THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY of AMERICA the Christian, The
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA The Christian, the Church, and Causes of War: A Systematic Analysis of the World Council of Churches’ Ecumenical Call to Just Peace A DISSERTATION Submitted to the Faculty of the School of Theology and Religious Studies Of The Catholic University of America In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree Doctor of Philosophy © Copyright All Rights Reserved By Tapani Kristian Saarinen Washington, D.C. 2016 The Christian, the Church, and Causes of War: A Systematic Analysis of the World Council of Churches’ Ecumenical Call to Just Peace Tapani Saarinen, Ph.D. Director: Michael Root, Ph.D. The World Council of Churches’ (WCC) Decade to Overcome Violence between 2001-2010 included theological reflection and work to overcome all violence. The results can be read in a document called Ecumenical Call to Just Peace (ECJP). ECJP presents a call to overcome violence and establish Just Peace in four distinct contexts: community, ecology, economy and international politics. As causes of violence differ depending on context, however, can such a holistic approach provide a workable solution for various contexts and their specific challenges? My study focuses on the possible contributions of ECJP’s teaching for the states as actors in international politics. The purpose of my study is to analyze and assess ECJP from the perspective of the causes of war, especially as such causes have been investigated by realist theories of international relations (IR). I transfer the IR approach which unites work for peace and analysis of the causes of war to the study of ecumenical teaching in ECJP. By placing the ecumenical teaching on Just Peace within the scrutiny of IR theory, my study tests the workability of ECJP’s teaching for states as actors in international politics. The results of my study show that ECJP’s teaching does not provide a workable plan to overcome wars and to establish Just Peace between states. There are four main reasons for this: Firstly, ECJP’s teaching on war’s causes is limited. Secondly, ECJP’s elaboration of international politics is limited. Thirdly, ECJP’s elaboration of international actors is limited, and fourthly, ECJP’s teaching and policy proposals rely on a theology of Just Peace, rather than a political understanding of the challenges which need to be overcome. My conclusion is, that WCC’s Just Peace suffers from too wide a scope. Without analyzing properly the challenges of a specific context, ECJP is not able to provide workable solutions for that context. A more focused Just Peace should prioritize those contexts, where Christians and churches have real power to make a change. This dissertation by Tapani Saarinen fulfills the dissertation requirement for the doctoral degree in theology and religious studies approved by Michael Root, Ph.D., as Director, and by William A. Barbieri, Ph.D., and Risto Saarinen, Dr. Theol., Dr. Phil., and David Walsh, Ph.D., as Readers. __________________________________________ Michael Root, Ph.D., Director __________________________________________ William A. Barbieri, Ph.D., Reader __________________________________________ Risto Saarinen, Dr. Theol., Dr. Phil., Reader __________________________________________ David Walsh, Ph.D., Reader ii Dedication This work is dedicated to IR scholars, who work to include religion in IR theories. This work is also dedicated to religious actors, whose work for peace would gain from the understanding which IR brings to international politics. iii “To explain how peace can be more readily achieved requires an understanding of the causes of war.” Kenneth Walzt, Man, the State and War iv Table of Contents 1. Introduction: Ecumenical Theology and the Task of Understanding the Causes of War 1.1. The Purpose of This Study 1.2 The Study Questions 1.3. Why Do These Questions Arise? 1.3.1. Just Peace as an Ecumenical Priority 1.3.2. Study of the Ecumenical Call to Just Peace 1.3.3. Theology and Causes of War 1.3.4. Religion and International Relations Theory 1.3.5. Causes of War in the WCC’s Theological Work During the DOV 1.3.6. Various Versions of an Emerging Paradigm of Just Peace 1.3.6.1. Just Peace as Social Development 1.3.6.2. Just Peace as Jus Post Bellum 1.3.6.3. Just Peace as a Peacebuilding Paradigm 1.4. Answers and Thesis 1.5. Methodology: Systematic Analysis 1.5.1. Text and Context 1.5.2. Building Blocs of International Relations (IR) Analysis 1.5.2.1. Actors, Instruments and Goals 1.5.2.2. Immediate and Underlying Causes of War at Three Levels of Analysis 1.5.2.3. Why Use IR in an Ecumenical Study? v 1.5.2.4. Why Use Realism as an IR Theory? 1.5.2.5. Limits and Challenges of IR 1.6. The Sources 1.6.1. Primary and Secondary Sources 1.6.2. What is An Ecumenical Call to Just Peace? 1.6.3. Violence and Peace in the General Outline of ECJP 1.7. Scope: Just Peace as “Peace Among the Peoples” 1.8. Key Concepts 1.9. Roadmap 2. IR, Realism and Causes of War 2.1. The Purpose of This Chapter 2.2. The Anarchic International System and Its Consequenses 2.2.1. International Politics as Politics in the Absense of a Common Sovereign 2.2.2. Security Dilemma 2.2.3. Balances of Power 2.2.4. Alliances 2.2.5. Nuclear Weapons 2.2.6. Realism and Liberalism: Two IR Answers to Anarchy 2.3. Realism and the Causes of War 2.3.1. The Basic Tenets of Realism and Their Critics 2.3.2. What Causes War According to Neorealism? vi 3. The World Council of Churches and the Ecumenical Call to Just Peace 3.1. The Purpose of This Chapter 3.2. Justice and Peace Are Aspects of the WCC’s Ecumenical Vision 3.3. ECJP in the Context of the WCC’s Social Ethics Tradition 3.3.1. ECJP and the Relationship Between History and the Eschatological Kingdom of God 3.3.2. Violence and Peace in the WCC’s Social Ethics Tradition 3.4. ECJP and Disputes Over WCC’s Ecumenical Priorities 4. Analysis: Causes of War in the Ecumenical Call to Just Peace 4.1. Purpose of This Chapter 4.2. The Concept of War in the ECJP 4.3. Causes of War in the Ecumenical Call to Just Peace 4.3.1. Individual Level Causes of War 4.3.1.1. Sin 4.3.1.1.1. Sin as a Cause for War 4.3.1.1.2. Analysis of Sin as War’s Cause 4.3.1.2. Theological Anthropology 4.3.1.2.1. Mixed Character of Fallen Humanity 4.3.1.2.2. Image and Likeness of God: Basis for Just Peace? 4.3.1.2.3. Eschatological Hope Settles Anthropological Tensions 4.3.1.2.4. Summary from the Analysis of Theological Anthropology vii 4.3.1.3. Logic of Violence 4.3.1.3.1. Regarding the Other Person as an Enemy, and Responding to Violence with Violence 4.3.1.3.2. Eschatological Hope as Basis for Overcoming the Logic of Violence 4.3.1.3.3. Analysis of the Logic of Violence 4.3.2. International System Level Causes of War 4.3.2.1. Proliferation of Weapons and High Global Military Expenditures 4.3.2.2. Analysis of the Proliferation of Weapons and High Military Expenditures 4.4. ECJP’s Understanding of International Politics 4.5. ECJP’s Understanding of International Actors 5. Assessment: ECJP’s Policy Proposals for Overcoming the Causes of War 5.1. The Purpose of This Chapter 5.2. Peace Education 5.2.1. Peace Education and ECJP’s Teaching on the Causes of War 5.2.2. ECJP’s Proposal for Peace Education 5.3. Disarmament 5.3.1. Disarmament and ECJP’s Causes of War Analysis 5.3.2. ECJP’s Policy Proposal for Disarmament viii 5.3.2.1. Disarmament and Just Peace 5.3.2.2. Disarmament and Non-violence 5.3.2.3. Disarmament, the Christian, and the Church 5.3.2.4. Disarmament and Security 5.3.2.5. Disarmament and the Eschatological Kingdom 5.4. Building a New International Order of Peace 5.4.1. ECJP’s Teaching on War’s Causes and a New International Order 5.4.2. ECJP’s Policy Proposal For a New International Order 5.4.2.1. International Rule of Law 5.4.2.2. Universal Human Rights and Global Governance 6. Conclusion 6.1. Thesis Revisited: Just Peace Does Not Provide a Workable Plan to Overcome Wars Between States 6.2. ECJP Lacks an Analysis of the Key Causes of War 6.2.1. Theological Understanding of War and Its Consequenses 6.2.2. ECJP’s Teaching on War’s Causes is Guided by Theology 6.2.2.1. Individual Level Causes of War 6.2.2.1.1. Sin 6.2.2.1.2. Anthropology 6.2.2.1.3. Logic of Violence 6.2.2.2. International System Level Causes of War 6.2.2.3. Opposing Points of View about Causes of War ix 6.3. ECJP’s Elaboration of International Politics is Limited 6.3.1. International Anarchy and International Order of Just Peace 6.3.2. Opposing Points of View about International Politics 6.4. ECJP Does Not Elaborate the Relative Power Between International Actors 6.4.1. Hard Power of States, Soft Power of Christians 6.4.2. International Actors in ECJP 6.4.3. Opposing Points of View on Relative Power 6.5. Just Peace Relies on Eschatological Hope, but States Cannot 6.5.1.