Five Point Plan for Iraq

Four years and tens of thousands of dead soldiers / civilians later, the United States is still in Iraq with no end in sight. Because of this, i have developed a five point plan based in Biblical principles to get the United States out of this conflict and to help Iraqis regain some stability. First, a little background is necessary. We often hear the Pottery Barn theory (You broke it, you bought it) used in reference to Iraq; however, what we never hear is – it is broken because we are still there! In my studying of Iraq and the Middle East, I have come to one determination – there would be less violence in Iraq if we left. Why, you ask – simple, three main reasons:

1. There was never a suicide attack in Iraq until the US invaded
2. In the Islamic faith, there are few bigger insults than occupation of land. They believe their land to be sacred and worth giving their lives for.
3. From 1980-2003 (pre-9-11) every single suicide attack on record around the world occurred by people whose land was currently being occupied.

This means – Land occupation plays a greater role in suicide bombings than religion. This was proven in Robert A. Pape’s editorial in the New York Times two years ago entitled “Blowing up an Assumption.” He actually showed that out of 315 incidents, only 27 were committed by Islamic groups, but the one element that they all had in common was land occupation. Actually, even 9-11 had something to do with land. One of Bin Laden’s biggest reasons for attacking was the US occupying presence and influence over Saudi Arabia. So, truly I believe that violence will settle down once the US soldiers leave Iraq.

However, America’s leaving Iraq is only one part of my five point plan to get us out of the Iraq quagmire in a way that will serve the Iraqi people and save both Iraqi and American lives. First, let us focus and meditate on what the Bible calls us to do in the face of those that we consider enemies.

Luke 6:27 “But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28 bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. 29 If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. 30 Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. 31 Do to others as you would have them do to you.

Of course, a major argument for us remaining in Iraq is the possibility of violence escalating when we exit; however, the loss of innocent lives already occur at devastating levels with us there – over 1,000 Iraqi’s killed each month and one million Iraqi’s leaving Iraq thus far, so how much worse could it get? But, I will say, my plan is not for us to evacuate right now. Instead, the United States needs to do something radical:

Point One We need to announce when our occupation will end – yes, that is right, create a timeline for withdrawl. As I have outlined above, our occupying presence is such an insult to those of the Islamic faith, especially when they consider it to be a Christian occupying presence, that announcing a complete withdrawl will stem the violence. As we have seen this weekend, with tens of thousands of Iraqi’s taking the streets shouting for America to leave, our presence there is a major factor in the violence. It was also announced this weekend that the iconic man that chopped down the statue of Saddam was quoted as saying ~ I wish Saddam was still in power – he was a tyrant, but not as bad as the United States occupation. We need to let the Iraqi people know clearly that we will not continue to occupy their land.

Point Two We need to change the focus of the mission from combat to humanitarian efforts. Currently the focus of the mission is based on hunting down insurgents and winning a military victory. In the process, we end up terrorizing innocent civilians and creating more terrorists in the process. Two different soldiers that have recently been in Iraq have said to me that they cannot tell the difference between innocent civilians and insurgents, so often they just assume they are all insurgents. One said specifically, they are all terrorists anyways, because I cannot tell them apart. And another said that the civilians know who the terrorists are and do not tell us ~ so they are all terrorists. When we are sending soldiers into civilian houses with this mindset, I think it is obvious why the Iraq study group said that our efforts in Iraq are creating more terrorists than they are preventing.

Instead of continuing a millitary strategy and creating more terrorists in process, we need to announce that we are leaving and that our combat mission will be changing to a humanitarian effort.

Point Three We must market this new effort and new focus to the Iraqi people, the United States citizens, to the other countries of the Middle East, and to the rest of the world. We must announce all over Iraq that we will no longer be hunting down insurgents; instead, we will be rebuilding pipelines, getting clean drinking water, getting electricity to work, etc. Most importantly, we will create a program that creates a large amount of jobs! For the amount of money that we spend in one month in Iraq we could create a program that would give jobs to most of the unemployed workers in Iraq. This gives them insentive to flee from the insurgency and work for a better Iraq. ~ We need to ask the Iraqis to rally around us to rebuild. Of course, we will respond when attacked, and we will do everything for defense of our soldiers lives that we can (besides going on the offense that is), but our main mission will change to rebuilding and leaving.

In order to be convincing with this change, we need to spread the ideas behind this new mission via word of mouth, television, radio, and leaflets. The marketing of this new campaign is important, because the average person in Iraq must believe that our new focus is entirely to help rebuild. If we can do this, I truly believe many of the average Iraqi civilians will begin working against the insurgency and helping the US rebuild.

This must also be explained to the American people, so that 75 percent of the US population or more can get behind this misison again. If our purpose is truly benevolant, i believe that this will happen. If we are truthful about changing completely to a humanitarian mission, I think that the 75 percent of us that are in the middle politically, will rally together and only those on the extreme ends of the spectrum will still be against the effort. This is integral, because a nation cannot enact change in the world unless we are united.

This idea must be sold to the countries of the Middle East and the rest of the world as well. If peace is ever going to come to Iraq again it is only possible with much of the world rallying together in this effort. We must talk to Syria, Iran, Turkey, and other countries. As argued by the 9-11 comission, even at the height of the cold-war Reagan talked to Russia. We need to create incentives for them to get involved in a positive manner. This is important in the world at large as well because if we are to ever solve this crisis, we need the world with us.

Point Four Ask the UN and the world for help. Once we change this mission to a complete humanitarian mission, then we need to humble ourselves at the UN and ask for help. We need to be clear that we will do everything that we can to help Iraq rebuild, but that we cannot do it alone. We need to ask the United Nations that if we change to a complete humanitarian effort, if they will come in and help us and transition Iraq now or after we leave. If we offer to give total control of the effort to the UN, they will accept it. What seems to hold back UN involvement is: 1. The US asking for help, and 2. Most importantly, handing over complete control to them. They do not want to be a part of a US led mission, but in my research I have come to believe that if we relinquish total control to them, they will take it.

This is an integral part of the plan because as long as there is a US face at the front of this effort, there will be a large – violent insurgency. However, once it is the world’s face instead of our own, I feel that the average person in Iraq will team up with the world, not against it.

Point Five Either the US or if we can get the UN involved needs to sit down with the leaders of the different factions in Iraq to negotiate a settlement. Why has this not happened to a greater extent already? I have no explanation, but it seems like the most obvious point of any of this. We need to send someone like Jimmy Carter, who has negotiated peace treaties in the Middle East in the past, or Bill Richardson, who recently negotiated successfully with North Korea, or someone representing the world body to attempt to bring these factions together. I think that one of the biggest injustices that has taken place so far in Iraq is that this has not yet happened on a larger, regular scale. We need some impartial negotiators to stay in Iraq and hammer out a settlement no matter how long it takes.

In conclusion, of course, a lot more than this would need to take place, but I think that this would radically change the course in Iraq for the better. While i do not believe that the United States millitary will ever act completely in a Christ-like manner (as they are secular by definition), I think that Christians need to hold them and the government accountable and do everything that we can to get them to act in a way that is just. Of course, Iraq is an extreme mess right now and the loss of life seems endless, but I truly believe if our effort is truly benevolent, with as little brute force as possible, then the support will come. If we give up our profits from this endeavor and act in a manner that sanctifies life – all life – then everyone will gain.

Globalization and Christianity Part One

Written by: Jeff

We currently live in an environment defined by trans-national corporations, no longer the nation-state. Globalization makes the world smaller, increases trade, communications, and mobility of workforces. It has reached every country in the world and has both benefits and horrors. Recently I have heard about parts of the Congo that have satellite television and can watch “Friends” reruns or almost any other U.S. product. Avon has over 10,000 representatives in Africa many of which push their wares on people in huts and no running water. And on an average night- I receive a phone call from a call center in India, use electronics from Asia, play internet poker with people from 5 or 6 different countries, watch television coverage of the middle east… etc. We live in a global environment whether we choose to or not.

The average American believes (merely my speculation) globalization is a positive process that promotes business, capitalism, democracy, and the newest-oldest buzz-word “moral values.” The idea of globalization as a positive process stems from studies such as the World’s Globalization Index that suggest the more globally open a country is the better the economy, the less corruption, better distribution of wealth, etc. In this study (which focuses on 62 countries- that consists of 98 percent of the world’s wealth) the U.S. comes in fourth behind Signapore, Ireland, and Switzerland. Studies such as these suggest that seeing a McDonald’s in India, or Avon representatives riding the Amazon is a blazing symbol of the wonders of globalization…

The truth about globalization offers a much more mixed, complex picture. Over the next few blog entries I would like to look at globalization and what this new global world means to Christians in America.

Someone that does not know the complexity of my current academic studies (of which there are only a couple of people that I have explained it to) may ask why such a project? The case is, my dissertation focuses on the forces of imperialism that shaped early nineteenth century Britain. The rise of Napoleon in France from 1789-1815 and the rise of the English Empire spurned a new outlook on imperialism and the world economy that I argue has provided the early structure for the current model of globalization and U.S. Imperialism.

Of course, colonization and imperialism have transformed a tremendous amount over the last 200 years, but many of the seeds of the current environment stem from the area of my expertise (of course many seeds formed even earlier as well). One of the reasons for this investigation is that much of globalization and U.S. imperialism has become invisible. The power structures that drive the world economy and the motives of U.S. imperialism are less visible than 200 years ago; therefore, by viewing these processes when they were more visible (even if quite different) we can learn more about our current environment.

I must warn- I am an extremely harsh critic of globalization in general, but the reason for this is because i think that in its current conception it is parasitic, drawing from the poor masses in order to profit the rich few in multi-national corporations and bloated governments. However, I do not hold a completely negative view because i accept that globalization is here to stay- it certainly is not going to evaporate any time soon.

Because of this- we need to transform it into a much more positive force that can benefit the masses instead of slaughtering them. Is this possible? I am not sure, and I do not think i can come to a final solution- but one of the focuses of this exploration will be to make visible some of the invisible power structures in order to bring them towards more positive ends. I will also investigate questions such as: what is a Christians role in this new environment? What are our new responsibilities as members of this new global world? How have changes in the Church paralleled globalization? And where is the global Church headed in the 21st century?