Beyond Afghanistan

Martin Luther King, Jr. and Reflections on the War and Peace

C. Anthony Hunt, Ph.D.

In this, the year of the 81st anniversary of the birth of Martin Luther King, Jr., we pause to reflect on state of our nation and world, and the prospects of peace among us. On December 1, 2009 President Barack Obama shared with the nation his decision to increase American troop levels in Afghanistan by 30,000 over the next six months, with plans for the withdrawal of American troops by the end of 2011. President Obama, whose presidential ambitions were launched by his opposition to the war in Iraq, indicated that the rationale for the escalation of the war in Afghanistan was based on an increased sense of urgency to conclude the war begun in the immediate aftermath of terrorist attacks on America on September 11, 2001.

What would Martin Luther King have to say about the current war in Afghanistan – and President Obama’s decision? Perhaps the best indicator can be found in King’s comments on the War in Vietnam. On April 4, 1967 at Riverside Church in New York City – in a sermon entitled, “Beyond Vietnam” – King expressed in very vehement terms his opposition to the war in Vietnam. He stated, "The bombs in Vietnam explode at home, they destroy the hopes and possibilities for a decent America… The war in Vietnam is but a symptom of a far deeper malady within the American spirit, and if we ignore this sobering reality, we will find ourselves organizing 'clergy and laymen concerned' for the next generation... Now it should be incandescently clear that no one who has any concern for the integrity and life of America today can ignore the present war. If America's soul becomes totally poisoned, part of the autopsy must read "Vietnam."

In “Beyond Vietnam,” King intimated that there are real spiritual, moral and social costs that are born as a result of war. He said, “A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death. America, the richest and most powerful nation in the world, can well lead the way in this revolution of values. There is nothing, except a tragic death wish, to prevent us from reordering our priorities, so that the pursuit of peace will take precedence over the pursuit of war. There is nothing to keep us from molding a recalcitrant status quo with bruised hands until we have fashioned it into a brotherhood."

In April 2003 I published an essay entitled, “Counting the Costs: Reflections on the Church and Just War,” on the brink of the decision of the Bush administration to engage in war with Iraq. I wrote that it seems appropriate for the church to continue to consider (and reconsider) the matter of the justice of war from both philosophical and Christian perspectives. In terms of the morality of war, those who have thought, written, and acted on such matters, have historically raised particular questions as to the determinants of when war might be justified. In the fifth century, St. Augustine, the Christian philosopher, was instrumental in the development of seven criteria for determining whether or not a war is “just.” First, there must exist a just cause. The war must confront an unquestioned danger. Second, competent authority must exist. The leader committing a nation to war must be acting on behalf of his/her people. Third, there should be right intention. The reasons set forth should be the actual objectives, and retaliation must not be the aim. Fourth, war should be the last resort. All peaceful alternatives must have been exhausted. Fifth, there needs to be the probability of success. Sixth, discrimination requires the immunity of noncombatants from direct attack. And seventh, the good that will be achieved by war cannot be outweighed by the harm that is done.

In light of the general philosophical criteria outlined here, particular concerns exist as to how these can be applied to the U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Specifically, have the alleged atrocities of Saddam Hussein (in Iraq) and the Taliban (in Afghanistan) warranted – over the past 8 years - the killing and maiming of countless innocent women, men and children? This is not to speak of the annihilation of an untold number of Iraqi and Afghani buildings, homes, shopping malls, factories, schools, and places of worship.

I wrote in 2003 that for those of us who are Christians, it seems that ours are not only philosophical concerns about whether or not a particular war is just, but our concerns center on what it means to live as disciples of Jesus Christ. And the matter of our attitudes and actions in Christ do not stop with asking the popular question, “What would Jesus do?” For it seems to be clear that Jesus did not - and would not - engage in such atrocities as the war in Iraq (or Afghanistan). The critical question for the church is also “What is Jesus doing in the lives of Christians today, and how does this lead us to respond?”

In the midst of the war in Vietnam, King stated in 1967 that, "The church must be reminded that it is not the master or the servant of the state, rather it is the conscience of the state. It must be the guide and the critic of the state, and never its tool. If the church does not recapture its prophetic zeal, it will become an irrelevant social club without moral or spiritual authority."

And so in these times where war persists in our midst, it is my sense that King would call the church yet again to reclaim its prophetic voice, and remind us that “true peace is not merely the absence of tension, it is the presence of justice.”