|
Home
Religion
is Morally Neutral
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6769668/site/newsweek/
Desmond
Tutu discusses the tsunami tragedy, God, Iraq and the re-election of George
W. Bush
By Arlene Getz, December 30, 2004
During the harshest years of apartheid, Desmond Tutu was always an outspoken
voice of conscience. The 73-year-old Anglican archbishop faced down dirty
tricks, arrests and assassination threats to lead protest marches and
highlight racial injustice in his native South Africa. And when his country
finally became a democracy in 1994, Tutu went on to chair the Truth and
Reconciliation Commissiona widely-admired panel that granted amnesty
to human rights violators and set a global model for other countries trying
to come to terms with legacies of political violence.
Now Tutu, winner of the 1984
Nobel Peace Prize, wants to move out of the public eye. I'm striving
to cut down and have a much more contemplative lifestyle, he told
NEWSWEEK. That, however, may be easier said than done. The winner of the
1984 Nobel Peace Prize is continuing to have his say, describing the U.S.
invasion of Iraq as immoral and criticizing South African
President Thabo Mbekisuccessor to Nelson Mandelafor Mbekis
policies on poverty and AIDS.
Tutu spoke to NEWSWEEKs
Arlene Getz from his home in Johannesburg about the tsunami tragedy, God,
Iraq and his astonishment at the re-election of George W. Bush. Excerpts:
NEWSWEEK: We are entering 2005 with the news dominated
by the tsunamis that have claimed such an awful death toll in Asia.
DESMOND TUTU: Its a devastating event and one wants to express,
however inadequately, deep sympathies and condolences to all the bereaved.
This reminds us that in the midst of life we are in death, and shows how
utterly vulnerable we human beings are. But a wonderful thing is seeing
how selfless people have been when, for example we hear about them diving
into the surf to rescue people.
The United Nations relief coordinator has accused wealthy Western nations
of being stingy in their aid to the affected nations. What
type of aid would you like to see?
One just hopes that the world will continue to respond with what is usually
remarkable generosity and compassion. Obviously, the more prosperous you
are, the more one would hope you would be able to do that.
You said recently that if forgiveness and dialogue were possible in
post-apartheid South Africa, the same could be true for Iraq. What impact
do you expect the Jan. 30 elections to have there?
Any normal human being ought to be feeling considerable outrage and deep,
deep, deep hurt for so-called ordinary [Iraqi] people. We hardly ever
hear about what the casualties have been on that side. How I wish that
politicians could have the courage and the humility to admit that they
have made mistakes. President Bush and Prime Minister [Tony] Blair and
whoever supported the invasion ought at least to have the decency to say
[they] went into this war because [they] were given the wrong reasons
for going to war. I do not know that you are able to have any meaningful
election [in Iraq] in the present circumstanceswhere you are never
sure, when you get into a car and you drive along the roadside, [whether]
the other car that is coming towards you is carrying bombs that might
explode in your face.
Yet other countriesSouth Africas first all-race election
10 years ago is one notable examplehave managed to hold successful
elections in spite of pre-poll violence.
There are things that give you some kind of hope. Most people don't want
violence. [But] who in the awful situation of Iraq genuinely represents
the people? The [interim government] that was put there by the United
States cant really claim to have any genuine credibility. Fortunately
in South Africa [in 1994] we knew who genuinely represented us. I do not
really see that we have a like situation there [in Iraq.]
You said George Bush should admit that he made a mistake. Were you
surprised at his re-election?
[Laughs] I still can't believe that it really could have happened. Just
look at the facts on the table: Hed gone into a war having misled
peoplewhether deliberately or notabout why he went to war.
You would think that would have knocked him out [of the race.] It didnt.
Look at the number of American soldiers who have died since he claimed
that the war had ended. And yet it seems this doesn't make most Americans
worry too much. I was teaching in Jacksonville, Fla., [during the election
campaign] and I was shocked, because I had naively believed all these
many years that Americans genuinely believed in freedom of speech. [But
I] discovered there that when you made an utterance that was remotely
contrary to what the White House was saying, then they attacked you. For
a South African the déjà vu was frightening. They behaved
exactly the same way that used to happen here [during apartheid]vilifying
those who are putting forward a slightly different view.
Do you see any other parallels with white-ruled South Africa?
Look at the [detentions in] Guantanamo Bay. You say, why do you detain
people without trial in the fashion that you have done? And when they
give the answer security, you say no, no, no, this can't be America. This
is what we used to hear in South Africa. It's unbelievable that a country
that many of us have looked to as the bastion of true freedom could now
have eroded so many of the liberties we believed were upheld almost religiously.
[But] feeling as devastated in many ways as I am, it is wonderful to find
that there are [also] Americans who have felt very strongly [about administration
policies]the people who turned out for rallies against the war.
One always has to be very careful not to do what we used to do here, where
you generalize very facilely, and one has to remember that there are very
many Americans who are feeling deeply distressed about what has taken
place in their country. We take our hats off to them.
Talking about religion, much has been said about the role it played
in the White House race. What do you say to those who believe that Bush
was chosen by God?
[Laughs] I keep having to remind people that religion in and of itself
is morally neutral. Religion is like a knife. When you use a knife for
cutting up bread to prepare sandwiches, a knife is good. If you use the
same knife to stick into somebodys guts, a knife is bad. Religion
in and of itself is not good or badit is what it makes you do
Frequently, fundamentalists will say this person is the anointed of God
if the particular person is supporting their own positions on for instance,
homosexuality, or abortion. [I] feel so deeply saddened [about it]. Do
you really believe that the Jesus who was depicted in the Scriptures as
being on the side of those who were vilified, those who were marginalized,
that this Jesus would actually be supporting groups that clobber a group
that is already persecuted? Thats a Christ I would not worship.
I'm glad that I believe very fervently that Jesus would not be on the
side of gay bashers. To think that people say, as they used to say, that
AIDS was Gods punishment for homosexuality. Abominable. Abominable.
Is this bigotry masquerading as faith?
No. I think there are people who do believe things genuinely. Bush followed
the example of President [Ronald] Reaganto be very simplistic. Bush
said we are the goodies, those are the baddies, [just] as Reagan said
about the Sovietsthat they were the evil empire. President Bush
has found much the same kind of thing: that people don't like ambiguities.
Do your comments about fundamentalism extend to fundamentalist Islam as
well?
It's true of every faith, that there are those people who frequently are
able to provide people with simplistic answers. Life is far more complicated
than we would like it to be, but we actually dont like having to
work through its ambiguities. We wish we could have straightforward answers.
It's not just in terms of religionyou see it in things like ethnic
cleansing. Part of the reason for ethnic cleansing is that one group says
we don't like people who are different from us. We want people who think
like us, people who look like us, and we want to eradicate any of the
diversities. We find it far easier to be in the against mode
than in the for mode.
So have the attacks of September 11 and the so-called war on terror
given America and its allies another focal point?
Yes. There's no question at all. It appears as if we need enemies for
our self identification.
What are your hopes for Africa in 2005?
I would like to see greater discrimination. When something happens in
one country in Africa, the whole continent gets to be condemned. People
don't make the distinctions that, for instance, theres been democracy
ever since the colonial period ended in Botswana, for instance. They don't
say, hey look at South Africa. Africa is just seen as an undifferentiated
whole, and mostly its the bad things that make the news and those
are the things that determine what the world thinks of Africa.
Your bitter public argument with President Thabo Mbeki recently made
headlines in southern Africa. He claimed you had not demonstrated decent
respect for the truth after you said his ruling African National
Congress (ANC) had stifled debate on Zimbabwe, AIDS and poverty; you responded
that he had called you a liar with scant regard for the truth and
a charlatan posing with his concern for the poor. How is your relationship
after an exchange like that?
[Laughs.] Well, I'm always friendly. But I generally try to tell the truth
as I see it. I don't claim to be infallible, but I've done that throughout
my career here. I support a lot of things that [the South African government]
is doing. I'm not a member of the ANC and I've never been a member of
any political party [but] I think they've done well. Given where we come
from, it is remarkable. But we do have the capacity, the potential, to
become a really scintillating success. And we ought to be concentrating
on some of the things I identified. It wasn't a hostile attack
and
I was a little surprised at the vehemence of the president's response.
But given my own record, that isn't anything that would intimidate me.
If I wanted to, I could respond almost in the same vein that I used to
respond to the apartheid legislators. But I'm retired and do not really
want to engage in slanging matches.
So you're going to continue to speak out if you think it's necessary?
I'm not keen at the moment to be in the public eye. I'm striving to cut
down and have a more contemplative lifestyle. I'd like to be more quiet,
I'd like to be more reflective and yes, contemplative in the Christian
sense of trying to spend more time in prayer and so on. But this is the
country I love, and I want to see our government succeed. When the opportunity
presents itself I will give due praise where that is due and point out
the things that I think need further attention.
Mbeki has been widely criticized for being slow to make anti-AIDS drugs
available to the poor of South Africa, which has the worlds highest
number of people with HIV. Is the situation improving?
I think our government has done a great deal less than it should have.
We spent a great deal of time in academic discussions while people were
dying, and that is deeply distressing.
You have been treated for prostate cancer. How is your health now?
I'm fine. [Laughs.] I sometimes say to people that when they heard upstairs
there was a prospect of my coming, there was considerable consternation
and they said, No, no, no, not that guy. Keep him down there, we
couldn't possibly manage him up here.
© 2004 Newsweek, Inc.
|
|