wfn.org | Faith and Life commentary: Kosovo crisis and Christian responsibility

[NewsDesk <NewsDesk@UMCOM.UMC.ORG>]

April 27, 1999 News media contact: Tim Tanton*(615)742-5470*Nashville, Tenn.
10-21-71BP{231}

NOTE: A head-and-shoulders photograph of the Rev. Phil Wogaman is available.

A UMNS Commentary
by the Rev. Phil Wogaman*

Once again this country is engaged in a great debate about the use of
military force in a far-off place. This time it is the Balkans, specifically
Kosovo. How should we think about this? What should we encourage our country
to do?  

The situation is complex, but we must begin with a very simple point: War is
evil, and military force is to be avoided under most circumstances.
Pacifists would say that military force should be avoided under all
circumstances. The great Swiss theologian, Karl Barth, recognized the moral
weight of pacifist arguments. He wrote that "pacifism has almost infinite
arguments in its favor."  
But Barth was not himself a pacifist. He also recognized that there are
situations where military force is necessary to prevent or stop even worse
evils. He thought World War II was tragic but necessary in order to bring an
end to the nightmare of Nazism and such evils as the Holocaust. Our
question: Is military action in the Balkans similarly necessary?

A number of church leaders have spoken out against what NATO is doing -
specifically the bombing in Serbia and Kosovo. Some question whether
military violence can in any circumstances be approved. Some political
leaders have joined the debate to argue that what goes on in the Balkans
does not impact the "national interest" of the United States and that even
an international body, such as the United Nations or NATO, should not
intervene within a sovereign country's borders.

I am frankly troubled by such conclusions. In some instances, military force
does help -particularly when it is clearly superior and when its goals are
clearly humanitarian and just. In such cases it is performing a needed
police function. The refugee crisis in Kosovo, with its heart-rending
accounts of genocidal brutalities, demonstrates beyond any possible doubt
that the Balkans need policing.  

NATO's announced objectives are certainly the right ones: a unified and
democratic Europe in which people of different ethnic backgrounds can dwell
together peacefully. The fact that the world community allowed "ethnic
cleansing" to occur in Central Africa and other parts of the world should
not be considered precedents but as cause for remorse.  

If NATO nations, including the United States, back away from this task now,
it will send the message that atrocities can be perpetrated at will. On the
other hand, if NATO stays the course, that can help lay the foundations for
international mechanisms of peace-keeping that are so obviously needed.  

Christians should always be troubled by violence. Yet there is a real
difference between violence undertaken as a routine instrument of foreign
policy and military force employed in behalf of justice and stability within
and beyond nations. This moment in history may represent a fairly brief
window of opportunity when powerful countries, such as our own, can use
their power in responsible ways. If that means ultimately that ground forces
must be used, they should be in sufficient numbers to make the outcome
incontestable.

Force cannot be the only form of intervention by the international
community. Having come this far, the NATO countries (and especially the
United States) have a sacred responsibility to help in the reconstruction of
Kosovo and Serbia - the resettlement of refugees, the rebuilding of their
homes, the reconstruction of bridges and other economic assets destroyed by
bombs and missiles.

Our model should be something like the Marshall Plan. Our objective should
be genuine reconciliation of peoples who have nurtured ancient animosities
far too long.

# # # 

*Wogaman, pastor of Foundry United Methodist Church in Washington and a
seminary professor of Christian ethics, is the author of 13 books. He is a
clergy member of the Baltimore-Washington United Methodist (regional)
conference.

Commentaries provided by United Methodist News Service do not necessarily
represent the opinions or policies of UMNS or the United Methodist Church.