The Foreign Service Journal, October 2003

O C T O B E R 2 0 0 3 / F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L 15 U ntil pretty recently, religion didn’t matter much to many Foreign Service employees. At my first post, Manila, one FSO told me that “religion is just the language people use to express economic frus- tration.” I disagreed, citing the role of the Catholic Church in overthrowing President Ferdinand Marcos and the tensions between Muslims and Christians in the southern Philippines, but he held firm to his conviction that religion was relatively unimportant vis-a-vis diplomacy. We had that exchange nearly a decade ago, but such views remained common in the Foreign Service until quite recently. Perhaps this was because America’s greatest foreign policy challenges for the previous 50 years had not appeared to be religious in nature. But communism, a non-religious ideology, is on the ropes and other forces with religious roots have begun to present the United States with new challenges. If we had not noticed this shift already, we assuredly should have on Sept. 11, 2001. The attacks we suf- fered that day had a strong religious component, a fact with profound implications for all of us, as diplomats and as Americans. In fact, now that the blinders are off, it seems obvious that many cur- rent conflicts around the globe have a religious component, from the Middle East to the Balkans, Nigeria, Sudan, Northern Ireland and Sri Lanka. We now see religion as a key factor in con- flict generation, conflict resolution and even in economic development. We recognize that it can be a powerful force for good or ill in the lives of com- munities and nations. And most Foreign Service personnel now recog- nize that involvement in the world of religion is essential to success in the world of diplomacy. But how do we, as U.S. diplomats, get traction in the world of religion in order to further the foreign policy goals of the United States? As a Foreign Service officer with a back- ground in religious studies, I’d like to suggest the following short list as a start: Remember the U.S. Constitu- tion. It may sound obvious, but we ought to support our constitutional principles regarding religion, and try to convince others of their value. These same principles, regarding the freedom of the human conscience, the right to assemble and the right to propagate one’s faith are also embod- ied in the U.N. Declaration on Human Rights, the Helsinki Accords and many other internationally recog- nized documents. True, these princi- ples (which I believe are universal) will find different expression in differ- ent environments and cultures, but their full realization is a goal for all human societies. Religious terrorists are religious totalitarians who want to impose their version of a given religion on others by force. We oppose this because it goes against our deeply held beliefs as Americans and also because we know that it won’t work in a world of diverse religions. For example, when religious people are killed for peacefully propa- gating their faith, our comments as American diplomats should be firmly on the side of the religious person, even if we do not personally agree with their beliefs or methods. It is simply wrong to kill people for their religious beliefs or activities, and doing so is murder. This applies in Yemen and India just as it does in New York and Indiana. Consistent and united American support for freedom of the human conscience gradually helped to erode the appeal of politically totalitarian ideologies during the Cold War, and we will eventually succeed against reli- gious totalitarianism, as well — if we are unapologetic and firm over the long term. In this sense, the annual International Religious Freedom Report process, and our ongoing advo- cacy of religious freedom, are not tan- Religion and Diplomacy B Y P HIL S KOTTE S PEAKING O UT Involvement in the world of religion is essential to success in the world of diplomacy.