CPNN

TOLERANCE AND SOLIDARITY .

Excerpts from an essay by Paul Lederach in Somalia: Creating space for fresh approaches to peace building

Introduction

The recent “Holder vs. Humanitarian Law Project” U.S. Supreme Court decision of June 21, 2010 has sharpened the debate about engagement with blacklisted groups and has directly impacted the wider communities where designated foreign terrorist groups operate. Anti-terror legislation has consequences and relevance for peacebuilding organizations . . .

click on image to enlarge

since 9/11 and even more with the “Holder vs Humanitarian Law Project” decision we have witnessed a divide emerging between two competing theories of change. The designated foreign terrorists list proposes a change strategy based on isolation. Peacebuilding proposes a strategy of engagement. . .

Conclusion

. . . I would make the case that isolation in the form of wide ranging terrorist lists was driven by desire to control future acts of terrorism. But the approach has little, if any, clear projections of a theory of change that addresses the complexity around the different contexts where it has been applied. It seeks to control violence in the short term but does not suggest how as strategy it contributes to desired change in the mid to long-term. Engagement as an approach includes concrete ideas about change over the mid and longer-term but does not have within its purview specific strategies aimed at controlling or preventing a particular act of terrorism in the short-term. Its purpose is not policing. Engagement strategies seek to change the conditions from which violence emerges, to locate and create the opportunities that make that change possible.

Policy recommendations

• Delineate with greater specificity the theory of change that supports terrorist listings with a particular focus on how it will meaningfully and strategically engage the affected populations. The assessment of the basic theory requires a careful compilation of evidence that assesses, in particular, whether it has increased or decreased a capacity to recruit, solidified or weakened more extremist leadership, and provided for shifts in the wider population toward nonviolent strategies of social change.

• Develop a clear end-game scenario for how geographies most affected or controlled by designated organizations will shift the justifying narratives and behavior from violence (and the use of terrorism in particular) toward nonviolent processes. This requires a specific strategy for how isolation contributes to constructive shifts in the wider civil society most affected by the terrorist listings.

• Based on what now appears to be compelling evidence, pinpoint how isolation of leaders (similar for example to policing approaches for criminal behavior) combines with robust engagement of local populations.

• Develop strategies that constructively impact the rise of second tier and secondary leadership. Given that many of these movements rely heavily on youth, a strategy that strategically approaches the growth of new and alternative leadership requires significant and varied approaches to engagement. Isolation as a blanket policy seems to hold little, if any, strategy for how alternative or future leaders will be different.

Islamic extremism, how should it be opposed?

Readers are encouraged to comment below on this theme which refers to the following CPNN articles:

Benin encourages interfaith dialogue against Boko Haram

Speech of Sierra Leone Foreign Minister to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation

Nonviolent Peaceforce: Urgent Update from South Sudan

The Challenge: A Cultural Program to Reject Extremism and Violence

The Elders debate “should military action be taken against Islamic State?”

See below for comments box.

TOLERANCE AND SOLIDARITY .

Excerpts from the video of a debate on BBC World

Four of the Elders, Hina Jilani, Jimmy Carter, Mary Robinson and Kofi Annan, took part in a live broadcast debate on BBC World to discuss some of the world’s biggest issues, from Syria and Ukraine to migration and extremism. Here are excerpts from their response to the question “should military action be taken against Islamic State?

Kofi Annan: Yes, we cannot allow them to continue their brutality unchecked, but the region is so divided I think that left to themselves, they cannot stop them. One would need to have a coalition that brings together the regional powers, countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Turkey, maybe Qatar and Egypt, working with Russia, the United States and eventually other members of the Security Council, to make a common cause, to say we face a common danger and we cannot allow this to go on unchecked and come up with a common program to contain them. . .

Mary Robinson: I think that what Kofi is saying is what really needs to be done, that those that have different interests must come together because this is a devastating situation for the populations of Syria, of Iraq now, increasingly. . .

Jimmy Carter: I agree with what has already been said. I think this would be a perfect example for the United Nations Security Council to act in unity for the first time in many years, where all five permanent members agree on the threat of ISIS. We met with President Putin recently and he said that Russia fears ISIS as much as anyone else. This would be a perfect time for the United Nations Security Council to agree, to get all the members to agree that “Let’s work in unity.”

Hina Jilani: ISIS is not just hijacking the Islamic religion, but distorting it in order to put forward their own political agenda. I think it is not about religion. ISIS is about control. . . . It’s not about religion or any attempt to impose any kind of religious values, because those values are obviously values of peace, of tolerance, of humanity. . . .

There is no other option but to use the military option, but at the same time it is always important to understand that military operations can never succeed in dealing with these kinds of forces unless and until a good social and political strategy is implemented in the areas where these forces are not active. Because it is the people that matter. It doesn’t matter that they are in control of a territory. What matters is that in the territory are people who are suffering these terrible crimes.

You can’t fight violence with violence. That’s why – I’ve said it already – you have to have a proper social and political strategy . . . Yes, if necessary, military force must be used, but at the same time, the force must be used after a political and social agenda has been constructed on what to do thereafter.

(article continued on the right side of the page)

Islamic extremism, how should it be opposed?

Readers’ comments are invited on this question and article. See below for comments box.

(article continued from the left side of the page)

Kofi Annan: Let me comment a little on the use of force. Yes, we’ve seen the limits of the use of force and military intervention, and we need to have other aspects of policy that goes with it, both political and diplomatic and social programs, as has been indicated. It is frustrating to see the misery that the people of the region are going through. . .

Mary Robinson: I just want to get back to the question of the war in Iraq. I think a lot of the problems stem from an unjustified and incredibly damaging war in Iraq. It humiliated, the “shock and awe”, the whole sense of it, and then, I think, it broke a trust somehow which is going to be very hard to rebuild. I think it’s important that we recognize that the problems didn’t all start there [i.e. Syria]. The problem started, or was very significantly contributed to by a war that was unjustified. I remember I was UN High Commissioner for Human Rights at the time, and I pleaded not to go to war in Iraq

TOLERANCE AND SOLIDARITY .

Excerpts from a publication by Ismail Serageldin

[Editor’s note: The author is head of the Bibliotheca Alexandrina in Egypt, one of the most important cultural institutions in the Arab world. The full essay is well over 100 pages, and readers are recommended to read it in detail. The following excerpts are an attempt to provide some of the main lines of his proposal.]

A Conceptual Model of Social Behavior

This essay represents my reflections . . . on the role
that the Library of Alexandria joining with all the cultural institutions of our society can play in confronting extremism and violence. The essay is composed of five major parts:

Culture in Egypt and the Arab world
On Extremism and Violence
The Dynamics of Cultural Change:
Elements of a Cultural Strategy:
Specific Programs

PART ONE: CULTURE IN EGYPT AND THE ARAB WORLD

. . . From isolationism to failed states to civil wars to new forms of barbarism, the political conditions in most of the Arab World could hardly be worse.

Violence is everywhere, terrorism and extremism are flagrantly challenging some governments who have but limited legitimacy, and millions have become homeless refugees both within their own countries and formally crossing frontiers into neighboring countries. Humanitarian crises are continuous.

We are witnessing a debacle of historic proportions. Why? Is it fair to refer to an Arab World? Or does each individual country have its own distinct identity and its own individual history that brought about its own demise?

For most of the Arab World, identity is based on culture, and specifically a shared language. . . Different Arab Countries have different histories and therefore have different identities, but they share an overarching identity of being Arab. . .

The fact is that we are all given multiple identities by birth and upbringing (gender, race, ethnicity and family, national origin) and usually we grow up learning the language of our milieu and accepting the religion of our parents. Most children adopt their parents’ religion and few convert to another religion at a later stage. We usually acquire some other identities such as group or club affiliations, political positions, etc. Fanatics want people to reduce their identities to one overarching identity, be it religious, ethnic, or political. This is obviously at the expense of pluralistic affinities and the multi-layered reality of modern society. This point has been forcefully made by Amartya Sen and by Amin Maalouf. . .

. . . the most extreme forms of barbaric terrorism being displayed by the forces of the so-called “Islamic State” in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) is a manifestation of the combination of several historic broad societal currents:

* The intellectual bankruptcy of many of the Arab regimes over long periods of reign preceding the revolutions of the Arab Spring. Their inability to renew the social contract in a meaningful fashion, and the continued monopolization of power by a mediocre elite that suppressed youthful talent and imposed a system of patronage for political and social advancement.

* The re-emergence of political Islam, long suppressed by a nationalist and secular political narrative, but given new wings by the Iranian revolution, the funding of the oil states and rich Arab individuals and the emergence of Hizbullah in Lebanon during the long civil war there and its role against the Israeli war in Lebanon. These and other factors were “topped up” by the return of the “Afghan Arabs” who were allied to the native Mujahedeen against the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, which yielded the Taliban regime there.

(article continued on the right side of the page)

Islamic extremism, how should it be opposed?

Readers’ comments are invited on this question and article. See below for comments box.

(article continued from the left side of the page)

* The American invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the subsequent mismanagement of the tense ethnic and religious cleavages in that society dealt a traumatic blow to the self-confidence of Muslims, who viewed the direct invasion by America and its allies of both Iraq and Afghanistan, as a direct humiliation of Muslims by the West. Furthermore, the systematic murder of civilians by the use of drones in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen and elsewhere; all served to inflame sentiments of victimization that fed the Muslim majorities’ emotional despair and consequent greater readiness to accept more extreme positions that would promise a return of a modicum of self-esteem and dignity in the face of perceived continued humiliation.

* The continued Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories and the incompetence of Fatah and its leadership which brought forth Hamas in Gaza.

* The emergence of a powerful tyrannical bureaucracy, especially in Egypt, which stifles and alienates all who deal with it. This type of bureaucratic tyranny had already been identified as a cause of the youthful rebellion of the 1960s throughout the west.

So the manifestation of fanaticism and extremism is a renunciation of the more subtle and multi-layered reality of multiple identities. It is an effort that rejects equality of gender, and religions and seeks to impose its will by force. It draws on the religious fervor of new converts and on the bruised local identities of victimized people to mobilize forces against others, e.g. Sunni Arabs in Iraq in the last decade. It is sapping the energies of youth by ever more extreme displays of violence and rejection of any discussion. The cultural battle ahead is therefore one that must assert pluralism and exalt its enriching aspects, while it develops the more complex set of identities that each of us possesses. . .

CULTURES

. . . When we talk of the cultural scene, it encompasses a wide range of activities: literature (including poetry, plays, novels and short stories), the visual arts (including the graphic arts, painting and sculpture), music, dance, theater, cinema, architecture and the built environment. The cultural scene also involves journalism, TV and the Mass Media, as well as books and publications, plus the new domains of cyberspace and virtual reality. Artistic and cultural endeavors also require teaching and criticism, and the publications and venues needed for both. . .

Clearly, an exhaustive review of all the above would be beyond the scope of this essay. However, we can try to show some highlights that would touch upon much more than one angle or even a sector of activity, especially that it is one of our premises that we need to promote pluralism in all these cultural domains. . .

PART FOUR: ELEMENTS OF A CULTURAL STRATEGY

. . . But if in the end the cultural output produced by our artists and intellectuals is to have an impact, to be internalized in the system, we also need the context in which they produce that work, and within which the society that they address receives it. Thus issues of governance, of democratic representation and of inclusiveness need to be looked at and addressed in any reform effort. Authoritarian governments, even if they bring stability and security in the short term, will always end up alienating those who are excluded from decision-making and those who feel they have no future in that society. Public involvement in the public realm is necessary. The Agora and the Aeropagus cannot be just for the elite or for tolerated artists and intellectuals if societal change is what we hope for , profound societal change where society will marginalize the extremists and will reject violence and celebrate diversity and rationally debate issues for the country’s future.

To create a climate where pluralism will prevail, where a culture of science will permeate our way of thinking, and where human rights will be considered the most important treasure we possess as a society, recognizing that the abridgement of the rights of any of us is an abridgment of the rights of all of us, we must build a socio-cultural framework that equally promotes security and freedom of expression. . .

[Editor’s note: In part five of his essay, Serageldin proposes specific policies to facilitate the arrows in his diagram of a perceptual model of social behavior shown above: the influences of the Quran, the Sunna of he Prophet, Greek and Latin influcences, local influences, new ideas, mass media, education, modernizing influences and physical change, as well as the many arrows within the diagram for the integration of its components. He explains how the arts, cinema and theatre provide “seeds of hope.” He provides proposals for funding. And he concludes as follows.]

To respond to the challenge posed by the presence of extremism in our midst, and to defeat the armies of violence and terrorism, by the power of ideas that will spread throughout society, ensuring openness to the other, adoption of the new and the celebration of diversity and pluralism… A true Cultural Transformation — That is how we will respond to the Challenge!