United States Institute of Peace

Home ▶ Publications

Religious Contributions to Peacemaking: When Religion Brings Peace, Not War

Peaceworks No. 55

By: Edited by David R. Smock

Publication Type: Peaceworks

In the popular mind, to discuss religion in the context of international affairs automatically raises the specter of religious-based conflict. The many other dimensions and impacts of religion tend to be downplayed or even neglected entirely. The contribution that religion can make to peacemaking--as the flip side of religious conflict--is only beginning to be explored and explicated.

Introduction

The post-September 11 world is seized with the dangers of religious extremism and conflict between religious communities, particularly between two or more of the Abrahamic faiths: Islam, Christianity, and Judaism. The threat of religious extremism is real and well documented. The connection between religion and conflict is in the process of being thoroughly explored, however, to the extent that hyperbole and exaggeration are commonplace. In the popular mind, to discuss religion in the context of international affairs automatically raises the specter of religious-based conflict. The many other dimensions and impacts of religion tend to be downplayed or even neglected entirely.

The contribution that religion can make to peacemaking--as the flip side of religious conflict--is only beginning to be explored and explicated. All three of the Abrahamic faiths contain strong warrants for peacemaking. There are past cases of mediation and peacemaking by religious leaders and institutions. For example, the World Council of Churches and the All Africa Conference of Churches mediated the short-lived 1972 peace agreement in Sudan. In South Africa, various churches were at the vanguard of the struggle against apartheid and the peaceful transition. The most dramatic and most frequently cited case is the successful mediation the Rome-based Community of Sant'Egidio achieved to help end the civil war in Mozambique in 1992.

Repeatedly citing these cases as the main points of reference distorts the reality of religious peacemaking. Most of the cases of religious or faith-based peacemaking are less dramatic in their outcomes. Also, religious peacemaking is becoming much more common, and the number of cases cited is growing at an increasing pace.

The field of religious peacemaking is also maturing. With more sophisticated reflections of its growing experience, a body of knowledge is developing. I made an earlier attempt to reflect on this experience in the book I edited titled Interfaith Dialogue and Peacebuilding (Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace Press, 2002). Some of the leading thinkers and practitioners in the field, including Marc Gopin, Mohammed Abu-Nimer, and David Steele, contributed chapters to that volume. The book contains an analysis of the keys of success in interfaith dialogue as a mechanism for resolving violent conflicts. It lifts up the unique elements of religious peacebuilding, with a particular focus on apology and forgiveness. It also emphasizes the importance of keeping issues of social justice front and center, so that religious peacebuilding does not merely make the participants feel better.

There are a number of other important contributions to this literature. When communal identities, particularly religious identities, are key causal factors in violent conflict, traditional diplomacy may be of little value in seeking peace or conflict management. Douglas Johnston, president of the International Center on Religion and Diplomacy, has identified conditions in several conflict situations that lend themselves to faith-based intervention:

  • religion is a significant factor in the identity of one or both parts to the conflict;
  • religious leaders on both sides of the dispute can be mobilized to facilitate peace;
  • protracted struggles between two major religious traditions transcend national borders, as has been the case over time with Islam and Christianity; and/or
  • forces of realpolitik have led to an extended paralysis of action.

Johnston also identifies the attributes that religious leaders and institutions can offer in promoting peace and reconciliation, including:

  • credibility as a trusted institution;
  • a respected set of values;
  • moral warrants for opposing injustice on the part of governments;
  • unique leverage for promoting reconciliation among conflicting parties, including an ability to rehumanize situations that have become dehumanized over the course of protracted conflict;
  • a capability to mobilize community, nation, and international support for a peace process;
  • an ability to follow through locally in the wake of a political settlement; and
  • a sense of calling that often inspires perseverance in the face of major, otherwise debilitating, obstacles.

By way of example, African peacemaker Hizkias Assefa, emphasizes the commendable role of religious leaders as an asset in peacemaking. Such religious leaders are particularly effective in working together for peace when they are from different faith communities. When the faiths explore and practice common values, such as justice and compassion, in public life, religious leaders can be an inspiration to others. Gerrie ter Haar summarizes Assefa's contention as:

"Bringing the spiritual dimension into the peacemaking process can create access to the more deep-seated, affective base of the parties' behavior, enabling them to examine critically their own attitudes and actions. People's conflict behavior is often based on more emotional considerations and thus may not be changed simply by rational negotiation processes and subsequent agreements. Cognitive decisions and commitments, he argues, do not necessarily translate into feelings and actions."

Religious resources are contained in the four main elements of which religions consist. Haar identifies these elements as: religious ideas (content of belief), religious practices (ritual behavior), social organization (religious community), and religious--or spiritual--experiences. These dimensions can all be used in the service of peacemaking. Two critical elements in religious life that are centrally important to peacemaking are empathy and compassion, and the value of tapping into these attributes is readily apparent in effective religious peacemaking.

The development of studies and practice relating to the connection between religion, conflict, and peace is paralleled by United States Institute of Peace (USIP) program development on religious peacemaking. In 1990, USIP established a program on religion, ethics, and human rights led by David Little, now a professor at Harvard Divinity School. That program focused on compiling case studies on the sources and nature of religious conflict in such countries as Sudan, Lebanon, Nigeria, Sri Lanka, and Ukraine. Several publications resulted from these case studies, including books on Sri Lanka and Ukraine regarding conflict between the faith communities. Overall, these studies viewed religion principally in terms of creating conflict.

After David Little retired from USIP in 1999, the Institute decided to continue prioritizing religion in relation to international conflict and peace, but decided to shift the emphasis from religion as a source of conflict to peacemaking. This shift fully acknowledged the contribution of religion to conflict, but lifted up the peacemaking potential of religious leaders and institutions. Working with local institutional partners, USIP's Religion and Peacemaking Program has collaborated in religious peacemaking in Nigeria, Sudan, Israel and Palestine, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Macedonia, and Indonesia. The emphasis is on peacemaking when two or more Abrahamic faiths are in conflict. In some cases, USIP's efforts have focused on helping believers reinterpret their religious principles in ways that contribute to peaceful coexistence with adherents of other faiths.

This Peaceworks builds upon and goes well beyond the book, Interfaith Dialogue and Peacebuilding , which presented general principles to guide effective interfaith dialogue as well as profiles of some of the leading organizations in the field. This report provides a series of case studies addressing specific religious conflicts through a variety of methodologies. Some of the cases describe dramatic successes, like the Inter Faith Mediation Center mediating peace between Christians and Muslims in some of the most strife-torn regions of Nigeria. Others tackle some of the most intractable conflicts in the world, such as the Alexandria process among Muslim, Jewish, and Christian leaders working to establish a religious peace track in Israel and Palestine. The analysis of the Iraqi Institute of Peace shows how the organization has grappled with the most critical issues currently facing a religiously fragmented Iraq. Not all the cases presented here describe dramatic success stories, but even the less decisive cases provide experiences and lessons that are instructive for future religious peacemaking in other places.

All of these cases explore projects by organizations that have been USIP partners in religious peacemaking and have received USIP financial support. Two of the cases (Kashmir and Sudan) describe projects undertaken prior to the Institute providing financial assistance, but all the other projects have been collaborative efforts with USIP. Presenting these case studies describes some of the richest material on this topic and also illuminates the Institute's involvement in this field.

This is not an analysis about interfaith dialogue in the traditional sense of members of different faith communities meeting to simply tell their stories, share their religious convictions with each other, or seek common religious understanding. Rather, the cases presented here are stories of religious communities and leaders joining together to resolve religious conflicts that are at least partially rooted in religious conflict.

Religion in many parts of the world is contributing to violent conflict, although exaggerated in many cases. This is well documented and broadly accepted. Usually disregarded, however, are opportunities to employ the assets of religious leaders and religious institutions to promote peace. Traditional diplomacy has been particularly remiss in its neglect of the religious approach to peacemaking. The cases described in the following sections illustrate the creative contributions that religion can make to peace in places like Israel/Palestine, Iraq, Macedonia, Nigeria, and Sudan. As these cases illustrate, religious approaches to peacemaking do not provide a panacea, but can complement secular peacemaking productively. This Peaceworks is meant both to demonstrate the value of religious contributions to peacemaking, and to extract lessons about what is and is not effective.

The following sections describe and analyze religious peacemaking in Kashmir, Israel/Palestine, Iraq, Nigeria, Sudan, and Macedonia. Though all employ religious approaches, these cases illustrate several methodologies. The Kashmir case uses interfaith dialogue. The Israel/Palestine project describes an effort to develop a religious track to peace as a complement to diplomatic/secular negotiations. The Iraq example describes the establishment and operation of the Iraqi Institute of Peace to promote interfaith comity in that strife-torn country. The Nigeria cases describe training religious leaders in peacemaking, and mediating between Muslims and Christians successfully in Plateau State to end bloody conflict. The Sudan case describes both religious peacemaking between two ethnic groups in Southern Sudan and a project to improve Christian/Muslim relations in Southern Sudan. Lastly, the Macedonia piece describes efforts to establish an interfaith council to promote peace among Macedonia's faith and ethnic communities.

About the Contributors

Imam Muhammad Nurayn Ashafa is codirector of the Inter Faith Mediation Centre in Kaduna, Nigeria and coauthor of The Pastor and the Imam: Responding to Conflict (1999) with Pastor James Movel Wuye.

Brian Cox is senior vice president and Kashmir project leader of the International Center for Religion and Diplomacy in Washington, D.C., www.icrd.org.

Emmanuel LoWilla is executive director of Reconcile in Kampala, Uganda, an organization affiliated with the New Sudan Council of Churches.

Paul Mojzes is professor and former dean at Rosemont College in Pennsylvania. Pastor James Movel Wuye is codirector of the Inter Faith Mediation Centre in Kaduna, Nigeria and coauthor of The Pastor and the Imam: Responding to Conflict (1999) with Imam Muhammad Nurayn Ashafa.

Daniel Philpott is an associate professor in the Department of Political Science and the Joan B. Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies at the University of Notre Dame, and is chair of the Task Force on Faith-based Diplomacy at the Council on Faith and International Affairs, www.cfia.org.

David R. Smock is the director of the United States Institute of Peace Religion and Peacemaking Initiative . Previously he served as director of the Institute's Grant Program and coordinator of Africa activities. He is editor of Interfaith Dialogue and Peacebuilding (2002).

Related Publications

Six Lessons for Addressing Myanmar’s Mental Health Crisis

Six Lessons for Addressing Myanmar’s Mental Health Crisis

Tuesday, August 6, 2024

By: Yu Yu Htay;  Sarah Harper-Johnston;  Divya Moorjani

There is a growing mental health crisis in Myanmar — one fueled by the junta’s violent atrocities against the population and a humanitarian crisis that has displaced an estimated 3.1 million people.

Type: Analysis

Conflict Analysis & Prevention ;  Religion

As Russia Builds Influence in Africa, its Church Takes a Role

As Russia Builds Influence in Africa, its Church Takes a Role

Wednesday, July 24, 2024

By: Andrew Hoyle

Vladimir Putin’s campaign to make the world safe for violent authoritarianism visibly exploits conflicts and bolsters military rule in Africa with mercenary armies, internet-borne disinformation and weaponized corruption. A less recognized Russian effort to build influence in Africa is an expansion across the continent of the Russian Orthodox Church. As the Russian church’s overt support for Putin’s war on Ukraine has corroded its influence in the traditionally Orthodox Christian world, the Moscow Patriarchate is opening parishes and hiring priests away from the established African church.

Religion ;  Global Policy

Ugandans Wield Faith and Youth Against Climate-Fueled Violence

Ugandans Wield Faith and Youth Against Climate-Fueled Violence

Thursday, July 18, 2024

By: Mona Hein

At age five, Muhsin Kaduyu began following his father, a respected imam in southern Uganda, on missions of peace — constant meetings, mediations, consolations and prayers among Muslims and Christians in their town and surrounding farmlands. So years later, Kaduyu felt sickened when Islamist suicide bombers killed 74 soccer fans in a crowd near his university, deforming and defaming his faith. That bombing, and an anti-Muslim backlash, ignited a life’s mission that has made Kaduyu a prominent peacebuilder among millions of Ugandans who struggle for survival, prosperity and peace amid communal conflicts, violent extremism and growing climate disaster.

Environment ;  Religion ;  Violent Extremism

What We Know — and Don’t Know — About Religion and Nonviolent Action

What We Know — and Don’t Know — About Religion and Nonviolent Action

Wednesday, July 17, 2024

By: Jason Klocek, Ph.D.

Kenya captured the world’s attention last month as thousands of youth took to the street to protest the government’s controversial proposed tax hikes. As these demonstrations reached a boiling point in late June, the predominately Gen-Z activists received support from a somewhat unexpected ally: faith leaders.

Nonviolent Action ;  Religion

Beyond Intractability

Knowledge Base Masthead

The Hyper-Polarization Challenge to the Conflict Resolution Field We invite you to participate in an online exploration of what those with conflict and peacebuilding expertise can do to help defend liberal democracies and encourage them live up to their ideals.

Follow BI and the Hyper-Polarization Discussion on BI's New Substack Newsletter .

Hyper-Polarization, COVID, Racism, and the Constructive Conflict Initiative Read about (and contribute to) the  Constructive Conflict Initiative  and its associated Blog —our effort to assemble what we collectively know about how to move beyond our hyperpolarized politics and start solving society's problems. 

By Eric Brahm

September 2005  

We are bombarded on a nearly daily basis with news stories that portray religion as a cause of seemingly intractable conflict the world over. Some, in fact, trace the view of religion as a source of conflict all the way back to the religious wars that ravaged seventeenth century Europe.[1] What does not attract attention is the peacebuilding power of religion. This contribution is often overlooked, in part, because the secular media rarely pays attention to the role of religious peacemakers because their work is often not dramatic enough. However, all of the world's major religions have a significant strain emphasizing peace.[2] Religious leaders and workers have proven to be key civil society actors in many efforts to resolve conflicts, serving as intermediaries or " Third Siders " or helping to facilitate reconciliation . This essay explores some of the ways in which religion has played a positive role in mitigating conflict and offers brief profiles of a few such organizations.

Relief/Humanitarian Assistance


Additional insights into  are offered by Beyond Intractability project participants.

Motivated by a desire to help those less fortunate, many religious-based NGOs are involved in humanitarian assistance . The desire is to relieve suffering, whether due to natural disaster or man-made calamity. Many are also engaged in longer-range development projects. At times, however, these projects have the unintended consequence of creating or exacerbating conflict.[3] That problem, combined with a growing recognition that peacebuilding will aid in the sustainability of humanitarian assistance and development programs, this has led quite a number of these organizations to build peacebuilding components into their work. Humanitarian assistance programs can also help peace by promoting poverty reduction and addressing economic inequality. They may also support the development of civil society organizations that provide venues for peaceful participation and conflict management. A few prominent examples include the following.

American Jewish World Service [ http://www.ajws.org/ ]

The AJWS began in 1985 with a mission of working to alleviate hunger, disease, and poverty around the world. In doing so, it draws upon notions of social justice in Jewish tradition. At present, it makes grants to hundreds of grassroots organizations around the world and hundreds of volunteers participate in projects each year.

Catholic Relief Services [ http://www.catholicrelief.org/ ]

American bishops created the organization in 1943. Inspired by the Gospel tradition, Catholic Relief Services aims to assist the poor and disadvantaged in pursuit of justice. It does so both through direct assistance and in supporting the development of local capacity. Catholic Relief Services has a global network of offices in nearly 100 countries around the globe.

Mercy Corps [ http://www.mercycorps.org/home/ ]

Mercy Corps has been working since 1979 to provide emergency relief. It also supports the development of sustainable communities through assistance in areas such as agriculture, economic development, health, housing, infrastructure, as well as capacity-building amongst local organizations. The organization also spearheads efforts to manage conflict peacefully and encourage citizen participation and accountability.

World Vision [ http://www.worldvision.org ]

World Vision is an ecumenical Christian relief and development organization that has recently recognized the importance of conflict prevention and peacebuilding in both making its relief services obsolete and making its development efforts sustainable. It does so primarily at the community level. "World Vision's research reveals that participatory processes to identify community needs and to promote community development can help prevent violent conflict. These planning processes contribute to peace through bringing community leaders together across ethnic/religious divisions and through intermixing groups that oppose each other."

Faith-Based Mediation/Intervention

Motivated by religious goals of seeking peace, religious leaders and faith-based NGOs have frequently played prominent roles as mediators or other forms of intervention in conflict scenarios. Some religious figures have been able to use their positions of authority to work toward peace and to forward the cause of justice. Pope John Paul II, for example, played a prominent role in Lebanon, Poland, and Haiti. As respected members of society, individual national religious leaders have often been at the forefront of efforts to deny impunity and bring an end to fighting. For instance, local bishops have served as mediators in civil wars in Mozambique, Burundi, and Liberia. The All Africa Conference of Churches [ http://www.aacc-ceta.org/homeEng.htm] brought a temporary end to the Sudanese civil war in 1972 in part through prayer at critical points in the negotiations and by invoking both Christian and Muslim texts. Under many Latin American dictatorships in the 1970-1980s, the Catholic Church was able to criticize the lack of human rights . In Brazil, members of the Church worked with the World Council of Churches [ http://www.wcc-coe.org/] to conduct a private truth commission of abuses under the military government. Some have pointed to the role that Buddhism can play in building peace in Cambodia as it is the only institution respected and trusted by all segments of society.[4] These efforts, however, often do go unrecognized, particularly the important efforts of individuals and groups engaged in Track II diplomacy and working at the grassroots level.

Mediators who are motivated by their faith may face challenges unique to their perspective.[5] It is very difficult to work with those who the faith-based mediator may believe to be morally wrong, if not evil. Furthermore, the mediator may be tempted to abandon their neutral position for ‘an eye for an eye' attitude, should they or their loved ones be threatened. The supreme challenge, although this is by no means unique to mediation, is to find God in others. One advantage they appear to have is their persistence and commitment. Studies have suggested that faith-based NGOs in Bosnia and Herzegovina have helped overcome conditions that fueled the conflict by bringing people together for such varied projects as soup kitchens, building homes, and organizing choirs. The long-term commitment of these NGOs, these studies find, have contributed to reconciliation.[6]

Some examples of faith-based organizations that engage in mediation or related interventions include:

Quakers (The Religious Society of Friends)

Quaker theology is committed to nonviolence. They began providing relief services in the 1960-1970s and had also gone so far as to sponsor conferences for disputants. Their 1984 involvement in the Sri Lankan civil war, however, led the Quakers in a new direction, namely providing mediation. They came to Sri Lanka hoping to learn more about the conflict, determine if there were development projects they could support, and share their experiences with similar conflicts elsewhere.[7] As the conflict became clearer, the Quakers concluded that mediation might have been beneficial, but no one was filling the role. From that experience, a number of lessons emerged. One was the importance of operating transparently and observing strict neutrality . The Quakers were very concerned about becoming the center of attention. They demanded that their role as intermediary be kept quiet. In their view, their effectiveness depended on not being seen as part of the conflict. In fact, they emphasized their powerlessness in the situation so as to impart on the parties that they had no interest in the conflict. For similar reasons, they refuse to set deadlines for the disputants. In Sri Lanka, they also repeatedly reaffirmed with the sides that their presence was still seen as useful.

The Anabaptists/Mennonites (Peace and Justice Support Network of Mennonite Church USA)

The Mennonites have also become active in peacemaking efforts.[8] Their belief in nonviolence dates back to their origins during the Reformation in the 1500s. The experience of World War II challenged the beliefs of many American Mennonites who shifted from conscientious objection, which was common in World War I, to participation in non-combat roles. After the war, Mennonites continued in similar roles. Their post-war work in providing relief after natural and manmade disasters led some to suggest that they should focus on the root causes of the crisis. By the mid-1970s, the Mennonite Conciliation Service (MCS) had been established to provide mediation in domestic and international contexts. For example, Mennonites worked in South Africa from the 1970s up to the end of apartheid. While identifying with the oppressed, they also reached out to the Afrikaner community.[9] Later innovations included Christian Peacemaker Teams and International Conciliation Service. Mennonite peacebuilding is distinguished by a number of factors:[10] they are careful not to take control of the process from the parties; they focus their efforts on the grassroots level; they commit to serve as witness and stand with the oppressed; and a determination to commit to long-term involvement should the parties desire it.

Plowshares Institute

The Plowshares Institute, based in the United Methodist Church, has spent three decades conducting faith-based peacebuilding training around the world. Their goal is to impart conflict transformation skills from a spiritual and moral perspective. In South Africa, the Plowshares Institute has worked with four other South African NGOs to bring together leaders from opposing sides in order to train them to facilitate communication and cooperation across social divides. In total, they identified some 1400 grassroots leaders in South Africa. The grassroots leaders were first trained to see conflict as an opportunity for systematic change and to build relationships that help transform conflict. Before South Africa's 1994 national all-race elections, Plowshares brought together South African police and anti-apartheid activists that had been mistreated by the police in order to challenge stereotypes and facilitate collaboration through such methods as cross-role playing, in which those on opposing sides adopting and advocating their opponents' points of view.

World Conference on Religion and Peace (WCRP) 

The World Conference of Religions for Peace was founded in 1970 as a venue for dialogue amongst the world's religious leaders to identify common concerns, formulate plans of action, and articulate a vision of the future. Amongst other things, WCRP has mediated dialogue among warring factions in Sierra Leone, worked to advance reconciliation in Bosnia and Kosovo and to assist the millions of children affected by Africa's AIDS pandemic.

Fellowship of Reconciliation (FOR)

The Fellowship of Reconciliation is an interfaith organization that recognizes the essential unity of all creation, works toward a just and peaceful world, and recognizes the transformative potential of religion in realizing such a vision. Founded in 1914, the organization now has branches in 40 countries. In one example of FOR's work, in 1984 the Little Sisters of Jesus in the Philippines asked FOR to train Filipino civil society leaders training in the theory and practice of active nonviolence because they feared the country was headed for civil war.

Community of Sant'Egidio

Sant'Egidio, a Rome-based Catholic lay organization, has made significant contributions to peace processes in such far ranging places as Mozambique, Burundi, Congo, Algeria, and Kosovo through a peacemaking approach that is deeply rooted in Catholic tradition and theology.[11] Andrea Bartoli, a member of Sant'Egidio describes their work in Mozambique in his interview with Beyond Intractability's Julian Portilla.

Interfaith/Inter-Religious Dialogue

John Paul Lederach, amongst others, has cautioned against assuming that religious (or any other form of conflict) conflict can be avoided. Rather, conflict is a natural outgrowth of human interaction. Recognizing this, there are more or less effective ways of managing conflict. With respect to our present interest, interfaith dialogue would seem an important, often proactive means of minimizing conflict through fighting ignorance and distrust . At its core, inter-religious dialogue brings together those of different faith traditions for conversation. Dialogue can take a range of forms and have a variety of goals in mind. It may involve any level of participant from elites to the grassroots . Through discussion, groups and individuals may come to a better understanding of other faith traditions and of the many points of agreement that likely exist between them. As the short list below suggests, these networks have multiplied as people from different faiths have recognized the importance of communication to facilitate interfaith cooperation and to end religious-based violence. In his interview for Beyond Intractability, Mohammed Abu-Nimer talks about his work in Jewish-Muslim interfaith dialogues.

Institute for Interreligious Dialogue , Iran

The institute works for the greater understanding amongst different religious faiths. It does so in part by maintaining a library with resources on different religions and sponsors language classes for those interested in studying Islam. What is more, it holds monthly meetings and is involved in local and international conferences to promote knowledge of other religions.

Institute of Interfaith Dialog (IID)

IID works to bring together representatives from different faiths around the world to promote understanding. By learning about other faith traditions, it also builds understanding of one's own faith. It also promotes efforts at religious education to eliminate ignorance.

International Council of Christians and Jews

The ICCJ is an umbrella organization of Christian-Jewish dialogue organizations in nearly 40 countries around the world. The dialogues got going in response in response to the Holocaust. Recently, the ICCJ has been pursuing dialogue with Moslems as well. The organization holds yearly conferences as well as ad hoc consultations.

Muslim Christian Dialogue Forum (Minhaj-ul-Quran), Pakistan

Established in 1998, the organization has sought to promote equal rights for all religious groups within Pakistan. It emerged from Pakistan Awami Tehreek, Pakistani political party.

Society for Inter-religious Dialogue (SIDA), Indonesia

SIDA was a response to the lack of respect for other religious traditions and inter-religious violence in Indonesia in the late 1990s. It aims both the promote understanding and meetings as well as to fight against the hijacking of religious symbols for political gains.

United Religions Initiatives

Created in 2000, URI has thousands of members representing over one hundred religions, spiritual expressions, and indigenous traditions in more than fifty countries around the world. They are working to build solidarity and facilitate the spread of best practices to build cultures of peace. The centerpiece of the URI is Cooperation Circles, which are regional or virtual teams made up of diverse members who identify concerns and articulate a vision of peace.

[1] Raymond G. Helmick, S.J., "Does Religion Fuel or Heal in Conflicts? In Forgiveness and Reconciliation , Raymond G. Helmick, S.J. and Rodney L. Petersen, eds. (Philadelphia: Templeton Foundation Press, 2001).

[2] Henry O. Thompson, World Religions in War and Peace , (Jefferson NC: McFarland, 1988).; John Ferguson, War and Peace in the World's Religion (New York: Oxford University Press, 1978); Homer Jack, ed. World Religions and World Peace: The International Inter-Religious Symposium on Peace (Boston: Beacon, 1968).

[3] Mary Anderson, Do No Harm: How Aid Can Support Peace or War . 1999 Boulder, CO: Lynne Reinner Publishers.

[4] Catherine Morris Peacebuilding in Cambodia: The Role of Religion http://www.peacemakers.ca/research/Cambodia/Cambodia2000ExecSum.html

[5] John Paul Lederach, The Journey Toward Reconciliation (Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1999).

[6] Can Faith-Based NGOs Advance Interfaith Reconciliation? The Case of Bosnia and Herzegovina http://www.usip.org/publications/can-faith-based-ngos-advance-interfaith-reconciliation-case-bosnia-and-herzegovina

[7] Deborah M. Kolb and Associates, "Joseph Elder: Quiet Peacemaking in a Civil War," in When Talk Works: Profiles of Mediators (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1994).

[8] Joseph S. Miller, "A History of the Mennonite Conciliation Service, Internaitonal Conciliation Service, and Christian Peacemaker Teams," in From the Ground Up: Mennonite Contributions to Internaiotnal Peacebuilding , Cynthia Sampson and John Paul Lederach, eds. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000).

[9] Robert Herr and Judy Zimmerman Herr, "Building Peace in South Africa," in From the Ground Up: Mennonite Contributions to Internaiotnal Peacebuilding , Cynthia Sampson and John Paul Lederach, eds. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000).

[10] Sally Engle Merry, "Mennonite Peacebuilding and Conflict Transformation: A Cultural Analysis," in From the Ground Up: Mennonite Contributions to Internaiotnal Peacebuilding , Cynthia Sampson and John Paul Lederach, eds. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000).

[11] Catholic Contributions to International Peace http://www.usip.org/publications/catholic-contributions-international-peace

Use the following to cite this article: Brahm, Eric. "Religion and Peace." Beyond Intractability . Eds. Guy Burgess and Heidi Burgess. Conflict Information Consortium, University of Colorado, Boulder. Posted: September 2005 < http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/religion-and-peace >.

Additional Resources

The intractable conflict challenge.

religion and peace sample essay

Our inability to constructively handle intractable conflict is the most serious, and the most neglected, problem facing humanity. Solving today's tough problems depends upon finding better ways of dealing with these conflicts.   More...

Selected Recent BI Posts Including Hyper-Polarization Posts

Hyper-Polarization Graphic

  • Massively Parallel Peace and Democracy Building Links for the Week of August 18, 2024 -- Reader suggested links, and the Burgesses selections of articles about colleague's activities and other news and opinion articles of interest.
  • A Potpourri Newsletter -- Short pieces about new books, and new ideas about the challenges we currently face and ways beyond them from John Paul Lederach, Lou Kriesberg, Kenneth Boulding, Deborah Laufer, and Guy and Heidi Burgess.
  •  Susan Carpenter and Heidi Burgess Reflect on Susan's 40+ Years' Experience Doing Consensus -- Susan Carpenter has been working in the field of collaborative problem solving for over 40 years. She talked about the changes she's seen over those years, and the time-tested approaches she has come to rely on for success.

Get the Newsletter Check Out Our Quick Start Guide

Educators Consider a low-cost BI-based custom text .

Constructive Conflict Initiative

Constructive Conflict Initiative Masthead

Join Us in calling for a dramatic expansion of efforts to limit the destructiveness of intractable conflict.

Things You Can Do to Help Ideas

Practical things we can all do to limit the destructive conflicts threatening our future.

Conflict Frontiers

A free, open, online seminar exploring new approaches for addressing difficult and intractable conflicts. Major topic areas include:

Scale, Complexity, & Intractability

Massively Parallel Peacebuilding

Authoritarian Populism

Constructive Confrontation

Conflict Fundamentals

An look at to the fundamental building blocks of the peace and conflict field covering both “tractable” and intractable conflict.

Beyond Intractability / CRInfo Knowledge Base

religion and peace sample essay

Home / Browse | Essays | Search | About

BI in Context

Links to thought-provoking articles exploring the larger, societal dimension of intractability.

Colleague Activities

Information about interesting conflict and peacebuilding efforts.

Disclaimer: All opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of Beyond Intractability or the Conflict Information Consortium.

Beyond Intractability 

Unless otherwise noted on individual pages, all content is... Copyright © 2003-2022 The Beyond Intractability Project c/o the Conflict Information Consortium All rights reserved. Content may not be reproduced without prior written permission.

Guidelines for Using Beyond Intractability resources.

Citing Beyond Intractability resources.

Photo Credits for Homepage, Sidebars, and Landing Pages

Contact Beyond Intractability    Privacy Policy The Beyond Intractability Knowledge Base Project  Guy Burgess and Heidi Burgess , Co-Directors and Editors  c/o  Conflict Information Consortium Mailing Address: Beyond Intractability, #1188, 1601 29th St. Suite 1292, Boulder CO 80301, USA Contact Form

Powered by  Drupal

production_1

  • Tools and Resources
  • Customer Services
  • Conflict Studies
  • Development
  • Environment
  • Foreign Policy
  • Human Rights
  • International Law
  • Organization
  • International Relations Theory
  • Political Communication
  • Political Economy
  • Political Geography
  • Political Sociology
  • Politics and Sexuality and Gender
  • Qualitative Political Methodology
  • Quantitative Political Methodology
  • Security Studies
  • Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Article contents

Culture, religion, war, and peace.

  • Yehonatan Abramson Yehonatan Abramson Department of Political Science, Johns Hopkins University
  • https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190846626.013.44
  • Published in print: 14 December 2013
  • Published online: 30 November 2017

Religion and culture have historically been neglected in international relations (IR) theories and in political science more generally. It was only recently that IR began to consider the role of culture and religion in war and peace. Several main scholarly trends in the study of culture, religion, conflict, and peace can be identified, starting with the definitional problems that IR scholars had to deal with as they tried to incorporate culture and religion. The first major attempt in the IR field to understand war almost exclusively through the religious prism was that of Samuel Huntington, who in his Clash of Civilization (1993, 1996) identifies two main reasons why religion can cause war: first, religion can be considered as a primordial and immutable identity; and second, religion is a form of ideology rather than identity. The scholarly literature has also addressed themes such as religious fundamentalism and violence, the role of religious actors in international conflict, the practical use of religion and culture to promote peace via diplomacy, and engagement of religion and culture in existing peace theories such as democratic peace theory. Avenues for future research may include the relational and constantly changing aspects of religion; what, when, and how various religious interpretations receive political prominence in promoting conflict or peace; how religion can be used as an independent variable across cases; and the hidden set of assumptions that are embedded in the cultural and religion labels.

  • international relations
  • Samuel Huntington
  • religious fundamentalism
  • democratic peace theory

Introduction

Historically, international relations (IR) theories neglected ideational factors such as identity, religion, and culture. Although culture was a part of political science since Almond and Verba's seminal book in 1963 , IR's dominant schools of thought (Realism and Liberalism) overemphasized material, structural, and “objective” factors in explaining states’ behavior. Religion was ignored altogether not only in IR, but also in political science in general (Wald and Wilcox 2006 ; Bellin 2008 ). In recent years, IR began to consider the role of culture and religion. Culture as a variable appeared during the end of the Cold War together with the “constructivist turn” (Lapid and Kratochwil 1996 ; Checkel 1998 ; Finnemore and Sikkink 2001 ). Religion entered the field a decade later alongside a scholarly focus on ethnic and religious conflicts and religious-inspired terrorism (Fox 2001 :53; Philpott 2009 :184; Snyder 2011 :1).

This essay reviews the main scholarly trends in the study of culture and religion as sources for conflict and resources for peace. After a brief survey of the early works of political theorists regarding religion and war, this essay turns to review how the topic has been understood within IR. As the essay demonstrates, the attempt to deal with religion and culture as part of identity is a source of much confusion. In order to avoid confusion and reiteration of other comprehensive review essays on culture and IR (such as the essays titled “Culture and Foreign Policy Analysis” and “Nonrealist Variables: Identity and Norms in the Study of International Relations” in this work), this essay gives special focus to the topic of religion in studies of conflict and peace. In IR, religion is usually an independent variable that causes war or peace, or an intervening variable that shapes the probability of a conflict and its violent potential (Hasenclever and Rittberger 2000 :644–8). Some scholars focus on what religion says, while others research what religion does; some scholars deal with religion in the individual level, while others emphasize the societal and organizational aspects of religion (Haynes 1998 ). The next section reviews the ways IR scholars define culture and religion and suggests that religion should be viewed as a part of culture. The following sections discuss the clash of civilizations debate; the relationship between fundamentalism and violence; religion as a cause of war; religion and the intensity of war; culture, religion and diplomacy with some references to cross-cultural negotiation; and culture and the democratic peace with some references to the debate regarding religion and democracy. The essay concludes with suggestions for future directions for research.

Conceptualizing Culture and Religion in IR Scholarship

Despite some exceptions, such as Adda Bozeman ( 1960 ), Jack Snyder ( 1977 ), and to some extent Robert Jervis ( 1976 ), IR scholars did not realize the importance of culture and religion to the understanding of peace and conflict until the post-Cold War era and the introduction of constructivism. The first task facing IR scholars trying to incorporate culture and religion is the task of definition. The understanding that these concepts can be rather distinct, but at the same time intrinsically connected has been a source for much confusion and contention. As this section suggests, different IR scholars treat culture and religion in different ways and sometimes use these concepts interchangeably with other concepts, such as norms, identity, and ethnicity.

The first example for such confusion exists in the writings of IR scholars from the English School, who understand religion as the main component in a society's culture. To Bozeman ( 1960 , 1971 ), for example, culture means civilization, and what dictates the mode of thinking and the normative order in a civilization is religion. Similarly, as Buzan ( 1993 :333) and Thomas ( 2005 :153–4) describe, Martin Wight argues that international societies can be formed on the basis of shared culture, but underlines the role of religion in not only promoting such peaceful unity but also holy wars. This view of religion as the core component of civilization is also shared by non-English School scholars such as Huntington ( 1996 ) and some of the authors in the volume edited by Katzenstein ( 2010 ).

While English School theorists understand culture as part of religion, the constructivist theoretical framework does the opposite. In constructivist studies, culture includes religion as well as other concepts such as identity, norms, or ideas (Lapid and Kratochwil 1996 ; Katzenstein 1996 ; Checkel 1998 ; Desch 1998 ). Cohen ( 1997 :11–12), for example, defines culture as “an acquired unique complex of attributes of a society that is subsuming every area of social life,” and we can find a similar approach in Mary Adams Trujillo et al. ( 2008 ). For others, such as Avruch ( 1998 :17) and Abu-Nimer ( 2001 :687) who draw on Theodore Schwartz's definition, culture is a less homogeneous and static concept and it “consists of the derivatives of experience, more or less organized, learned or created by the individuals of a population, including those images or encodement and their interpretations (meanings) transmitted from past generations, from contemporaries, or formed by individuals themselves.”

Subsuming religion under culture kept the concept under-theorized. It is notable that a canonical constructivist text, Alexander Wendt's Social Theory of International Politics ( 1999 ), does not include “religion” in the index (Snyder 2011 :2). An exception is Kubálková ( 2000 ), who brings religion into the study of IR through rule-oriented constructivism. However, the increasing interest in communal conflicts, such as ethno-national wars, and especially the September 11th attacks, have led to a resurgence of religion in the study of world politics (Fox 2001 :53; Philpott 2009 :184; Snyder 2011 :1).

Religion presents further definitional problems. The definition must encompass numerous but exclude from other phenomena such as ideologies or cults (Philpott 2003 ). Some of the early studies that deal with religion and international conflict, such as Ryan ( 1988 ), Azar ( 1990 ), Gurr ( 1994 ), and Gagnon ( 1994 ), consider religion to be part of a larger concept of ethnicity, or communality. Seul ( 1999 :553) tries to explain “the frequent appearance of religion as the primary cultural marker distinguishing groups in conflict,” and concludes that religion often exists “at the core of individual and group identity” (Seul 1999 :558). For Rothschild ( 1981 :86–7), however, religion is subsumed under the concept of ethnic identity. Correlation of War (COW) data uses both religion and ethnicity in measuring culture (see Henderson 1997 :661). Finally, Anthony Smith traces modern nationalism to religious origins (Smith 1999 ; see also Brubaker 2012 ).

Haynes ( 1998 ) provides a brief discussion about the definition dilemma and draws on Aquaviva while offering two sociological definitions. One sees religion as “a system of beliefs and practices related to an ultimate being, beings of the supernatural,” and the other considers religion to be what is “sacred in a society, that is, ultimate beliefs and practices which are inviolate” (Haynes 1998 : 4). The latter kind of definition is sometime referred to as ‘civil religion’ (Liebman and Don-Yiḥya 1983 ).

Toft ( 2007 :99) lists the common elements in most definitions: “a belief in a supernatural being (or beings); prayers and communication with that being; transcendent realities that might include some form of heaven, paradise, or hell; a distinction between the sacred and the profane and between ritual acts and sacred objects; a view that explains both the world as a whole and a person's proper role in it; a code of conduct in line with that world view; and a community bound by its adherence to these elements.”

On one hand, this discussion provides us some indicators to distinguish between religion and culture: the first belongs to the realm of the sacred and involves a relatively stable doctrine that connects the individual with the transcendental, while the latter belongs to the realm of the profane and involves a malleable combination of practices, customs, and expectations in relation to the society. On the other hand, religion and culture are intrinsically connected by myths, practices, and moral judgments that make religion a part of culture.

War and Peace in the Works of Religious Scholars and Political Theorists

Almost all religious texts have references to war and peace – the Hebrew Bible, the New Testament, the Quran, the Iliad and Odyssey, the Rig Veda, Mahabharata and Ramayana, Arthasastra, and so on. These references offer different treatments of war and peace. Some describe human nature as aggressive or as pursuing peace, some explain war and peace as a result of divine intervention and will, and some define the conditions in which war and peace can be achieved. Some references in sacred texts condition peace on the society's moral behavior. Other texts determine with whom, when, and how a war can be held and a peace treaty can be signed. Most of the sacred texts also have detailed historical narratives of war and peace, from which we can draw conclusions how the religion conceives war and peace. Religious figures and leaders are still creating new interpretations and commentary about peace and war, and this rich genre receives a lot of attention from scholars. In the Western world, books on Judaism and Christianity were written focusing on analyzing peace and war in the Hebrew Bible, in the New Testament, and in sermons, letters, and other external texts and exegeses (Arias 1533 ; Belli 1563 ; Benezet 1776 ; Heaton 1816 ; Dymond 1834 ). In the Muslim world, a similar attempt was made (Shaybani 1335 ; Ibn Khaldun 1377 ; Baladhuri 1866 ). This trend is still relevant in contemporary research today in Christianity (Faunce 1918 ; Barrett 1987 ; Swartley 2006 ), in Buddhism (Kraft 1992 ; Jerryson and Juergensmeyer 2010 ), in Islam (Khadduri 1940 ; Khadduri 1955 ; Kelsay and Johnson 1991 ; Abu-Nimer 2003 ; Mirbagheri 2012 ), in Judaism (Homolka and Friedlander 1994 ; Eisen 2011 ), in Hinduism (Banerjee 1988 ), and in some of them together (Jack 1968 ; Ferguson 1978 ; Smock 1992 ; Gort et al. 2002 ; Nelson-Pallmeyer 2003 ; Nan, Mampilly, and Bartoli 2012 ).

Political philosophy also includes religion in its scholarship. Religion, God, and faith exist in the writings of Hobbes, Machiavelli, Grotius, Rousseau, Locke, Kant, and other early Western political thinkers. All of them considered religion to be an inherent part of life and society that had to be accounted for in political analysis. Some perceived religion as a moral and ethical guideline for individuals and society, and some debated whether religion is an obstacle for government and society or an integral part of it. The relationship between religion and political life remains a vibrant subject of debate to this day (Eisenach 1981 ; Beiner 1993 ; Martinich 2003 ; De Vries 2003 ). Despite the richness of the contributions of religious scholars and of philosophers, these works have not yet offered a scientific theory regarding the role that religion plays in war and peace.

Religion and Conflict: The Clash of Civilization Debate

The first major attempt in the IR field to understand war almost exclusively through the religious prism was that of Samuel Huntington in his well-known article and book Clash of Civilization ( 1993 , 1996 ). Huntington, rejecting Francis Fukuyama's notion of the “End of History,” divides the world into seven or eight major civilizations that are fundamentally different from each other “by history, language, culture, tradition and, most important, religion” (Huntington 1993 :25). Instead of the traditional territorial nation-states, Huntington recognizes a world comprised of various identities that are not necessarily delineated by national boundaries. He argues that the end of the Cold War and the ideological battle between the West and the East will be replaced by a battle of civilizations, which is the broadest category of identification for individuals and is mainly determined by religious beliefs. More specifically, Huntington predicts that the main civilizational conflict will be between the Islamic civilization and the Judeo-Christian Western civilization, due to conflictual history from both sides, a large gap in values, the rise of Islamic extremists and fundamentalism, and a clash of identities as a result of Muslim immigration.

In sum, Huntington's view clarifies two main reasons why religion can cause war. First, religion can be considered as a primordial and immutable identity. The Manichean perception of ‘us’ versus ‘them’ that religion provides is a main source of conflict (Dark 2000 :4–5, 11). Second, globalization, which folds within it rapid economic development and an increase in interactions between individual groups, creates a clash between traditional customs and Western modernity (Fox 1997 :3; Thomas 2000 :5). The desire of other civilizations to maintain their core values and traditions, and to prevent the domination of Western culture lead Huntington to claim that civilizational differences will be the main source of future wars (Huntington 1993 :29–31, 40).

Huntington's thesis received a lot of interest in scholarly and political discourse, and his thesis was tested and criticized from many angles. Ajami ( 1993 ), Bartley ( 1993 ), and Weeks ( 1993 ), for example, argue that states are still the main actors in the international system and that the English-Western secular modern force is more powerful than Huntington thinks. Kirkpatrick ( 1993 ) claims that intra-civilizational conflicts are more common than inter-civilizational conflicts. Others, such as Tipson ( 1997 ), Pfaff ( 1997 ), and Said ( 2001 ), criticize Huntington's facts and methodology (for more comprehensive reviews of the clash of civilization debate see O'Hagan 1995 ; Fox and Sandler 2004 ; Fox 2005 ). Katzenstein ( 2010 ) rejects Huntington's conception of civilizations as homogeneous in favor of a pluralistic view recognizing internal diversity. Katzenstein ( 2010 ) further questions the Huntingtonian “clash” with the evident capacity for inter-and trans-civilizational encounters.

Scholars have also made quantitative attempts to test Huntington's theory. Russett, Oneal, and Cox ( 2000 ) examine inter-state wars between 1950 and 1992 and conclude that realist and liberal variables provide better explanations of these conflicts than civilizational factors. Henderson and Tucker ( 2001 ) examine international wars between 1816 and 1992 and find no connection between civilization membership and international wars. In addition, Henderson and Tucker find that conflicts within civilizations are more likely than conflicts between civilizations. More recent attempts also do not find support for the clash of civilization thesis (Chiozza 2002 ; Ben-Yehuda 2003 ; Bolks and Stoll 2003 ; Fox 2004 ; Henderson 2005 ). However, Henderson's ( 1997 :663) findings suggest that “the greater the religious dissimilarity between states, the greater the likelihood of war.” Similarly, Roeder ( 2003 ) examines ethnopolitical conflicts and finds support for Huntington's thesis. Fox, James, and Li ( 2009 ) bring a different angle to the clash of civilizations debate in examining international interventions on behalf of the same ethno-religious group in another state. Although they focus only on conflicts in the Middle East and North Africa, their findings show that Muslim states are more likely to intervene on behalf of other Muslim minorities. Moreover, ethnic conflicts with a religious dimension seem more likely to attract intervention than other ethnic conflicts.

Another view of religion as a cause of war sees religion as a form of ideology rather than identity. In this kind of approach, the emphasis is not on how clashing religious identities create conflict, but rather how religious ideas shape worldviews that justify or are consistent with conflict (see also Desch 1998 ). According to Beker ( 2008 ), for example, the Jewish notion of the “chosen people” has fueled many ideological conflicts between Jews and non-Jews. He further demonstrates how the battle over “chosenness” is evident in modern anti-Semitic discourse. Khadduri ( 1955 ) makes an analogous point with the concepts of dar al-harb (territory of war) and dar al-Islam (territory of Islam) in Islamic laws of war. Similarly, in examining Chinese thought and culture and their influence on Ming strategy towards the Mongols, Johnston ( 1995 :xi) finds that the non-militant ideas usually associated with Confucianism may be “inaccurate, misleading, or plainly wrong.” Juergensmeyer ( 2003 ) focuses on ideas that affect “cultures of violence.” Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Muslims, Sikhs, and others, Juergensmeyer claims, share a worldview of cosmic war between darkness and light (Juergensmeyer 2003 :13, 35). Because religious ideology is a defined non-negotiable set of rules, resolving a religious dispute peacefully is harder than with other disputes (Dark 2000 :1–2).

Religious Fundamentalism and Violence

The relationship between religious worldviews and war leads us to religious fundamentalism and violence. Of special note is the five-volume work by Marty and Appleby ( 1991 –5) that encompasses different approaches and case studies related to fundamentalism. Marty and Appleby ( 1992 :34) define fundamentalism as “a distinctive tendency – a habit of mind and a pattern of behavior – found within modern religious communities and embodied in certain representative individuals and movements … a religious way of being that manifests itself as a strategy by which beleaguered believers attempt to preserve their distinctive identity as a people or group.” They recount the ideological extremism in social, political, and structural conditions, such as social deprivation, repressive regimes, reaction to secularization, and economic crises. Marty and Appleby argue that religious ideas are not the goal for the fundamentalists, but rather they use religion as a means to achieve political ends. Fundamentalists use “old doctrines, subtly lift them from their original context … and employ them as ideological weapons against a hostile world” (Marty and Appleby 1991 :826). Fundamentalism, in this view, is a religious backlash against secular rule (see also Tibi 1999 ). Juergensmeyer ( 1993 ) shares this view but opposes labeling this religious fervor as fundamentalism due to the accusatory and ambiguous meanings of the term.

Eisenstadt ( 1999 ) agrees with Marty and Appleby that “contemporary” fundamentalist movements are thoroughly modern movements, but disagrees with the link they draw between religious force and fundamentalism. For Eisenstadt, contemporary fundamentalist movements rest on the same universal, utopian, totalistic, and secular claims of modernity that the Jacobins and the communist revolutions were based upon but “promulgate anti-modern or anti-Enlightenment ideologies” (Eisenstadt 1999 :1). The direction which a fundamentalist movement takes depends on its civilization, the political and social circumstances surrounding the movement, and the international setting (Eisenstadt 1999 ). Reviews of religious fundamentalism and violence include Gill ( 2001 ) and Ozzano ( 2009 ).

Religious Actors and International Conflict

Scholarship has gone beyond the clash of civilizations debate and the study of fundamentalism to explore further questions about how and under what conditions religion leads to war. One approach has been to consider individual values and mindsets in the lists of factors that affect decision making by leaders, including decisions about war. Brecher ( 1972 ), Jervis ( 1976 ), and Fisher ( 1997 ) focus on culture, while Fox ( 2001 ), Sandal and James ( 2010 ), and Warner and Walker ( 2011 ) focus specifically on religion. On the collective level, society's core values, conceptions, and assumptions about the world and the enemy can influence foreign policy outcomes (Booth 1979 ; Hudson and Vore 1995 ; Reeves 2004 ). Religious beliefs should not be dismissed as irrational or marginal, but should be included in the strategic calculations of leaders and states (Toft 2007 :129).

Religious affinities on the collective level are not confined to traditional territorial state boundaries. Transnational religious actors are another good example of the role of religion in conflict. Religious terrorist groups that have cells in different countries can initiate a conflict between states, and global riots can result from injury to religious sentiment, as in the Danish caricature case (Dark 2000 :5–10; Fox 2001 :67–9; Haynes 2001 ). These kinds of conflicts can be international, when religious diaspora is engaged in the conflict, or remain domestic (civil wars). Fox and Sandler show how local wars can capture the interest of members of transnational religious groups due to the possible involvement of holy sites (Fox and Sandler 2004 :63–82). Even without direct participation in violence, religious transnational movements and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) participate in global conflict by lobbying or protesting in order to encourage a state to intervene in a distant war between ethno-religious minorities (Fox, James and Li 2009 ).

Religion may also have an indirect effect on war since it can be used as a tool to mobilize people and to enhance legitimacy (Fox 2001 :65–7; Haynes 2004 :456; Snyder 2011 :11). This does not necessarily mean that political leaders actually hold religious beliefs but that such beliefs serve them in accomplishing their political interests. This view holds that the recent global resurgence of religion in various societies occurs as a result of instrumental use of religion by political elites (Fox 1997 :4; Hasenclever and Rittberger 2000 :643–6).

The question of whether religion is the cause of a conflict, or just a tool or a dimension of it was addressed in several quantitative studies. Gurr ( 1993 ) uses the Minorities at Risk data to examine mobilization and collective action in “communal conflicts.” His findings indicate that an essential basis for mobilization is a sense of group identity. Gurr measures group identity by using six indicators including religion, ethnicity, and social customs. Fox ( 1997 , 2002 ) tries to isolate conflicts between groups from different religions. Using the same data as Gurr, Fox concludes that in such cases “religious issues play, at most, a marginal role” (Fox 1997 :16). Henderson, however, using Correlates of War data, concludes that “cultural difference, especially in the case of religion, is positively associated with war” (Henderson 1997 :666). Durward and Marsden ( 2009 ) offer a more nuanced and developed understanding of how religious beliefs, discourses, and practices are politicized and used to trigger conflicts, justify military interventions, and facilitate resolutions.

Religion and the Intensity of War

Another trend in the study of religion and war asks whether religious conflicts are more violent than other conflicts and if some religions are more prone to use more violence than others. Fox and Sandler ( 2004 ), using Minorities at Risk data, conclude that “religious conflicts … are consistently more violent than nonreligious conflicts.” A study by Pearce ( 2005 ) using a different data set supports this conclusion.

As for the relationship between a specific religion and violence, Pearce's ( 2005 :349) results show that Judaism and Hinduism are more violence prone, but this may be due to a small number of cases. Fox and Sandler's ( 2004 :132) results demonstrate “conflicts involving Islamic groups are more violent than conflicts not involving Islamic groups,” and conflicts within the Islamic civilization “are slightly more violent” than conflicts between civilizations. Due to the fact that there are many Muslim states, but only one Jewish state and one Hindu state that are each experiencing protracted conflict, it is still unclear whether specific religions are more violent than others, or whether it is a false image created by the uneven numbers of religious groups. The finding that Islamists were involved in 81 percent of the religious civil wars between 1940 and 2000 led Toft ( 2007 ) to eventually conclude that “overlapping historical, geographical, and, in particular, structural factors account for Islam's higher representation in religious civil wars.” More importantly, her theory suggests that religious aspects are an instrument by political elites for gaining more legitimacy in order to survive, or to achieve another objective (Toft 2007 :97–8, 128).

The degree of religious violence does not have to be related to a specific religion, but rather to the type of regime or degree of state power. Thomas ( 2000 :14–15) suggests that the appeal for religious ideas grows larger especially in weak states. Fox ( 1997 ) shows an increase in religious discrimination and grievance in autocratic states compared with democratic regimes. When a transition to democracy happens, the chances of such communal violence rise due to the diminishing power of the regime and an ease of autocratic repression (Gurr 1994 ).

Culture, Religion, and Diplomacy

Scholars have also been interested in the practical use of religion and culture to promote peace. Discussing culture specifically, Kevin Avruch ( 1998 ) suggests that culture is a significant variable in conflict resolution as each negotiator comes with his or her own subculture (class, region, ethnicity, and more). In contrast, Zartman ( 1993 :17) gives culture little substantive significance and argues that it is as relevant as the breakfast the negotiators ate. Fisher ( 1980 ) and Cohen ( 1997 ) occupy the middle ground suggesting that culture matters together with other variables. For a good introductory review regarding these approaches, see Ramsbotham, Miall, and Woodhouse ( 2011 ).

Cultural gaps may involve language barriers, create problems of interpretation, and disrupt the transfer of information (Gulliver 1979 ; Fisher 1980 ; Faure and Rubin 1993 ; Cohen 1997 ; Berton et al. 1999 ). The dichotomy, made by Hall ( 1976 ) between high-context cultures and low-context cultures, is useful in explaining these cultural obstacles in international negotiation. High-context cultures are generally associated with collective societies in which communication is less verbal and more indirect, emphasizing the context in which things are said and done. High-context cultures require communicators to pay attention to nuances and body language. Consequently, those from such cultures are more sensitive socially, they try to please their audience, and they see great importance in small talk and group consensus. Low-context cultures, on the other hand, are individualistic in character, and communication is direct and with a clear message. Accuracy in the written or spoken word is very important in low-context culture, and less attention is paid to context, body language, and facial expressions (Cohen 1997 ; Rubinstein 2003 ). When two societies from the two different types of culture meet around the negotiation table, potential pitfalls are evident. This line of research has specific practical implications. The US Institute of Peace published a series of works analyzing different negotiating styles and behaviors to equip negotiators with a better understanding of cultural differences. Examples include Wittes ( 2005 ), Solomon and Quinney ( 2010 ), and Schaffer and Schaffer ( 2011 ).

As for structure and the process of negotiation, culture can play an important role in the degree of trust between the sides, which can define negotiation strategy and whether there is a need for mediation. These factors can also influence the size of the delegations, the different roles within the delegation, the degree of unity within the delegation, negotiating procedures, seating arrangements, and public announcements (Berton et al. 1999 :3–5).

This vast literature regarding culture and diplomacy has little to say about religion. As former United States Secretary of State and international relations scholar Madeleine Albright confesses, diplomacy, conflict resolution, negotiation, and peace were all conceptualized in secular terms with no room for religion and faith prior to the terror attacks of September 11th (Albright 2006 :8–9). Indeed, most of the IR studies on culture and diplomatic practices to promote peace were written during the 1980s and 1990s. Only after September 11th did religion and faith become a primary topic.

Many scholars agree that the same power that religion has in inciting conflicts can also be used to promote peace (Gopin 1997 ; Appleby 2000 ; Broadhead and Keown 2007 ). Some works continue the trajectory of previous studies on cross-cultural negotiation and focus on a specific religion. In the case of Islam, Alon ( 2000 ), Alon and Brett ( 2007 ), and Pely ( 2010 ) focus on Muslim perceptions of conflict resolution, values of honor, and the institutional mechanism of sulha (reconciliation). Other studies consider how peace can be achieved with an emphasis on shared religious values, such as empathy, forgiveness, mercy, compassion and the Golden Rule to “do unto others as you would have them do unto you” (Gopin 1997 ; Gopin 2001 ; Cilliers 2002 ; Carter and Smith 2004 ). Similarly, Albright ( 2006 :73) mentions the religious notion that “we are all created in the image of God” as a common ground. Shore ( 2009 :2) shows how “Christianity played a central role in South Africa's Truth and Reconciliation Commission,” and how values of forgiveness and justice were important in South Africa's peaceful transition to democracy. Similarly, Gopin ( 2002 ) argues that in the Israeli-Palestinian case, the marginalization of religious aspects was crucial in the failure of the Oslo agreement. He adds that by putting religion in the middle of the reconciliation process, and with dialogues between key religious figures from both sides, peace in the Middle East can be achieved.

While traditional realpolitik diplomacy has had difficulties coping with religion-inspired conflicts, non-state actors, such as religious leaders and members of religious NGOs, had more success in promoting peace in different forms – whether peacemaking, peacebuilding, peace enforcing, or peace keeping (Little 2006 :102). Cynthia Sampson ( 1997 ) overviews the various roles and methodologies used by religious-motivated institutional actors in the process of peacebuilding. She provides manifold examples of conflict intervention by religious institutional actors that advocate (such as during the Rhodesian war of independence), intermediate (such as in the 1972 Sudanese peace process), observe (such as during the 1991 Zambian elections), and educate (such as in Northern Ireland). Appleby ( 2000 ) offers a similar approach focusing on religious actors and their roles.

The vast examples of religious involvement in peacebuilding have led Johnston and Sampson ( 1997 ) and Johnston ( 2003 ) to conceptualize this type of diplomacy as “faith-based diplomacy,” which takes place through track II channels (the informal and unofficial negotiations). In general, the Catholic Church receives more scholarly attention than other religious institutions in mediating disputes. Examples include the 1968–89 internal dispute in Bolivia (Klaiber 1993 ) and the Beagle Channel dispute between Argentina and Chile (Garrett 1985 ; Lindsley 1987 ; Laudy 2000 ). Bartoli's analyses of the reconciliation process in Mozambique specify how religion plays a role in conflict resolution. He demonstrates that religion does not replace or transform the political process of negotiation, but rather provides motivation, organizational capacities, legitimacy, and flexibility (Bartoli 2001 , 2005 ; see also Toft, Philpott, and Shah 2011 ).

The volume edited by David Little ( 2007 ) offers a different perspective that focuses on individual religious figures, rather than institutions, as peacemakers. Examples from El Salvador, Israel/Palestine, Kosovo, Northern Ireland, and Sudan highlight the grassroots efforts by religious individuals to promote peace. Using religious texts, rituals, and networks these individuals increase global attention, help find common ground, provide moral justification, and facilitate face-to-face communication between the warring sides (see also Smock 2008 ; for more on the topic of diplomacy and religion see “Diplomacy and Religion”).

Recently, there is a growing interest in challenging the secularist assumptions of United States foreign policy. Hurd ( 2008 ), for example, demonstrates that the perceived separation between religious and secular political authorities is a result of a political process and is socially constructed. By identifying two trajectories of secularism – a laicist one and a Judeo-Christian one – she shows how religion and secularism were never apart. Thus, instead of characterizing religion as a threat, diplomats and decision makers should realize that there are various political representations and interpretations of religion and should make more room for non-Western forms of politics (Hurd 2007 ). From a different perspective, Farr ( 2008 ) calls for rejecting the American narrow version of religious freedom that focuses on humanitarian violations in favor of a more tolerant and broader version that builds and encourages different versions of religious freedom in different regimes. Philpott ( 2013 :31) supports Farr's conclusions by highlighting how religious freedom is a “critical enabler of peace.”

Culture, Religion, and the Democratic Peace

Another research theme in IR tries to engage religion and culture in existing peace theories. The main example is democratic peace theory, by which liberal democracies tend not to fight each other. One of the explanations for democratic peace argues that shared cultures, values, and norms favoring compromise and peaceful solutions lead liberal democracies to solve disputes peacefully (Maoz and Russett 1993 ). But the traditional cultural explanation for democratic peace focuses on political culture and not on other elements such as ethnicity, language, and religion. Henderson ( 1998 ) tests the theory with those elements included and concludes that religious similarities within democratic dyads decrease the likelihood of war, while ethnic and lingual similarities increase this likelihood.

The connection between peaceful behavior and regime type led scholars to examine the connection between specific religions and democracy as a way to better understand the conditions for democracy and presumably for peace. After Huntington's theory and the events of September 11th, Western scholars tested Bernard Lewis’ hypothesis that Islamic religion conflicts with democracy (Midlarsky 1998 :486). This topic was researched from different angles. Some argue that Muslim resistance to modernity is an obstacle to democracy (Sivan 1990 ); some argue that lack of sufficient economic development holds back democracy; others claim that the possession of oil and the concept of the ‘rentier state’ hinder democracy (Ross 2001 ; Fish 2002 ); and some claim that the ideas grounded in Islamic thought and religion are incompatible with democracy (Huntington 1984 ; Lewis 1996 ). On the other hand, Esposito and Piscatori ( 1991 ) and Esposito and Voll ( 1996 ) argue that Islam is not necessarily hostile to democracy, and urge us to remember that Islam, like democracy, has a variety of interpretations, meanings, and political practices. Midlarsky ( 1998 ) tries to test the relationship between Islam and democracy using a political rights index (measuring procedural democracy) and an index of liberal democracy (measuring liberal freedoms). He finds that Islam, measured by the percentage of population that is Muslim, has a negative correlation with liberal freedoms but does not necessarily rule out democratic procedure. Recently, Hunter and Malik ( 2005 ) offer an antithesis to this view and demonstrate how military, colonial, international economic, and domestic economic factors prevented the creation of a civil society that is crucial for democracy. Sonn and McDaniel's chapter in the same book demonstrates how modern Islamic thought is quite similar to Western values, including rationality and tolerance.

Future Research

In the study of war and peace, religion long played a marginal role. Both sacred texts and Western canonical philosophical works contain religious references to war and peace, but none of the main theoretical works in IR address religion. Since the end of the Cold War and the growing attention to ethnic conflicts, new interests in culture and religion emerged. Scholars first explored the interplay of culture, war, and peace focusing on decision making, negotiation, national character, and the cultural construction of friends and foes. Then, as a result of the growing attention to ethnic conflict and terrorism, there was a resurgence of interest in religion in IR scholarship. Treated both as a central component of social identity and as an overarching ideology, religious international violence is understood by some scholars as a reaction to global population flows, modernization processes, and secularization.

Religion, as a social phenomenon, is also able to help us understand the growing power of actors outside the traditional boundaries of the state. Transnational actors that share religious beliefs with each other can pursue different, and sometimes contradictory, goals from those of the nation-state. Such actors can ignite conflicts, but can also help in mediating negotiations and promoting peace. Diplomats have learned to use key religious figures in their reconciliation attempts and they try to emphasize common values and diminish differences between religions.

The rediscovery of religion in IR scholarship has produced many studies that try to theorize the role of religion in conflict and peace. Thus far, these studies treat religion either as a political tool used by agents for their own interests or as an essentialist ideological scheme that informs actors’ behavior. Future research may focus on the relational and constantly changing aspects of religion and show what, when, and how various religious interpretations receive political prominence in promoting conflict or peace. Moreover, IR scholarship could use more theorization of how religion can be used as an independent variable across cases. How can one compare the religious passions animating the Crusades, with the religious passions during the Thirty Years War, or with modern fundamentalist terrorism? The definitional problems, mentioned earlier, provide difficulties in that regard.

A new way to look in more depth at religious and cultural elements of international politics is to use them as interpretive tools. Culture can be conceptualized as the “practices of meaning-making,” and thus open an opportunity to investigate the ways in which meanings are created within a society (Wedeen 2002 ). For example, examining political rhetoric can help us understand how meanings become inscribed within a society and how changes in rhetoric can lead to changes in foreign policy (Krebs and Jackson 2007 ; Krebs and Lobasz 2007 ). Another beneficial way to engage the elusive concepts of culture and religion is to trace the hidden set of assumptions that are embedded in the cultural and religion labels. What does “democracy” or “freedom” mean to different cultural or religious groups? What types of behavior are expected from a negotiator who is labeled Muslim or Buddhist and how does it affect the negotiation process? Moreover, how does popular representation of different religions shape these hidden assumptions?

IR literature will probably continue to engage culture and religion in its research, but in order to develop the field and avoid academic stagnation, it is important to enable scientific pluralism that will force us to reconsider how we treat religion and culture. A deeper understanding of different religions and cultures will open our understanding of the different “worlds” within “our world” and will identify the values that drive these worlds.

Acknowledgments

I wish to thank Renée Marlin-Bennett for her valuable guidance and comments, and Andrew Mark Bennett for his meticulous assistance.

  • Abu-Nimer, M. (2001) Conflict Resolution, Culture, and Religion: Toward a Training Model of Interreligious Peacebuilding. Journal of Peace Research (38) (6), 685–704.
  • Abu-Nimer, M. (2003) Nonviolence and Peacebuilding in Islam . Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida.
  • Ajami, F. (1993) The Summoning. Foreign Affairs (72) (4), 2–9.
  • Albright, M.K. (2006) The Mighty and the Almighty: Reflections on America, God, and World Affairs . New York: Harper Perennial.
  • Almond, G.A. , and Verba, S. (1963) The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  • Alon, I. (2000) Negotiation in Arab-Speaking Islam: A Research Note . Jerusalem: Leonard Davis Institute for International Relations, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
  • Alon, I. and Brett, J.M. (2007) Perceptions of Time and Their Impact on Negotiations in the Arabic-Speaking Islamic World. Negotiation Journal (23) (1), 55–73.
  • al-Shaybani, M. (1335) Kitab al-Siyar al-Kabir [A Treatise on the International Law] . Hyderabad.
  • Appleby, R.S. (2000) The Ambivalence of the Sacred: Religion, Violence, and Reconciliation . Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.
  • Arias, F. (1533) De Bello et Eius Iustitia in Tractatus Universi Iuris [Justice of War in Universal Law Treaties] .
  • Avruch, K. (1998) Culture and Conflict Resolution . Washington: United States Institute of Peace Press.
  • Azar, E.E. (1990) The Management of Protracted Social Conflict: Theory and Cases . Aldershot: Dartmouth.
  • Baladhuri, A. (1866) Futuh al-Buldan [Conquests of the Lands] . Leiden.
  • Banerjee, N.V. (1988) Towards Perpetual Peace . Shimla: Indian Institute of Advanced Study.
  • Barrett, C. (1987) Peace Together: A Vision of Christian Pacifism . Cambridge: J. Clarke.
  • Bartley, R.L. (1993) The Case for Optimism. Foreign Affairs (72) (4), 15–18.
  • Bartoli, A. (2001) Forgiveness and Reconciliation in the Mozambique Peace Process. In R.G. Helmick and R.L. Petersen (eds.), Forgiveness and Reconciliation: Religion, Public Policy, and Conflict Transformation . Philadelphia: Templeton Foundation Press.
  • Bartoli, A. (2005) Learning from the Mozambique Peace Process: The Role of the Community in Sant'Egidio. In R.J. Fisher (ed.), Paving the Way: Contribution of Interactive Conflict Resolution to Peacemaking . Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
  • Beiner, R. (1993) Machiavelli, Hobbes, and Rousseau on Civil Religion. The Review of Politics (55) (4), 617–38.
  • Beker, A. (2008) The Chosen: The History of an Idea, the Anatomy of an Obsession . New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Belli, P. (1563) De re Militari et de Bello in Tractatus Universi Iuris [The Military Affairs of the War in Universal Law Treaties] .
  • Bellin, E. (2008) Faith in Politics: New Trends in the Study of Religion and Politics. World Politics (60) (2), 315–47.
  • Benezet, A. (1776) Thoughts on the Nature of War . Philadelphia.
  • Ben-Yehuda, H. (2003) The “Clash of Civilizations” Thesis: Findings from International Crises, 1918–1994. Comparative Civilizations Review ( (49) ), 28–42.
  • Berton, P. , Kimura, H. , and Zartman, W.I. (eds.) (1999) International Negotiation: Actors, Structure/Process, Values . New York: Saint Martin's Press.
  • Bolks, S. , and Stoll, R. (2003) Examining Conflict Escalation within the Civilizations Context. Conflict Management and Peace Science (20) (2), 85–109.
  • Booth, K. (1979) Strategy and Ethnocentrism . New York: Holmes & Meier.
  • Bozeman, A.B. (1960) Politics and Culture in International History . Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  • Bozeman, A.B. (1971) The Future of Law in a Multicultural World . Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  • Brecher, M. (1972) The Foreign Policy System of Israel: Setting, Images, Process . New Haven: Yale University Press.
  • Broadhead, P. , and Keown, D. (2007) Can Faiths Make Peace? Holy Wars and the Resolution of Religious Conflicts . New York: IB Tauris.
  • Brubaker, R. (2012) Religion and Nationalism: Four Approaches. Nations and Nationalism (18) (1), 2–20.
  • Buzan, B. (1993) From International System to International Society: Structural Realism and Regime Theory Meet the English School. International Organization (47) (3), 327–52.
  • Carter, J. , and Smith, G.S. (2004) Religious Peacebuilding: From Potential to Action. In H.G. Coward , and G.S. Smith (eds.) Religion and Peacebuilding . New York: State University of New York Press, pp. 279–302.
  • Checkel, J.T. (1998) The Constructivist Turn in International Relations Theory. World Politics (50) (2), 324–48.
  • Chiozza, G. (2002) Is There a Clash of Civilizations? Evidence from Patterns of International Conflict Involvement, 1946–97. Journal of Peace Research (39) (6), 711–34.
  • Cilliers, J. (2002) Building Bridges for Interfaith Dialogue. In D.R. Smock (ed.), Interfaith Dialogue and Peacebuilding . Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace Press, pp. 47–60.
  • Cohen, R. (1997) Negotiating Across Cultures . Washington: United States Institute of Peace Press.
  • Dark, K.R. (2000) Religion and International Relations . Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Desch, M.C. (1998) Culture Clash: Assessing the Importance of Ideas in Security Studies. International Security (23) (1), 141–70.
  • De Vries, H. (2003) Religion and Violence: Philosophical Perspectives from Kant to Derrida . Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
  • Durward, R. , and Marsden, L. (eds.) (2009) Religion, Conflict, and Military Intervention . Burlington, VT: Ashgate.
  • Dymond, J. (1834) An Inquiry into the Accordance of War with the Principles of Christianity . Philadelphia: William Brown.
  • Eisen, R. (2011) The Peace and Violence of Judaism: From the Bible to Modern Zion . New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Eisenach, E.J. (1981) Two Worlds of Liberalism: Religion and Politics in Hobbes, Locke, and Mill . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Eisenstadt, S.N. (1999) Fundamentalism, Sectarianism, and Revolution: The Jacobin Dimension of Modernity . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Esposito, J.L. , and Piscatori, J.P. (1991) Democratization and Islam. Middle East Journal (45) (3), 427–40.
  • Esposito, J.L. , and Voll, J.O. (1996) Islam and Democracy . New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Farr, T.F. (2008) World of Faith and Freedom: Why International Religious Liberty is Vital to American National Security . New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Faunce, H.P. (1918) Religion and War . New York: The Abingdon Press.
  • Faure, G.O. , and Rubin, J.Z. (eds.) (1993) Culture and Negotiation: The Resolution of Water Disputes . Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  • Ferguson, J. (1978) War and Peace in the World's Religions . New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Finnemore, M. , and Sikkink, K. (2001) Taking Stock: The Constructivist Research Program in International Relations and Comparative Politics. Annual Review of Political Science (4) (1), 391–416.
  • Fish, M.S. (2002) Islam and Authoritarianism. World Politics (55) (1) 4–37.
  • Fisher, G. (1997) Mindsets: the Role of Culture and Perception in International Relations . Maine: Intercultural Press.
  • Fisher, G. (1980) International Negotiation: A Cross-Cultural Perspective . Chicago: Intercultural Press.
  • Fox, J. (1997) The Salience of Religious Issues in Ethnic Conflicts: A Large-N Study. Nationalism and Ethnic Politics (3) (3), 1–19.
  • Fox, J. (2001) Religion as an Overlooked Element of International Relations. International Studies Review (3) (3), 53–73.
  • Fox, J. (2002) Ethnoreligious Conflict in the Late Twentieth Century: A General Theory . Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
  • Fox, J. (2004) Religion and State Failure: An Examination of the Extent and Magnitude of Religious conflict from 1950 to 1996. International Political Science Review (25) (1), 55–76.
  • Fox, J. (2005) Paradigm Lost: Huntington's Unfulfilled Clash of Civilizations Prediction into the 21st Century. International Politics (42) (4), 428–57.
  • Fox, J. , and Sandler, S. (2004) Bringing Religion into International Relations . New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Fox, J. , James, P. and Li, Y. (2009) Religious Affinities and International Intervention in Ethnic Conflicts in the Middle East and Beyond. Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue Canadienne (42) (1), 161–86.
  • Gagnon, V.P. (1994) Ethnic Nationalism and International Conflict: The Case of Serbia. International Security (19) (3), 130–66.
  • Garrett, J.L. (1985) The Beagle Channel Dispute: Confrontation and Negotiation in the Southern Cone Journal of Inter-American Studies and World Affairs (27) (3), 81–109.
  • Gill, A. (2001) Religion and Comparative Politics. Annual Review of Political Science (4) (1), 117–38.
  • Gopin, M. (1997) Religion, Violence, and Conflict Resolution. Peace & Change (22) (1), 1–31.
  • Gopin, M. (2001) Forgiveness as an Element of Conflict Resolution in Religious Cultures: Walking the Tightrope of Reconciliation and Justice. In M. Abu-Nimer (ed.), Reconciliation, Justice, and Coexistence: Theory & Practice . Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 87–99.
  • Gopin, M. (2002) Holy War, Holy Peace: How Religion Can Bring Peace to the Middle East . New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Gort, J.D. , Jansen, H. , and Vroom, H.M. (2002) Religion, Conflict, and Reconciliation . New York: Rodopi.
  • Gulliver, P.H. (1979) Disputes and Negotiations: a Cross-Cultural Perspective . New York: Academic Press.
  • Gurr, T.R. (1993) Why Minorities Rebel: A Global Analysis of Communal Mobilization and Conflict Since 1945. International Political Science Review (14) (2), 161–201.
  • Gurr, T.R. (1994) Peoples Against States: Ethnopolitical Conflict and the Changing World System: 1994 Presidential Address. International Studies Quarterly (38) (3), 347–77.
  • Hall, E.T. (1976) Beyond Culture . New York: Anchor.
  • Hasenclever, A. , and Rittberger, V. (2000) Does Religion Make a Difference? Theoretical Approaches to the Impact of Faith on Political Conflict. Millennium-Journal of International Studies (29) (3), 641–74.
  • Haynes, J. (1998) Religion in Global Politics . London: Longman.
  • Haynes, J. (2001) Transnational Religious Actors and International Politics. Third World Quarterly (22) (2), 143–58.
  • Haynes, J. (2004) Religion and International Relations: What Are the Issues? International Politics (41) (3), 451–62.
  • Heaton, A. (1816) War and Christianity Contrasted . New York: Samuel Woods & Sons.
  • Henderson, E.A. (1997) Culture or Contiguity. Journal of Conflict Resolution (41) (5), 649–68.
  • Henderson, E.A. (1998) The Democratic Peace Through the Lens of Culture, 1820–1989. International Studies Quarterly (42) (3), 461–84.
  • Henderson, E.A. (2005) Not Letting Evidence Get in the Way of Assumptions: Testing the Clash of Civilizations Thesis with More Recent Data. International Politics (42) (4), 458–69.
  • Henderson, E.A. , and Tucker, R. (2001) Clear and Present Strangers: The Clash of Civilizations and International Conflict. International Studies Quarterly (45) (2), 317–38.
  • Homolka, W. , and Friedlander, A.H. (1994) The Gate to Perfection: The Idea of Peace in Jewish Thought . Providence: Berghahn Books.
  • Hudson, V.M. , and Vore, C.S. (1995) Foreign Policy Analysis Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow. Mershon International Studies Review (39) (2), 209–38.
  • Hunter, S.T. , and Malik, H. (2005) Modernization, Democracy, and Islam . Westport: Praeger.
  • Huntington, S.P. (1984) Will More Countries Become Democratic? Political Science Quarterly (99) (2), 193–218.
  • Huntington, S.P. (1993) The Clash of Civilizations. Foreign Affairs (72) (3), 22–49.
  • Huntington, S.P. (1996) The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order . New York: Simon and Schuster.
  • Hurd, E.S. (2007). Political Islam and Foreign Policy in Europe and the United States. Foreign Policy Analysis (3) (4), 345–67.
  • Hurd, E.S. (2008) The Politics of Secularism in International Relations . Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  • Ibn Khaldun, A. (1377) Muqaddimat Ibn Khaldun [Ibn Khaldun's Introduction] .
  • Jack, H.A. (1968) World Religions and World Peace . Boston: Beacon Press.
  • Jerryson, M.K. , and Juergensmeyer, M. (2010) Buddhist Warfare . Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Jervis, R. (1976) Perception and Misperception in International Politics . Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  • Johnston, A.I. (1995) Cultural Realism: Strategic Culture and Grand Strategy in Chinese History . Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  • Johnston, D.M. (2003) Faith-Based Diplomacy: Trumping Realpolitik . New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Johnston, D.M. , and Sampson, C. (1997) Religion, the Missing Dimension of Statecraft . New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Juergensmeyer, M. (1993) Why Religious Nationalists are not Fundamentalists. Religion (23) (1), 85–92.
  • Juergensmeyer, M. (2003) Terror in the Mind of God: the Global Rise of Religious Violence . Berkeley: University of California Press.
  • Katzenstein, P.J. (ed.) (1996) The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in World Politics . New York: Columbia University Press.
  • Katzenstein, P.J. (ed.) (2010) Civilizations in World Politics: Plural and Pluralist Perspectives . New York: Routledge.
  • Kelsay, J. , and Johnson, J.T. (1991) Just war and Jihad: Historical and Theoretical Perspectives on War and Peace in Western and Islamic Traditions . New York: Greenwood Press.
  • Khadduri, M. (1940) The Law of War and Peace in Islam: A Study in Muslim International Law . London: Luzan.
  • Khadduri, M. (1955) War and Peace in the Law of Islam . Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
  • Kirkpatrick, J.J. (1993) The Modernizing Imperative. Foreign Affairs (72) (4), 22–4.
  • Klaiber, J. (1993) The Catholic Church's Role as Mediator: Bolivia, 1968–1989. Journal of Church and State (35) (2), 351–65.
  • Kraft, K. (1992) Inner Peace, World Peace: Essays on Buddhism and Non-Violence . New York: State University of New York Press.
  • Krebs, R.R. , and Jackson, P.T. (2007) Twisting Tongues and Twisting Arms: The Power of Political Rhetoric. European Journal of International Relations (13) (1), 35–66.
  • Krebs, R.R. , and Lobasz, J.K. (2007) Fixing the Meaning of 9/11: Hegemony, Coercion, and the Road to War in Iraq. Security Studies (16) (3), 409–51.
  • Kubálková, V. (2000) Towards an International Political Theology. Millennium – Journal of International Studies (29) (3), 675–704.
  • Lapid, Y. , and Kratochwil, F.V. (1996) The Return of Culture and Identity in IR Theory . Boulder: Lynne Rienner.
  • Laudy, M. (2000) The Vatican Mediation of the Beagle Channel Dispute: Crisis Intervention and Forum Building. In M.C. Greenberg , J.H. Barton , and M.E. McGuinness (eds.) Words over War: Mediation and Arbitration to Prevent Deadly Conflict . Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, pp. 293–320.
  • Lewis, B. (1996) A Historical Overview. Journal of Democracy (7) (2), 52–63.
  • Liebman, C.S. , and Don-Yiḥya, E. (1983) Civil Religion in Israel: Traditional Judaism and Political Culture in the Jewish State . Berkeley: University of California Press.
  • Lindsley, L. (1987) The Beagle Channel Settlement: Vatican Mediation Resolves a Century-Old Dispute. Journal of Church and State (29) (3), 435–54.
  • Little, D. (2006) Religion, Conflict and Peace. Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law (38) (1), 95–103.
  • Little, D. (ed.) (2007) Peacemakers in Action: Profiles in Religious Conflict Resolution . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Maoz, Z. , and Russett, B. (1993) Normative and Structural Causes of Democratic Peace, 1946–1986. The American Political Science Review (87) (3), 624–38.
  • Martinich, A.P. (2003) The Two Gods of Leviathan: Thomas Hobbes on Religion and Politics . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Marty, M.E. , and Appleby, R.S. (eds.) (1991) Fundamentalisms Observed . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Marty, M.E. , and Appleby, R.S. (eds.) (1992) The Glory and the Power: The Fundamentalist Challenge to the Modern World . Boston: Beacon Press.
  • Midlarsky, M.I. (1998) Democracy and Islam: Implications for Civilizational Conflict and the Democratic Peace. International Studies Quarterly (42) (3), 485–511.
  • Mirbagheri, F. (2012) War and Peace in Islam: A Critique of Islamic/ist Political Discourses . New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Nan, S.A. , Mampilly, Z.C. , and Bartoli, A. (eds.) (2012) Peacemaking: From Practice to Theory . Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.
  • Nelson-Pallmeyer, J. (2003) Is Religion Killing Us? Violence in the Bible and the Quran . New York: The Continuum International Publishing Group.
  • O'Hagan, J. (1995) Civilisational Conflict? Looking for Cultural Enemies. Third World Quarterly (16) (1), 19–38.
  • Ozzano, L. (2009) A Political Science Perspective on Religious Fundamentalism. Totalitarian Movements and Political Religions (10) (3–4), 339–59.
  • Pearce, S. (2005) Religious Rage: A Quantitative Analysis of the Intensity of Religious Conflicts. Terrorism and Political Violence (17) (3), 333–52.
  • Pely, D. (2010) Honor: The Sulha's Main Dispute Resolution Tool. Conflict Resolution Quarterly (28) (1), 67–81.
  • Pfaff, W. (1997) The Reality of Human Affairs. World Policy Journal (14) (2), 89–96.
  • Philpott, D. (2003) The Challenge of September 11 to Secularism in International Relations. World Politics (55) (1), 66–95.
  • Philpott, D. (2009) Has the Study of Global Politics Found Religion? Annual Review of Political Science (12) (1), 183–202.
  • Philpott, D. (2013) Religious Freedom and Peacebuilding: May I Introduce You Two? The Review of Faith & International Affairs (11) (1), 31–7.
  • Ramsbotham, O. , Miall, H. , and Woodhouse, T. (2011) Contemporary Conflict Resolution . Malden, MA: Polity.
  • Reeves, J. (2004) Culture and International Relations: Narratives, Natives, and Tourists . New York: Routledge.
  • Roeder, P.G. (2003) Clash of Civilizations and Escalation of Domestic Ethnopolitical Conflicts. Comparative Political Studies (36) (5), 509–40.
  • Ross, M.L. (2001) Does Oil Hinder Democracy? World Politics (53) (3), 325–61.
  • Rothschild, J. (1981) Ethnopolitics: A Conceptual Framework . New York: Columbia University Press.
  • Rubinstein, R.A. (2003) Cross-Cultural Considerations in Complex Peace Operations. Negotiation Journal (19) (1), 29–49.
  • Russett, B.M. , Oneal, J.R. , and Cox, M. (2000) Clash of Civilizations, or Realism and Liberalism Déjà Vu? Some Evidence. Journal of Peace Research (37) (5), 583–608.
  • Ryan, S. (1988) Explaining Ethnic Conflict: The Neglected International Dimension. Review of International Studies (14) (3), 161–77.
  • Said, E. (2001) A Clash of Ignorance. The Nation , 11–13.
  • Sampson, C. (1997) Religion and Peacebuilding. In W.I. Zartman , and L.J. Rasmussen (eds.) Peacemaking in International Conflict: Methods & Techniques . Washington: United States Institute of Peace Press, pp. 273–318.
  • Sandal, N.A. , and James, P. (2010) Religion and International Relations Theory. European Journal of International Relations (17) (1), 3–25.
  • Schaffer, H.B. , and Schaffer, T.C. (2011) How Pakistan Negotiates with the United States: Riding the Roller Coaster . Washington: United States Institute of Peace Press.
  • Seul, J.R. (1999) Ours is the Way of God: Religion, Identity, and Intergroup Conflict. Journal of Peace Research (36) (5), 553–69.
  • Shore, M. (2009) Religion and Conflict Resolution: Christianity and South Africa's Truth and Reconciliation Commission . Burlington, VT: Ashgate.
  • Sivan, E. (1990) Radical Islam: Medieval Theology and Modern Politics . New Haven: Yale University Press.
  • Smith, A.D. (1999) Ethnic Election and National Destiny: Some Religious Origins of Nationalist Ideals. Nations and Nationalism (5) (3), 331–55.
  • Smock, D.R. (1992) Religious Perspectives on War: Christian, Muslim and Jewish Attitudes toward Force after the Gulf War . Washington, DC: United State Institute of Peace Press.
  • Smock, D.R. (ed.) (2008) Religious Contributions to Peacemaking: When Religion Brings Peace, Not War . Washington, DC: United State Institute of Peace Press.
  • Snyder, J.L. (1977) The Soviet Strategic Culture: Implications for Nuclear Options . Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.
  • Snyder, J.L. (2011) Religion and International Relations Theory . New York: Columbia University Press.
  • Solomon, R.H. , and Quinney, N. (2010) American Negotiating Behavior: Wheeler-Dealers, Legal Eagles, Bullies, and Preachers . Washington: United States Institute of Peace Press.
  • Swartley, W.M. (2006) Covenant of Peace: The Missing Peace in New Testament Theology and Ethics . Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing.
  • Thomas, S.M. (2000) Religion and International Conflict. In K.R. Dark (ed.) Religion and International Relations . New York: Macmillan, pp. 1–23.
  • Thomas, S.M. (2005) The Global Resurgence of Religion and the Transformation of International Relations: The Struggle for the Soul of the Twenty-First Century . New York: Macmillan.
  • Tibi, B. (1999) The Fundamentalist Challenge to the Secular Order in the Middle East. The Fletcher Forum of World Affairs (23) (1), 191–210.
  • Tipson, F.S. (1997) Culture Clash-ification: A Verse to Huntington's Curse. Foreign Affairs (76) (2), 166–9.
  • Toft, M.D. (2007) Getting Religion? The Puzzling Case of Islam and Civil War. International Security (31) (4), 97–131.
  • Toft, M.D. , Philpott, D. , and Shah, T.S. (2011) God's Century: Resurgent Religion and Global Politics . New York: W.W. Norton.
  • Trujillo, M. , Bowland, S.Y. , Myers, L.J. , Richards, P.M. , and Roy, B. (eds.) (2008) Re-centering Culture and Knowledge in Conflict Resolution Practice . Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.
  • Wald, K.D. , and Wilcox, C. (2006) Getting Religion: Has Political Science Rediscovered the Faith Factor? American Political Science Review (100) (4), 523–9.
  • Warner, C.M. , and Walker, S.G. (2011) Thinking about the Role of Religion in Foreign Policy: A Framework for Analysis. Foreign Policy Analysis (7) (1), 113–35.
  • Wedeen, L. (2002) Conceptualizing Culture: Possibilities for Political Science. American Political Science Review (96) (4), 713–28.
  • Weeks, A.L. (1993) Do Civilizations Hold? Foreign Affairs (72) (4), 24–5.
  • Wendt, A. (1999) Social Theory of International Politics . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Wittes, T.C. (ed.) (2005) How Israelis and Palestinians Negotiate . Washington: United States Institute of Peace Press.
  • Zartman, W.I. (1993) A Skeptic's View. In G.O. Faure , and J.Z. Rubin (eds.) Culture and Negotiation: The Resolution of Water Disputes . Newbury Park, CA: Sage, pp. 17–21.

Links to Digital Materials

Berkley Center for Religion, Peace & World Affairs. At http://berkleycenter.georgetown.edu/ , accessed August 21, 2013 . The Berkley Center for Religion, Peace & World Affairs, based at Georgetown University, is an educational and a research center for the study of religion in relation to various international phenomena, such as globalization, human rights, ethnics of war, negotiation, and more. The website also includes data regarding international religious freedom.

The Institute for Cultural Diplomacy (ICD). At http://www.culturaldiplomacy.org/index.php?en , accessed August 21, 2013 . The ICD is an international NGO whose main goal is to enhance the intercultural relations between peoples and areas in the world. The ICD offers reports and publications researching various aspects of cultural diplomacy – definitions, efforts, implementation, and future directions. The institute combines academic development of the field with practical programs and educational resources.

Minorities at Risk (MAR). At http://www.cidcm.umd.edu/mar/ , accessed August 21, 2013 . The MAR project, located at University of Maryland, collects data regarding active conflict between communal groups. Among other variables, the MAR data measures religious characteristics of the conflicting groups.

Religions and Ethics in the Making of War and Peace Project. At http://relwar.org/ , accessed August 21, 2013 . The project on Religion and Ethnics in the Making of War and Peace, based at the University of Edinburgh, is an academic and practical forum to discuss the relationship between military and religious ethics. The publication section includes several articles on that topic.

Religions for Peace. At http://religionsforpeace.org/ , accessed August 21, 2013 . Religion for Peace was founded in 1970 as a coalition of representatives from the world's major religions dedicated to promote peace. The website offers guides and resources aimed to help religious leaders decrease violence and encourage development and peace.

United States Institute of Peace. At http://www.usip.org/ , accessed August 21, 2013 . Beside various books dealing with negotiation styles of different cultures, the United States Institute of Peace offers panels, initiatives, reports, and other publications dealing both with culture and religion in diplomacy and in war.

Printed from Oxford Research Encyclopedias, International Studies. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 27 August 2024

  • Cookie Policy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Legal Notice
  • Accessibility
  • [185.66.15.189]
  • 185.66.15.189

Character limit 500 /500

Religion, peace and politics Essay

  • To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
  • As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
  • As a template for you assignment

Religion, peace and politics have always been closely tied. Admittedly, the Dark Ages can be regarded as the brightest example of the period when religion was the most potent stimulus in making peace or rather war. Of course, the contemporary world has changed significantly as the society has become more secular.

Nonetheless, religion is still an important part of political life of countries. Numerous conflicts suggest that people are still ready to start a war trying to defend their religious beliefs and traditions. Importantly, religion also shapes ways people employ to reach their goals. It is possible to consider conflicts in such countries as South Africa, Egypt and Burma to understand the correlation between religion, politics and peace in the contemporary world.

In the first place, it is important to note that religion has often contributed to certain division of citizens within countries. Thus, religion contributed greatly to the development of Apartheid in South Africa (Botman 244). The debate on segregation started in the Dutch Reformed Church in the 19 th century. Notably, local people were converted into Christianity and Christian churches were built. Soon, however, local people were prevented from coming to some churches.

A bright example of the process is the way Khoi-Khoi people were deprived of their right to practice Christianity with white people. Khoi-Khoi people invited white people to join their church, but some white congregants addressed church officials to hold separate celebrations (Botman 244).

The Synod considered the matter and it was declared that “it was desirable and according to the Holly Scripture” that white people could attend churches different from the ones attended by the locals (Botman 244). This contributed greatly to the division within the society.

Another illustration of the process of division is Egyptian society. Historically, the society has been divided in two major groups, Muslims and Orthodox Christians. There have always been conflicts between the two groups.

Nonetheless, in the middle of the twentieth century, Abdel Nasser strived for creation of a secular society and this led to decrease in conflicts between religious groups (Hibbard 86). Multiethnic society divided into two major religious groups learnt to live in peace.

However, in the 1970 the political situation changed and a new force came in power. Anwar Sadat employed mechanisms to “promote a Saudi-inspired salafist (or fundamentalist) Islam in Egyptian public life” (Hibbard 86). This led to activation of fundamentalist Islamic groups such as Muslim Brotherhood.

Tension between the groups also increased as Orthodox Christians were afraid of possible violent acts and restriction of their freedoms. The present Egyptian society is still torn into two camps where Orthodox Christians have to defend their right to practice their religion and remain equal with the rest of the citizens.

They are afraid of becoming an inferior class of citizens pursued by the larger group of Muslims. In other words, they are afraid of another form of Apartheid which took place in South Africa. Therefore, it is obvious that religion can shape (in this case, divide) the society, which can lead to numerous conflicts and strive for violent changes.

Hence, it is possible to note that religion is still one of the reasons of conflicts worldwide. Religion is also an integral part of political regime in some countries. The Egyptian case is one of the brightest examples. Fundamentalist Muslim groups strive for a Muslim society where all people share Islamic values.

Admittedly, the most fundamentalist militants also believe that other religions are wrongful and cannot exist in Egypt (Hibbard 92). Therefore, some militants attack Orthodox Christians and destroy their property. This increases tension between the two groups.

As has been mentioned above, religious beliefs have shaped the political regime in Egypt. For instance, in 1980, The Egyptian constitution was amended to make Islamic Law “the principal (or primary) source of legislation” (qtd. in Hibbard 93). Since then, Egypt has witnessed Islamization of all spheres of public life.

Remarkably, Sadat relied on the Islamic student groups and the Muslim Brotherhood to seize power. Sadat also supported development of these groups and similar organizations. Nevertheless, these groups have caused a lot of problems to the political regime as these groups have been responsible for numerous violent acts which negatively affect popularity of those in power.

One of the most recent attacks took place in 2010 when several Muslim men killed seven people and wounded some people after celebrations services on the Orthodox Christmas Eve. This led to other conflicts and violence in the streets. It is apparent that even though the changes started in the 1970s, people are still unwilling to abandon their father’s religious beliefs.

More so, focus on religion contributes to imbalance in political life, which, in its turn, affects economic sphere and wellbeing of all Egyptians. Of course, economic constraints make people to strive for changes in the country. The Egyptian government is unable to break this vicious circle. Thus, there is a strong correlation between religious beliefs and political as well as public sphere.

It is also necessary to note that religion does not only shape the development of societies as it can also affect political struggle. The case of Burma is a good example of the impact of religion on people’s struggle. In the 1980s, people’s life became intolerable as harsh economic crisis led to unprecedented rate of poverty.

According to religious beliefs, people should give food to monks, which is a “primary form of merit-making in Theravada Buddhist practice” (Fink 355). Irresponsible policies and economic measures of the government contributed to the development of severe crisis. People did not have food for themselves. They did not have food to give to monks, and, in other words, to live in accordance with their religious beliefs.

Thus, monks decided to start demonstrations to make officials aware of the intolerable conditions of people. Importantly, monks did not want to make others involved in the demonstrations as they were afraid of possible negative consequences for people. At that, monks could not pose threats to people or cause any harm. Interestingly, religion was also used as a tool as monks refused to take food from those in power or military people who used force to disperse demonstrators.

In 2007, demonstrations started again due to financial constraints the country faced. The primary force of the opponents of the regime was the 88 Generation Students’ Group. Again, monks participated in marches and demonstrations. Importantly, religious beliefs sparked the movement as those in power used force and a lot of monks were badly injured. This led to people’s dissatisfaction and even anger as physical assault of monks is one “one of the greatest sins” in Buddhism (Fink 355). Lots of people joined marches and demonstrations.

It is also important to note that actions of demonstrators were quite organized and peaceful which deprived the officials of opportunity to use force. Notably, different countries supported peaceful marches and tried to make the government take into account protestors’ demands. Therefore, it is possible to trace a global trend as many countries strive for peaceful changes in societies. Obviously, the vast majority of countries condemn violence and societies try to implement the change employing peaceful measures.

Clearly, religion, politics and peace are closely connected in the twenty-first century. People are still eager to defend their right to preserve their religious beliefs and practices.

In some countries, religion is an integral part of political and social life. Thus, there are several Islamic countries where Islamic law is incorporated in the constitution. This does not necessarily lead to tension and violent acts if the population of the country is homogeneous (at least, in terms of religion). However, when there are several religious groups in the society, these groups often have conflicts.

Recent conflicts can suggest that a society constituted by different religious groups and peace are incompatible. Importantly, the world is globalized and countries will have more and more newcomers. It is likely that there will be no homogeneous societies any more. Those newcomers are likely to pertain to different religious groups. Nonetheless, there are lots of examples of peaceful coexistence of different ethnical and religious groups.

For instance, Egypt of the 1950s was a country constituted by several religious and ethnic groups. Thus, one of the best ways to ensure peace within a country is to divide secular and spiritual spheres. Thus, political sphere should be secular as a few countries are now homogenous in terms of religion and ethnicity.

Therefore, all groups should have equal rights to practice their religion. This will also ensure that all citizens will have equal civil rights irrespective of their religious beliefs. Admittedly, people cannot be divided into certain classes according to their religious beliefs or ethnicity. Any unfair division will result in violent acts and unrest.

Though, it is necessary to note that religion can also have a positive impact on political struggle. The vast majority of religions strive for peaceful solutions for any conflicts. Thus, peaceful demonstrations in Burma can be a good example how to struggle for civil rights exploiting peaceful tools only.

Admittedly, citizens have to remind groups in power that the latter are chosen to contribute to the development of the country and should address citizens’ needs. However, it is inappropriate to use force and strive for violent changes in the society as this leads to destruction and numerous negative consequences.

In conclusion, it is possible to note that the cases of South Africa, Egypt and Burma provide numerous important lessons to learn. These are lessons on the correlation between religion, politics and peace. These cases reveal hazards and opportunities for the contemporary societies.

These lessons help people understand that political sphere should remain secular in multicultural and multiethnic societies of the contemporary world. At the same time, political struggle can be based on religious values of peace, cooperation and respect. This will enable people to contribute to positive and peaceful changes in the society.

Works Cited

Botman, H. Russel. “Truth and Reconciliation: The South Africa Case.” Religion and Peacebuilding . Ed. Harold Coward and Gordon S. Smith. Albany, NY: SUNY Press, 2004. 243-261. Print.

Fink, Christina. “The Moment of the Monks: Burma, 2007.” Civil Resistance and Power Politics: The Experience of Non-Violent Action from Gandhi to the Present . Ed. Sir Adam Roberts and Timothy Garton Ash. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2009. 354-370. Print.

Hibbard, Scott W. “Egypt and the Legacy of Sectarianism.” Between Terror and Tolerance: Religious Leaders, Conflict, and Peacemaking . Ed. Timothy D. Sisk. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2011. 85-104. Print.

  • Pragmatics in Political News
  • Cameroon's Political and Economic Development
  • Engaging In Psychotherapy with the Orthodox Jew
  • Traditions in Eastern Orthodox as a Most Practiced Christian Religion
  • The Orthodox Church in San Francisco: Christian Experience
  • Sharia System and Globalization
  • Is Sectarianism an Obstacle to the Democratization of Iraq?
  • Cambodia: Religion and Peacebuilding
  • Turkey: Synthesis between Islam and Secularism
  • Iran and Politics – Article Analysis
  • Chicago (A-D)
  • Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2019, June 14). Religion, peace and politics. https://ivypanda.com/essays/religion-peace-and-politics/

"Religion, peace and politics." IvyPanda , 14 June 2019, ivypanda.com/essays/religion-peace-and-politics/.

IvyPanda . (2019) 'Religion, peace and politics'. 14 June.

IvyPanda . 2019. "Religion, peace and politics." June 14, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/religion-peace-and-politics/.

1. IvyPanda . "Religion, peace and politics." June 14, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/religion-peace-and-politics/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Religion, peace and politics." June 14, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/religion-peace-and-politics/.

Essay Service Examples Religion Influence of Christianity

Religion And Peace: Christianity And Islam

  • Proper editing and formatting
  • Free revision, title page, and bibliography
  • Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

document

Our writers will provide you with an essay sample written from scratch: any topic, any deadline, any instructions.

reviews

Cite this paper

Related essay topics.

Get your paper done in as fast as 3 hours, 24/7.

Related articles

Religion And Peace: Christianity And Islam

Most popular essays

  • Influence of Christianity

The Gibside estate is a landscape garden built in the 18th century located in county Durham...

The claim for Christianity states that 2,000 years ago God the Son came to the earth to reveal the...

Abraham who was considered as the first prophet to have made a covenant with God is the father of...

For centuries, African traditional religions have been characterized by different stereotypes and...

Among many cultural, racial, geographic and literary aspects of Bram Stoker’s Dracula, religion is...

Many religions adopted ideas and integrate them into their own or a new religion. Greco-Roman...

Augustine was a Roman African who lived from 254 – 430 AD, he is renowned as a great theologian,...

During the 2nd to 5th century, Christianity had started to gain traction in in the Roman Empire....

  • History of Islam

Religion provides many benefits to humans, and also allows human beings to make sense of our...

Join our 150k of happy users

  • Get original paper written according to your instructions
  • Save time for what matters most

Fair Use Policy

EduBirdie considers academic integrity to be the essential part of the learning process and does not support any violation of the academic standards. Should you have any questions regarding our Fair Use Policy or become aware of any violations, please do not hesitate to contact us via [email protected].

We are here 24/7 to write your paper in as fast as 3 hours.

Provide your email, and we'll send you this sample!

By providing your email, you agree to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy .

Say goodbye to copy-pasting!

Get custom-crafted papers for you.

Enter your email, and we'll promptly send you the full essay. No need to copy piece by piece. It's in your inbox!

Home / Essay Samples / Religion / Five Pillars of Islam / Islam: The Religion of Peace and Compassion

Islam: The Religion of Peace and Compassion

  • Category: Religion
  • Topic: Five Pillars of Islam , History of Islam

Pages: 1 (535 words)

  • Downloads: -->

Fundamental Principles of Peace

Historical context of tolerance, unveiling misconceptions, in conclusion.

--> ⚠️ Remember: This essay was written and uploaded by an--> click here.

Found a great essay sample but want a unique one?

are ready to help you with your essay

You won’t be charged yet!

Pilgrimage Essays

Protestant Reformation Essays

Hinduism Essays

Hell Essays

Related Essays

We are glad that you like it, but you cannot copy from our website. Just insert your email and this sample will be sent to you.

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service  and  Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Your essay sample has been sent.

In fact, there is a way to get an original essay! Turn to our writers and order a plagiarism-free paper.

samplius.com uses cookies to offer you the best service possible.By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .--> -->