Mennonite Church Peace Resources for Youth

Too often Iraq is a confusing subject for many Americans and Mennonites to look at objectively. There seems to be only two prevailing views, both of which are imperfect at best and disastrous at worst.

James W. Skillen had some brutally honest things to say recently. He speaks of a "third way" by summarizing the misconceptions many Republicans and even Democrats have about the Iraq war.

"... first, America liberated Iraq from Saddam Hussein; second, we returned sovereignty to the Iraqi people; third, sectarian violence tragically increased; and now, in the fourth phase, we are "deploying reinforcements and launching new operations to help Iraqis bring security to their people."

And counters:

All of this is delusional. U.S. forces did not liberate Iraq; they wiped out its government, and the Bush administration then failed to exercise American responsibility to govern the country so it could be rebuilt and eventually governed by Iraqis themselves. We opened the floodgates to chaos, civil war, the death or flight of tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians, and a continuing influx of terrorists whom our 'war' was supposed to destroy. That is not liberation.

He goes on to suggest, no, insist that if Americans truly realized the extent of destruction we have caused and are causing, we would pay any price and use all power available to us in an all-out effort of "doing everything necessary to bring real government to Iraq".

Before you accuse Skillen of being unabashedly partisan, consider that the above statement isn't exactly making the political right or left happy. Compare it to these statements made by other people (yeah, you've heard of these guys):

Hillary Clinton (2/17/2007): "[The Iraq Troop Protection and Reduction Act] calls for the phased redeployment of our troops out of Iraq. I've been pushing for this for almost two years. Now it's time to say the redeployment should start in ninety days or we will revoke authorization for this war."

Barack Obama (2/21/2007): "I've introduced legislation that would bring this tragic chapter in our history to a close. It's called the Iraq War De-Escalation Act. It makes the U.S. policy on Iraq crystal clear. It stops the escalation now and begins a redeployment to bring U.S. combat forces out of Iraq by March 31, 2008. If you want to cut through the political games and support a clear policy that will get us out of Iraq, sign on to support it now and spread the word...

George W. Bush (5/1/2003): "The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11, 2001 -- and still goes on. That terrible morning, 19 evil men -- the shock troops of a hateful ideology -- gave America and the civilized world a glimpse of their ambitions. They imagined, in the words of one terrorist, that September the 11th would be the 'beginning of the end of America.' By seeking to turn our cities into killing fields, terrorists and their allies believed that they could destroy this nation's resolve, and force our retreat from the world. They have failed."

Mitt Romney (1/10/2007): "It is impossible to defeat the insurgency without first providing security for the Iraqi people. In consultation with generals, military experts, and troops who have served on the ground in Iraq, I believe securing Iraqi civilians requires additional troops.

Skillen makes it clear that a hasty decision involving deep selfishness and only looking out for our good as an American people is a sign of a nation deserving of strong language such as "immoral" and "delusional" (as noted by McLaren).

Setting dates for an American military withdrawal while blaming the nearly powerless Iraqi government for not climbing out fast enough from the hole we dug for it is as immoral as continuing on the present course.

If the president really believes that a failure to win the "war" we started in Iraq will mean more 9/11s here at home, how can he possibly imagine that a "surge" of only 21,000+ troops for only a few months in Iraq could deliver security to Iraqis and keep us safe at home?

McLaren muses, "For those of us who supported the war, and for those of us who opposed it but failed to stand up and speak up strongly enough, this is not a time for reactive behavior. It's an opportunity, as Senator Obama recently said, to be as in careful planning our next steps as we were careless in planning our steps in the past."

And I can only add...those of us who pretend to be non-partisan, creative thinkers had better get our hands into the rotten mess that is burning in the kitchen and take out the cooks that are ruining the broth (which would be most of them). We need to teach the Iraqi people how to fish, yes, but we also need to tear down the dam that is blocking the fishing hole; we need to destroy the enormous sewer that is churning black poison into the water and killing the fish; we need to put hedges around the fishing pole shed so that the fishing equipment stops being stolen. We need to build new fishing holes and buy more people fishing rods. We need to turn the worms into bait. We need to change the rules about no fishing on Sunday. We need to tell expert fisherman and people who buy their fish in grocery stores about the deplorable fishing conditions in Iraq.

How can you help?

The year was 1856. The sun beat down on the cotton fields and the dark backs of dozens of African Americans bent in manual labor on a plantation in Alabama. An overweight white man sitting in the shade seemed to be the only one not working, but a closer glance revealed the whip and pistol on his belt to be more than pleasantries. His job was not an easy one-he spent day and night keeping the slaves in subordination to him. Someday, he knew, the day could very well come when the slaves would rise up-to shed his blood-because he was the object that stood between them and freedom.That day came.

He was cruelly killed, but the slaves were free to begin their lives over again-and experienced freedom from oppression in ways they had never known before in their lives.

Yet, the institutional church rebuked the slaves for their rebellion and especially their "guiltless" violence. But is the church, even the "Peace" church, any different today? Peace is after all only an American middle class luxury because it too often supports the rhetoric for oppression.

Who is responsible for the violence caused by a situation in which a group of people dare to see themselves as human beings and fight for that right? Too often, we "nonviolent" American churchgoers will point fingers at the oppressed instead of the oppressor. (Just think of Iraq, Oklahoma City, 9-11, Middle Eastern conflict, Vietnam, etc etc etc.)

Why?

I suggest it is because we are using "peace" as the end goal instead of seeing it as the method--the catalyst--for accomplishing the real end goal--justice, equity and salvation.

In conclusion, peace has suddenly become the newest "cool" thing to protest, the cause that is easy for everyone to support. How do we regain a message that was clearly so close to Jesus' heart yet has been warped and stolen by popular culture? I've hinted that it is only with giving justice her proper perspective that peace can be a voice for the oppressed. But how does that work and how should we do that--we who live in middle-class America? I'll be exploring this subject more in future postings...but in the meantime I'd like your thoughts on one question:

"Why does the 'peace cause' sometimes encourage oppression and injustice and what should we do to correct this?"

On a recent visit to South America, I observed two groups of ants fighting fiercely. Each of the groups resided in one of two anthills located about 20 feet apart. Throughout the fight, many ants were injured or killed by the opposing side. Eventually, both armies gave up, and they all slowly retreated to their respective "forts" or anthills.

The ant psychologist in me was stumped by their abnormal behavior. There seemed to be substantial food to satisfy both parties of ants, and the two anthills were not interfering with each other in any noticeable way. I was deeply moved by the experience, not only because of the ants' ludicrous actions, but because I had caught a glimpse of human nature in those ants.

According to the Jewish Torah, God created the human race out of the material of the universe, the "dust" of the ground. We as a human race are one family, brothers and sisters under the Creator of the universe. Why then is the history of humankind marked with continuing bloodshed, hate, oppression-fighting?

Sadly, today our world is divided into many countries marked by imaginary borders. Some nations are quite hostile to others. We've been like those ants-we love our anthill more than our fellow ants. This tendency is known as nationalism, or the loving of one's own nation above others.

Today, God calls us to see past dubiously defined nationwide boundaries, and see a family of human beings with deep hurts that cry for healing. In my life, I have taken small steps toward seeing the world as a family, rather than nationally divided people groups. The road has not been easy, but through it all, God has showed me that His blessing and sanctions are not exclusively American. He loves all people equally, even terrorists and Muslims. I have been led towards becoming a "global" Christian, or a Christian who sees the world globally instead of nationally. Some ways I can show the world that I care about people as individuals instead of by their national identity are as follows:

• by praying for world peace,
• by showing love to everyone regardless of nationality or economic status, and
• by refusing to endorse unjust economic situations, and by sharing the wealth and benefits I receive as a result of American citizenship.

What creative ideas do you have for setting to rights the divisiveness that the North American church has often promoted in their nationalistic righteousness?

I'm learning that becoming a global Christian takes time. Change won't happen overnight, and plenty of love is needed when relating to nationalistic Christians, or those who insist on viewing the world through an American lens. Through Christians who believe that Jesus really came to save the whole world and not just Americans, I believe the day may come when the world will begin to see a truer view of God and how He works in the world. It's that day I'm working toward.

Does our prominent position as respected middle-class Americans hinder our commitment to justice? I know my view of justice has been diluted by it.

I had often heard about justice, or the setting of things to rights. But rarely had I considered the implications of a life dedicated to justice. I had always assumed justice consisted of not much more than talk and tithing to help some poor kids in Cambodia.

But whoa, was I wrong! Purely by chance one day, I opened the Bible, and read a conversation between Jesus and the Pharisees, the elitist religious group of His day. "But woe to you Pharisees! You give a tenth of your mint, rue, and every herb, yet you neglect justice and love for God! But you should have done these things without neglecting the others." (Luke 11:42, NET Bible) Here was a people dedicated to tithing, yet who neglected justice. I soon realized that justice involved more than just sharing monetary wealth.

In the United States, I tended to view justice as perfectly fine as long as it didn't shatter my comfort zone. If justice was something I could do without suffering personal loss, then I'd be willing to do it. But I discovered that justice is much more than that. I have a vision of a global church arising that does actually care and will make things right in a big way no matter the personal expense.

This starts with us and with small things, such as shopping at Hot Topic. Too often, I delight in browsing the latest clothing styles at the mall without considering the poor individuals who may have labored in thankless, cruel sweatshops to produce Americans' brand name clothing. Maybe if more of us protested and boycotted clothing brands that use foreign sweatshops, their inhumane conditions would improve. [For more information about sweatshops, check out the following websites: Co-op America, SweatShop Watch, and Coolnotcruel]

Maybe if we were more committed to adopting orphans and caring for single mothers, the injustice of abortion could be set right. We've taken the easy way out, however, and reduced it to an issue that can be solved by legislation.

Maybe if we were more committed to loving Muslims and Middle-Eastern people in the United States, then public sentiment would not condone a fruitless war of aggression. Maybe more white Americans could see Iraqis as people instead of "evil".

If we are committed to justice, we need to be willing to suffer in large or small ways. It is only then that we can really feel and see what others are going through. Maybe then we can really "love our neighbor as ourselves" as Jesus recommended.