In
light of the flurry of headlines related to recent events surrounding the 30
month civil war in Syria, my thoughts quickly gravitated to Christ’s parable in
Luke 14:31. As Jesus recounted the demands of true discipleship, He illustrated
the realities of following Him with a king’s cost-benefit analysis for going to
war. His point is well taken, no responsible king rushes headlong into battle
without first thoroughly and carefully tabulating the price tag.
Even
though Christ was referencing those who claim to follow Him, His example of a
king comprehensively assessing the potential of war is pertinent. So how
should Christians assess the current sabre rattling related to Syria and
possible US involvement? Better yet, what should guide our thinking as we seek
to make God-informed decisions?
As
one who subscribes to what is known as Just War theory, there are a number of
sober-minded questions that must be posed and honestly answered, before any
determination can be made. Based on the labyrinth that is the Middle East, this
will not be easy or straightforward.
For
starters, Just War theory is predicated on the divine mandate of government to
punish evil doers and praise those who do right (1 Peter 2:14). Romans 13:4
echoes the same sovereign sentiment when government is authorized “to bear the
sword” and serve as a “terror” to evil which “carries out God’s wrath on wrong
doing.” In a post-fall world this sometimes necessitates the use of deadly
force, though this should never be taken lightly. In short, a nation has divine
sanction and a moral obligation to defend itself from enemies both foreign and
domestic. But this should never be done devoid of sober-minded assessment and
vigorous deliberation.
So
how does this apply to the situation in Syria, where over 100,000 Syrians have
died? In accordance with Just War theory, a series of tough, penetrating,
thought provoking questions must be answered and debated objectively before the
first bullet is ever jacked into the chamber. The following is but a sampling
of such an inquiry:
1. Is this war really just? :
Those contemplating war must first entertain the real reasons they are marching
Johnny off to war. In the case of Syria and Bashar Assad, President Obama views
intervention as a humanitarian effort for freedom fighting, democracy loving
rebels. All of this is lashed to the US assertion that Assad is guilty of using
chemical weapons against his own people. To date it is not
known whether the chemical strike was by
al-Qaeda backed rebels or Assad, as both are known to have access to chemical
agents. There is a great degree of ambiguity surrounding this. As the old saying goes “Truth is the first
casualty of war.”
As
magnanimous a gesture as a humanitarian war might sound, there is little in the
US Constitution to commend such action on humanitarian grounds. Syria in no way serves as an existential
threat to the national security of the US, which would be a reason for US
action. After all, where does one draw the line where inhumanities are
concerned? What about the 100,000 Syrians killed prior to the chemical strike?
Over 5 million people have died in the eastern Congo in the last 18 years of
civil war, but no one is calling for a US response. Why?
From
the USA’s vantage point, it is not yet clear punitive action is entirely
justified in Syria.
2. Has a competent authority sanctioned war based on the
most reliable intelligence (Romans 13:1)? :
President Obama has yet to go to congress to seek approval for a military
strike. Given the unpopularity of such a war by the American people (70% are
against it) it is doubtful congress would approve military intervention. But
Obama can still invoke executive privilege, as he often does, and do an end-run
around congress, especially if this is the “unbelievably small” attack
Secretary of State Kerry said it would be.
Should
President Obama act unilaterally on his own, and it goes horribly wrong, his presidency
would be in peril. Thus, by-passing congress would be an unwise move. In 2008 those who voted for Obama did so on
the basis of ending wars, not starting them. Apparently this has slipped his mind.
3. Is it clear that the actions of the enemy are morally
wrong, while a response, in turn, is morally justified (Romans 13:3)?
: While Assad is a brute and a beast responsible for 100,000 deaths, it is just
as certain that the al-Qaeda backed rebels — many of whom are from surrounding
Islamic states — are just as reprehensible as they callously slaughter Syrian
Christians and Kurds with impunity. The
jihadist fuelled al-Qaeda mercenaries are currently operating under a fatwa
that allows them to rape non-Sunni women. In one tragic instance a 15 old
Syrian Christian girl, named Mariam, was raped 15 times in 15 days by 15
different men before being executed.These are the same forces President Obama is currently supplying with
arms and supplies.
The
real question here is which side is more immoral? It would appear to be a coin
toss. Make no mistake, democracy and freedom are not on the menu regardless of
which side one references.
4. What is the intention of going to war — is it to
protect and promote righteousness and justice (Proverbs 21:2)?
: Recent history indicates that the West, and the US particularly, think that
western–style democracy can easily be exported to the Middle East. This is an
egregiously naïve assumption which
think-tank scholar, Bruce Thornton,
calls the “fetishizing of democracy”. What the West hasn’t figured out yet is
that Islam, when in the majority, is wholly immune to our notions of democracy
and freedom. The so-called “Arab Spring”
is about a resurgence of Sharia law attended by a swelling jihadism, not
freedom and democracy. There is an innate incompatibility between Sharia and
democracy, something the West has been very slow to learn.
While
promoting democracy and freedom abroad sounds a noble cause, it should be
apparent by now that the Middle East, save Israel, is constitutionally
incapable of implementing these concepts as the West understands them.
5. Have all other options for resolution been exhausted
(Matthew 5:9; Romans 12:8)? : Truthfully, there are not
any good options in this complex situation.
Historian, Victor
Davis Hansen, summed it up best: “We are
planning to do all kinds of things by not doing anything.” His point is that
there aren’t any appealing options, only a long list of bad ones to include
doing nothing.
6. What is the probability of success (Luke 14:31)?
: A limited US strike would leave everything in suspended animation with any
number of undesirable variables possible. US provocation could see Russia and
Iran enter the fray on behalf of Assad, with Turkey, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia
forced to aid the Sunni rebels more than at present. Iran, in response, could
taunt Israel while soliciting Hezbollah and Hamas to the same. In such a
scenario Lebanon would no doubt get swept up in the rapids of violence and
senseless killing of an ever escalating conflagration. Of course doing nothing
might send a telegraph to others in the region that it is alright to use WMDs.
Even
if Assad were eliminated, what then? Who will take his place? A jihadist
desiring to implement Sharia? Will that really be an improvement over the
status quo? Those desiring a more secular government would surely revolt and
plunge the country back into a second round of civil war. Toppling Assad will
only create a dangerous power vacuum, much like that seen in both Egypt and
Libya. In other words, a US victory is highly improbable unless the action is
long term.
7. Will the good achieved through US military
intervention outweigh the negative consequences of war (Romans 12:21; 13:4)?
: In view of the aforementioned, probably not. If the recent history of US
foreign policy in the Middle East is anything to go by, the US should quit while
they are behind. In 1979 Jimmy Carter supported the overthrow of the Shah of
Iran who was summarily replaced by the theocratic ayatollahs, who are now
knocking on the door of nuclear capabilities — something that is probably more
of threat than Syria. Iraq’s tenuous “democracy” is in serious doubt, while
Afghanistan is hanging by a slender thread. In the aftermath of the eternal dispatchment
of Mummar Qaddafi, Libya is anything but stable as they experience a rising
tide of jihadism, which has now spilled over into northern Mali. Then there is
Egypt. The West applauded the sacking of strongman Hosni Mubarak even though
present instability is the order of the day. In the meantime Coptic Christians
watch their churches being burned down to the ground, their women raped, some
killed, and others persecuted to varying degrees. This hardly sounds like the
work of those thirsty for democracy and hungry for freedom.
Christian
journalist Cal
Thomas well concludes, “What makes anyone
think bombing Damascus is going to bring positive change?” He is right.
Even though there is a deal in the making
regarding Assad’s surrender of WMDs, it remains to be seen if this permanently diffuses
the situation. For any real progress to
be made, the rebels would need to surrender their WMDs as well. The unvarnished
truth of this situation is that in all likelihood there will not be a positive
outcome in the near future. The battle will rage on with or without Assad,
regardless of what the US does or does not do.
But is there anything Christians can tangibly do to help in this tragedy? Here are but four suggestions:
But is there anything Christians can tangibly do to help in this tragedy? Here are but four suggestions:
· We need to inform ourselves
about Islam and the Middle East, so we can pray more intelligently about the
situation. Likewise we must pray for those, like President Obama, to make sound
decisions based on bi-partisan advice.
· We need to daily pray for
the growing number of refugees who are fleeing the bloodshed and daily
persecution with nothing other than the clothes on their backs.
· Pursue supporting reputable aid agencies
involved in the humanitarian efforts to the disenfranchised, displaced, and
homeless in Syria. Pray that God would rise up some truly Christian relief
workers who take more than food, clothing, and shelter to the refugees, as they
also reach out with grace of the glorious gospel!
·
Finally, while most of us
cannot go as missionaries to evangelize in an Islamic country, God has
surrounded us with pockets of Islam that still need to be reached with the
gospel of Christ. Let us pray for and support Christ-centered ministries seeking
to reach local Muslims. Even better, let us count the cost and reach out
ourselves to Muslims we know!