Faith, Power, and War: The Danger of Religious Nationalism in American Foreign Policy
Pete Hegseth blusters and lies while invoking the Christian God
At a Pentagon briefing about the escalating war with Iran, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth stepped to the podium to deliver what should have been a sober assessment of a volatile conflict. Instead, the briefing became something else entirely. It was a mix of bluster, disputed claims about battlefield success, and overt religious rhetoric that should scare hell out of anyone who believes war must be guided by reason rather than ideology.
Hegseth repeated sweeping claims about the effectiveness of U.S. strikes and the collapse of Iranian command structures. Military briefings often contain optimism, but the tone was closer to triumphalism than caution. This, of course, is all Trumpian inspired bullshit, but then came something far more troubling.
As he wrapped up his remarks, Hegseth urged Americans to pray for victory and spoke about getting “on bended knee” before Jesus. In another context, that might be harmless personal faith. But this was not a church service. This was the Secretary of Defense of the United States speaking during an active war briefing.
The distinction matters.
The clown standing at that podium oversees the most powerful military force in human history. Nuclear weapons, global strike capability, and millions of service members ultimately fall under the authority of the Pentagon. When the leader of that institution frames a military conflict in openly religious terms, it sends a message that the war is not just strategic or political, but spiritual.
That should set off alarms.
Faith has always been part of American life, and many presidents and military leaders have been devout. The issue is not private belief. The problem is the ideology known as Christian nationalism, which has grown dramatically in influence within the political movement surrounding Donald Trump.
Christian nationalism is not simply Christianity in politics. It is a political ideology that insists the United States is fundamentally a Christian nation and should be governed according to a specific interpretation of Christian belief. In that worldview, patriotism and religious identity become fused together. Critics are not merely political opponents but enemies of a sacred mission.
This ideology is no longer confined to the political margins. It now sits disturbingly close to the center of power.
The danger becomes even clearer when you look at how Christian nationalist rhetoric frames global conflict. The world is cast as a moral battlefield between good and evil. Nations that oppose American interests are often described not just as adversaries but as enemies of God’s order.
Iran frequently appears at the center of this narrative.
For decades, Iran has been a geopolitical rival of the United States. But in certain Christian nationalist circles, the country is also woven into apocalyptic interpretations of the Middle East. Some religious leaders and activists openly talk about biblical prophecy and the belief that conflict in the region will usher in the end times.
When government officials echo religious language during wartime briefings, it raises an unavoidable question. Are strategic decisions being shaped by careful analysis, or by a belief that history itself is unfolding according to divine plan? I fear it is the latter, and so should you.
That question should absolutely disturb every American regardless of political party.
History shows the danger of leaders who believe they are carrying out a sacred mission. When leaders see themselves as instruments of divine purpose, compromise becomes weakness and diplomacy becomes betrayal. Opponents are no longer political adversaries but existential enemies.
Conflicts that might otherwise be contained become crusades.
There is an uncomfortable truth here that Americans rarely want to confront. The mindset behind Christian nationalism has disturbing similarities to other forms of religious extremism around the world.
Radical Islamist movements also frame politics and war as sacred struggles. They, too, believe they are acting on divine authority. They, too, divide the world into believers and enemies. The theology is different, but the structure of the thinking is strikingly similar.
Both forms of extremism merge religion with political power. Both reject pluralism. Both treat compromise as moral weakness.
The United States has spent decades fighting the consequences of religious extremism abroad. It would be a catastrophic mistake to ignore similar patterns emerging at home.
The hostility toward the press is another warning sign.
During the same briefing, Hegseth lashed out at CNN for its coverage of the war and suggested the network would improve under new ownership aligned with the Trump movement, ie. David Ellison. This kind of rhetoric is not just petty political theater. It is part of a broader pattern in which criticism is framed as disloyalty.
A democracy cannot function that way.
Journalists question leaders precisely because war demands scrutiny. Military decisions carry enormous consequences: lives lost, regions destabilized, and the ever-present risk of escalation between powerful states. When officials respond to scrutiny by attacking the press rather than answering questions, they weaken the guardrails that prevent catastrophic mistakes.
When that hostility is combined with religious certainty, the risk becomes even greater.
If leaders begin to believe their policies are part of God’s plan, critics can be dismissed as obstacles to that plan. Accountability erodes. Doubt disappears. Decisions become reckless. And global war becomes distinctly possible.
The office of Secretary of Defense exists to manage the most destructive capabilities on Earth with calm judgment and strategic discipline. It is not a pulpit for religious crusades.
The United States was founded with a separation between church and state for a reason. Many of the founders were deeply religious themselves, but they understood that merging religious authority with government power leads to division, intolerance, and conflict.
That principle is now under strain.
Christian nationalism threatens the pluralistic foundation of the country. It narrows the definition of who truly belongs in America and what values should guide its power. It replaces democratic debate with theological certainty.
At a moment when the United States is already engaged in a dangerous conflict in the Middle East, the growing influence of that ideology inside government should concern everyone.
War should never be treated as prophecy.
Finally, the people responsible for directing America’s military power should never sound like they are preparing for a crusade. The stakes are simply too fucking high.
Professor Mike is a university lecturer. He teaches, among other subjects, justice studies and global security, including international terrorism. In his spare time, he writes for Medium and Substack. His work has been published on CNN.