David Ignatius’ op-ed, “Unsettling Times for Jihadists,” is about a jihadist’s view of Barack Obama’s election and it places Obama in a unique context, especially in light of reading Lawrence Davidson’s article “Christian Zionism as a Representation of American Manifest Destiny.” Davidson’s article describes decades of a bipolar worldview of the moral West and immoral East, out of which grows foreign relations dominated by Christian Zionism. Christian Zionism is the belief that the return of Jews to the
Using the assumption that Christian Zionism marks all previous foreign policy (which is certainly debatable!), then David Ignatius’ article refers to a future presidency that will reflect a diminishing role of Judeo-Christian beliefs in foreign policies. Ignatius says that jihadists are “nervous because [Obama] undermines the belief that Islam and the West are locked in an inescapable clash of civilizations.” Ignatius poses Obama as less about confrontation and more about negotiation, which he says threatens al-Quaeda’s stature in the Muslim world. Even though Ignatius does not examine the underlying motivation behind Obama’s less aggressive stance, one might argue it is because his Christian faith is less confrontational compared to previous presidents. In other words, Obama does not share the same bipolar worldview that so many before him have had.
Still, religion and politics will always be intertwined and Ignatius ends the article by discussing how the jihadist might be citing the economic disaster as divine punishment. He says that the jihadist is probably not as unhappy as we think because “the financial news brings daily evidence that Allah is smiting the infidels.” Ironically, the examples include comments that resemble the same rhetoric used by Christian and Jewish Zionists. Primarily, all three groups share the belief that God blesses their efforts (such as the
This article poses contrasting issues when trying to answer the question about how religion in politics has changed in the last two centuries. First, it seems that Obama will lead us into a new era where religion is not a leading decision maker of foreign policy. Still, as the article ends with quotes from religious leaders, we are reminded that many Christian, Muslims, and Jews still believe that God is involved in political, social, and economic affairs. Moreover, people will continue to act on their religious convictions through political means. So, how will religion in American politics change during the next four years? Will religion or active religious groups, like the Christian Zionists, be less of an influence on foreign policies? In what ways could President-elect Obama reshape religion’s influence on foreign policy?
No comments:
Post a Comment