The Impact of Religions upon International Politics
Essay Preview: The Impact of Religions upon International Politics
Report this essay
“The 21st century will be religious or it will not be.”
Andrй Malraux.
By publishing a book this year (1), in which she pleads for a better integration of religious dimensions in the diplomatic approach, the american former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright underlines in which extent perception of religion has been modified during last twenty years in politicians approach. Throughout the 20th century actually, sociologists as political commentators had announced the fading, the weakening of religion in the industrial Age, indeed even predicted its disappearance. For a long time, the religious factor was not welcome in occidental social sciences, and in particular in international relations theories : many politicians remained reluctant to the idea to integrate it in their recflection, convinced that religion would stay confined in the private sphere, and that many others ideological dimensions would be much more relevant to envision international affairs. Nevertheless, different developments occurred
since the 80s brought about to revalue these perceptions, bringing to light the backlash of religion on the international political scene. The phenomenon had been visible especially at the time of events which have left a mark in recent History, such as the influence of catholic Church in the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe, or the climbing of radical islamism, but also the importance of religious references in the foreign politics speech of president Bush.
The religious factor reappears broadly that way, inviting international relations theories to reinstate it, especially in their analysis of confrontational dynamics. From then on, we no longer count works on the theme of the religions come-back, and corollary, about “the clash of civilizations”. This resurgence represents therefore an outstanding phenomenon of our time, which must be taken in account to study contemporary international relations. Envisioning the impact of religious phenomenons upon international politics from the angle of an acute resurgence brings about consequently to interrogate oneself about the new forms they assume : how does the religious factor weigh upon policies, in which way does it influence the conduct of international relations, which role does the religious dimension play upon the worldwide chessboard ?
In a concern for our reflection to be part of a global framework, we will articulate our reasoning around three major axis. The first one consists in considering religion as a source of antagonisms, generating conflicts of interests, of which the political repercussions do shake the international scene. In a second time, we will linge over the way in which convictions, dogmas or religious ideologies can model policies, set the tone to diplomatic initiatives, influence the guidance of statess foreign affairs, thereby weighing upon international relations. Finally, we will tackle the matter of fundamentalisms and others extremist religious dynamics, with a proselyte indeed messianic vocation, liable to threaten the international balance.
“History, for milleniums, proves that religion isnt a simple small difference, but the deeper difference which could exist between people.” (2) The diagnosis is issued by Samuel Huntington, who sees in religion a strong identity highlight, ascribing the “global religious renewal” to the religions capacity for providing an identity, in a modernisation worldwide context.
Without any doubt Huntingtons reflections contributed, in their way, to a new taking in account of religious factors in the study of international relations, finding a favourable echo few years later, after the attempts perpetrated on the American ground. So Jonathan Fox acknowledged(3) that “the attempts of 9/11 brought about occidental research wokers to reassert the role of religion in international relations.”
The political problem which consumes Middle-East, with Jerusalem as epicentre, testifies that way to the complexity of antagonisms with a religious dimension. It would be easy to reduce the israelo-palestinian matter to simple political discrepancies, exclusively binded to the creation of the Israeli State in 1948, to the question of its legitimacy or to territorial considerations, but it would hide quite a dimension of the problem, definitely
more essential. The taking into consideration of religious factors and the backward-distance of History provide a very different scale of reading upon the situation. Thus we become aware of the holy city status of Jerusalem, its sacred character as for the Jewish than in Muslims eyes, making obsolete any bid for a territorial sharing. A diplomatic solution would imply concessions on both sides ; but even if the best willingnesses would agree on the wish to get along, they will always come up against an obstacle, which affects in the depths of religious convictions : one doesnt compromise with something sacred, what is holy cant bear any trade-off.
The way in which the Oslo agreements of 1994 finally failed, even if they attained the most consensual diplomatic solution and perhaps the most succeeded, relevant one ever reached, provides in the respect an edifying instance. On Palestinians side, if the Fatahs officers would be ready today to recognize officially the existence of Israлl, opening consequently the way to the creation of a Palestinian State, they remain widely a minority ; many more radical movements, in the wake of Hamas, keep rejecting it categorically, echoing back moreover a position shared by the majority by the Palestinian civilian society, as more widely in a part of the Arabic world. The most significant consequence on a political point of view nowadays is the official absence of Palestinian State.. The weight of denominational discrepancies had always played in this respect a foreground role, aroused by decades of struggles and grudges, which plunge in deadlock every bid for political resolution of the conflict. Madeleine Albright doesnt falter to state besides that without any religious dimension, Jerusalems matter would have been solved for a long time.
Political repercussions of the Middle-East crisis go beyond the scope of the Gulf today, and the most radical islamists authorithies apply themselves to make the whole of the Arabic world alive to the Palestinians cause, in a wannabe federative fight.
In a more isolated way, the last decades saw conflicts breaking out, embittered or degenerated on account of religious tensions.