|
With the beginning of WW2 during the early 1930's many people of faith were confronted with the question of how to deal with the evil of Hitler. The reasons being postulated for war were crazy. Wasn't peace better than war? Can't we use reason and mature discussion to prevent conflict? The Munich Accord and its results apply ample answer. It was in just such a climate that Karl Barth attempted to define what correct action by a Christian in the face of evil should entail. His work led to a redefinition of "who is my neighbor" to include all people in the world. This helped provide the moral certitude necessary to help many to combat an evil that did not directly affect them.
This is also one of the basis for the "America as policeman to the World" idea. Now Americans feel it is their duty to prevent evil in the world. Yet doesn't it seem that we are selective in what evils we will "correct"? During the Gulf War, Sadaam Hussein could have been overthrown. The lesson he learned was to be more repressive to his own people, build a bigger army, and look at military alternatives such as chem/bio/nuclear. There was an evil present that led to, probably, more than a million Iraqi deaths but now that a nuclear, outward evil is projected, we act. As war looms we need to remember that our neighbor is the Palestinian as well as the Israeli, that we owe as much help to the Kurdish villager as much as the Saudi Prince.
If we want to claim the moral high ground; we need to remember that our neighbor includes innocents in all of the countries in the Middle East.
__________________
|