A friend has suggested that I read Madeleine Albright's "The Might and the Almighty." I am reading it and have been surprised by a few statements Albright makes in the first chapter [that is as far as I've gotten so far]. So look for a more thorough evaluation of the book in the future.

Apparently, Albright argues that U.S. policy makers must understand the influence and place of religion in motivating the behavior of nations before U.S. policy makers can be effective. That is certainly true.

Ignoring the impact of religion, for good or evil, on world affairs has been and will continue to be perilous. As Albright points out in the first chapter of her book, "Almost everywhere, religious movements are thriving."

The movements can be observed in Central and South America, she asserts. They can also be observed in China, in India, in the various countries that were once part of the Soviet Union, in Israel, in other parts of Asia and in Africa -- all over the globe.

This phenomenon is nothing new. Religious beliefs "guided" Hitler. And remember Jim Jones? Obviously, leaders in the U.S. must become aware of the impact of religion upon the leaders of other nations.

I glanced through the remainder of the book. Albright appears to be particularly critical of President Bush's doctrine of preemption in "starting" the war in Iraq and of, according to her, its "botched" conduct. She is certainly entitled to her criticism, but how she has determined that the war in Iraq is preemptive is a little beyond me.

The "religious" terrorists did hit us first. They then sought refuge in Iraq. If we were going to get them where they were rather than simply waiting for them to hit us again on our own soil, we had to go there to stop them not simply to be preemptive.

In the end Albright appears to be saying that "religion counts." Whether it counts for peace or war remains to be seen. Undoubtedly, it will count for both in the future as it has in the past.

I have heard more than a little criticism of our current president for his belief in God, and his believing what he "hears" God may be saying to him. Interestingly, I have heard little criticism from the same people about Hillary Clinton's having a seance to get through to Eleanor Roosevelt, and "hearing" her!

I do appreciate Albright asserting, however, that liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, will have to extend a little grace to each other and accentuate our common ground on both ethical and policy issues if we are to effectively meet the challenges of a world where religion will count for something.

Jack Rollins is managing editor of the Daily Dunklin Democrat.