Does Religion Cause War? Research Paper

Introduction

The debate on the relationship between war and religion has always been a heated one. With the development and expansion of religious ideologies, world populations have been passionate about expressing their beliefs and opposed religions that they considered foreign. Since the total number of world religions is counted in thousands, it is not surprising that the opposition may reach extreme levels. To determine the extent of the relationship between war and religion, the correlation should be studied from different perspectives: cross-cultural, political, social, and individual. While most religions promote ideas of forgiveness, charitability, and righteousness, it is possible that these ideas get misinterpreted and lead to armed opposition between groups.

Background

The concept of religion is nearly impossible to define due to its problematic and multi-dimensional nature¹. More importantly, the definition is particularly hard for academics to get away from entirely. However, it is noted that the concept of religion itself was invented within the ‘wars of religion’ turmoil, which took place in multiple European nations after the period of Reformation². During the Enlightenment, the term ‘religion’ was purposefully distinguished from ‘theology.’ It was during that period when the study of religion took an important turn since it was no longer the subject of devotional study and became a theme for philosophers’ considerations about uncovering the reasons for human beings seeking religion and gaining positive knowledge from irrational beliefs. In the social thought of the nineteenth century, finally, ‘religion’ was applied when referring to ‘other’ and ‘world’ religions³. It is important to note that in history, the term ‘religion’ is seen as an opposition to Christian theology because it is considered as tradition.

Depending on the approaches to religion, its definition can vary significantly. For instance, Lewis explored the concept in relation to rituals that people followed and therefore did not give an exact definition of the term.⁴ In contrast to Lewis’ approach, Durkheim specifically identified religion as a unified system of practices and beliefs⁵. Another perspective on religion was offered by Hecht and Biondi who studied the concept from the perspective of civil relationships⁶.

History of Religious War

Dating as far back as the age of Mesopotamia, nations fought over religious misunderstandings, and often the reason for such conflicts was the belief that God had ordered them to do so⁷. For instance, the Arabic (Islamic) Conquest arose from Islam itself – as Prophet Mohammad started receiving life threats in Mecca, Muslims, who were left with no livelihood, started raiding Meccan caravans, which inevitably resulted in an armed conflict. Prophet Muhammad supported the actions of his followers by delivering Quranic verses that permitted the previously peaceful Muslims to fight the Meccans. The first major battle took place in March of 624 A.D. and was led by Muhammad himself.

The Crusades is among the most infamous religious wars because of its longevity and impact – the conflict lasted two hundred years intermittently and led to significant losses. The most widely known Crusades were the church-supported campaigns in the Eastern Mediterranean targeted at freeing the Holy Land from Islamic rule. In general, the term ‘crusades’ was applied to a variety of armed conflicts that were sanctioned by the Catholic church, including the Baltic and the Cathars. In 1095, the First Crusade was called by Pope Urban II through encouraging armed support of the Byzantine Empire that lacked reinforcement from allies when dealing with the migration of Turks that planned to colonize Anatolia⁸. The value of the Crusades to the discussion about religion and war is indisputable because the armed expansion of supposed enemies was done in the name of Christianity and was directly encouraged by the Pope.

To add to the discussion, it is also important to mention the French Wars of Religion. Similar to the Crusades, the conflict included multiple events that exploded between 1562 A.D. and 1598 A.D. the main reason for the violence was the opposition between Catholics and Protestants⁹. By the end of the war, between two to four million people had died, which resulted in Protestants’ being given civil rights and freedom. The conflict started when Protestantism had gained momentum in the regions of France which were dominated by Catholics. While King Francis I made some attempts to resolve differences between the opposing religious ideologies, the conflict escalated when Protestants started putting up anti-Catholic posters, contributing to the growth of friction.

With the widespread effects of globalization on the world society in general, the religious identity of societies took on a heightened significance. This is especially relevant in the context of breaking political alliances, as seen from the case of Yugoslavia at the beginning of the 1990s’ when Bosniacs, Croats, and Serbs were divided between three religious ideologies: Mulsim, Catholic, and Orthodox¹⁰. For some, it is hard to believe that religion could cause so much tension between formerly amicable groups. Nevertheless, the conflict that was also escalated through political misunderstandings ensured the disintegration of Yugoslavia and the creation of Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia, Macedonia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Contemporary Religious Conflicts

Apart from causing political tensions within countries, religion has been used as a tool for justifying acts of terror in the international arena. Before discussing the issue further, it is essential to note that Islam will be the main focus due to the disproportionate number of terrorist attacks made in the name of the religion. In addition, the scope and the devastating effects of Islamic terrorism prompted the international community to lead a complex and never-ending war against violent extremists. Nevertheless, the issue, in this case, lies in the idea of extremism itself, which can arise in the context of any religion. For instance, the Ku Klux Klan was rooted in the anti-Catholic religious foundations of Christian Protestantism, while the Peoples Temple in Jonestown had both Christian, utopian and atheistic characteristics, the combination of which made it possible for its leader to enforce a dictatorship and subsequently force his followers to end their lives in a communal suicide¹¹.

The roots of Islamic extremism and the agenda lie in how religious followers interpret the teachings of Prophet Muhammad. While radical Islam implies an aggressive interpretation of the Quran for justifying violent acts against other religions, moderate believers choose to stay away from the extremist teachings of the faith. This means that when an extremist reads Quran verses that depict violence, they can use them for justifying their extremist ideologies targeted at non-Muslims. Because of this, there is a disconnect between the majority of practicing Muslims who live their lives in peace and aggression-led minorities that commit extreme acts of violence and continue recruiting new people for suicide bombings¹². However, there should be no confusion about the real purposes behind terrorists’ actions since there is a wrongful belief that all attacks are irrational and take place due to the mere hatred for non-Muslims.

There is a strong political agenda that unites many attacks of Islamic terrorists. As reported by Sebastian Dixon for ABC News, the principal target of the Bali Bombings (with 202 fatalities, and 88 of them coming from Australia) was not the color of citizens’ skin or their religious identity¹³. As said by Osama bin Laden himself, the bombings occurred due to Australia’s support for the United States-led international war on terror as well as the country’s assistance in liberating East Timor from Indonesia¹⁴. Thus, exploring radical Islamism, it can be suggested that religion is used as a tool for supporting and justifying violence instead of causing it directly.

9/11

The devastating outcomes of the September 11th attacks in 2001 in New York and Washington, DC had a tremendous influence on how the global society perceives the problem of Islamic extremism. One year after the tragedy, Richard Dawkins was criticized for suggesting that the attacks could have only taken place when Islamic extremists used their weapons¹⁵. However, nowadays, ISIS uses advertises its religious motivations, justifying its actions with their help. Unfortunately, the attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon created an overall negative perception of Islam. As mentioned by Alnatour for Huffington Post, when there is one Muslim extremist, his actions are blamed on 1.3 billion non-extremist Muslims¹⁶. The fact that al-Qaeda took responsibility for the terrorist attack and praised their religion for allowing them to commit violent acts subjected innocent believers of Islam to discrimination as well as religious and cultural profiling. The holy war on the United States declared by Osama bin Laden was identified as the primary reason for such a high degree of violence.

Analysis

Researchers have widely argued that the most impactful expressions of religious beliefs were linked to political and social conflicts such as civil or anti-colonial wars of independence¹⁷. As conflicts occurred, religion was often used as a justification for violent acts between and within political players. Examples of such acts include the controversy associated with the publication of satirical cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad in Jyllands-Posten in 2005, the murder of Theo Van Gogh by a Muslim extremist in 2004, widespread campaigns around the United States to oppose same-sex marriages, the twin tower tragedy in New York on September 11, 2011, the Palestine and Isreal suicide bombings, the infamous Charlie Hebdo shooting in Paris in 2015, and hundreds more. These instances illustrate the visibility of the impact religion can have on the world.

Religion as a contributor to conflict aligns with the assumption of “unrevised theory of secularism that assumes the ‘secular’ to signal a neutral space in what the political philosopher John Rawls called “an overlapping consensus” of comprehensive doctrines that do not interact well between each other¹⁸. This suggestion predominantly comes from the liberal secularist tradition, which had its start during the Enlightenment when such philosophers as John Locke explored the political and social backdrop of devastating wars that took place in Europe. Subsequently, philosophers’ explorations led to the discovery that profound political and public ideologies were deeply rooted in societies’ approaches to the religious and secular.

In the revisitation of the most important events associated with religion-fueled conflict, it was found that most acts of violence had an underlying political agenda. Religion as a system of beliefs and ideologies was used as a justification for violence, especially thousands of years ago when religion was used for guiding every aspect of societal life. Today, societies usually aim to differentiate between what their religions actually preach and what people interpret themselves. Even by reading the Bible, one can find verses that justify violence against other people. This means that the way people choose to view the message of religions will depend on whether or not wars on the basis of religions occur.

Conclusion

The exploration of religion within the context of armed conflicts showed that it was not religious ideologies themselves that encouraged violence. Rather, wars took place because governments, religious institutions, or groups used their beliefs as a justification for their extremist acts. At the moment, violent acts committed in the name of Islam present the most challenges to the global society, especially due to its scope and the devastating impact. Since Islam, in particular, has gained a tremendously negative reputation on a worldwide scale, the problem of discrimination and cultural profiling of believers in the prophecy of Mohammad remains. Global governments, especially the United States of America, see no other solution to the problem than to oppose violence with violence, which transformed into an ongoing war that seems to have no end. To conclude, there are positive and negative teachings of any religion, but wars depend on whether people choose to justify their violence with the help of theistic teachings.

Bibliography

Alnatour, Omar. “Muslims are Not Terrorists: A Factual Look at Terrorism and Islam.” Huffington Post, 2015. Web.

Dixon, Sebastian. “The Real Motivation of Terrorists is Clear.”ABC News, 2014. Web.

Gillingham, John. “Was Peoples Temple Religious?: Jonestown and Durkheim’s Religious Typology.” Jonestown. 2018. Web.

Hecht, Richard, and Vincent Biondo. Religion and Culture: Contemporary Practices and Perspectives. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2012.

Lewis, Gilbert. Day of Shining Red (Cambridge Studies in Social and Cultural Anthropology). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1988.

Rawls, John. “The Idea of an Overlapping Consensus.” Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 7, no. 1 (1987): 1-25.

Robins, Martin. “Richard Dawkins, ‘Islamophobia’ and the Atheist Movement.”The Guardian, 2013. Web.

Sapinsky, A. L. “The Top Religious Wars in History.” Religio Magazine. 2018, Web.

Stringer, Martin. Contemporary Western Ethnography and the Definition of Religion. London, UK: Continuum, 2011.

“1095. Pope Urban II Orders First Crusade.”History. 2018, Web.

Woodlock, Rachel, Antony Loewenstein, Jane Caro, and Simon Smart. “Doesn’t Religion Cause Most of Conflict in the World?”The Guardian, 2013. Web.

Footnotes

1. Martin Stringer, Contemporary Western Ethnography and the Definition of Religion (London, UK: Continuum, 2011), 5.
2. Stringer, Contemporary Western Ethnography, 5.
3. Ibid., 6.
4. Gilbert Lewis, Day of Shining Red (Cambridge Studies in Social and Cultural Anthropology) (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1988), 3.
5. Stringer, Contemporary Western Ethnography, p. 8.
6. Richard Hecht and Vincent Biondo, Religion and Culture: Contemporary Practices and Perspectives (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2012), 31.
7. A. L. Sapinsky, “The Top Religious Wars in History,” Religio Magazine, Web.
8. “1095. Pope Urban II Orders First Crusade,” History, Web.
9. A. L. Sapinsky, “The Top Religious Wars in History.”
10. Rachel Woodlock et al., “Doesn’t Religion Cause Most of Conflict in the World?” The Guardian, Web.
11. John Gillingham, “Was Peoples Temple Religious?: Jonestown and Durkheim’s Religious Typology,” Jonestown, Web.
12. Sebastian Dixon, “The Real Motivation of Terrorists is Clear,” ABC News, Web.
13. Sebastian Dixon, “The Real Motivation of Terrorists.”
14. Ibid.
15. Martin Robins, “Richard Dawkins, ‘Islamophobia’ and the Atheist Movement,” The Guardian, Web.
16. Omar Alnatour, “Muslims are Not Terrorists: A Factual Look at Terrorism and Islam,” Huffington Post, Web.
17. Richard Hecht and Vincent Biondo, Religion and Culture, 1.
18. John Rawls, “The Idea of an Overlapping Consensus,” Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 7, no. 1 (1987): 1.