Featured Review | Chasing the Devil at Foggy Bottom. The Future of Religion in American Diplomacy, Shaun A. Casey
Reviewed by Simon Polinder.
In 2017, Prince Jaime de Bourbon de Parme, serving as the Dutch ambassador to the Holy See, discussed his role in an interviewed with the national newspaper Trouw. During the conversation, he illustrated by holding up five fingers why the Netherlands, despite being a secular country, maintains official diplomatic ties with the Catholic Church. ‘Starting with the thumb. First, we work with other governments. Then civil society organizations, companies and knowledge institutions will follow. The little pinky remains. It stands for religion.’ De Bourbon De Parme noted in this context that many Dutch citizens expressed surprise at his ambassadorship: ‘Isn’t religion out of date? And do we not have a separation of church and state? A diplomat does not “do God”, does he?’ The ambassador’s response? ‘Well, the rest of the world does.’
It is precisely for this reason that Shaun A. Casey has written a book arguing that effective diplomacy requires a deep understanding of and engagement with religious actors, ideas, and motivations, rather than treating them as irrelevant or ignoring them altogether. Casey was the director of the US Department of State’s Office of Religion and Global Affairs (S/RGA) and served as U.S. special representative for religion and global affairs under the Obama administration. His book offers valuable insights into the workings of the S/RGA; it is partly autobiographical, recounting how the author came into this position and how he carried out his role, and partly a collection of the significant lessons learned along the way.
The book fits well into the existing body of literature on the role of religion in international relations. It demonstrates what religion ‘does’ in practice and what difference it can make. It is also of interest to countries considering the appointment of a special envoy for religion and belief. Such envoys already exist in the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, the European Union, and the United States—though in the latter case the position is now called Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom.
In his work, Casey addresses three overarching key questions: Why is it important for American diplomacy to understand global religious dynamics? How can this be done? And how can the knowledge and experience gained be preserved? As a response, he outlines three compelling reasons for including religion into diplomatic analysis, using Iraq as a case study. The first reason is effectiveness: religious figures and leaders are often powerful and influential actors; collaborating with them can therefore improve policy effectiveness. The second reason is cost: had the U.S. possessed a better understanding of Iraq’s religious dynamics, both lives and resources might have been spared. The third argument is that complexity and controversy require expertise. The author supports this point with a striking quotation from Bryan Hehir: ‘governments trying to integrate the understanding of religion into diplomacy is like performing brain surgery; it may be necessary, but it can be fatal if not done well.’ In other words, rather than sidelining religion due to its complexity, it is far better to bring in specialized expertise and harness religion’s positive potential.
Casey develops his arguments by reflecting on the US invasion of Iraq. According to him, diplomacy requires religious literacy, an understanding of internal Islamic dynamics, and constructive engagement with religious actors—all of which were largely absent in the Iraqi context. He identifies five areas in which religion, if present, could have made a difference. First, knowledge of religious divisions (Sunni, Shia, other religious minorities) played no role in former President Bush’s decision to invade the country. Second, soldiers were expected to acquire religious knowledge on their own, while military chaplains were pressed into advisory roles for which they were not trained. Third, Iraq was compelled to adopt a constitution modelled on the American principle of separation of church and state, which sparked resistance including a fatwa issued by Ayatollah Sistani. Fourth, the reconstruction effort neglected the important role of religious leaders, whose involvement might have been crucial to success. Fifth, Bush was narrowly focused on both Iraq as a terrorist state and on regime change, disregarding evidence that there was no direct link between Iraq and Al-Qaeda or with weapons of mass destruction. His worldview was starkly binary, dividing nations along the lines of allies or enemies. While he makes a compelling argument, Casey, however, does not clearly show how religious engagement would have altered Bush’s thinking. Whether deeper religious involvement would have softened his binary approach therefore remains uncertain. This lack of clarity may reflect the author’s own biases and disagreements with the policies of a Republican president, making it difficult at times to disentangle his expert views on religion and diplomacy from his political convictions.
Later in the book, Casey turns to the war between Russia and Ukraine, recalling a conversation with a Russian citizen shortly before President Putin’s annexation of Crimea. The woman in question asked whether Casey’s office had a strategy for engaging with the Russian Orthodox Church. At that time, it did not. What if it had? Had such a strategy existed, might it have prevented the Russian Orthodox Church from providing ideological support for the war? Statistics from the Pew Research Center in 2014 showed that 72 percent of Russians identified with the Orthodox faith. Had the Church clearly communicated that the invasion was illegal and contrary to Orthodox teaching, it could have posed a serious obstacle to President Putin’s plans. History offers further examples of the Church’s ability to steer the course of events. A prominent example is Pope John Paul II’s landmark visit to Poland, during which he openly criticized Communist ideology. This visit ignited widespread public mobilization, contributing directly to the emergence of the Solidarity movement and ultimately playing a key role in the decline of Communism across Eastern Europe.
Finally, the author offers three overall recommendations for a better inclusion of religion. First, attention to religion and belief should go beyond merely advocating for religious freedom. Second, he cautions against instrumentalizing religion—treating it merely as a tool for achieving political objectives. This risk is particularly prevalent when religion is employed in countering violent extremism and terrorism, as it can easily backfire. Foreign actors working with religious leaders to overcome violent extremism may rather fuel violent extremism by making religious leaders appear to be instruments of foreign powers, which makes them more vulnerable to terrorist attacks. Casey therefore advises honesty and transparency about personal aims and interests. This is especially relevant when working with religious actors, as their authority and transformative power depends on their own honesty and integrity. Third, Casey suggests that attention to religion and belief is best achieved when tied to concrete policy issues—demonstrating in practice the difference that religious engagement can make. In this context, the insights of Peter Mandaville, former senior advisor of S/RGA, are particularly relevant: one must avoid the tendency to over-religionize an issue, as though everything revolves around religion, while also resisting the impulse to explain religion away or reduce it to something else. The challenge lies in finding the middle ground—the ‘right-sizing of religion.’
In conclusion, Casey’s book stands out for its detailed account of both practical experiences and best practices, offering clear guidance on what to do—and what to avoid—when countries seek to practice religion-sensitive diplomacy. It convincingly demonstrates that religion merits serious attention, without overstating its role as a solution to all challenges. While the author’s personal political views sometimes come through, given the autobiographical nature of the work, they do not detract from the book’s overall argument. As such, this book deserves a place on the bookshelves of anyone aiming to incorporate religion in foreign policymaking and diplomacy.
Reviewed by
Dr. Simon Polinder is a postdoctoral researcher at the Department of History of International Relations at Utrecht University. He has studied the role of religious leaders and their response to terrorism in Nigeria and Kenya. His most recent book is Towards A New Christian Political Realism. The Amsterdam School of Philosophy and the Role of Religion in International Relations (Routledge 2025).
Chasing the Devil at Foggy Bottom. The Future of Religion in American Diplomacy, by Shaun A. Casey
In his book, Shaun A. Casey draws on his experience as the former director of the U.S. State Department’s Office of Religion and Global Affairs to analyze the role of religion in diplomacy. The book is a mixture of memoir, policy analysis, and a call to action, showing how a better integration of religious understanding could improve diplomacy and global engagement in the 21st century. Casey argues that religion is a critical yet under-resourced dimension of American diplomacy. He also critiques past U.S. foreign policy approaches that ignored or oversimplified religion—such as focusing narrowly on religious freedom or counter-terrorism—and offers a vision for more religious literacy in diplomacy.