LONDON: The threat of military intervention against Iraq has brought about a resurgence of the Church of England’s moral authority. It has taken the lead in discussing the circumstances under which a “just war” could be pursued. The next Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, thinks it would be immoral and illegal to support an American war on Iraq without UN authority.

Richard Harries, Bishop of Oxford, has said something similar as part of five criteria he has laid down. In March, a report by the Church’s Board for Social Responsibility, chaired by the Bishop of Southwark, said it would be difficult to see how military action in Iraq could meet the criterion of being a just war.

The other day, Pax Christi, the Roman Catholic peace movement, handed a protest letter to Downing Street signed by nearly 3,000 people of different denominations.

An interesting facet of attitudes to Iraq is the way that the Christian Aquinian tradition, mainstream Islamic views and secular reasoning have come to similar conclusions about what constitutes a just war — civilians not being targeted, retribution being proportionate and wars only being declared by a head of state, not a maverick such as Osama bin Laden.

Leaders of the Church of England believe a war must have “proper authority and right intent”. It is agreed that the lawful authority must be the UN. The logic of this, in Richard Harries’ words, is that “in disputes between lower authorities appeal can always be made to a higher one for a resolution without recourse to war”.

No one pretends that the Baghdad government is other than an illegal and immoral regime run by a despot. Saddam may be planning more evil deeds. But his is not the only such state with ambitions to arm itself with weapons of mass destruction.

For one country or two countries to appear to launch an attack purely because it satisfies their own self-interest would be immoral, and would create a dangerous precedent.

Unlike the expulsion of Iraq from Kuwait, an invasion of Iraq — as matters stand now — is unlikely to have unambiguous UN backing. Our reports show how widespread is the opposition to, and the misgivings about, an attack on Iraq.

If Tony Blair, the most religious of recent prime ministers, ignores groups politically allied to him and the strong moral guidance of religious leaders, he could land himself in a political and moral morass from which he may never escape.—Dawn/The Guardian News Service.