Issues Page

Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo get more press, but among the most urgent national security challenges facing President-elect Obama is what to do about America's stockpile of aging nuclear weapons. No less an authority than Secretary of Defense Robert Gates calls the situation "bleak" and is urging immediate modernization. On the campaign trail, Mr. Gates's new boss appeared to take a different view. Candidate Obama said he "seeks a world without nuclear weapons" and vowed to make "the goal of eliminating all nuclear weapons a central element in our nuclear policy." His woolly words have given a boost to the world disarmament movement, including last week's launch of Global Zero, the effort by Richard Branson and Queen Noor to eliminate nuclear weapons in 25 years. Naturally, they want to start with cuts in the U.S. arsenal.

Dear President-elect Obama: Our economic security bubble has been decisively punctured, resulting in recession, massive losses of jobs and homes, destroyed dreams and ruined retirements. These are terrible losses, but they do not approach the severe consequences that would result from a punctured nuclear security bubble. We must move resolutely to assure that nuclear weapons will never be used again by accident or design. One fact that is clear concerning nuclear weapons: They do not and cannot protect their possessors. They can be used to inflict monstrous death and destruction, in a first strike or in retaliation for a first-strike, but they cannot provide their possessors with security.

The desperate plight of civilians caught between warring militias in the Democratic Republic of Congo was underscored last week by three Congolese church leaders who visited Baltimore to deliver an urgent appeal for help. The two bishops, accompanied by a nun, spoke at the Catholic Relief Services headquarters in downtown Baltimore, where they related the havoc wrought by militia groups and bandits who have raped and massacred thousands of innocent civilians and driven a quarter-million refuges from their homes since fighting flared up again in August. Over the last decade, more than 5 million people have been killed in Congo's civil war. No other conflict since World War II has been as deadly.

Some 100 nations signed a major anti-cluster bomb treaty, the Convention on Cluster Munitions, during a conference that began Dec. 3 in Oslo, Norway. It is a move that supporters hope will shame the United States, Russia, China, Israel and other non-signers into abandoning weapons blamed for maiming and killing thousands of innocent civilians. Norway was first to sign, followed by Laos and Lebanon, both hard-hit by the weapons. The Holy See not only signed the treaty but ratified it. The Vatican said by ratifying the treaty on the same day it was signed, it wanted "to give a strong political signal." Pope Benedict XVI voiced support for the treaty effort in mid-May. The drive to ban cluster bombs gathered momentum after Israel's war with Hezbollah in 2006, when it scattered some 4 million bomblets over Lebanon.

Of all the issues President-elect Barack Obama faces before he takes office, none is of greater moral urgency than changing the tenor of the US response to what he has repeatedly described as "genocide in Darfur." That's because, before Inauguration Day, the International Criminal Court (ICC) is very likely to issue a warrant for the arrest of Sudan's president, Omar al-Bashir, charging him with crimes against humanity and genocide in Darfur. These charges are amply justified by the evidence. Mr. Obama's clear and effective response is needed, because the Khartoum regime has threatened aggressive violence in a calculated campaign to fend off the arrest. Indeed, its threats are as shocking as they are underreported.

Pope Benedict XVI condemned the systematic atrocities, killings and violence targeting innocent people in Congo and called for all sides to work for peace. Recent waves of "destruction, pillaging and violence of every kind have forced (an) additional tens of thousands of people to abandon what little they had in order to survive," and more than 1.5 million people are now refugees, the pope said. Pope Benedict said "bloody armed clashes and systematic atrocities have caused and continue to cause numerous victims among innocent civilians" in the North Kivu region of Congo. He appealed to all sides to "work together to restore peace in that land (that has been) martyred for too long."

Everyone's talking about the collapsing economy, the probability that the recession will deepen and that next year will be even harder. People fear that McCain and Palin will continue the wars, worsen the economy, and bring further suffering to the world's poor. Many hope Obama will be elected, end the wars, restore the economy and begin healing the world's poor. But I keep pointing to those deeper Gospel lessons, the long-term journey of personal and global disarmament that Christ commands of us. We're so used to violence. We easily believe the myth of redemptive violence, the lie of war, the false spirituality of violence, the misguided notion that might makes right, that war is justified, that our weapons protect us, that violence works. I suspect we don't trust God, don't think God can protect us, don't take Jesus seriously. In the end, such questions reveal our lack of faith. Do we believe in the God of peace or not?

Democrats like to say that theirs is a "big-tent" party, welcome to members of all stripes. The same description, it seems, applies to their protesters. As delegates began flooding into Denver yesterday for the start of today's Democratic National Convention, hundreds of antiwar demonstrators marched from the state capitol to the Pepsi Center, the convention headquarters. But just about all they shared was a march route and an opposition to the war in Iraq. The demonstrators were an extraordinarily varied lot, promoting a mishmash of conflicting agendas and opinions. Many were sympathetic to Obama and the Democratic platform; others advocated an overthrow of the two-party system. They ranged from soft-spoken, 1960s-vintage antiwar activists to younger radicals, bandanas covering their faces, voicing objection to the very existence of the United States.

In Israel, there is a village where Arabs and Jews live as neighbors. Both groups endeavor to create a just society that can be a model for peace in the region. What's it called? "Oasis of Peace." Though the town's name gives the impression that it's some sort of magical, idealistic utopia, the people living there are challenged daily and deeply by the reality of an intractable, painful, and violent conflict. Like anything worth attaining, peace comes with hard work. Much can be learned from Neve Shalom, its Hebrew name, or Wahat al-Salam as it's called in Arabic, about inter-faith relations. In the local Jewish-Arab primary school, children study one another's faiths with natural curiosity. Students break the fast together at Ramadan, share a sukkah booth at the festival of Sukkot, and exchange small gifts at Christmas. And dialogue begins, but never ends.

Benedict XVI is calling for open pathways for humanitarian relief to reach Georgia. The Pope spoke of the conflict in the Caucasus after he prayed the midday Angelus on Sunday with crowds gathered at the papal summer residence at Castel Gandolfo, south of Rome. Georgia and Russia engaged in a brief but bloody conflict that began Aug. 7 over the status of the disputed regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Russia reported that it was withdrawing its forces today. Benedict XVI affirmed that "ethnic minorities involved in the conflict must be guaranteed safety and the inviolability of their fundamental rights." Meanwhile, Christians of various traditions have joined their voices to call for a halt to conflict.

Barack Obama and John McCain have plenty of disagreements, but one thing they are united on is promising a troop surge in Afghanistan. But what are the real prospects for turning fractious, impoverished Afghanistan into an orderly and prosperous nation and a potential ally of the United States? What true American interests are being insufficiently advanced or defended in its remote deserts and mountains? And even if these interests are really so broad, are they deliverable at an acceptable price? The answers to these questions put the wisdom of an Afghan surge into great question.

The brinksmanship between the West and Iran over that country's nuclear ambitions appeared to enter a new and dangerous phase earlier this month, when the Iranians did not accept the West's latest offer to set aside further economic sanctions if the Iranians immediately stopped enriching uranium. Representatives of six Western nations had given Iran until Aug. 2 to reply to their offer. Iran allowed the deadline to pass, then responded 48 hours later with little that was new. In the interim it deployed a new long-range weapon it said was capable of striking U.S. ships in the Persian Gulf. In return, the United States and its allies have said that they will pursue additional economic sanctions.

Saint Ambrose parishioners are supporting the Most Rev. John C. Wester, Bishop of the Diocese of Salt Lake City, in the editorial he wrote about abolishing nuclear weapons. Following the weekend Masses July 19-20, 365 parishioners, including children, signed letters written to President George W. Bush, Senator John McCain, and Senator Barack Obama. Some letters included whole families and listed the childrens' ages. The letters asked each leader to dedicate himself to the abolishment of nuclear weapons. The project to support Bishop Wester, was an effort by Saint Ambrose Parish supported by members of the Peace and Justice Committee.

Iraq and Afghanistan are the messes getting attention today, but they are only symptoms of a much broader cancer in American foreign policy. In short, the United States is hugely overinvesting in military tools and underinvesting in diplomatic tools. The result is a lopsided foreign policy that antagonizes the rest of the world and is ineffective in tackling many modern problems. Incredibly, the most eloquent spokesman for more balance between "hard power" and "soft power" is Defense Secretary Robert Gates. Mr. Gates, who is superb in repairing the catastrophe left behind by Donald Rumsfeld, has given a series of astonishing speeches in which he calls for more resources for the State Department and aid agencies.

Pope Benedict XVI appealed for an immediate end to military operations in Georgia and its breakaway province of South Ossetia. Citing reports of heavy civilian casualties and a large number of refugees, the pope called on the international community to act quickly to bring Russian and Georgian leaders to the bargaining table. "It is my fervent wish that military actions cease immediately," the pope said Aug. 10. He urged both sides to "refrain, also in the name of a common Christian heritage, from further confrontations and violent retaliations that could degenerate into a wider conflict."

The deadliest three months for American forces in Afghanistan have pushed the U.S. death toll to at least 500, forcing a war long overshadowed by Iraq back into the headlines. Larger, more sophisticated militant attacks have also caused a sharp rise in Afghan civilian deaths - at least 472 in the first seven months of the year, most in suicide bombings, according to an Associated Press count. In all, at least 600 Afghan civilians were killed from January through July, a 30 percent increase from the same period last year, according to AP figures compiled from coalition and Afghan officials. That includes at least 128 killed by U.S. or NATO forces.

Military might against Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups isn't working - and no wonder. After studying the record of 648 terrorist groups between 1968 and 2006, we've found that military force has rarely been effective in defeating this enemy. Indeed, the US reliance on military force - especially conventional military forces - has often been counterproductive. A good start toward peace, though, would be for Washington to stop thinking of this as a "war" with a battlefield solution.

After long and costly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, how can the United States plan to win in either country? What would an achievable victory look like? This question has new urgency, given the recent upswing in violence in Afghanistan and the sense emerging among many US leaders – from both parties – that military resources need to be speedily diverted there from Iraq. One thing is clear. Neither of these victories will look like your grandfather's victory in the Pacific in 1945. Back then, Japan's army chief and top-hatted foreign minister traveled to the USS Missouri to sign a surrender document and hand it with full pomp to Gen. Douglas MacArthur.

For many Democrats, Afghanistan was always the "good war," as opposed to Iraq. I think Barack Obama needs to ask himself honestly: "Am I for sending more troops to Afghanistan because I really think we can win there, because I really think that that will bring an end to terrorism, or am I just doing it because to get elected in America, post-9/11, I have to be for winning some war?" The truth is that Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon and Pakistan are just different fronts in the same war.