 Christopher Wake argues for a positive Christian role in international crises.
Ask an average student in the UK what relevance evangelical Christianity could possibly have to international affairs in the 21st century and the stock response will likely be less than positive. For many, the sentiments of Edward Said chime a resounding chord: "I have no misgivings about religion as a private autobiographical experience. What I dislike is the hijacking of religion for political purposes."
Yet as the intelligent students that we are it's important to attempt to perceive, in the sage words of The Office's David Brent, "the whole pie" and not just selected portions. When it comes to Christianity, indeed, it would be constructive to take a serious look at examples of where its advocates claim to have a positive impact on world affairs, in order to see if their actions match their rhetoric.
Evangelical Christians claiming to be genuinely altruistic don't come much more high profile than those working at the International Centre for Reconciliation (ICR) at Coventry Cathedral. Founded in 1940 and spearheaded by the courageous Rev Canon Andrew White, the ICR is one of the leading and most respected independent organisations working to promote peace in areas such as Western Africa and the Middle East. It is also unflinchingly Christian in its ethical grounding.
Does the ICR's presence in hot spots like Nigeria, Israel/Palestine and Iraq make it a harbinger of love, joy and peace? Or is it merely a case of the blind leading the blind, causing more long-term confusion and tension in already highly strung situations?
In recent months, the ICR has come to international prominence through Andrew White's position as one of the key players in Iraq attempting to negotiate the release of kidnapped Western hostages. Using his contacts with a network of religious and tribal leaders, White was among the leading mediators working behind the scenes to secure the release of Italian aid workers Simona Pari and Simona Torretta back in September. The Canon was also intimately involved in negotiations to release Kenneth Bigley from his captors in October, which before his horrendous death had looked to herald some promise.
In a more long-term capacity, the ICR is currently contributing towards peace in Iraq through their establishment of the Iraqi Initiative for Peace (IIP). The unique strength of this body lies in its desire to bring together all the key religious figures in Iraq in order to encourage regular dialogue and co-operation. White recognises that efforts towards a lasting peace in Iraq must involve the collaborative involvement of religious heads representing local Shi'ite Muslims, Sunni Muslims, Christians and other sects. Religious leaders hold considerable sway amongst the Iraqi people - as was highlighted by the huge march on Najaf initiated by the Grand Ayatollah Ali al Sistani in August. Such is their influence that White is positive that "engaging with the religious leaders is pivotal to Iraq's future being free of conflict".
The IIP has scored some notable successes, including the signing of the Baghdad Religious Accord in February 2004, which commits religious leaders in Iraq to guaranteeing religious freedom and uniting against larger violence. The pact has received the support of an impressive array of religious figureheads across Iraq, including the Grand Ayatollah Ali al Sistani, Muqtada al Sadr and many influential Sunni and Kurdish leaders.
Despite the uphill struggle the IIP will clearly face over the coming months, most would agree that the country is far less likely to descend into civil war if there exists a framework to enable dialogue and co-operation between powerful religious leaders. In May of this year, the IIP illustrated this principle when it negotiated the return to Iraq of the leading Sunni cleric Sheikh Abdul Latif Humayem. In recognition of the Sheikh's return, the Ayatollah threw a party in Baghdad to welcome him. This momentous occasion - a Shia Ayatollah entertaining a Sunni Cleric who was part of the previous regime - provides a symbol of hope for the future of Iraq that the IPP is helping to cement.
The ICR's commitment to engage seriously in the religious dimensions of a conflict makes it an organisation with a role as pertinent as it is exciting. While it would be unhelpful to label genuinely political conflicts with exclusively religious motivations, it is equally true to say that peace accords initiated by secular institutions tend to treat the spiritual in a reductionist manner. The ICR, by contrast, seeks to regard the issue of religion with the same seriousness as the participants themselves. White regards this as essential. "If religion is part of the cause of a conflict then it also needs to be part of the cure," he says.
As an evangelical Christian organisation, one might be tempted to assume that the ICR occupies something of a biased position when it comes to mediation and reconciliatory work. In actual fact, White regards the primary role of the ICR as being that of a neutral peacemaker as opposed to one of overt evangelism. Indeed, it is the ICR's position of neutrality on the one hand, and its clear understanding and respect for things spiritual on the other, which gives it particularly amenable credentials for mediation work in areas where religion is so divisive.
The recent role of the ICR in the Israel/Palestine conflict also serves to prove the relevant role a Christian organisation can play in conflict with deep spiritual dimensions. One view of the Oslo Accords of 1993 is that their stagnation was in part due to their overly secular nature. It could be said that the inability of the accords to deal with the profoundly spiritual dimensions surrounding issues associated with Jerusalem and the Holy Sites meant that they stood little chance of being universally accepted.
In order to work towards more meaningful and relevant dialogue, the ICR established the Alexandria Process in 2002. The cornerstone of the Process is the Alexandria Declaration, signed by leading religious leaders in Israel/Palestine and secured with support from Yasser Arafat, Ariel Sharon and the leadership of Egypt and Jordan. The Declaration, committing leading religious leaders to work together for peace, is today regarded by much of the international community as one of the only viable networks bridging the religious and political divide between Palestinians and Israeli leadership. Most of the delegates to the Permanent Committee for the Implementation of the Alexandria Declaration (PCIAD) do not have a history of involvement in inter-faith dialogue and therefore represent the grassroots opinion of their constituents better than out of touch liberal elites.
A hint at the kind of positive impact the PCIAD might be able to have in the region came during the siege of the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem in 2002, widely reported in the international press. The occupation of the Church by Palestinian fighters lasted five weeks but was finally resolved through the skilful mediation of White and the delegates of the PCIAD.
On a more ongoing basis, PCIAD delegates also engage regularly with religious leaders who are thought to play a role in the perpetuation of violence. Underpinning their work is an active campaign against the demonisation of 'the other' and an encouragement to forgive and embrace one's enemies. White himself has such strong relationships with both former Hamas commanders and settler rabbis that he has created a bond between them that enables honest debate and genuine compassion for each other's suffering.
In both Iraq and Israel/Palestine many religious leaders have responded positively to the ICR's presence. The prominent Iraqi Sunni, Sheikh Ahmed Quabassi, has said that he admires White and the ICR for their attitude of "bringing fire extinguishers to put out raging fires". There can be little doubt that the ICR is not merely a talking shop but an organisation active and passionate about improving the plight of people stuck in vicious cycles of conflict.
The ICR's work in the Middle East is rooted firmly in world affairs, but its motivations could be regarded as being from a different world all together. White's organisation may not aim to proselytise, but it is carrying out its work in response to the example set by Jesus, whose life of forgiveness, self-sacrifice and reconciliation provides both an inspiration and model. Just as Christ, through his sacrifice on the cross, reconciled God and his 'enemy' - mankind - so the ICR seeks to facilitate reconciliation between enemies at odds.
Within the context of a world suspicious about the role and relevance of religion, Andrew White and the ICR prove that evangelical Christianity does have a purposeful place when it comes to international conflict. Those involved at the ICR are not 'hijacking' their religion for political ends, but acting out their lives in the way they feel best represents what Christ has done for them. In areas of conflict such as Iraq and Israel/Palestine, the future is bleak unless it can be characterised by a forgiveness of past wrongs and a willingness to reconcile former enemies.
The example of White himself is a powerful one, and shows how a living faith can, against all the odds, contribute to peace and reconciliation in the world. Despite narrowly avoiding the blasts of suicide bombers, suffering regular disappointments and even betrayal, and being forced to live without his family for months on end, the Canon remains undeterred. "At the end of the day the compelling force that keeps us going is the reconciling message of Christ and the certainty of the resurrection," he says. White's conviction and hope in his cause, despite the great trials he faces, go far to prove the maxim spoken by Jesus over two millennia ago: "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God."
Christopher Wake is studying for a postgraduate degree in Violence, Conflict and Development at the School of Oriental and African Studies in London.
Powered by AkoComment 2.0! |
