God and to others, law and by making sacrifices to provide especially on matters of life and death. Jesus humanitarian assistance and accompani - summed up God’s law this way: “In every - ment, but not by abolishing the law in order thing do to others as you would have them to deploy military power. do to you; for this is the law and the prophets.” 18 We are not entitled to kill others because PEOPLE need not let their hearts be of reasons that we come up with, no matter troubled with worry that too many people how good the reasons are, because killing is might call for a non-killing foreign policy, not loving, and we do not want others to kill thereby risking some irresponsible out - us because of any reasons that they may come. At any point in a gradually changing give to justify their killing. No one was enti - public opinion, the more people who tled to kill Jesus because of any reason he or oppose killing, the more quickly a better she gave. Yet to make the point that killing system of governance is likely to evolve, as was wrong, Jesus himself could not engage a willingness to rely on violence would in killing. He paid with his life to show that gradually subside. Never will there be too killing was not justified, even when to fight many calling for this peaceful change against those who might kill innocent per - because the spread of a non-killing, active- sons (like Jesus) would be fully justified in loving ethic does not simply bow down to realists’ eyes. the ruthless. It upholds law to protect the In all his answers to those testing whether innocent, abolish poverty, eliminate condi - he was responsible, he refused to endorse tions that give rise to terrorism, and respect violence, whether to maintain the Jewish the environment. system, to defend Jews against the Roman It is becoming clear that to be faithful and system, to support the Roman international to be responsible mean doing the same system, or to overthrow that system. His things. Many churches that historically have main emphasis was: We should not aban - never been pacifist declared in a recent don God’s law in order to render to the state World Council of Churches action: “We what belongs to God. We should follow feel obliged as Christians to…challenge God’s law in shaping our relationships with any…justifications of the use of military people and institutions, thereby implement - power and to consider reliance on the con - ing the peace of Christ. cept of a ‘just war’ and its customary use to To sum up, Jesus calls people to uphold be obsolete.” 19 Together, these worldwide

6 BRETHREN LIFE & THOUGHT churches are transforming the old law of pressing shalom relationships, rather than a just war, which was based on “you-have- static end state. It emphasizes that peace is heard” mutually exclusive national identi - the work of justice and that killing is to be ties, into an all-inclusive identity that avoided, rather than that wars can some - includes all people in a new understanding times be justified, especially “our” wars, as of the law found in what is being called just-war advocates usually have concluded. “just peace.” Justpeace also includes a call for withdraw - In 2016, Pope Francis hosted a historic convocation on Nonviolence and Just Peace. It focused on what he called “the Jhrist’s peace arises from active witness of nonviolence as a ‘weapon’ the law calling people to achieve peace.” The gathering voiced “an appeal to the Church to recommit to love God, all neighbors, to the centrality of nonviolence.” 20 Carrying the idea of just peace further, the and themselves, and to treat Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dia - logue declared that the misuse of religious others as one wants traditions in political conflicts, the “you- have-heard” dimension, “requires a call to to be treate V. nonviolence, a rejection of violence in all its forms.” 21 Earlier the Pope emphasized ing support from the killing aspects of any that “Jesus marked out the path of nonvio - system, domestic or international, in ways lence. He walked that path to the very that invite replacing the violent enforcement end….” Therefore, “to be true followers of of preferences through the militarized bal - Jesus today also includes embracing his ance-of-power system with a worldwide teaching about nonviolence.” 22 In addition, rule of law, buttressed by international com - “the choice of nonviolence as a style of life munity policing, that seeks to avoid killing is increasingly demanded in the exercise of even when employing the coercion that is responsibility at every level….” 23 All those sometimes necessary to enforce a rule of law. holding public office are especially called Christ’s peace arises from the law calling to “cultivate a nonviolent style.” 24 people to love God, all neighbors, and A “just peace,” the meaning of which themselves, and to treat others as one wants may be improved by joining them together to be treated. This understanding of Christ’s in one inseparable word, “justpeace,” can peace enables harmony not only with all be summed up as international and inter - Christian communions but also with all personal relations focused on advancing major religious traditions, which in fact peace, human security, justice, and human share the ethic of treating others as one rights by doing unto others as you would wants to be treated. Living Christ’s peace is have them do unto you. It can speak to the most that one can do to avert nuclear those with spiritual sensitivities as well as to war and the spread of weapons of mass those without such concerns. Roots for just - destruction. Living Christ’s peace is the peace might be found in Muslim traditions most one can do to reduce terrorism, to end as well as Christian, or in Jewish traditions poverty, to bring justice, and to usher in a as well as Buddhist and Hindu, or in Im - transformed global system. Living Christ’s manuel Kant’s categorical imperative 25 as peace is being faithful. And it is being well as other philosophical traditions. It is a responsible. process of continually establishing and ex - If we understand the things that make for

SPRING/SUMMER 2018 7 peace, we can act, with humility and con - Robert C. Johansen is Professor Emeritus of Po - science grounded in being faithful and litical Science and Peace Studies at the Univer - sity of Notre Dame and a Senior Fellow at the responsible, together with people of other Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies. faith traditions, to build justpeace. 

1. Matthew, 5:9, New Revised Standard Version, unless indicated otherwise. 2. John 14:27. 3. Matthew 26:52. 4. Luke 24:36. 5. Rufus D. Bowman, The Church of the Brethren and War (Elgin, IL: Brethren Publishing House, 1944), 350. 6. See Erica Chenoweth and Maria J. Stephan, Why Works: The Strategic Logic of Nonvio - lent Conflict (New York: Columbia University Press, 2011). 7. Thomas Pogge, World Poverty and Human Rights (Cambridge, UK: Polity, 2008), 264. 8. Karen J. Alter, The New Terrain of International Law: Courts, Politics, Rights (Princeton: Princeton Uni - versity Press, 2014), 4. 9. Thomas Pogge, Politics as Usual (Cambridge, UK: Polity, 2010), 11, 31. 10. “Resolution on Peace,” Minutes of the 161st Recorded Annual Conference of the Church of the Brethren , held at Orlando, FL, 10–15 June 1947, 92. 11. Matthew 5:17. 12. Matthew 5:43–44. 13. Matthew 5:18. 14. Matthew 22:37–39. 15. Matthew 22:40. 16. Matthew 22:17 RSV. 17. Matthew 22:21 RSV. 18. Matthew 7:12. 19. Matthews George Chunakara, Building Peace on Earth: Report of the International Ecumenical Peace Convocation (Geneva, Switzerland: World Council of Churches, 2013), 182. 20. See Terrence J. Rynne, “Toward a New Theology of Peace,” Sojourners 45:7 (July 2016): 9–10. See also, “An appeal to the to recommit to the centrality of gospel nonviolence,” accessed July 28, 2016. http://www.paxchristi.net/news/appeal-catholic-church-recommit-centrality-gospel-nonvio - lence/5855#sthash.omd9Fpal.dpuf. 21. “Vatican’s Message for Buddhist Feast of Vesakh,” April 22, 2017, accessed April 28, 2017. http://zenith.org/articles/vaticans-message-for-buddhist-feast-of-vesakh-2/. 22. The Pope is quoted in “Vatican’s Message for Buddhist Feast of Vesakh,” from his 2017 Message for the World Day of Peace, “Nonviolence: A Style of Politics for Peace,” no. 3, accessed April 28, 2017. http://zenith.org/articles/vaticans-message-for-buddhist-feast-of-vesakh-2/. 23. “Address of His Holiness Pope Francis on the Occasion of the Presentation of the Letters of Credence,” 15 December 2016. Quoted in “Vatican’s Message for Buddhist Feast of Vesakh,” and in CNS below. 24. Carol Glatz, “Pope: World Needs Nonviolent Responses to Social, Political Problems,” Catholic News Service , 15 December 2016, accessed April 28, 2017. https://www.ncronline.org/blogs/francis-chroni - cles/pope-world-needs-nonviolent-responses-social-political-problems. 25. Kant’s translated formulation is: “Act only in accordance with that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it become a universal law.” Immanuel Kant, Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals , translated by James W. Ellington (Cambridge: Hackett, 1993 [1785]), 30.

8 BRETHREN LIFE & THOUGHT