Issues of Peace and Conflict

What you'll learn

This guide covers the WJEC GCSE Religious Studies specification on Issues of Peace and Conflict. You'll explore Christian and Islamic teachings on war, violence, terrorism, forgiveness and reconciliation. This topic requires you to evaluate religious responses to modern conflict situations, apply religious teachings to ethical dilemmas, and compare perspectives across and within faith traditions.

Key terms and definitions

Pacifism — the belief that all violence and war is wrong and that disputes should be settled peacefully.

Just War Theory — a set of conditions that must be met for a war to be considered morally acceptable (e.g., last resort, proportionate force, legitimate authority).

Holy War — a war fought for religious reasons, usually sanctioned by religious leaders and believed to be commanded by God.

Reconciliation — the process of restoring friendly relations after conflict; making peace between opposing groups.

Terrorism — the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in pursuit of political or religious aims.

Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) — weapons capable of killing large numbers of people and/or causing great damage (nuclear, chemical, biological weapons).

Conscientious objector — someone who refuses to serve in armed forces or bear arms on moral or religious grounds.

Forgiveness — pardoning someone for wrongdoing; letting go of anger and the desire for revenge.

Core concepts

Christian attitudes to war and peace

Christianity contains diverse perspectives on whether war can ever be justified.

Pacifist Christians believe all violence contradicts Jesus' teachings:

• "Blessed are the peacemakers" (Matthew 5:9)
• "Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you" (Matthew 5:44)
• "Those who live by the sword die by the sword" (Matthew 26:52)
• The early Church refused military service
• Quakers and some Mennonites maintain pacifist traditions today
• They argue that Jesus rejected violence even when facing execution

Just War Theory Christians accept war under strict conditions:

• Developed by Augustine and Aquinas
• War must have a just cause (e.g., defending the innocent)
• Declared by legitimate authority (recognised government)
• Right intention (establishing peace, not revenge)
• Last resort (all peaceful options exhausted)
• Proportionality (force used must be proportionate to the threat)
• Reasonable chance of success
• Non-combatants must be protected
• Most mainstream denominations (Catholic, Anglican, Methodist) accept this position

Biblical support for Just War:

• "There is a time for war and a time for peace" (Ecclesiastes 3:8)
• Jesus praised the Roman centurion's faith without condemning his profession (Luke 7)
• Paul wrote that authorities "do not bear the sword for no reason" (Romans 13:4)

Islamic attitudes to war and peace

Islam teaches that peace is the ideal state, but war is permitted under specific circumstances.

The concept of jihad:

• Greater jihad — the personal spiritual struggle against sin
• Lesser jihad — physical struggle, which may include warfare
• The Qur'an permits fighting in self-defence: "Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits" (Qur'an 2:190)
• War must only be defensive or to end oppression

Conditions for a just war in Islam:

• Must be in self-defence or to protect the oppressed
• Declared by legitimate Islamic authority
• Conducted proportionately
• Non-combatants (women, children, elderly) must not be harmed
• Trees and crops must not be destroyed
• Peace must be accepted if the enemy offers it: "If they incline to peace, make peace with them" (Qur'an 8:61)

Holy war concept:

• Historic caliphates declared wars to defend or spread Islam
• Modern mainstream Islam emphasises the defensive nature of permitted conflict
• Extremist interpretations misuse jihad to justify terrorism — rejected by the vast majority of Muslims
• Muhammad established rules of warfare prohibiting excessive violence

Terrorism and violence against civilians

Both Christianity and Islam strongly condemn terrorism and violence against innocent civilians.

Christian responses:

• Terrorism violates the sanctity of human life: "You shall not murder" (Exodus 20:13)
• Deliberately targeting civilians contradicts Just War principles
• Jesus rejected violent revolution against Roman occupation
• Christian teaching emphasises the image of God in every person (Imago Dei)
• Victims deserve justice, but revenge cycles must be broken

Islamic responses:

• The Qur'an prohibits killing innocents: "If anyone kills a person... it is as if he kills all mankind" (Qur'an 5:32)
• Terrorism violates conditions for jihad by targeting non-combatants
• Suicide attacks condemned as suicide is forbidden: "Do not kill yourselves" (Qur'an 4:29)
• Muslim leaders worldwide have issued fatwas condemning terrorism
• Extremist groups like ISIS are rejected by mainstream Islamic scholars

Why terrorism occurs:

• Political oppression and occupation
• Economic inequality and poverty
• Religious extremism and misinterpretation of texts
• Retaliation for perceived injustices
• Desire to instil fear and gain attention for a cause

Nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction

Religious perspectives on nuclear weapons involve balancing deterrence arguments against moral concerns.

Arguments against nuclear weapons:

Christian perspective:

• Scale of destruction is never proportionate
• Violates Just War principles by killing non-combatants indiscriminately
• Cannot distinguish between combatants and civilians
• Long-term environmental devastation
• Stewardship responsibility for creation
• Catholic Church teaching calls for nuclear disarmament
• "Blessed are the peacemakers" implies working toward disarmament

Islamic perspective:

• Violates prohibition against killing non-combatants
• Destroys Allah's creation
• Disproportionate force prohibited in Qur'an
• Ummah (global Muslim community) responsibility to protect life
• Many Muslim-majority nations lack nuclear weapons by choice

Arguments for nuclear weapons (deterrence):

• Prevents large-scale war through mutually assured destruction
• Protects populations from aggression
• Romans 13 suggests governments have duty to protect citizens
• May be necessary evil in fallen world
• Possession without use maintains peace

Religious responses to WMD:

• Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) has strong religious participation
• Pope Francis called nuclear weapons "an affront to God"
• Islamic Relief and Muslim charities campaign against proliferation
• UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons supported by faith groups

Forgiveness and reconciliation

Both faiths emphasise reconciliation after conflict, though approaches differ.

Christian teaching on forgiveness:

• Central to Jesus' message: "Forgive us our sins, as we forgive those who sin against us" (Lord's Prayer)
• Peter asked how many times to forgive; Jesus replied "seventy-seven times" (Matthew 18:22) — meaning unlimited
• Jesus forgave those crucifying him: "Father, forgive them" (Luke 23:34)
• Parable of the Prodigal Son illustrates God's forgiveness
• Christians must forgive to receive God's forgiveness
• Desmond Tutu's Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa applied Christian reconciliation principles

Islamic teaching on forgiveness:

• Allah is repeatedly described as "Most Merciful, Most Compassionate"
• Qur'an encourages forgiveness: "The reward of the evil is the evil thereof, but whoever forgives and makes amends, his reward is with Allah" (Qur'an 42:40)
• Forgiveness is better than revenge but justice is also permitted
• Muhammad forgave the people of Makkah who had persecuted Muslims
• Ramadan emphasises seeking and granting forgiveness
• Reconciliation restores peace within the ummah

Practical reconciliation:

• Mediation and dialogue between opposing groups
• Restorative justice programs
• Interfaith initiatives promoting understanding
• Addressing root causes of conflict (poverty, injustice)
• Both faiths teach that reconciliation requires acknowledging wrongdoing

Religious responses to victims and perpetrators of war

Religious communities balance justice with mercy when responding to war's impact.

Supporting victims:

• Christian Aid, Islamic Relief, and other faith-based charities provide humanitarian assistance
• Sheltering refugees fulfils biblical command to "welcome the stranger" (Matthew 25:35)
• Islamic duty of Zakat supports those in need
• Hospital chaplains support wounded soldiers
• Counselling for PTSD and trauma
• Advocacy for displaced populations

Dealing with perpetrators:

• Justice systems should hold war criminals accountable
• International Criminal Court prosecutes genocide and war crimes
• Truth commissions allow confession and amnesty
• Christian emphasis on rehabilitation over pure punishment
• Islamic justice balances retribution with opportunity for repentance
• Forgiveness possible but does not eliminate earthly consequences
• Some crimes (genocide) may be beyond human capacity to forgive

Conscientious objection:

• Right to refuse military service on religious grounds recognised in UK law
• Quakers historically refused to fight
• Alternative service options (medical corps, humanitarian work)
• Selective conscientious objection (refusing specific wars) more controversial
• Religious freedom protections support this right

Worked examples

Example 1: Explain two contrasting Christian attitudes to war. (4 marks)

Model answer:

One Christian attitude is pacifism, which teaches that all war and violence is wrong because Jesus said "love your enemies" and "blessed are the peacemakers." Pacifist Christians like Quakers believe following Jesus means rejecting all violence, even in self-defence.

A contrasting attitude is Just War Theory, accepted by many Catholic and Anglican Christians. This teaches that war can be morally acceptable if certain conditions are met, such as being a last resort with a just cause. This is supported by Ecclesiastes 3:8, "there is a time for war and a time for peace."

Examiner note: This answer provides two clear contrasting attitudes (1 mark each), with religious teaching supporting each (1 mark each) = 4 marks total.

---

Example 2: "Nuclear weapons can never be justified." Evaluate this statement considering Christian teaching. You should refer to Christian teaching in your answer. (15 marks — AO2)

Model answer structure:

Arguments agreeing (nuclear weapons cannot be justified):

Many Christians argue nuclear weapons are never morally acceptable because they violate fundamental Christian principles. The scale of destruction caused by nuclear weapons means they cannot meet Just War criteria, particularly proportionality and discrimination between combatants and non-combatants. Hiroshima and Nagasaki killed hundreds of thousands of civilians instantly, contradicting "You shall not murder." The long-term radiation effects continue killing innocents for generations, violating stewardship of God's creation.

Pacifist Christians point to Jesus' teaching "blessed are the peacemakers" and his rejection of violence in Gethsemane as evidence that Christians should work toward disarmament rather than maintaining nuclear arsenals. Pope Francis called nuclear weapons "an affront to God," showing Catholic opposition. The indiscriminate nature of nuclear weapons means they cannot distinguish between guilty aggressors and innocent civilians, including children, violating the principle that all humans bear God's image.

Arguments disagreeing (nuclear weapons can be justified):

However, some Christians argue nuclear deterrence has prevented World War III and saved countless lives. Romans 13 teaches that governments "do not bear the sword for no reason," suggesting authorities have a duty to protect citizens using available means. If nuclear weapons prevent their own use through deterrence, they actually serve peace rather than war, aligning with peacemaking values.

In a fallen world where evil exists, nuclear weapons might be a necessary evil. Britain maintaining nuclear weapons could prevent aggression from hostile nations, protecting millions of innocent lives. This defensive purpose might be justified even if their actual use would not be. Some Christians argue we must be realistic about human sinfulness rather than naively disarming while enemies remain armed.

Conclusion with personal judgment:

Overall, while deterrence arguments have practical merit, the Christian emphasis on sanctity of life and Jesus' consistent teaching on peace and love suggests nuclear weapons fundamentally contradict Christian values. The risk of accidental launch or escalation is too great, and Christians should work toward a world where such weapons are unnecessary rather than accepting their continued existence. The money spent on nuclear weapons could instead address poverty and injustice, following Jesus' concern for "the least of these."

Examiner note: A level 5/6 answer (13-15 marks) requires sustained evaluation with developed religious arguments, varied perspectives, and a clear judgment supported by reasoning throughout.

---

Example 3: Explain two reasons why some Muslims might become involved in fighting. (4 marks)

Model answer:

One reason is to defend their country or community from attack. The Qur'an permits fighting in self-defence, stating "Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you" (2:190). If a Muslim-majority country is invaded, Muslims might consider it their religious duty to protect their land and people.

Another reason is to defend the oppressed and stop injustice. Muslims believe in the ummah, the worldwide Muslim community, and may feel obligated to help fellow Muslims suffering persecution. The Qur'an encourages defending the weak, and some Muslims interpret this as justifying military intervention to stop atrocities like genocide.

Examiner note: Two distinct reasons (1 mark each) with development including religious teaching (1 mark each) = 4 marks.

Common mistakes and how to avoid them

• Confusing greater and lesser jihad: Remember that greater jihad refers to the internal spiritual struggle, while lesser jihad includes physical defence. Don't suggest that jihad primarily means "holy war" — this is a common misconception.

• Applying only one denomination's view as "the Christian view": Christianity contains diverse perspectives. Always specify which Christians hold which views (e.g., "Quaker Christians believe..." or "Catholic teaching states...") rather than generalising about all Christians.

• Failing to distinguish terrorism from legitimate resistance: In exam answers, clearly explain why mainstream religious teaching condemns terrorism specifically because it targets civilians, even if the same traditions might permit some defensive warfare.

• Ignoring the conditions for Just War: When discussing Just War Theory, don't simply say "some Christians accept war." List specific conditions (just cause, last resort, legitimate authority, proportionality) to show detailed knowledge.

• Neglecting to use religious texts: High-mark answers must include specific scriptural references or religious teachings. Memorise key quotations for both Christianity and Islam that relate to peace, war, forgiveness, and justice.

• Writing one-sided evaluations: In AO2 questions ("Evaluate..." or "To what extent..."), you must present multiple perspectives before reaching a reasoned conclusion. Even if you personally agree with one view, demonstrate understanding of contrasting positions.

Exam technique for "Issues of Peace and Conflict"

Command words matter:

• "Describe" (2 marks) — give factual information without explanation
• "Explain" (4 marks) — give reasons why, using religious teaching/beliefs to support points
• "Evaluate" / "Assess" / "To what extent" (15 marks) — present multiple viewpoints with religious reasoning, then reach a justified conclusion

Structure for 15-mark questions:

• Introduction acknowledging the statement
• 2-3 paragraphs supporting the statement with religious arguments
• 2-3 paragraphs presenting alternative perspectives
• Conclusion with your reasoned judgment
• Weave religious teachings throughout — aim for at least 4-5 relevant quotations or teachings

Mark allocation awareness:

• 2-mark questions need one basic point
• 4-mark questions need two developed points with religious teaching
• 15-mark questions require sustained argument with varied perspectives and integrated religious knowledge

Comparative questions:

• When asked about "two contrasting attitudes," ensure they genuinely differ (e.g., pacifism vs. Just War, not Just War vs. defensive jihad which are similar)
• Use comparison phrases: "whereas," "in contrast," "however," "alternatively"

Quick revision summary

Christianity and Islam both value peace but differ on whether war can be justified. Pacifist Christians reject all violence, while Just War Theory sets conditions for acceptable conflict. Muslims permit defensive jihad but emphasise peace and protecting non-combatants. Both faiths condemn terrorism and weapons targeting civilians. Nuclear weapons face religious criticism for indiscriminate destruction, though deterrence arguments exist. Forgiveness and reconciliation are central to both traditions, with Jesus and Muhammad modelling mercy. Religious communities support war victims through aid and advocate for justice while emphasising rehabilitation and peace-building.