Now that the International Criminal Court has issued a warrant for the arrest of Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir, a question arises: what would happen if the guy were actually arrested?

The New York Times published two op-eds on opposite sides of the issue on Monday, one from Desmond Tutu and the other from Rev. Franklin Graham. Tutu's thesis is that without justice, there can't be true peace; Graham's flip-side is that justice would stir up violence and make even a limited form of peace more difficult. Theologically and philosophically speaking, it's a classic dilemma. Is the time for justice really always now?

MLK's letter from Birmingham jail -- a piece I genuinely regard as sacred Scripture -- suggests the answer is yes:

We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct action campaign that was "well timed" in the view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. For years now I have heard the word "Wait!" It rings in the ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity. This "Wait" has almost always meant "Never." We must come to see, with one of our distinguished jurists, that "justice too long delayed is justice denied."...

I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice.

And in the "I Have a Dream" speech:

We have also come to this hallowed spot to remind America of the fierce urgency of now. This is no time to engage in the luxury of cooling off or to take the tranquilizing drug of gradualism. Now is the time to make real the promises of democracy. Now is the time to rise from the dark and desolate valley of segregation to the sunlit path of racial justice. Now is the time to lift our nation from the quick sands of racial injustice to the solid rock of brotherhood. Now is the time to make justice a reality for all of God's children.

To be sure, King's view need not be definitive. And even if it were, King was referring to specific historical moments; he wasn't arguing explicitly for a general rule that says waiting is always bad and acting is always good. Indeed, in the Birmingham letter, King notes several occasions in which he has opted to wait rather than act. But the principles underlying his arguments -- that gradualism is a "traquilizing drug," that opponents of change never think now's a good time, and that a truly "positive peace" requires the presence of justice -- indicate a moral starting point that puts the burden of proof on those who oppose bold action rather than on those who support it.

The rub is that individual situations are rarely as simple as the theological frameworks that seek to explain them. In the case of Sudan, Graham has some thought-provoking points:

But arresting Mr. Bashir now threatens to undo the progress his country has made. In 2005, Sudan's government and the Sudan People's Liberation Movement signed an accord ending the civil war in the south. The agreement paved the way for elections in the south later this year, as well as for a referendum on southern independence scheduled for 2011. The accord has brought benefits to Sudan, but it isn't clear that they will last. Mr. Bashir, who fought members of his own party to approve the deal, is critical to the peace process.

I want to see justice served, but my desire for peace in Sudan is stronger. Mr. Bashir, accused of genocide and crimes against humanity, is hardly an ideal peacemaker. But given all the warring factions in Sudan, there is no guarantee that his replacement would be better....

Now, his arrest could threaten the south's elections and referendum, and hurl the country back into civil war. His removal could also spur retaliation by Bashir loyalists and other forces against civilians, United Nations peacekeepers or international aid workers.

So let's say we somehow arrest Bashir. Would it be worth it if the result is more violence and, perhaps, a replacement president who's even worse? I honestly don't know. Maybe the precedent set for other would-be tyrants would be worth the temporary spike in bloodshed. And maybe an arrest would help discombobulate and weaken the government, allowing opposition elements to gain strength within Sudan. Or, hell, perhaps we should adopt a deontological perspective and arrest the bastard simply because it's right, regardless of the consequences.

I just hope the world's leaders are reciting Reinhold Niebuhr's well-worn serenity prayer from time to time.

This post was originally published at jesselava.com.