Historical Foundations of Religious Engagement
Throughout history, military leaders have engaged religious figures, often seeking to invoke divine favor or claim spiritual authority in the pursuit of warfare. Some leaders went so far as to assert their own divinity, blending religious and military power to motivate their forces. At other times, the emphasis shifted toward making warfare more “just,” ensuring it aligned with the moral principles of the divine.
Contemporary Dynamics of Religious Engagement
Since the Cold War, shifts in philosophy, politics, and increased immigration have complicated military-religious relations. Many modern militaries and nations have grown more religiously diverse, and official religious leaders may not always represent the full spectrum of beliefs in a region. After the collapse of the Iron Curtain, NATO chaplains began meeting across Europe to better understand the religious needs of populations transitioning from decades of state atheism. These efforts proved vital during subsequent conflicts, such as the Balkan wars, which were marked by ethnic, religious, and political strife. Whereas the focus was once on boosting morale or weakening adversaries, it is now more important to understand local religious dynamics in order to anticipate responses and unintended consequences of military actions.
Personal Experience in Religious Leader Engagement
From 2015 to 2021, serving as a Navy chaplain provided me with firsthand experience in the evolving landscape of religious leader engagement. Supporting U.S. SIXTH Fleet, Naval Forces Europe / Naval Forces Africa involved collaboration with European naval chaplains and participation in the International Military Chiefs of Chaplains Conference. These opportunities fostered partnership, cultural exchange, and shared understanding.
A follow-on assignment to the Joint Staff supporting the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff expanded my appreciation for chaplains’ efforts at the strategic level across multiple combatant commands. What became very clear across all these Religious Leader Engagement (RLE) initiatives was that they often depended on the individual chaplain’s motivation, skill set, or personality to get them off the ground. Additionally, such initiatives also depended upon the willingness of command leadership to empower such engagement.
Traditionally, chaplaincy focused on supporting internal religious needs. However, evolving operational realities highlighted the necessity of external engagement, a change not clearly articulated in policy or doctrine.
Evolution of Religious Leader Engagement in U.S. and Allied Commands
As NATO-aligned nations responded to the Gulf War after Iraq’s 1990 invasion of Kuwait, the necessity for religious leader engagement became clear. Western chaplains and service members, largely Christian, found themselves operating within Muslim nations, often at the behest of local leadership. The freedom to practice and express religious belief was challenged in various ways as the coalition was being built. With unacceptable restrictions being placed upon U.S. personnel and chaplains, military leaders quickly realized the need for new guidance governing interactions within diverse religious landscapes.
Prior to the Gulf War, U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) had no chaplain on staff, but this soon changed. Over time, engagement between U.S. and Middle Eastern religious leaders became routine, mirroring similar efforts in Europe.
The events of September 11, 2001, significantly intensified the need for religious engagement. Previous engagements certainly had religiously aligned ethnicities (1990s Balkan Wars) or nations (Gulf War), but now the U.S. military was venturing into the realm of extremism, with religious motivations that were not contained by ethnicity or national borders. Expanding partnerships and religious understanding became the order of the day. Both European Command (EUCOM) and CENTCOM chaplains worked closely with religious leaders across allied nations.
In October 2008, the establishment of U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) introduced a chaplain role that quickly became central to conferences and visits among African partner nations. These engagements united African chaplains, U.S. military chaplains serving in Africa, and National Guard chaplains involved through the State Partnership Program (SPP). U.S. Indo-Pacific Command (INDO-PACOM) also began facilitating engagement with chaplains and religious leaders of partner nations.
In February 2014 Russia invaded Crimea. Western militaries suddenly were brushing up on the branches of Orthodox Christianity and their relationships among ethnic groups spread across European and Asian nations. The impetus for this was Russian President Vladimir Putin’s reliance on, and utilization of, his close relationship with the Russian Orthodox Church in his campaign of conquest.
Over the past forty years, such events have been the impetus of efforts to strategically engage religious leaders and have helped shape modern military practice.
The Need for Doctrine and Enduring Engagement
Despite a history of effective RLE and varying degrees of service-level guidance, there was no comprehensive policy addressing religious engagement at the strategic level within the U.S. military. Without explicit command support, chaplain efforts could quickly lose momentum amid competing priorities. Those departments or missions that had a clear doctrinal or policy requirement got the requisite time and support. The time was right to argue for a greater awareness of the impact of religion and its enduring role. This led to the publication of “Rightsizing Our Understanding of Religion” in Joint Forces Quarterly followed shortly by the first edition of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction, “Strategic Religious Affairs,” which began to formalize the chaplain’s external strategic religious engagement role. This first edition was a modest effort to get something on the table, and subsequent teams in the Joint Staff Chaplains Office have undertaken the work of putting meat on the bones of this document.
Ongoing Challenges in Religious Engagement
RLE is not always easy, and not without challenges. Military chaplains must always assess who they are talking to, as well as who they are not talking to, and why. American ideals respect the religious beliefs and values of others. Yet, the very role of the military is to enforce the will of our political leaders, which can present conflicts regarding religion. Chaplain leaders must work to ensure religious engagement remains free from manipulation or coercion.
Military leaders are expected to engage respectfully in religious matters, resisting the urge to use RLE for intelligence gathering, psychological operations, or political / military purposes. A lesson can be learned from the biblical account of Joshua who, prior to leading Israel against Jericho, inquires of a military figure if he was an ally or adversary. The figure responds, "Neither, but as the commander of the army of the LORD I have now come." Joshua was concerned about what might aid his goals or hinder them. By the end of Joshua’s career, he had grown to see the greater need for personal alignment with religion rather than using religion for personal ends. In Joshua chapter 24, verse 15 we read “as for me and my household, we will serve the LORD.” Joshua had learned to change his personal engagement with faith.
