Joe Volks asks whether religion can help us replace the narrative of “us versus” them with a more compelling story of peace.
Religious communities are beginning to address the connections between climate change and global justice.
It’s a mistake for the U.S. government to ignore religion or promote it zealously. Scott Thomas offers an alternative.
The Commission on International Religious Freedom has provided tacit support for a dangerous turn in American foreign policy.
The anti-sweatshop campaigns, the protests against the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the mobilizations against free-trade agreements have all been an education in the global economy that is rarely found in the classroom.
Religious faith and institutions can be positive factors in peacebuilding. But there are also many potential pitfalls.
I pray for the day when the scales fall from our leaders’ eyes, they expiate their political sins, and Washington is wholly transfigured.
Ira Chernus writes that Americans crave a foreign policy based on moral conviction. Neoconservatives have offered one version. The left must provide a different one.
War grabs the headlines, and anti-war art grabs our attention. They do so with some of the same tools: guns, bombs, and body counts.
According to the compromise proposal of UN special envoy Martti Ahtisaari, the international community was to grant “supervised independence” to Kosovo, the largely Albanian enclave in southern Serbia.
Should the United States emphasize democracy or humanist religious traditions in its approach to global Islam? FPIF’s Najum Mushtaq and Abdeslam Maghraoui of the U.S. Institute of Peace offer two different answers.
The Bush administration is supporting the reform of Islam from within. But this faith-based approach is undemocratic, ignorant of the complexities of Islam, and ultimately doomed to fail.