As I'm writing, there is some question about how well the Democrats in the United States have done in this week's election. Apparently, there are some votes to be recounted in Virginia and, depending on the final numbers, the American Senate or House of Representatives will be “controlled” by the Democrats or Republicans.

Already, President George Bush's Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, has resigned. I haven't heard news commentary about this, but no doubt, he takes the success of the Democrats in the election as a rejection of the Bush/Republican management of the war in Iraq. Since he was a leading voice in that management, he understands that the time has come to hand over his office to someone else.

This would be a great time to gloat if you dislike Bush. But I don't think gloating is a good idea, except where all parties concerned are pretty good-humoured about it. Or, it would be good time to enter a state of anguish if you liked him. But I'm not sure if that's very helpful either.

So, for what it's worth, here is how I am processing the results of the election: four weakly connected thoughts.

First, I think I can sympathize with the initiation of the war in Iraq. Five years ago terror attacks successfully brought down one of the great icons of American global success, the World Trade Centre. At the same time, a plane crash brought death and disruption to an icon of American military prowess, the Pentagon.

With a country armed to the teeth behind him, a country seething with anger about the attacks, it is hard to imagine that any President would not have taken the attacks as an “act of war” (Bush's words) and responded in kind. It would probably have been out of character with the American narrative and its self-understanding to do anything but.

Second, having said that, Canadian students have an opportunity to consider our American friends during a time when they are rethinking their expensive and very risky war. Canadian student journalists, and others involved in reflecting on politics, have an opportunity to sympathize with Americans as they go through a time of soul searching.

We can help them reconsider whether it is realistic to think that the U. S. and a western coalition can plant democracy (by means of war) in an environment where democracy has no roots. Democracy has flourished in the western world because of a curious mixture of Greek political tradition, and the Christian emphasis on the dignity and self-worth of every individual since she has been created to reflect God. The Greeks, in fact, were not terribly democratic in practice—the practice flowered only in the Christianized west.

Understanding this helps us to see that gung-ho optimism about democratizing a far away non-western nation in a period of a few years is extremely ill founded. It would be fitting for Americans to be a bit humble about their ability to change the political and social landscape of Iraq.

Third, we can respond to Bush's words that he is committed to protect the American people from attack. No one (here) wants to deny Americans freedom from attack. The question is, what is the best way to prevent such attacks?

A couple of quick thoughts.

The U. S. has been playing dirty politics in the Middle East for decades. It used to fund the Taliban for example. The U. S. (and all countries) should avoid to the ninth degree secret wars, covert military operations, and other cruel stratagems for getting its way in the world. These methods have a way of biting back through unintended consequences, such as terror attacks.

As an alternative, the U. S. (and all countries) should put maximum efforts into community building. Women's rights groups, the thousands of religious NGOs, pacifist peacemaking groups, human rights organizations, humanitarian aid agencies, the United Nations, and a spectacular range of options for the long-term development of international friendships are available to be exploited. What if the United States put as much energy into a world strategy of friendship and community development as it does on being armed for Armageddon?

My fourth thought: The U. S. and Canada have vibrant, well-networked religious communities. The Catholic, Protestant and Evangelical churches in North America are very much present and deeply desirous of world peace. They have deep roots in both countries and are very active in processing political and social issues.

Political leaders should encourage these faith communities to do two things. One is to bring forward their considerations on peace and how best to wage it. The second is to ask them to pray, from the heart, without cessation, for God to bring peace in a world that is increasingly explosive, yet so hungry to rest from war.
Editorial opinions or comments expressed in this online edition of Interrobang newspaper reflect the views of the writer and are not those of the Interrobang or the Fanshawe Student Union. The Interrobang is published weekly by the Fanshawe Student Union at 1001 Fanshawe College Blvd., P.O. Box 7005, London, Ontario, N5Y 5R6 and distributed through the Fanshawe College community. Letters to the editor are welcome. All letters are subject to editing and should be emailed. All letters must be accompanied by contact information. Letters can also be submitted online by clicking here.