Discuss and Evaluate the Role of Religion In the Formulation and Practice of Foreign Policy - Essay Example

Discuss and Evaluate the Role of Religion In the Formulation and Practice of Foreign Policy This paper attempts to examine the way in which a country's national religion effects the way in which it evolves and maintains its relationship with other nations. Is a country's foreign policy influenced by its religious outlook Do religious considerations always play a role in interaction between nations What are the potential for positive and negative outcomes of this Do religious differences always result in war, or can differing countries unite to answer other needs Introduction: Religion is an important element in establishing identity, both for the individual, and nation states. However, sovereign states have a history of religious intolerance towards other religions, both within their domains, and with other nations. When you start making foreign policy based on religion, and Particularly when it's fuelled by religion based on absolute Beliefs, you get some horrific results (Rappaport) The current differences in faiths becomes important when you consider that terms such as 'Fundamentalist' or 'Crusaders' are polemical terms which serve to label every member of that religious group as extremist and threatening: The term fundamentalism is used polemically to polarize the debate And eliminate the middle groundlittle distinction is made among Islamic traditionalists, neo traditionalists, radical and militant Islamists, while liberal and reformist currents in Islam are Ignored (Fundamentalism discourses: enemy images WAF) The danger here is obvious: by drawing different faiths as extremists or religious militants, leaders reduce the likelihood of possible reconciliation, understanding, and cooperation on important issues such as famine and poverty, tyrants and natural disasters. Defining the thoughts of others through religious caricatures essentially harms international relations, and blinds the public to other important issues. Some nations have used religion as an excuse to begin wars, and other nations have gone to war because of differences in faith; as can be seen in the case of the former Yugoslavia: Focus on 'ethnic cleansing' has enabled the use of religion as an Expression of "ethnic" difference. (Editorial 1995, Women Against Fundamentalisms) The 20th century demonstrated several clear examples of the difficulties posed by uniting religious belief with foreign policy, not least of all the Vatican's policy during World War II, which has been denounced as inadequate and even as actually favouring the Nazi's ( Manhattan, 171). There is also reference to "The conflicts between the Roman Church and the Freedoms of democracy" (Glenn Archer, quoted in Manhattan, 7). Sometimes the religious policies of a nation are in direct conflict with its own best interests, and the medieval histories of the Eastern European Bloc demonstrates: Constantly the battleground between the different Christian sects, and the mighty Muslim empire of the Ottoman's, Eastern Bloc states such as Yugoslavia, Romania and Hungary experienced not only external holy conflict, but internal as well. Religion is not just a state mechanism, but is also a personal belief of many World leaders, a fact which cannot be avoided when considering their foreign policy: Even in an ostensibly secular state the private religious convictions And concerns of foreign policy-makers can be crucial, even decisive Factors in shaping international relations (A. Rotter, quoted in Kirby, 3) These conflicts and difficulties can be demonstrated through three case studies. The first two shall concentrate upon religious conflicts between states within a certain time period: beginning with how foreign policy was affected by religious conflict during the reign of Henry VIII, and then considering how religion formed a part in the policies of the Cold War. This will culminate in a review of the religious troubles of the Eastern Bloc, looking at conflict in both the later middle ages and during the Bosnian War in the latter half of the 20th Century. The ideals of liberalism and secularism will also be briefly examined, as they play an important role in Western foreign policy, and must be considered. This will also involve considering the contrast between religious notions of peace and brotherhood and the murder of entire communities (During the St Bartholomew's Day Massacre, for example) Religious Wars: Religious wars are "An engagement across the boundaries of sovereignty" (Kaufman), and the notion of a 'just war' within Christianity has a long history, the First Crusade being one example. What is especially interesting about this Crusade is the way in which the peasants (under the leadership of Peter the Hermit), committed atrocities upon the Jewish population in Germany and the Balkans. These communities had been living with the Christians peacefully up to that point: but religious fervour made the peasants wipe out these religiously different peoples. (Medieval Sourcebook), though they were not part of the Muslim invasion of Jerusalem, nor involved in any wars with the Christians in Europe. Religious wars are not the only evidence of faith affecting foreign policy, and the three case studies will attempt to demonstrate all religious positions. Case Studies: Henry VIII Henry VIII of England inherited the throne of a nation deeply rooted in Catholicism, and for the first twenty years of his reign, this did not alter. Until the end of Papal supremacy in England, Henry's foreign policy concerns were centred around the two great superpowers of Renaissance Europe: France and Spain. Henry used the opposition of the Papacy to France's imperialism to bolster England's diplomatic power. He even offered to go on crusades against the Turkish Empire, almost certainly a diplomatic manoeuvre, rather than a genuine declaration (Scarisbrick, 105-6). Even before the final Break with Rome it seems clear that Henry used religious opposition to the Pope in order to 'lean' on him (Elton, 122), so until 1532, foreign policy actually affected how religion and religious dissent was regarded within England. This matter changed with the Reformation. Now, Henry was isolated from the two great powers, and vulnerable. Here, the religious difference between England, on one hand, and France and Spain on the other, made him seek out the Lutheran rulers of Eastern Europe: He overestimated the danger from abroad, and therefore overvalued An alliance with foreign Lutheransthis struggle, in which diplomacy And religion were intricately entwined, is the story of the years 1536-58 (Elton, 151) Although Henry remained in many respects a good Catholic, as demonstrated by the speed with which he abandoned the German Princes as soon as France and Spain began to quarrel amongst themselves, he also was ready to talk to the Lutherans (protestants) again should the need arise: Splendid isolation did not seem enough now, and the approach to Germany was resumed with vigour. From May to October 1538 German ambassadors tried to come to an agreementbut Henry's Reluctance tocommit the countryto Protestantism prevented the treaty. (Elton 155) Although Henry VIII is commonly seen as a renaissance dictator and tyrant (being associated with the phrase "Off with his head!"), he was willing to put his own dislike of Protestantism aside in order to promote the defence of his realm. His foreign policy had to revolve around religious differences in part, due to the strength of Catholicism: however, he was also willing to talk with both papists (French and Spanish ambassadors) and Lutherans (German and Flemish ambassadors). In 16th Century England, religion was secondary to foreign policy needs. In the next century and a half religious conflict in England resulted in the deaths of many thousands; however, these were mainly civil and internal difficulties; English subjects feared a return to Catholicism by their monarchs, but three Stuart monarchs married catholic consorts, and the ministers of Elizabeth I were prepared to accept a catholic prince as her husband in order to secure the succession. The ideal of using religion as a tool for foreign policy, rather than the other way around, shows that the two can mix successfully without leading to major conflict. The Cold War. The role of religion in the events of the Cold War conflict between the USA and Russia, and their allies, has recently been put to the foreground again, chiefly through a series of articles by Dianne Kirby, and one reviewer has described her theory as "That the Cold War was one of history's great religious wars" (Thomas). The Russian Communists' atheism was a prime target of the American administration: "Marxist atheism provided a window of vulnerability" (Kirby, 2). Not only that, but, again according to Kirby, this enabled the Christian Americans to take the moral high-ground, giving them the "Just war" element of the crusades. The conflict with the Soviet Union as a particular sort of Christian Enterprise, sustained by the conviction that the American cause Was morally right, and the communists were evil. (Kirby, 3). What was significant about the religious Americans conception of the Communist Russians is that they believed that not only were they in the right over this issue (God-fearing versus Godless), but also that they could create the break-up of the Soviet Union because of the Russians strong Orthodox faith. The American regime initiated propaganda which was designed to make the religious Russian overthrow the atheist Communists. This was surely a very simplistic view of the Russian peasant, who not only was religious, but also nationalistic and deeply cynical about the nature of priests (Consider the reputation of Rasputin as a womaniser). In addition, recent scholarship has shown that by the end of the Second World War, The USSR and the Church were not in opposition: so the foreign policy was clearly mistaken there (Kirby, 9) The secondary consideration is how the American view of their religion affected their view of the people who were affected by their Cold War policies. The defence of Western civilisation and the defence of Christianity Became linked in the minds of people in general, and also in the minds Of their leaders, taking on the characteristics of a crusade. (Thomas) Also, "An atheistic American is a contradiction in terms" (Civic Religion). This clearly shows that the American administration regarded the civilians of the Russian empire as less than their own citizens; it was therefore alright to liberate them through underhand practices, covert bombings, and war on their allies. It should be asked at this point whether the administrations of America and England failed to intervene in Stalin's mass murder because he was killing people who were not as valuable as Americans Religion here clearly played a part in deciding the foreign policy of the American administration; less is known about how the Russians viewed the situation. If, as it seems, the Americans saw themselves in a religious war with Russia, then it would not be too extreme to suggest that the Cold War was prolonged, with devastating effects in Russia and the Eastern Bloc, because the Americans were on a crusade, and could not compromise their religious views in order to develop a better foreign policy. Yugoslavia: One of the countries worst hit by the collapse of the Soviet Union was the state know known as 'the former Yugoslavia'. This area of Europe has long been a religious battleground, with a mixture of Catholic and Orthodox Christianity, Judaism, and Muslim faiths all operating within this kingdom. The Peasant's Crusade, which as we have seen resulted in the deaths of others who were not part of the Holy War, was not the final crusade which affected the Balkans. By the end of 1453, the Turks had conquered most of the former Byzantine Empire, and in the first few decades of the 16th Century, were attacking as far up as Vienna. For the Ottoman empire, this was a land-grab: for Catholic Europe, it was deeply disturbing. The final conquest of Serbia in 1459 resulted in a coalition of very different Princes, among them Vlad Dracula. He is a very interesting Prince, not only because of his inclusion in a Catholic force when he was Russian Orthodox (not becoming Catholic until about 1462, when he converted during imprisonment by the Catholic King Matthias of Hungary {McNally and Florescu, 101). As well as this, he also made several short-lived pacts with the Turks, his brother Radu was supposedly a convert to Islam, and his cousin, Stephan of Moldavia, himself joined forces with the Turkish invaders in order to attack Vlad's castle in Chilia. I think we can be clear, therefore, that Vlad's religious principles, like Henry VIII's, came secondary to his own self-preservation, and that foreign policy was geared towards whoever could give him the best advantage, regardless of faith. Expediency, rather than faith, was the Dracula's code. In the 20th century, Yugoslavia became well-known for a series of atrocities which were directed inside the country, mainly towards the Muslim Bosnians and Croatians. The conflict was reported as though the basis for the problems were 'Ancient hatreds", and Dick Cheney was quoted as saying: Until the Bosnians, Serbs and Croats decide to stop killing each other, there is nothing the outside world can do about it (Belman, 2004) The reaction of the world to the events in Yugoslavia demonstrate that there is some element of racism and religious division even in supposedly international organisations. The war was considered an "Ethnic conflict" In reality, the Serbs, Croats, Slovenes and Muslims in those Countries share a common Slavic ethic origin. They view Themselves today as distinct peoples largely because of their Different religious heritages (Religioustolerance) In essence the only thing dividing the Yugoslavians is their traditional religious identity. In fact, one of the tools of the conflict's leaders was to claim that churches and other religious buildings had been torn down by the other side (Bosnian Institute). While this was certainly a machination on the part of the leaders, that the Slavs themselves were so willing to believe these details implies that it tapped into previously existing religious intolerance. Liberalism and the Secular State: Liberal traditions are in part composed of the ideal that human beings should be free to worship in whichever way they choose: a liberty which is on the first pages of all human rights and liberty confirmations across the globe. "Maintaining the separation of Church and state is a necessary precondition of liberty" (Reich). The combination of religious bias and a nation's foreign policy is contrary to liberalist ideals. Even in England, so determinedly secular, the parliament voted not to repeal the Act Of Succession, which prohibits a Catholic from succeeding to the throne of Great Britain (Madeley, 4). At the moment, it seems as though no country can successfully enact religious neutrality, a worrying affair when the divisions between Christians, Muslims and Jews need to be closed if we are to prevent serious conflict in the Middle East. Conclusion. Religious conflict continues to shape and define the modern world, although this is in direct contrast to the ideals of the secular institutions which are governing the west. While 16th Century monarchs were at least prepared to go along with a foreign policy which demanded treaties with different religious groups, the largest superpower in the West has shown that it regards religion as an integral part of its foreign strategy. Although even religious leaders say that It is not the role of the church, in the main, to say what we should Do on North Korea. (Wortman) Religious works are often cited for their pressing demands for and end to bloodshed, and the promotion of peace: however, religious conflict often has a completely opposite result. Civil war in Yugoslavia resulted in the deaths of many thousands of peoples who were of the same descent and backgrounds as the people who killed them. The only difference was the faith of killer and killed, and this demonstrates why the need for religious neutrality is even more important now than in previous centuries. Religion still plays a large role in a country's foreign policy, and this may result in more and more conflict between the world's different religious powers. Bibliography A Civic Religion Of the American Way of Life at http://www.colorado.edu/ReligiousStudies/chernus/4820-ColdWarCulture/Readings/CivicRreligion.pdf England Under The Tudors Elton, G. R. (3rd Edition, Routledge, London 1991) European Liberal Democracy and the Principle of State Religious Neutrality Madeley, J. www.lse.ac.uk/collections/europeanInstitute/articles Henry VIII Scarisbrick, J. (Yale University Press, 1997) Former Yugoslavia and Pope John Paul II Patrick Moore April 14 2005, in www.bosnia.org.uk/news Fundamentalism discourses: Enemy Images, Fundamentalist Politics in Israel and the Vatican, Identifying Politics with Religion, And Editorial, Journal no.5 1994 all in Women Against Fundamentalisms waf.gn.apc.org/articles.htm In Search of Dracula McNally, R, and Florescu, R. (Robson, London, 1997) 'Just follow the money': the cold war, the humanistic study of religion, and the fallacy of insufficient cynicism. McCutcheon, R. at www.as.us.edu/maasr/mccutchcoldwaressay.pdf. Medieval Sourcebook: Albert of Aix and Ekkehard of Aura: Emico and the Slaughter of the Rhineland Jews at www.fordham.edu/halsall/sbook.html. Politics, Culture, Media and Leadership in the Transformation of Yugoslavia. Belman, J. (May 2004) Religion and the Cold War - an Introduction Kirby, D. www.palgrave.com/pdfs/0333993985.pdf. Religion and the Cold War book review by Merrilyn Thomas, at www.history.ac.uk/ihr/Focus/cold/reviews/thomas.html Religion and Foreign Policy: an interview with Roland Stevens Homet, Jr. Wortman, J. www.thewitness.org/archive/march2003/interview.html Religious Aspects of the Yugoslavia-Kosovo Conflict in www.religioustolderance.org. The Religious Wars Reich, R. In The American Prospect Vol 14, Issue 11, 12/01/03 Religious Wars and World Peace Frank Kaufman. International Coalition for Religious Freedom, Washington DC, April 1998. Scholar Warns Against Mixing Religion and Foreign Policy Scott Rappaport, in UC Santa Cruz Currents. http://currents.ucsc.edu/04-05/05-02/religion .asp The Vatican in World Politics Avro Manhattan, (1949, Gaer Associations. First publication in England by C.A. Watts and Co ltd. London) Read More