Just War: Venezuela

              Upon waking up to news about our attack on Venezuela, images played on repeat of massive explosions and burnt out Venezuelan military vehicles, and reports of their president and first lady, the Maduros, capture… with militias gathering up for reprisals and other South American countries activating their militaries, I went back and looked at previous pastoral letters I’ve written, one from when it looked like President Obama was about to invade Syria because they used chemical weapons, and another after the assassination of Iranian General Soleimani in the first Trump Administration.

              I started those letters with words that loom large in my heart today as well. Kyrie Eleison—Lord have mercy.

              Kyrie Eleison… This is how we start our opening prayer to God in worship—the start of the prayer, in which we pray for peace from above and for our salvation—peace for the whole world.

              And I would ask that you take a moment to pray this prayer from our Hymnal:     

“Gracious God, grant peace among nations. Cleanse from our own hearts the seeds of strife: greed and envy, harsh misunderstandings and ill will, fear and desire for revenge. Make us quick to welcome ventures in cooperation among the peoples of the world, so that there may be woven the fabric of a common good too strong to be torn by the evil hands of war. In the time of opportunity, make us be diligent; and in the time of peril, let not our courage fail; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.”

              Now, our present moment is a little different from the two previous times I responded with pastoral letters, as there is a quasi-policing veneer to last night’s attacks, the situation has been escalating for months, and there is a sense (incorrect I believe) that what happened last night ends things. Our killing of Soleimani didn’t stop attacks on US soldiers in the Middle East or our bombing of Iran a few years later. Likewise, our inaction in Syria festered for a decade until Assad was deposed by his own people. As someone who studied the history of war as an undergraduate, I would point to that truism that every soldier can quote by van Moltke, “No battle plan survives first contact with the enemy.” Engaging in battle has a force to it, choosing to fight innately radicalizes the goals of those who go to war—if you give a general a cookie, he’ll keep the tanks moving. Additionally, war tends to reshape national identities in unexpected ways.

              And our faith has something to say about such things. For two thousand years we Christians have been struggling with being faithful in the world as it is, in situations of persecution, famine, feast, might, and war. And those struggles have given us a rich tradition of thought and action, something much deeper than the knee-jerk reactions of TV pundits and political intellectuals.

              In the early days of the Church, Christians were known for being pacifists. In fact, the Society of Friends (Quakers) and Mennonites still are pacifists, they see refusing to go to war as a witness to the world that the Prince of Peace, Jesus Christ, reigns. Other Christians, such as us Lutherans, follow a tradition that includes Just War Theory, “which requires certain conditions to be met before the use of military force is considered morally right. 

These principles are:

1.      A just war can only be waged as a last resort. All non-violent options must be exhausted before the use of force can be justified.

2.      A war is just only if it is waged by a legitimate authority. Even just causes cannot be served by actions taken by individuals or groups who do not constitute an authority sanctioned by whatever the society and outsiders to the society deem legitimate.

3.      A just war can only be fought to redress a wrong suffered. For example, self-defense against an armed attack is always considered to be a just cause (although the justice of the cause is not sufficient--see point #4). Further, a just war can only be fought with "right" intentions: the only permissible objective of a just war is to redress the injury.

4.      A war can only be just if it is fought with a reasonable chance of success. Deaths and injury incurred in a hopeless cause are not morally justifiable.

5.      The ultimate goal of a just war is to re-establish peace. More specifically, the peace established after the war must be preferable to the peace that would have prevailed if the war had not been fought.

6.      The violence used in the war must be proportional to the injury suffered. States are prohibited from using force not necessary to attain the limited objective of addressing the injury suffered.

7.      The weapons used in war must discriminate between combatants and non-combatants. Civilians are never permissible targets of war, and every effort must be taken to avoid killing civilians. The deaths of civilians are justified only if they are unavoidable victims of a deliberate attack on a military target.”

              Additionally, this Church, the ELCA, in 1995, created a document “For Peace in God’s World” which particularized our understanding of Just War Theory to the challenges of the 20^th and 21^st century. Here are a few stand out statements:

            “Wars, both between and within states, represent a horrendous failure of politics. The evil of war is especially evident in the number of children and other noncombatants who suffer and die.”

            “Helping the neighbor in need may require protecting innocent people from injustice and aggression. While we support the use of nonviolent measures, there may be no other way to offer protection in some circumstances than by restraining forcibly those harming the innocent. We do not, then--for the sake of the neighbor--rule out possible support for the use of military force. We must determine in particular circumstances whether or not military action is the lesser evil.”

            “From the posture of the just/unjust war tradition, the aim of all politics is peace. Any political activity that involves coercion should be held accountable to just/unjust war principles. They are important for evaluating movements, sanctions, embargoes, boycotts, trade policies to reward or punish, and other coercive but nonviolent measures.”

            And finally, and most solemn, "Any decision for war must be a mournful one."

            And so, I conclude this letter as I did the last two, Kyrie Eleison.

Pandemic: COVID19 Edition

Pandemic: COVID19 Edition

            Hi all. In the midst of the current global pandemic, I thought I would offer a little catharsis—a variant of/add on to the board game Pandemic.

            The main differences come:

-In the set up stage.

-Restricting the first three turns.

-And the addition of COVID19 World Event Cards that reflect actual news reports. 

Click here to download the word document with the game varients.

Enjoy!

On Issues of War and Peace

              Upon hearing about the assassination of the Iranian General Soleimani and the talk of tit-for-tat reprisals from both our president and the leader of Iran, I went back and looked at the pastoral letter I wrote to you all when it looked like President Obama was about to invade Syria because they used chemical weapons. I hope and pray this letter is as unnecessary as that one turned out to be, that peace will eclipse all intentions toward war.

              I started that letter with words that loom large in my heart today as well. Kyrie Eleison—Lord have mercy.

              Kyrie Eleison… This is how we start our opening prayer to God in worship—the start of the prayer, in which we pray for peace from above and for our salvation—peace for the whole world.

              And I would ask that you take a moment to pray this prayer from our Hymnal:     

“Gracious God, grant peace among nations. Cleanse from our own hearts the seeds of strife: greed and envy, harsh misunderstandings and ill will, fear and desire for revenge. Make us quick to welcome ventures in cooperation among the peoples of the world, so that there may be woven the fabric of a common good too strong to be torn by the evil hands of war. In the time of opportunity, make us be diligent; and in the time of peril, let not our courage fail; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.”

              Now, I recognize the current moment we find ourselves in is different than the one we were in 6 years ago with Syria. In this case we killed a general who, during the second Iraq War, snuck rockets into Iraq that could pierce up-armored military vehicles, which killed hundreds of US soldiers. Consequently we are worried about blowback—that US soldiers in Iraq or Afghanistan will be targeted and that, if things swing out of control, we’ll be re-invading Iraq to secure a place from which to invade Iran.

              And our faith has something to say about such things. For two thousand years we Christians have been struggling with being faithful in the world as it is, in situations of persecution, famine, feast, might, and war. And those struggles have given us a rich tradition of thought and action, something much deeper than the knee-jerk reactions of TV pundits and political intellectuals.

              In the early days of the Church, Christians were known for being pacifists. In fact, the Society of Friends (Quakers) and Mennonites still are pacifists, they see refusing to go to war as a witness to the world that the Prince of Peace, Jesus Christ, reigns. Other Christians, such as us Lutherans, follow a tradition that includes Just War Theory, “which requires certain conditions to be met before the use of military force is considered morally right. 

These principles are:

1.      A just war can only be waged as a last resort. All non-violent options must be exhausted before the use of force can be justified.

2.      A war is just only if it is waged by a legitimate authority. Even just causes cannot be served by actions taken by individuals or groups who do not constitute an authority sanctioned by whatever the society and outsiders to the society deem legitimate.

3.      A just war can only be fought to redress a wrong suffered. For example, self-defense against an armed attack is always considered to be a just cause (although the justice of the cause is not sufficient--see point #4). Further, a just war can only be fought with "right" intentions: the only permissible objective of a just war is to redress the injury.

4.      A war can only be just if it is fought with a reasonable chance of success. Deaths and injury incurred in a hopeless cause are not morally justifiable.

5.      The ultimate goal of a just war is to re-establish peace. More specifically, the peace established after the war must be preferable to the peace that would have prevailed if the war had not been fought.

6.      The violence used in the war must be proportional to the injury suffered. States are prohibited from using force not necessary to attain the limited objective of addressing the injury suffered.

7.      The weapons used in war must discriminate between combatants and non-combatants. Civilians are never permissible targets of war, and every effort must be taken to avoid killing civilians. The deaths of civilians are justified only if they are unavoidable victims of a deliberate attack on a military target.”

              Additionally, this Church, the ELCA, in 1995, created a document “For Peace in God’s World” which particularized our understanding of Just War Theory to the challenges of the 20^th and 21^st century. Here are a few stand out statements:

            “Wars, both between and within states, represent a horrendous failure of politics. The evil of war is especially evident in the number of children and other noncombatants who suffer and die.”

            “Helping the neighbor in need may require protecting innocent people from injustice and aggression. While we support the use of nonviolent measures, there may be no other way to offer protection in some circumstances than by restraining forcibly those harming the innocent. We do not, then--for the sake of the neighbor--rule out possible support for the use of military force. We must determine in particular circumstances whether or not military action is the lesser evil.”

            “From the posture of the just/unjust war tradition, the aim of all politics is peace. Any political activity that involves coercion should be held accountable to just/unjust war principles. They are important for evaluating movements, sanctions, embargoes, boycotts, trade policies to reward or punish, and other coercive but nonviolent measures.”

            And finally, and most solemn, "Any decision for war must be a mournful one."

            And so, I conclude this letter as I did the last one, Kyrie Eleison.

My initial "hot take" on the transcripts of Donald and Volodymyr

Anti-tank Missiles for Hillary’s Server & Discrediting Mueller’s Testimony the Day Before

VOLODYMYR: Ukraine’s President: We are almost. ready to buy more Javelins from the United States for defense purposes.

DONALD: I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike ... I guess you have one of your wealthy people... The server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation… I think you are surrounding yourself with some of the same people. I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it. As you saw yesterday, that whole nonsense ended with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller, an incompetent performance, but they say a lot of it started with Ukraine. Whatever you can do, it's very important that you do it if that's possible.

Personal Relationship with Donald Trump for Information on a Political Opponent’s Son

VOLODYMYR: I would also like and hope to see him having your trust and your confidence and have personal relations with you so we can cooperate even more so I will personally tell you that one of my assistants spoke with Mr. Giuliani just recently and we are hoping very much that Mr. Giuliani will be able to travel to Ukraine and we will meet once he comes to Ukraine. I just wanted to assure you once again that you have nobody but friends around us.

DONALD: The other thing. There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great.

Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it ... It sounds horrible to me.

The Investigation will be Done by Yes Men, You’ll Get the Result You Want
Pass on the Direction You Want the Investigation to Go

VOLODYMYR: I wanted to tell you about the prosecutor First of all I understand and I'm knowledgeable about the situation. Since we have won the absolute majority in our Parliament; the next prosecutor general will be 100% my person, my candidate, who will be approved, by the parliament and will start as a new prosecutor in September. He or she will look into the situation, specifically to the company that you mentioned is this issue. The issue of the investigation of the case is actually the issue of making sure to restore the honesty so we will take care of that and will work on the investigation of the case. On top of that, I would kindly ask you if you have any additional information that you can provide to μs, it would be very helpful for the investigation

The Prosecutor Removed from Office for Corruption is the Kind of Prosecutor I Want You to Use

ALSO

I’ll Bribe You with Economic Incentive for the Results I Want

DONALD: I will have Mr. Giuliani give you a call and I am also going to have. Attorney General Barr call and we will get to the bottom of it. I'm sure you will figure it out. I heard the prosecutor was treated very badly and he was a very fair prosecutor so good luck with everything. Your economy is going to get better and better I predict.

Emoluments Clause OR The Tower of Babel is So Beautiful!

VOLODYMYR: I stayed at the Trump Tower. I will talk to them and I hope to see them again in the future. I also wanted to thank you for your invitation to visit the United States, specifically Washington DC. On the other hand, I also wanted to assure you that we will be very serious about the case and will work on the investigation. As to the economy, there is much potential for our two countries and one of the issues that is very important for Ukraine is energy independence.

Mueller Report in Meme form

So, if you watched the 7 hour grilling of Mueller you know he's super frustrated that no one read his report (other than me... apparently).

To help everyone out I posted a summary. I also posted highlights.
Here is my final attempt to make sure people know what happened... inspired by this slate article:

The Mueller Report in Meme form

Intro:

Shared Campaign Info:

Lied to Investigators:

Tampered with Evidence:

Russia Used Social Media to Influence 126,000,000 Americans... it had real world consequences:

The Russians also Hacked Democrats:

Trump's Request to Hack the DNC and Hillary were Taken Seriously:

The Trump Campaign Coordinated with Wikileaks, who Coordinated with Russia:

Trump's Son was Given the Password to an Anti-Trump PAC Website: 

Wikileaks Used Trump Jr. as a Puppet:

A Summary of the Hacking:

Trump's Campaign was Initially a Real Estate Infomercial:

Everyone Pretended to be More Important Than They Were, and that Made them More Important:

The Trump Campaign Freely Shared Information with the Russians, because they were Compromised:

But Her EMAILS!!!

So Incurious:

They Knew the Meeting was About Dirt on Clinton:

Many Trump Folk Lie, for Example:

Trump is NOT not Guilt of Obstruction of Justice:

Trump Lies:

People in Trump's Orbit Refuse to Follow Presidential Orders:

The President's Team Lied about Trump Editing his Son's Press Statements:

The Scope of the President's Actions:

Congress Needs to Hold the President Accountable because No One is Above the Law:

The President Would Not Answer Questions about Obstruction of Justice:

The President Acted in a Two-Faced Manner:

The President Refused to be Interviewed:

Either the President has a Memory Problem, or He's Lying:

My Summary of the Mueller Report

My Summary:

The Russians did it, the Trump team bungles everything, there were many instances of obstruction that Congress needs to follow up on, and the President recalls NOTHING.

The Russians Did It

            The Russians used social media to influence 126 million Americans with propaganda that highlighted divisions in the country, and later assisted the most divisive candidate, Donald Trump. This had real world implications, including people attending rallies in real life.

            The Russians also hacked a bunch of Democratic Party officials and offices. They then leaked this information to Wikileaks. Wikileaks coordinated with members of the Trump political team. This included giving stolen passwords to an anti-Trump PAC website to Donald Trump Jr. and leaking the Clinton Campaigns playbook. Imagine competing against an opponent who knew your every plan and schedule; that would be incredibly unfair.

The Trump Team Bungles Everything

            One thing that comes across loud and clear in the report is that the Trump team is decidedly not the Best and the Brightest. They bluff to no end, claiming authority they don’t have; they claim that they attend meetings with people when all they did was google the person’s name; they make assumptions about what is going on that just aren’t true, but keep going because why not… 

            A crazy example that points to all of these tendencies: Papadopoulos meets a Russian academic, who won’t pay attention to him at a party, until he starts bragging that he is high up in Trump’s organization (which he is not). Then the Russian sets up a meeting with Papadopoulos and two other Russians, one of them a woman. Papadopoulos brags to the Trump team that the Russian academic, who didn’t really want to talk to him, is his good friend. Then he tells the team that the woman at the meeting he is at is in fact Putin’s niece. She is not. Later Trump Junior looks up the name of one of the Russians on Wikipedia and tells the team that he just got off the phone with the person… but in actuality all he did was google the guy’s name… this kind of thing happens A LOT in the report! In general, it seems that the entire Trump team is incapable of making true statements.

There Were Many Instances of Obstruction that Congress Needs to Follow Up On

            Discerning whether a President can obstruct justice is a complex constitutional question, above Mueller’s pay grade, so to speak.

            Defining what Obstruction of Justice is, however, was not nearly as hard. Mueller defines Obstruction of Justice as having three parts, an obstructive act, a nexus between the acts and an official proceeding, and corrupt intent. In other words, did the person do something, that would harm an official proceeding, and was it intentional? 

            Mueller then lays out 14 instances where the President’s actions could be an Obstruction of Justice and analyzes them with the above three criterion. Then he goes on and says these 14 instances, looked at together, could establish a pattern of the President attempting to Obstruct Justice. Mueller then asserts that no one is above the law and congress ought to look into these 14 instances of Obstruction of Justice.

The President Recalls NOTHING

            Finally, we can read the President’s written responses to Mueller’s questions. In a very short couple of paragraphs the president claims that he doesn’t recall specific events 30 times!

We’re Flattening Immigrants

The current immigration policy in the United States flattens immigrants. It does not make a distinction between different types of immigrants, lumping them all together “flattening” the complex ways people come to this country and the nuanced policies we had in place to deal with different types of people. It also flattens them in the sense of it squishes them, destroying their lives.

              I think of the Indonesian folk I’m connected to. It used to be their names were on a list of people whose presence in the US was, I’m going to use that word again, nuanced. As ethnically Chinese Christians they were in danger of persecution back home, so we invited them in to this country, gave them travel visas, then winked and nodded, asking them to come back every year to check in, but promised they’d be okay. For two decades they were on a list of people who overstayed their travel visa, but there was a footnote next to their name indicating that if they returned to their home country they would be in danger, so when ICE interacted with them they would not arrest them. Then the President’s executive order changed policy at the Department of Homeland Security, and soon all the footnotes on ICE’s list were gone—and so were these Indonesian fathers who left behind American kids here between the ages of 1 and 16. The list had been flattened, everyone was the same, flattened too were three families who now are without breadwinners and a church without some of their leaders.

              I think of these children being held in cages. They are forced to represent themselves in court. Yes, three and four year-olds representing themselves in court. Again, American immigration policy is flattening immigrants, squishing 3-year-olds and thirty-year-olds into the same category. Flattening, as well, these poor kids who are playing with elevator buttons and sitting on tables chewing on their toes, instead of answering questions that might protect them.

              I think of those soldiers serving in the US military in order to earn their citizenship, being deported. To be clear, there are US soldiers who have served two tours in Afghanistan who are being deported. Again, a flattening in which folk who served in uniform are seen as no different than civilians who have not; previous policies and promises are squished out and leak out as people who fought for our country are flattened by that same country.

              Current immigration policy in the US is ignoring the particular stories and situations of folk who come to this country.

It doesn’t matter if we promised you citizenship if you were a citizen soldier,

it doesn’t matter if you are three, you still need to be treated like an adult,

it doesn’t matter that you will be discriminated against and in grave danger if you return home you are out of here.

We’re ruining people’s lives. I can’t help but wonder, is it because the current administration is not capable of handling the complexity of actually governing and are simply governing on slogans or if they don’t understand American values and prefer blunt authoritarianism, or if they are simply cruel.

I Was Not Wrong

You might remember that I endorsed Hillary Clinton and warned about the dangers of electing Donald Trump.

I suggested he’d endanger people with pre-existing conditions, that there was no there there—his ideas were basically empty slogans, and that he had authoritarian tendencies.

Six months later, I think we can assess my worries about Trump. 

At this point I think I can safely say I was not wrong.

Pre-existing conditions

            The Affordable Care Act is still the law of the land, though there are plenty of ways Trump is undermining it, including pulling ads and use of executive orders. That said, he’d initially said Trumpcare would protect people with pre-existing conditions, until he got down to the final hour before the bill was going to go for a vote, and gladly cut up that part of the bill before the whole thing failed. There is now a new effort to repeal the ACA and cut people with pre-existing conditions off at the knees. So, yeah, I was not wrong.

Empty Slogans

            When Trump was trying to tackle healthcare he admitted, “Nobody knew healthcare could be so complicated.” This after claiming he’d create a perfect plan that kept all the things people liked about the ACA, but it would be tons cheaper. “A terrific plan that would cover everyone.” Yes, he’s governing by slogan not idea.

            As further evidence, he’d promised, as you might remember, to get China to invade North Korea for us, now he’s planning on “solving” North Korea without China.

            He had a secret plan to defeat ISIS, it looks more like he’s just letting the Obama plan chug along, maybe with more civilian casualties and botched raids.

            He was going to build a wall and have Mexico pay for it. They won’t.

            He promised to ban Muslims, which has proved to be unconstitutional and judges have blocked said executive order twice.

            You get the picture, he says things, but they don’t seem to work as actual policy, so he backtracks. I was not wrong.

Authoritarianism

            I was a NATO kid and was on a NATO base when the Tiananmen Square Massacre took place. I was told in no uncertain terms that was what we were fighting against—America while deeply imperfect, stands for human rights, and when we fail that we are held to account for it, because that is who we are. Yeah, naïve right, but still, damn it, if I have a choice between someone who stands up to China and says, “Women’s rights are human rights!” or someone who thinks what happened at Tiananmen Square shows strength, I’m going with Human Rights every time.

            Off my soap box.

            So far, Trump and his people have proved to be very cozy with Vladimir Putin. In fact, he’s defended Putin killing journalists and employed a moral equivalency between America and Russia to defending Putin being a killer.

            Additionally, he’s given Egyptian Strongman Al-Sisi legitimacy and a boatload of cash, green lighting his human rights abuses. In general, Middle Eastern dictators are loving this.

            So far he’s ruling via executive orders, with 23 so far (vs 18 for Obama at this time). And when these orders don’t go as planned we’re told to not question his authority. Those who do their job and interpret the constitutionality of the orders are dismissed as “so called judges.” He is threatening fellow Republicans like he’s “The Godfather.” Also, he capriciously knocked a billion dollars off an American company’s stock via Twitter.

            As for the hate crimes, it’s so bad the Lutherans are doing active bystander training. And before you think we’re over-reacting, the night before the first training a young woman was spat upon for wearing a hijab and the day after I visited a local Islamic Center, it was targeted. On a more terrifying scale an Indian man was killed in Kansas because he looked Muslim. Then there is White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon’s obsession with “The Camp of the Saints” in which immigrants from the 2/3rds world and hippie leftists are eventually slaughtered to save the West.

            So, it seems Trump is emboldening human rights violators abroad and racists at home and governing in a heavy-handed manner. I was not wrong.