Military Review English Edition March-April 2015 | Page 93

FORCE AND FAITH

(Photo by Capt. Carlos Agosto, 361st Public Affairs Detachment)

Two soldiers on Fort Buchanan, Puerto Rico peer with curiosity 15 June 2010 as they see Chaplain (Col.) Jacob Goldstein, a Jewish rabbi, and
Brooklyn, N.Y., native, who has served the military since 1977. He often gets curious looks because he wears a beard, in accordance with his
Jewish faith, while in uniform.

protected in practice. It is instructive, therefore, to understand our own fitful history in balancing nonestablishment with free exercise and religious diversity. The
American example of a democracy thriving amidst its
religious diversity is a vital tool of American soft power
in approaching religious matters internationally.
Nonestablishment of religion protects the state
from religion and religion from the state. Military
leaders must take a thoughtful approach to balancing
the religious and humanitarian spheres inherent in the
majority of post-Cold War international interventions.
Preserving nonestablishment in this field protects the
state from the appearance of favoring one religion over
another while at the same time protecting religious
authorities from compromising their claims of authority
in the spiritual realm. Critical to this point is the modeling of nonestablishment by military leaders in their
public activities as military professionals.
The power of religion both unites and divides.
Democracy thrives on political activism, and religious
motivation will continue to be a primary means to
spark such activism. Just as in our own revolution, we
should expect to see religious figures play a leading, if
MILITARY REVIEW  March-April 2015

not decisive, role in the organization of new governments in the wake of popular uprisings. Therefore, the
two previous conclusions are important to remember
as we engage with leaders of these new states as they try
to find their own balance between spiritual and secular
influence over the state.

Conclusion
Religion unites and divides us—both as a nation
and a community of nations. As we have good reason
to assume that religion will continue to be a significant
variable in American domestic politics and in international relations, American foreign policymakers
will be well served to become familiar with America’s
own fitful journey of balancing the uneasy marriage of
religion and politics. By understanding this history and
placing it in the context of the evolving international
order, our strategic leaders will be better prepared to
tackle the hard questions of whether the new international order offers promises for peace or impending
peril—and what, in particular, military leaders should
consider when bringing religion into strategic and
campaign planning.
91