[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 79 (Wednesday, May 14, 2008)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E907]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

[[Page E907]]



                           FAITH IN DIPLOMACY

                                 ______
                                 

                        HON. WAYNE T. GILCHREST

                              of maryland

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, May 14, 2008

  Mr. GILCHREST. Madam Speaker, I rise today to submit in the Record an 
opinion piece by Marshall Breger, a former alternate delegate of the 
U.S. to the U.N. Human Rights Commission in Geneva, and currently a 
professor of law at the Columbus School of Law, the Catholic University 
of America. In it, he discusses the importance of religion in 
negotiating peace through diplomacy.

                           Faith in Diplomacy

                          (By Marshall Breger)

       Whatever one's view of the Oslo peace process, it is 
     remarkable that the 1993 signing ceremony on the White House 
     lawn did not include benedictions by rabbis, imams, or 
     priests. In an America where religious leaders open sessions 
     of Congress, pray for the success of our armies, and even 
     sometimes pray for fair winds and bless the fleet at yachting 
     regattas, this is passing strange.
       The absence of religious content speaks volumes about the 
     assumptions that drive conventional diplomatic wisdom in 
     Washington. Foreign policy professionals instinctively recoil 
     at the notion that religion can or should play an important 
     role in foreign policy. They see it as a ``private matter,'' 
     according to Tom Farr, former director of the State 
     Department's office of international religious freedom, 
     ``properly beyond the bounds of policy analysis and action.''
       Far too many American diplomats and think-tank gurus 
     continue to dismiss or, at best, ignore religion as ``a tool 
     of statecraft.'' They talk about promoting ``civil society'' 
     but forget that in regions as diverse as the Middle East and 
     South Asia, the largest and most powerful actors in civil 
     society are religious. They assume that a ``moderate'' Muslim 
     is a less religious Muslim, and that an ``Islamist'' who 
     believes that Islam should play a role in politics must be in 
     his or her heart a bomb-throwing extremist. They treat 
     religion as a distraction to diplomacy and a threat to global 
     stability.
       Academic theories of modernization teach that as societies 
     modernize they irrevocably grow more secular. But the truth 
     is otherwise. Sociologist Peter Berger contends that 
     religious sensibility does not wither in the modern world. 
     Even the State Department, long a bastion of secularist 
     thinking, is beginning to get the picture. In a powerful book 
     written after she left the State Department, former secretary 
     Madeleine Albright effectively offered a mea culpa for 
     ignoring religion while she was in office. And Karen Hughes, 
     former undersecretary of state for public diplomacy and 
     public affairs, said that President Bush wanted her ``to 
     reach out and meet with religious leaders--because faith is 
     such an important part of life for so many Americans and so 
     many people across the world.''
       How should we incorporate religion in our foreign policy? 
     First, we must study it. You can't understand West Bank 
     settlers without understanding the ``Greater Israel'' 
     theology of Rabbi Tzvi Yehuda Kook and his disciples. Nor can 
     you follow Shia politics without an appreciation of the role 
     of the ashura--the commemoration of the death of the 
     Prophet Mohammed's grandson in the 680 battle of Karbala--
     as the transformative event in Shia martyrology, or the 
     oft-misunderstood role of the mahdi--the ``hidden Imam'' 
     expected to bring justice and final judgment to the 
     world--in Shia eschatology. Or how the ``puritanism'' of 
     18th-century theologian Mohammed Ibn Abd-al Wahab has 
     affected the Salafi understanding of the Quran.
       Only by understanding religion can we mobilize it as a 
     force for reconciliation and as an ally in the search for 
     peaceful solutions. No one can deny the injurious role 
     religious fervor has had in foreign affairs--just think of 
     the Thirty Years' War and Osama bin Laden. Nonetheless, we 
     know of many examples of how religion can assist in the 
     process of making peace. Consider the Community of 
     Sant'Edigio, which has midwived cease-fires in conflict zones 
     like Mozambique. The Vatican mediated the Argentina-Chile 
     dispute over the Beagle Channel, and evangelical Christians 
     have helped place international religious freedom, AIDS, and 
     global poverty on the major powers' foreign policy agendas. 
     Jewish groups, for their part, have led the campaign to end 
     the violence in Darfur.
       In 2002, Jewish, Muslim, and Christian leaders in the 
     Middle East signed the Alexandria Declaration of the 
     Religious Leaders of the Holy Land, committing themselves to 
     the dignity of the individual, whatever his or her religion, 
     and an end to bloodshed. That work is being carried on by 
     groups like Mosaica and the Adam Institute and by other 
     religious leaders such as Knesset member Rabbi Michael 
     Melchior and Sheikh Abdullah Nimr Darwish, founder of the 
     Islamic movement in Israel.
       Religious leaders in Jerusalem have formed a Council of 
     Religious Institutions of the Holy Land to promote not just 
     interfaith dialogue, but also practical advances like access 
     to and protection of holy sites; religious freedom; education 
     for tolerance in mosques, synagogues, and churches; and 
     support for a two-state solution that recognizes the dignity 
     of both Israelis and Palestinians. This nascent enterprise 
     includes religious leaders such as the Latin patriarch, chief 
     rabbis, and Sheikh Taysir Al-Tamimi, head of the Sharia 
     courts of Palestine.
       These developments make clear that religious leaders can 
     foster reconciliation in the Middle East and elsewhere. To 
     succeed, any new peace initiative must encompass their 
     efforts. Perhaps this time around we can avoid the religious 
     deficit of so much previous American diplomacy.

                          ____________________