God of War, God of Peace: The Political Ambivalence of Christianity in American Foreign Policy
Over the past twenty years, the field of international relations has belatedly come to recognize the importance of religion in shaping international outcomes. Much of this work concerns the idea of the “ambivalence of the sacred”—the idea that religious actors hailing from the same religious traditi...
| Κύριος συγγραφέας: | |
|---|---|
| Τύπος μέσου: | Ηλεκτρονική πηγή Άρθρο |
| Γλώσσα: | Αγγλικά |
| Έλεγχος διαθεσιμότητας: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Φόρτωση...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Έκδοση: |
Oxford University Press
2022
|
| Στο/Στη: |
A journal of church and state
Έτος: 2022, Τόμος: 64, Τεύχος: 3, Σελίδες: 458-478 |
| Τυποποιημένες (ακολουθίες) λέξεων-κλειδιών: | B
Χριστιανισμός (μοτίβο)
/ Εξωτερική πολιτική
/ USA
|
| Σημειογραφίες IxTheo: | KBQ Βόρεια Αμερική SΑ Εκκλησιαστικό Δίκαιο |
| Διαθέσιμο Online: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Σύνοψη: | Over the past twenty years, the field of international relations has belatedly come to recognize the importance of religion in shaping international outcomes. Much of this work concerns the idea of the “ambivalence of the sacred”—the idea that religious actors hailing from the same religious tradition sometimes pursue radically different politics, and that religious individuals and communities of faith draw on their beliefs to make sense of the political world in profoundly different ways over time. So far, explanations for political outcomes have centered on two different levels of analysis: the individual level, known as the “first image” in international relations, and the state level, known as the “second image.” First image explanations point to the political theologies held by individuals who seek to steer foreign policy in a direction in line with their faith beliefs.1 Second image explanations show how relations between religious and political institutions—and in particular how a state’s level of religious freedom—drive international outcomes that support either violence or peace and reconciliation.2 In addition to these two images, however, there is also a “third image.” In contrast to the first two images, third image explanations attempt to locate the cause of international outcomes at the international level. This dimension of religion’s impact on international relations remains underdeveloped. The goal of this article is to show that a consideration of international dynamics can add to our understanding of how religion matters in international relations. This essay furthers our understanding of the ambivalence of religion by offering an explanation grounded in the international threat environment in which political leaders find themselves. Simply put, I argue that the international climate allows these leaders to draw on their religious beliefs to support either more hawkish or more dovish foreign policies. In times of threat and crisis, religion will be used to support militant policies; the opposite is true in times of peace or deescalating tensions ... |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2040-4867 |
| Περιλαμβάνει: | Enthalten in: A journal of church and state
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1093/jcs/csac021 |