1.1 What is religious conflict?

The following paper will: (1) introduce a view of religious identity that provides a key to understanding emerging conflicts; (2) survey emerging trends in religious conflict; (3) bring insights from Christian scriptures to religious conflict; and, (4) tell stories of hope on transforming religious conflict into reconciling encounter.

The intent of this paper is not to show that religions are in conflict with each other directly, but to suggest that religious identities are integral to the character of peoples, nations and blocs of nations in conflict with each other. Put another way, the role of religious identity as a component of the corporate identities of groups in conflict is growing. The beliefs of various faiths have rarely been the source of conflicts, enabling some to say the emerging conflicts of the 1990's are not religious. These judgments are made as either/or distinctions between religion and ethnicity, or religion and politics. It will be shown from a both/and perspective that religion helps form most ethnic identities and contributes to shaping most politics.

This paper is not an introduction to any religion but only a survey of how religious identity is increasing as a factor in conflict around the world. I chose not to use the term inter-religious conflict because religious conflict is often intra-religious. To the extent conflict is a product of the mind and emotions in contact with structures of perception, conflict often has a religious component. In the words of Roger Ruston, "I wish to argue that war is always a deeply religious phenomenon; that this has become manifest in the twentieth century; that Christian approaches to it should begin from the understanding that it is a religious phenomenon; and finally that this is the most serious grounds for Christian opposition to particular wars" (Ruston, p.130).

People are prone to fight over whatever they consider sacred: ideologies, beliefs, a motherland, some economic benefit or the rights of a nation state. To the extent that war always involves sacrificing the young in battle and generating resources for the struggle, war is strongly religious in the way it motivates and demands ultimate sacrifices. Religion often participates in national efforts to develop the degree of sacrifice needed to motivate people toward warfare.

1.2 Not texts but contexts

In surveying the encounter of religious identities this paper will not be a direct comparison of texts and beliefs, but a survey of the contexts and behaviors of peoples formed by various religions. If we survey the texts and truths of most faiths we could project few problems between them. However, if we survey the history of their encounter we often find more blood than truth and peace. This is the case because often various faith groups first encountered each others' imperial military, political, and cultural structures in contexts of conflict.

Therefore, the primal images of ´the religious other' are often the extreme: for the Muslim the Christian is the Crusader; for the European, the Muslim is the invading Turk; for the Jew, the Christian is the perpetrator of pogroms or the Nazi; for the Hindu, the Christian is the colonial occupier and the Muslim is the ancient invader, etc. Encounter between persons of these faiths often needs to move through these primal images before reconciling encounter is possible. As an illustration Karen Armstrong notes that during the Gulf War many media, religious, and political figures in the Muslim world explained the zeal of the West in crusader categories: "the spontaneous and instinctive use of the word ´Crusade' in the Muslim world showed that, whatever Western people may think, crusading is not a dead issue in the region. It is central to the Muslim perception of the West . . . " (Armstrong, p.ix).

Though these faiths have profound and often practiced ideals of tolerance, their faith communities are often coopted by national or imperial goals that compromise tolerance. Because part of this paper focuses on the activities of resurgent Islam, I want to state clearly that Islam has had a mostly noble tradition of respect for other faith communities.

1.3 Religious identity and conflict

The thesis of this paper is twofold: first, ideologies (state socialism, secular democracy, nationalism, etc.) had replaced religion as the prime ´ethos source' for many nations in the modern era; and second, this trend is on the decline as religion is returning to reclaim its previously prominent role in the triad of identities operating in most pre-modern societies: (1) political-national identity, (2) ethno-cultural identity and (3) religious identity.

This triadic form of analysis will be used as the main interpretive grid for the following observations and theological reflections on religion and conflict. A triadic analysis of combatants in the Chechen conflict reveals the likelihood of that conflict occurring and the role of religious identity as one of the core identities of the groups in conflict:

	Political Identity	Ethnic Identity	Religious Identity
Soviet Era	Soviet Soviet	Russian Chechen	Orthodox Muslim
Post-Soviet Era	Russian Chechen	Russian Chechen	Orthodox Muslim

During the Soviet era the Soviet political ideology dominated all other identities. After the Soviet era, political identity in Chechenya was determined by an ethnically Russian dominated group that was mostly Christian in ethos. So, Chechen Muslims could not say they were ethnically or politically Russian and wanted a new Chechen political reality that was Muslim in ethos. In the post-Soviet era Chechen Muslims could not sacrifice their ethnic and religious identity to Russian ethnic and political labels. Russians and Chechens held no element of identity in common so conflict was probable especially in view of the bitter history between the two peoples.

A more complicated situation resulted when Yugoslavian Bosnian Muslims, Yugoslavian Croatian Catholics and Yugoslavian Serbian Orthodox found themselves living together without the Yugoslavian communist ideological and political cover. For each of these groups the ethnic and religious identities moved forward to form new political identities as the former Yugoslavian family began to disintegrate. Since none of these three groups had a prime identity in common they could not easily live together and were torn apart by their differences. Gerald Shenk notes how these three identities worked together to inflame the Balkan conflict:

The religious and cultural differences among Sarajevo's inhabitants never melted into a homogeneous brew. Its diversity was precarious, affecting even the coloration of profanity in public. Confession-specific terms such as Jesus, Mohammed, or Moses were not mentioned in the otherwise vigorous vocabulary of protest. Even in a negative way, this sensitivity marked a grudging respect for the religion of the other as symbol of identity, and a potential offense. Perhaps herein lies a clue to the dimension of hatred which compounded and resulted in such vicious atrocities. Nationalisms and media were manipulated by powerful elites to preserve their privileged positions; the populace responded most readily to this manipulation only when it successfully managed to invoke religious symbols for cultural significance in the struggle. (Shenk, p.26, emphasis added)

Shenk describes religious identity as the trigger of the Balkans conflict when it was used by the political elite as a tool for manipulation of the people. When the respective triadic alliances of political, ethnic and religious identities formed within the three communities of the former Yugoslavia, conflict became probable as they had no identity in common except a shared history of mutual atrocities.

Religious identity permeates groups and provides the well of assumptions that direct decisions and behavior. Ethnicity and culture generates character and defines the style of relationships. Political identity represents, directs and channels these energies into corporate relationships and decision making. The political identity and character of a group changes over years or decades. Ethnic identity evolves gradually over centuries. But, religious identity is relatively permanent over centuries and millennia.

Following are some phrases that identify elements of the triadic identity as a basic human frame of reference as indicated by the numbers: 1--Political, 2--Ethnic/Cultural, and 3--Religious.

"The Holy (3) Roman (2) Empire (1)" was the main religio-political entity in medieval Europe.

"For Faith (3), Tsar (1) and Motherland (2)" was the main rallying cry during Russia's expansion before the Communist Revolution.

"The Spirit (3) of America (1) Rally (2)" was held in a stadium in Houston, Texas in 1991 to celebrate United States' role in the Gulf War victory. Here the religious identity is strongly nationalistic with a rally of people celebrating America's political and military prowess.

"Hebron is the cradle of our culture (2), our civilization (1) and our religion (3). We cannot give it up." Likud Kennesset member Ben Eliazar made this statement on Voice of Israel English radio service on September 8, 1995, responding to the possibility of Palestinian autonomy in Hebron, the burial place of the patriarchs.

"The brave Lebanese (2) engaged in the nationalist (1) and Islamic (3) resistance in southern Lebanon." I daily hear this phrase on an Arab radio station's reports on the efforts to repel the Israeli occupation of Southern Lebanon. The interesting fact is that the resistance is described as both nationalist and Islamic.

"In that great battle Michael the Brave captured many princes and wizirs (1), thousands of soldiers (2-people), and the green flag of the prophet (3)." On August 20, 1995 I heard this broadcast on Romanian Radio's English Service describing the 400-year anniversary of August 23, 1595, when St. Michael drove the Ottoman Muslim forces out of Romania. Here the announcer unconsciously notes the total ´triadic' defeat of the Ottomans. Later he describes how the political ruler Michael the Brave was made a saint.

Among others, French (1), Armenian (2), Orthodox (3), American Armenian Catholic and Lebanese Armenian Orthodox cooperated in setting up the new state of Armenia because they all had two major components of identity in common. They all sent resources and young men to fight in establishing Armenia and securing its boundaries.