Time for truth and moving beyond conspiracies
The Political Pulpit
The Political Pulpit is intended to tackle various societal issues from opposite points of
view, ostensibly from a conservative and liberal viewpoint. There are issues and seasons
when a marked difference simply is not possible and if attempted gives way to becoming
act one of the theater of the absurd. Albert Camus, as both a playwright and philosopher
of "The Theater of the Absurd," espouses the ultimate landing point to all who do not
believe a righteous remedy for what we as Christians understand as unchecked evil.
"Camus argued that humanity had to resign itself to recognizing that a fully satisfying rational explanation of the universe was beyond its reach; in that sense, the world must ultimately be seen as absurd" (1995, Grolier Multimedia Encyclopedia). The absence of hope with an unhealthy sprinkling of despair, confusion, and refusal to commit are earmarks of the citizens of any and all countries. Evil is evil and as a reality has as much right to exist as what some call good. The meanings of the two words are transposed over each other making a clear definition impossible to the person outside the Christian worldview.
If I announce total support of the war in Iraq without a thoughtful accounting of the primary reason for entry and the jumble of current events, my words would betray the fundamental Christian view of humanity being of sacred worth, regardless of geographical location, religion or absence of religion, and ethnic connection. I am convinced, as my colleague writes, the weapons of mass destruction were obviously non- existent and the cavalier use of this absent fact as a reason for making war is reprehensible. I do not connect the dots forming an outline of an oil rig suggesting a covert action to keep America supplied with oil or the pockets of American oil tycoons lined with black gold. I have never been much of an X-file type person believing in conspiracies.
The only conspiracy I recognize is born in the heart of evil.
Prior to the entry of the coalition forces, Iraq was immersed in evil. One should not have to recite a litany of the atrocities of Saddam's reign to justify the presence of evil. It is naive to believe because one leader was deposed and found slinking in a hole that evil would throw in the towel or go down for the count. Evil is active in Iraq. If we do not create an environment for democracy to gain prestige and position, we will resign Iraq to the world of Albert Camus. I am well aware that most people in the United States, according to television ratings, prefer to watch the antics of Lindsay Lohan or catch a glimpse of the latest photograph of Angelina Jolie-Pitt's baby than an in-depth reporting of the War in Iraq.
As I write this article, the guns are silent for the moment in the skirmish between Lebanon and Israel. An accord has been reached without the massive entry of coalition armed forces. I am neither pro-Israel nor pro-Lebanon a.k.a. Hezbollah. Israel's reaction to the kidnapping of two of their soldiers by assaulting the alleged hiding places of the Hezbollah nestled in the community of Lebanese citizens is unacceptable to me. Lebanese civilians killed stands at 1,100 and 43 Israeli citizens. Hezbollah as a political group in the Middle East should have lost all credibility as they hid in the midst of working-class people. There is a word I want to throw into the mix that I believe describes both the actions of Israel and Hezbollah: arrogance.
"Arrogance" is a word that personifies evil. Using the much-quoted sinking of the Titanic as a monumental representation of arrogance in motion with the weak and innocent being cruelly harmed as the freezing water embraced both steel and flesh without regard for sacred worth, all the time a litany of unsinkable was muttered by the baffled survivors. The disregard for the sacred worth of human life was evident in the "skirmish" between Israel and Hezbollah. Almost within shouting distance is a much more complicated war that is marred by the same personification of evil, arrogance.
America thought we could dash into Iraq and, in lightning speed with minimal casualties, overrun the real estate. We did. But, our arrogance has betrayed us. We believed defeating the apparent evil ruler would win us entrance into the hearts and lives of all the people. It would seem we have a rather short memory in regard to occupying foreign soil. In 1915, Woodrow Wilson sent 330 Marines to Haiti to quiet an uprising against the dictator, Jean Vilbrun Guillaume. Why? The reason for the intervention was to protect American business interest.
The Marine numbers grew and a projected short-term intervention stretched to nineteen years. The U.S. Marine Corps was given control over the government. We possessed veto privileges over all decisions made by the new order. The Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Franklin D. Roosevelt, wrote their new constitution with a carefully worded section permitting foreigners the right to own land in Haiti. This was against a much coveted and precious law dating back to 1804. Haitian rebels continuously provided resistance to the American occupation. Over 2,000 Haitians died resisting the occupation. We disregarded the cultural nuances and exhibited a pronounced racism in regard to believing the Haitians were capable of self-rule. The fact is, their constitution was written by a person outside their country with little knowledge of the unique nature of the oldest Black republic in the hemisphere. Haiti won its independence in 1804 from France. America was arrogant in how it viewed this nation. Although President Bush applauds the occupation of the Philippines as an example of success, I seriously doubt any history scholar would agree.
We arrogantly believe we know what is best for the people of Iraq. I join the ranks of arrogance in maintaining that democracy is essential for this ancient nation as well as the introduction of the Christian message of God's redemptive love. But, I do not believe I understand the culture or history of Iraq to the degree of knowing exactly how to communicate and influence the political restructuring necessary for democracy to succeed. I suggest we were improperly prepared to serve the cause of freedom in a cross- cultural setting.
Perhaps William Patey, the former UK ambassador to Iraq, is absolutely correct when he inferred that civil war is a high probability before democracy is set in place. General John Abizaid, U.S. Commander in the Middle East, agrees with the probability of civil war.
This should not surprise anyone! It is not a sign of a weak American military action in Iraq, rather the inevitability of a people given freedom of expression without careful regard for the fact of a history of internal mistrust and profound religious and philosophical disagreements. Thirty-six percent of the Iraq populations are Sunni. Interestingly, ninety percent of all Muslims worldwide are Sunni. They follow their understanding of the revelations given to Muhammad. Enter the Shi'ites or the "party of Ali." They profess their members are directly descended from the prophet's family, especially the descendants of Muhammad's daughter, Fatima, and her husband, Ali. Needless to say the two groups do not agree and are adversarial toward each other.
Now let's move to the existence of seven armed military groups in Iraq which have existed prior to the war: Al-Qaeda, Mujahiddein Shura Council, Sunni Nationalist, Ansar Al-Islam, Shia Militias, Mahdii Army, and Badr Brigade. U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad, has described such groups as "the infrastructure of civil war." These groups are responsible for the brutal murder by beheading of numerous businessmen transmitted worldwide over the internet. Car bombs, people bombs, rocket attacks, torture, kidnapping, and the list of atrocities goes on and on. I can name the groups because of the research by the BBC, yet I admit little understanding of what motivates them to the degree of violence. Once again, I want to quote our Ambassador to Iraq as reported in an interview by Scott Johnson, Newsweek August 14, 2006: "So you believe in the idea that to defeat terror you have to fundamentally change the Middle East?
"We need to succeed in ways that Iraq becomes an asset in the war on terror. It's part of the broader transformation of this region. You have to work on the Arab-Israeli conflict. You have to improve conditions so that the factors that produce Islamic extremism, which in turn leads to some becoming terrorists, are dealt with. That's not going to be done quickly. It's not weeks or days. The problem of terrorism is a result of a dysfunctional system, it's a crisis of a civilization that is producing this, a crisis within Islam, and it's going to take a lot of effort by Muslims in their own countries with their friends from abroad. What happens in Iraq, what happens in Afghanistan, will shape this region."
I propose the United States entered the war on the false assumption of the existence of weapons of mass destruction. This immediately biased our tactics and expectations for success.
Second, personally I have admitted to number one and failure to embrace this conclusion will only exasperate the sense of being disconnected to the reality of a war that began on an incorrect directive. It is absurd to agree and proceed with what is historically false. I believe intervention was necessary. The scope of the intervention in retrospect was obviously flawed. Yet the true hope for a future Iraq as a democracy is in the hands of the coalition forces cooperating in totality with the established government.
Third, the absurdity, if protected, will foster a culture absent of hope yielding to confusion and total disillusionment. We must embrace the truth if we truly desire to go forward in establishing a democracy.
Fourth, our arrogant attitude must cease if we are to birth a democratic republic. There are too many signs of "America knows best" and until we approach this ancient land with a teachable spirit, I fear we will perpetuate a decade of civil war and strife among people who are citizens of the same nation.
Fifth, terrorism is the real enemy. I am totally baffled in any attempt to comprehend the mentality of the terrorist. I agree with Ambassador Khalilzad in that it is a problem within the Middle East and cannot be addressed in isolation of all nations. Cooperation is essential among the nations terrorists use for their purpose.
Sixth, radical Islam is not the Islam of the majority of the people called Muslims, whether Sunnis or Shiites. Radical Islam is as unacceptable.
The scriptures for Thanksgiving and Advent are filled with opportunities to preach the following topics: admission of being wrong and going forward with integrity, forgiveness as a powerful theme as a backdrop of a nation desperately needing the healing of forgiveness as understood by our Christian faith, the redemptive love of God, the evil of arrogance and how it can brutalize a person's actions causing pain for the innocent, and acceptance of authentic world religions without denying our belief in the supremacy of Christ. Hostility toward Islam because of the action of Islamic militants is unacceptable. Advent is not a time to preach politics, rather to allow the examples of God's redemptive power evident in the world to shine through to all hearts.
Chester Harris is the senior pastor of Dueber United Methodist Church in Canton, Ohio. He holds a D.Min. degree from Asbury Theological Seminary and an M.Div. degree from Pittsburgh Theological Seminary. Chester enjoys being a father and grandfather.
"Camus argued that humanity had to resign itself to recognizing that a fully satisfying rational explanation of the universe was beyond its reach; in that sense, the world must ultimately be seen as absurd" (1995, Grolier Multimedia Encyclopedia). The absence of hope with an unhealthy sprinkling of despair, confusion, and refusal to commit are earmarks of the citizens of any and all countries. Evil is evil and as a reality has as much right to exist as what some call good. The meanings of the two words are transposed over each other making a clear definition impossible to the person outside the Christian worldview.
If I announce total support of the war in Iraq without a thoughtful accounting of the primary reason for entry and the jumble of current events, my words would betray the fundamental Christian view of humanity being of sacred worth, regardless of geographical location, religion or absence of religion, and ethnic connection. I am convinced, as my colleague writes, the weapons of mass destruction were obviously non- existent and the cavalier use of this absent fact as a reason for making war is reprehensible. I do not connect the dots forming an outline of an oil rig suggesting a covert action to keep America supplied with oil or the pockets of American oil tycoons lined with black gold. I have never been much of an X-file type person believing in conspiracies.
The only conspiracy I recognize is born in the heart of evil.
Prior to the entry of the coalition forces, Iraq was immersed in evil. One should not have to recite a litany of the atrocities of Saddam's reign to justify the presence of evil. It is naive to believe because one leader was deposed and found slinking in a hole that evil would throw in the towel or go down for the count. Evil is active in Iraq. If we do not create an environment for democracy to gain prestige and position, we will resign Iraq to the world of Albert Camus. I am well aware that most people in the United States, according to television ratings, prefer to watch the antics of Lindsay Lohan or catch a glimpse of the latest photograph of Angelina Jolie-Pitt's baby than an in-depth reporting of the War in Iraq.
As I write this article, the guns are silent for the moment in the skirmish between Lebanon and Israel. An accord has been reached without the massive entry of coalition armed forces. I am neither pro-Israel nor pro-Lebanon a.k.a. Hezbollah. Israel's reaction to the kidnapping of two of their soldiers by assaulting the alleged hiding places of the Hezbollah nestled in the community of Lebanese citizens is unacceptable to me. Lebanese civilians killed stands at 1,100 and 43 Israeli citizens. Hezbollah as a political group in the Middle East should have lost all credibility as they hid in the midst of working-class people. There is a word I want to throw into the mix that I believe describes both the actions of Israel and Hezbollah: arrogance.
"Arrogance" is a word that personifies evil. Using the much-quoted sinking of the Titanic as a monumental representation of arrogance in motion with the weak and innocent being cruelly harmed as the freezing water embraced both steel and flesh without regard for sacred worth, all the time a litany of unsinkable was muttered by the baffled survivors. The disregard for the sacred worth of human life was evident in the "skirmish" between Israel and Hezbollah. Almost within shouting distance is a much more complicated war that is marred by the same personification of evil, arrogance.
America thought we could dash into Iraq and, in lightning speed with minimal casualties, overrun the real estate. We did. But, our arrogance has betrayed us. We believed defeating the apparent evil ruler would win us entrance into the hearts and lives of all the people. It would seem we have a rather short memory in regard to occupying foreign soil. In 1915, Woodrow Wilson sent 330 Marines to Haiti to quiet an uprising against the dictator, Jean Vilbrun Guillaume. Why? The reason for the intervention was to protect American business interest.
The Marine numbers grew and a projected short-term intervention stretched to nineteen years. The U.S. Marine Corps was given control over the government. We possessed veto privileges over all decisions made by the new order. The Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Franklin D. Roosevelt, wrote their new constitution with a carefully worded section permitting foreigners the right to own land in Haiti. This was against a much coveted and precious law dating back to 1804. Haitian rebels continuously provided resistance to the American occupation. Over 2,000 Haitians died resisting the occupation. We disregarded the cultural nuances and exhibited a pronounced racism in regard to believing the Haitians were capable of self-rule. The fact is, their constitution was written by a person outside their country with little knowledge of the unique nature of the oldest Black republic in the hemisphere. Haiti won its independence in 1804 from France. America was arrogant in how it viewed this nation. Although President Bush applauds the occupation of the Philippines as an example of success, I seriously doubt any history scholar would agree.
We arrogantly believe we know what is best for the people of Iraq. I join the ranks of arrogance in maintaining that democracy is essential for this ancient nation as well as the introduction of the Christian message of God's redemptive love. But, I do not believe I understand the culture or history of Iraq to the degree of knowing exactly how to communicate and influence the political restructuring necessary for democracy to succeed. I suggest we were improperly prepared to serve the cause of freedom in a cross- cultural setting.
Perhaps William Patey, the former UK ambassador to Iraq, is absolutely correct when he inferred that civil war is a high probability before democracy is set in place. General John Abizaid, U.S. Commander in the Middle East, agrees with the probability of civil war.
This should not surprise anyone! It is not a sign of a weak American military action in Iraq, rather the inevitability of a people given freedom of expression without careful regard for the fact of a history of internal mistrust and profound religious and philosophical disagreements. Thirty-six percent of the Iraq populations are Sunni. Interestingly, ninety percent of all Muslims worldwide are Sunni. They follow their understanding of the revelations given to Muhammad. Enter the Shi'ites or the "party of Ali." They profess their members are directly descended from the prophet's family, especially the descendants of Muhammad's daughter, Fatima, and her husband, Ali. Needless to say the two groups do not agree and are adversarial toward each other.
Now let's move to the existence of seven armed military groups in Iraq which have existed prior to the war: Al-Qaeda, Mujahiddein Shura Council, Sunni Nationalist, Ansar Al-Islam, Shia Militias, Mahdii Army, and Badr Brigade. U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad, has described such groups as "the infrastructure of civil war." These groups are responsible for the brutal murder by beheading of numerous businessmen transmitted worldwide over the internet. Car bombs, people bombs, rocket attacks, torture, kidnapping, and the list of atrocities goes on and on. I can name the groups because of the research by the BBC, yet I admit little understanding of what motivates them to the degree of violence. Once again, I want to quote our Ambassador to Iraq as reported in an interview by Scott Johnson, Newsweek August 14, 2006: "So you believe in the idea that to defeat terror you have to fundamentally change the Middle East?
"We need to succeed in ways that Iraq becomes an asset in the war on terror. It's part of the broader transformation of this region. You have to work on the Arab-Israeli conflict. You have to improve conditions so that the factors that produce Islamic extremism, which in turn leads to some becoming terrorists, are dealt with. That's not going to be done quickly. It's not weeks or days. The problem of terrorism is a result of a dysfunctional system, it's a crisis of a civilization that is producing this, a crisis within Islam, and it's going to take a lot of effort by Muslims in their own countries with their friends from abroad. What happens in Iraq, what happens in Afghanistan, will shape this region."
I propose the United States entered the war on the false assumption of the existence of weapons of mass destruction. This immediately biased our tactics and expectations for success.
Second, personally I have admitted to number one and failure to embrace this conclusion will only exasperate the sense of being disconnected to the reality of a war that began on an incorrect directive. It is absurd to agree and proceed with what is historically false. I believe intervention was necessary. The scope of the intervention in retrospect was obviously flawed. Yet the true hope for a future Iraq as a democracy is in the hands of the coalition forces cooperating in totality with the established government.
Third, the absurdity, if protected, will foster a culture absent of hope yielding to confusion and total disillusionment. We must embrace the truth if we truly desire to go forward in establishing a democracy.
Fourth, our arrogant attitude must cease if we are to birth a democratic republic. There are too many signs of "America knows best" and until we approach this ancient land with a teachable spirit, I fear we will perpetuate a decade of civil war and strife among people who are citizens of the same nation.
Fifth, terrorism is the real enemy. I am totally baffled in any attempt to comprehend the mentality of the terrorist. I agree with Ambassador Khalilzad in that it is a problem within the Middle East and cannot be addressed in isolation of all nations. Cooperation is essential among the nations terrorists use for their purpose.
Sixth, radical Islam is not the Islam of the majority of the people called Muslims, whether Sunnis or Shiites. Radical Islam is as unacceptable.
The scriptures for Thanksgiving and Advent are filled with opportunities to preach the following topics: admission of being wrong and going forward with integrity, forgiveness as a powerful theme as a backdrop of a nation desperately needing the healing of forgiveness as understood by our Christian faith, the redemptive love of God, the evil of arrogance and how it can brutalize a person's actions causing pain for the innocent, and acceptance of authentic world religions without denying our belief in the supremacy of Christ. Hostility toward Islam because of the action of Islamic militants is unacceptable. Advent is not a time to preach politics, rather to allow the examples of God's redemptive power evident in the world to shine through to all hearts.
Chester Harris is the senior pastor of Dueber United Methodist Church in Canton, Ohio. He holds a D.Min. degree from Asbury Theological Seminary and an M.Div. degree from Pittsburgh Theological Seminary. Chester enjoys being a father and grandfather.
