Get E-Mail Updates

God's Politics Blog

Obama in Oslo: Nonviolence is the Strongest Weapon

by Johann Christoph Arnold 12-16-2009 | 5:00pm
Print
16 Comments | Login or Register to post comments

I was saddened by our president's acceptance speech for the Nobel Peace Prize. He missed a chance to witness to courage and leadership. True, Mr. Obama was awarded the prize and did not seek it for himself. However, even the Nobel Committee acknowledged that what they were rewarding was a change in direction, more than any concrete achievements for peace. Sadly, the Committee missed the irony of awarding the prize to a President who is waging two wars.

It is nice that Mr. Obama invoked the memories of Mohandas K. Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. He was right in saying that without their vision and moral clarity, he would never have been standing at the lectern in Oslo. But he neglected to mention that both sacrificed their lives for taking this stand. This is true leadership.

Yes, like our president said, evil does exist in the world. But he was wrong in saying that a nonviolent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies. It is this thinking that gives nations the right to wage "just wars." Any kind of war is wrong. There is a much better way. This is why our president and all Americans need to understand the power of nonviolence.

History has proven this. Due to the patience and perseverance of Gandhi and his many followers, the mighty British Army was halted in its tracks and had to withdraw from India. This came about at a great personal cost to Gandhi. He was beaten, thrown into jail, and went on many hunger strikes which almost killed him.

By advocating love, forgiveness, and nonviolence, Dr. King also withstood the hatred and viciousness of those who believed in white supremacy. He, too, was beaten and imprisoned. He was even stabbed and did not retaliate. Through this he inspired hope and gave millions of people a vision that transformed our entire society.

As a young man, I had the privilege of marching with Dr. King in Selma, where I experienced firsthand the nonviolent legacy that King gave to our nation. In the end, both he and Gandhi were assassinated for their beliefs. The evening before King was killed, he said: "I have been to the mountaintop; I have seen the glory of the Lord and I am not afraid."

Both Gandhi and King drew their strength from a deep faith in God. Without such a faith, nonviolence will never seem possible. Only with it will we be able to overcome such vicious adversaries as Al-Qaeda and similar group that abide by no law.

Dostoyevsky writes:

Of some thoughts one stands perplexed -- especially at the sight of men's sin-and wonders whether one should use force or humble love. Always decide to use humble love. If you resolve on that once and for all, you may subdue the whole world. Loving humility is marvelously strong, the strongest of all things, and there is nothing else like it.

Nonviolence is the strongest weapon we can wield to overcome evil. May God give our president the strength and wisdom to embrace this truth.

Johann Christoph Arnold is the author of ten books, which are available as free e-books at www.plough.com.

16 Comments | Login or Register to post comments
Sojourners relies on the support of readers like you to sustain our message and ministry.

Related Stories

Resources

Like what you're reading? Get Sojourners E-Mail updates!

by: bill pence

12-16-2009 @ 5:24pm

what do you think the eventual outcome of Afghanistan will be in 5 years? when our military presence leaves Iraq what will we have to show for it? I would love to hear others opinions on these matters.

Millions of supporters have embraced Obama in the hopes that his strategy would represent change that would bring more peace, less war.. and not the perpetuation of "peace through military victory" that was the motto of Rome during Jesus' life as well. The myth of redemptive violence had led to our spending hundreds of billions of dollars (and the estimate is 1 TRILLION dollars at the end of 2010) to bomb the 3rd poorest country on the planet. shame on us. it is hard to be proud to be american sometimes, at least for me it is.

this is a youtube link regarding civilian death, exemplifying my amazement that christians can justify our killing in afghanistan.. its hard to watch. it's from rethinkafghanistan.com

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQsoxtjo7E4&feat...

by: WayneNorthey

12-18-2009 @ 2:45pm

"But as a head of state sworn to protect and defend my nation, I cannot be guided by their [Martin Luther King's and Gandhi's non-violence] examples alone. I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people. For make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world. A non-violent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies. Negotiations cannot convince al Qaeda's leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force may sometimes be necessary is not a call to cynicism -- it is a recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of reason."

by: KK

12-16-2009 @ 6:55pm

Many comments seem focused solely on the lethal aspects of a military presence. Are you aware that our military performs other functions?

Again, I find myself speaking as a friend of a fellow Christian and soldier, Jeff Courter, who went to Afghanistan in service to his country and his God. While there, he chronicled his experience in a digital diary - which he later compiled into a book, "Afghan Journal." (He now writes a blog, http://www.LifeLoveandTruth.com)

What I've learned from Jeff is this...soldiers must carry weapons. And they must be prepared to use them if needed. But they also fight other critical battles. In this case - it's a battle to win the hearts and minds of Afghan tribes.

It is neither quick, easy or cheap to win such "wars." But I ask you to consider the words of the man that President Obama has entrusted with implementing his military strategy in Afghanistan - General Stanley McChrystal - who constantly reminds anyone who listens that PROTECTING residents is the only way to wean support from the Taliban.

Exhibit A - a sound bite from a recent New York Times article:

"It's NOT the number of people you KILL. It's the number of people you CONVINCE," General McChrystal instructed his regional commanders...over a video conference as he discussed the impact of the 30,000 new troops.

"It's the number of people that DON'T get killed," he continued.
"It's the number of houses that ARE NOTE destroyed. It's the number of children that DO get to go to school."

I hope you'll factor this perspective into your discussion. It certainly shouldn't be ignored. My soldier friend Jeff says that McChrystal's philosophy is, indeed, what guided him on his training mission.

KK

by: letjusticerolldown

12-16-2009 @ 3:33pm

If Dr King had lived and became President in January 1, 2001 at age 71--on September 11 of that year--he would have received information that two airliners had been crashed into the WTC, one into the Pentagon and another headed for DC. He would have decided whether to scramble fighters with the possibility of having to shoot down the airliner.

This is the reality of the Presidency.

Too much of this commentary about Obama misses the little detail that it ain't bout Obama. We have a nation with a democratic government. This is not Obamaland in which he governs as a little god.

This is what many commenters were warning some here about in the run-up to the elections. You are so disappointed because you sought a King.

Well the King ended up as President of a fallen nation in a fallen world with a fallen military, fallen churches, and fallen police. He must govern towards imperfect ends with imperfect tools. He lacks the luxury to wait until goals and means can be pure. And he acts in representation of us not as our Savior.

We have a system. We have a government. Almost all candidates fail to articulate a real-life plan for the real things they will seek and how they will use the President's limited time and resources to accomplish very finite results and respond to extreme crises with the tools he is charged to steward.

by: bill pence

12-16-2009 @ 5:24pm

what do you think the eventual outcome of Afghanistan will be in 5 years? when our military presence leaves Iraq what will we have to show for it? I would love to hear others opinions on these matters.

Millions of supporters have embraced Obama in the hopes that his strategy would represent change that would bring more peace, less war.. and not the perpetuation of "peace through military victory" that was the motto of Rome during Jesus' life as well. The myth of redemptive violence had led to our spending hundreds of billions of dollars (and the estimate is 1 TRILLION dollars at the end of 2010) to bomb the 3rd poorest country on the planet. shame on us. it is hard to be proud to be american sometimes, at least for me it is.

this is a youtube link regarding civilian death, exemplifying my amazement that christians can justify our killing in afghanistan.. its hard to watch. it's from rethinkafghanistan.com

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQsoxtjo7E4&feat...

by: NC77

12-16-2009 @ 9:20pm

Excellent and astute observation Justice.

by: KK

12-16-2009 @ 6:55pm

Many comments seem focused solely on the lethal aspects of a military presence. Are you aware that our military performs other functions?

Again, I find myself speaking as a friend of a fellow Christian and soldier, Jeff Courter, who went to Afghanistan in service to his country and his God. While there, he chronicled his experience in a digital diary - which he later compiled into a book, "Afghan Journal." (He now writes a blog, http://www.LifeLoveandTruth.com)

What I've learned from Jeff is this...soldiers must carry weapons. And they must be prepared to use them if needed. But they also fight other critical battles. In this case - it's a battle to win the hearts and minds of Afghan tribes.

It is neither quick, easy or cheap to win such "wars." But I ask you to consider the words of the man that President Obama has entrusted with implementing his military strategy in Afghanistan - General Stanley McChrystal - who constantly reminds anyone who listens that PROTECTING residents is the only way to wean support from the Taliban.

Exhibit A - a sound bite from a recent New York Times article:

"It's NOT the number of people you KILL. It's the number of people you CONVINCE," General McChrystal instructed his regional commanders...over a video conference as he discussed the impact of the 30,000 new troops.

"It's the number of people that DON'T get killed," he continued.
"It's the number of houses that ARE NOTE destroyed. It's the number of children that DO get to go to school."

I hope you'll factor this perspective into your discussion. It certainly shouldn't be ignored. My soldier friend Jeff says that McChrystal's philosophy is, indeed, what guided him on his training mission.

KK

by: NC77

12-16-2009 @ 9:20pm

Excellent and astute observation Justice.

by: LadyJess78

12-17-2009 @ 12:00pm

I'm truly torn about the war in Afghanistan. I deplore war and believe that violence can only beget violence. But, we are not talking about another government that can be reasoned with, be negotiated with. We are talking about a network of individuals intent on hurting and destroying as many as possible. I find it difficult to believe that just leaving them alone is the best answer, either.

Also, let's not forget that Obama inherited these two wars. It is his responsibility to deal with them responsibly. That means that he can't just declare it over and pretend it didn't happen.

by: SpareChange

12-17-2009 @ 3:04pm

(But he was wrong in saying that a nonviolent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies.)

Sorry Johann, I have a hard time understanding your logic after a statement like that...

by: LadyJess78

12-17-2009 @ 12:00pm

I'm truly torn about the war in Afghanistan. I deplore war and believe that violence can only beget violence. But, we are not talking about another government that can be reasoned with, be negotiated with. We are talking about a network of individuals intent on hurting and destroying as many as possible. I find it difficult to believe that just leaving them alone is the best answer, either.

Also, let's not forget that Obama inherited these two wars. It is his responsibility to deal with them responsibly. That means that he can't just declare it over and pretend it didn't happen.

by: WayneNorthey

12-18-2009 @ 2:45pm

"But as a head of state sworn to protect and defend my nation, I cannot be guided by their [Martin Luther King's and Gandhi's non-violence] examples alone. I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people. For make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world. A non-violent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies. Negotiations cannot convince al Qaeda's leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force may sometimes be necessary is not a call to cynicism -- it is a recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of reason."

by: SpareChange

12-17-2009 @ 3:04pm

(But he was wrong in saying that a nonviolent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies.)

Sorry Johann, I have a hard time understanding your logic after a statement like that...

by: WayneNorthey

12-18-2009 @ 12:45pm

"But as a head of state sworn to protect and defend my nation, I cannot be guided by their [Martin Luther King's and Gandhi's non-violence] examples alone. I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people. For make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world. A non-violent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies. Negotiations cannot convince al Qaeda's leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force may sometimes be necessary is not a call to cynicism -- it is a recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of reason."

by: WayneNorthey

12-18-2009 @ 12:45pm

"But as a head of state sworn to protect and defend my nation, I cannot be guided by their [Martin Luther King's and Gandhi's non-violence] examples alone. I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people. For make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world. A non-violent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies. Negotiations cannot convince al Qaeda's leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force may sometimes be necessary is not a call to cynicism -- it is a recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of reason."

by: letjusticerolldown

12-16-2009 @ 3:33pm

If Dr King had lived and became President in January 1, 2001 at age 71--on September 11 of that year--he would have received information that two airliners had been crashed into the WTC, one into the Pentagon and another headed for DC. He would have decided whether to scramble fighters with the possibility of having to shoot down the airliner.

This is the reality of the Presidency.

Too much of this commentary about Obama misses the little detail that it ain't bout Obama. We have a nation with a democratic government. This is not Obamaland in which he governs as a little god.

This is what many commenters were warning some here about in the run-up to the elections. You are so disappointed because you sought a King.

Well the King ended up as President of a fallen nation in a fallen world with a fallen military, fallen churches, and fallen police. He must govern towards imperfect ends with imperfect tools. He lacks the luxury to wait until goals and means can be pure. And he acts in representation of us not as our Savior.

We have a system. We have a government. Almost all candidates fail to articulate a real-life plan for the real things they will seek and how they will use the President's limited time and resources to accomplish very finite results and respond to extreme crises with the tools he is charged to steward.

Comments sorted by highest rated. After voting you must refresh your page to see the sort order change.

by: letjusticerolldown

12-16-2009 @ 3:33pm

If Dr King had lived and became President in January 1, 2001 at age 71--on September 11 of that year--he would have received information that two airliners had been crashed into the WTC, one into the Pentagon and another headed for DC. He would have decided whether to scramble fighters with the possibility of having to shoot down the airliner.

This is the reality of the Presidency.

Too much of this commentary about Obama misses the little detail that it ain't bout Obama. We have a nation with a democratic government. This is not Obamaland in which he governs as a little god.

This is what many commenters were warning some here about in the run-up to the elections. You are so disappointed because you sought a King.

Well the King ended up as President of a fallen nation in a fallen world with a fallen military, fallen churches, and fallen police. He must govern towards imperfect ends with imperfect tools. He lacks the luxury to wait until goals and means can be pure. And he acts in representation of us not as our Savior.

We have a system. We have a government. Almost all candidates fail to articulate a real-life plan for the real things they will seek and how they will use the President's limited time and resources to accomplish very finite results and respond to extreme crises with the tools he is charged to steward.

by: letjusticerolldown

12-16-2009 @ 3:33pm

If Dr King had lived and became President in January 1, 2001 at age 71--on September 11 of that year--he would have received information that two airliners had been crashed into the WTC, one into the Pentagon and another headed for DC. He would have decided whether to scramble fighters with the possibility of having to shoot down the airliner.

This is the reality of the Presidency.

Too much of this commentary about Obama misses the little detail that it ain't bout Obama. We have a nation with a democratic government. This is not Obamaland in which he governs as a little god.

This is what many commenters were warning some here about in the run-up to the elections. You are so disappointed because you sought a King.

Well the King ended up as President of a fallen nation in a fallen world with a fallen military, fallen churches, and fallen police. He must govern towards imperfect ends with imperfect tools. He lacks the luxury to wait until goals and means can be pure. And he acts in representation of us not as our Savior.

We have a system. We have a government. Almost all candidates fail to articulate a real-life plan for the real things they will seek and how they will use the President's limited time and resources to accomplish very finite results and respond to extreme crises with the tools he is charged to steward.

by: bill pence

12-16-2009 @ 5:24pm

what do you think the eventual outcome of Afghanistan will be in 5 years? when our military presence leaves Iraq what will we have to show for it? I would love to hear others opinions on these matters.

Millions of supporters have embraced Obama in the hopes that his strategy would represent change that would bring more peace, less war.. and not the perpetuation of "peace through military victory" that was the motto of Rome during Jesus' life as well. The myth of redemptive violence had led to our spending hundreds of billions of dollars (and the estimate is 1 TRILLION dollars at the end of 2010) to bomb the 3rd poorest country on the planet. shame on us. it is hard to be proud to be american sometimes, at least for me it is.

this is a youtube link regarding civilian death, exemplifying my amazement that christians can justify our killing in afghanistan.. its hard to watch. it's from rethinkafghanistan.com

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQsoxtjo7E4&feat...

by: bill pence

12-16-2009 @ 5:24pm

what do you think the eventual outcome of Afghanistan will be in 5 years? when our military presence leaves Iraq what will we have to show for it? I would love to hear others opinions on these matters.

Millions of supporters have embraced Obama in the hopes that his strategy would represent change that would bring more peace, less war.. and not the perpetuation of "peace through military victory" that was the motto of Rome during Jesus' life as well. The myth of redemptive violence had led to our spending hundreds of billions of dollars (and the estimate is 1 TRILLION dollars at the end of 2010) to bomb the 3rd poorest country on the planet. shame on us. it is hard to be proud to be american sometimes, at least for me it is.

this is a youtube link regarding civilian death, exemplifying my amazement that christians can justify our killing in afghanistan.. its hard to watch. it's from rethinkafghanistan.com

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQsoxtjo7E4&feat...

by: KK

12-16-2009 @ 6:55pm

Many comments seem focused solely on the lethal aspects of a military presence. Are you aware that our military performs other functions?

Again, I find myself speaking as a friend of a fellow Christian and soldier, Jeff Courter, who went to Afghanistan in service to his country and his God. While there, he chronicled his experience in a digital diary - which he later compiled into a book, "Afghan Journal." (He now writes a blog, http://www.LifeLoveandTruth.com)

What I've learned from Jeff is this...soldiers must carry weapons. And they must be prepared to use them if needed. But they also fight other critical battles. In this case - it's a battle to win the hearts and minds of Afghan tribes.

It is neither quick, easy or cheap to win such "wars." But I ask you to consider the words of the man that President Obama has entrusted with implementing his military strategy in Afghanistan - General Stanley McChrystal - who constantly reminds anyone who listens that PROTECTING residents is the only way to wean support from the Taliban.

Exhibit A - a sound bite from a recent New York Times article:

"It's NOT the number of people you KILL. It's the number of people you CONVINCE," General McChrystal instructed his regional commanders...over a video conference as he discussed the impact of the 30,000 new troops.

"It's the number of people that DON'T get killed," he continued.
"It's the number of houses that ARE NOTE destroyed. It's the number of children that DO get to go to school."

I hope you'll factor this perspective into your discussion. It certainly shouldn't be ignored. My soldier friend Jeff says that McChrystal's philosophy is, indeed, what guided him on his training mission.

KK

by: KK

12-16-2009 @ 6:55pm

Many comments seem focused solely on the lethal aspects of a military presence. Are you aware that our military performs other functions?

Again, I find myself speaking as a friend of a fellow Christian and soldier, Jeff Courter, who went to Afghanistan in service to his country and his God. While there, he chronicled his experience in a digital diary - which he later compiled into a book, "Afghan Journal." (He now writes a blog, http://www.LifeLoveandTruth.com)

What I've learned from Jeff is this...soldiers must carry weapons. And they must be prepared to use them if needed. But they also fight other critical battles. In this case - it's a battle to win the hearts and minds of Afghan tribes.

It is neither quick, easy or cheap to win such "wars." But I ask you to consider the words of the man that President Obama has entrusted with implementing his military strategy in Afghanistan - General Stanley McChrystal - who constantly reminds anyone who listens that PROTECTING residents is the only way to wean support from the Taliban.

Exhibit A - a sound bite from a recent New York Times article:

"It's NOT the number of people you KILL. It's the number of people you CONVINCE," General McChrystal instructed his regional commanders...over a video conference as he discussed the impact of the 30,000 new troops.

"It's the number of people that DON'T get killed," he continued.
"It's the number of houses that ARE NOTE destroyed. It's the number of children that DO get to go to school."

I hope you'll factor this perspective into your discussion. It certainly shouldn't be ignored. My soldier friend Jeff says that McChrystal's philosophy is, indeed, what guided him on his training mission.

KK

by: NC77

12-16-2009 @ 9:20pm

Excellent and astute observation Justice.

by: NC77

12-16-2009 @ 9:20pm

Excellent and astute observation Justice.

by: LadyJess78

12-17-2009 @ 12:00pm

I'm truly torn about the war in Afghanistan. I deplore war and believe that violence can only beget violence. But, we are not talking about another government that can be reasoned with, be negotiated with. We are talking about a network of individuals intent on hurting and destroying as many as possible. I find it difficult to believe that just leaving them alone is the best answer, either.

Also, let's not forget that Obama inherited these two wars. It is his responsibility to deal with them responsibly. That means that he can't just declare it over and pretend it didn't happen.

by: LadyJess78

12-17-2009 @ 12:00pm

I'm truly torn about the war in Afghanistan. I deplore war and believe that violence can only beget violence. But, we are not talking about another government that can be reasoned with, be negotiated with. We are talking about a network of individuals intent on hurting and destroying as many as possible. I find it difficult to believe that just leaving them alone is the best answer, either.

Also, let's not forget that Obama inherited these two wars. It is his responsibility to deal with them responsibly. That means that he can't just declare it over and pretend it didn't happen.

by: SpareChange

12-17-2009 @ 3:04pm

(But he was wrong in saying that a nonviolent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies.)

Sorry Johann, I have a hard time understanding your logic after a statement like that...

by: SpareChange

12-17-2009 @ 3:04pm

(But he was wrong in saying that a nonviolent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies.)

Sorry Johann, I have a hard time understanding your logic after a statement like that...

by: WayneNorthey

12-18-2009 @ 12:45pm

"But as a head of state sworn to protect and defend my nation, I cannot be guided by their [Martin Luther King's and Gandhi's non-violence] examples alone. I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people. For make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world. A non-violent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies. Negotiations cannot convince al Qaeda's leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force may sometimes be necessary is not a call to cynicism -- it is a recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of reason."

by: WayneNorthey

12-18-2009 @ 12:45pm

"But as a head of state sworn to protect and defend my nation, I cannot be guided by their [Martin Luther King's and Gandhi's non-violence] examples alone. I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people. For make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world. A non-violent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies. Negotiations cannot convince al Qaeda's leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force may sometimes be necessary is not a call to cynicism -- it is a recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of reason."

by: WayneNorthey

12-18-2009 @ 2:45pm

"But as a head of state sworn to protect and defend my nation, I cannot be guided by their [Martin Luther King's and Gandhi's non-violence] examples alone. I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people. For make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world. A non-violent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies. Negotiations cannot convince al Qaeda's leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force may sometimes be necessary is not a call to cynicism -- it is a recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of reason."

by: WayneNorthey

12-18-2009 @ 2:45pm

"But as a head of state sworn to protect and defend my nation, I cannot be guided by their [Martin Luther King's and Gandhi's non-violence] examples alone. I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people. For make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world. A non-violent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies. Negotiations cannot convince al Qaeda's leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force may sometimes be necessary is not a call to cynicism -- it is a recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of reason."