Greetings from the Association for Conflict Resolution! The Spring 2007 issue of ACResolution will focus on conflict resolution in higher education. Would you be willing to send out the attached Call for Proposals to the list? We are trying to encourage a very large number of diverse proposals for this issue.

Association for Conflict Resolution (ACR)

Call for Article Proposals For ACR's ACResolution Spring 2007 Magazine on Conflict Resolution in Higher Education

ACR's spring 2007 issue of ACResolution magazine will focus on the topic of Conflict Resolution in Higher Education. The editors seek proposals from people who would like to write articles on any aspect of this topic. What are the key issues in conflict resolution in higher education programs? What are the different higher education options available to students interested in conflict resolution? Where are these educational programs going in the future, and how are they changing the field of conflict resolution?

The editors seek diversity in authors and subject matter; authors do not have to be ACR members.

If interested, please:
-- write a half-page description of your proposed article;
-- include a title/headline for your article;
-- include your name and contact information;
-- include one to three lines of biographical information; and
-- specify if you would like to write a major (3,000 words) or minor feature
(1,500 words).

Send your proposals via email to ACResolution Managing Editor at:

publications@ACRnet.org

... as soon as possible, but no later than December 1, 2006.

An editorial advisory committee will review the proposals and choose 2-3 major features and 2-3 minor features. All authors will be notified by end of December. If selected, completed articles will be due to ACR by February 1, 2007.

For more information about ACR publications and guidelines, please visit:

http://www.ACRnet.org/publications/acresolution.htm.

For more information on ACR, please visit: http://www.ACRnet.org

Thank you for your interest in the Association for Conflict Resolution.

Emily Welty
Publications Manager
Association for Conflict Resolution
1015 18th Street, NW, Suite 1150
Washington, D.C. 20036
Phone: 202-464-9700 ext. 230
Fax: 202-464-9720
Email: EWelty@acrnet.org
http://www.ACRnet.org

Celebrating Our Past, Shaping the Future ... See you in Philadelphia for ACR’s Sixth Annual Conference October 25-28, 2006. Register now for the conference, at: http://www.ACRnet.org/conferences/ac06/

PEACE ALLIANCE FOUNDATION NEWSLETTER
AUGUST 2006

In This Newsletter:
1. Message from Dot
2. Memo from the Editor
3. Global Engagement
4. The Peace Registry
5. Imagine a Culture of Peace: Impressions of Youth
6. Pondering Peace
7. You can Help!
8. Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Update

===============================
MESSAGE FROM DOT

Dear Friends,

It is with heartfelt joy that we share our first Peace Alliance Foundation newsletter with you. Our intention is to help make visible a culture of peace. In fact, peace is breaking out all over!

The mission of the Foundation is to empower and inspire civic engagement for a culture of peace. We have three main areas of focus: Global Engagement, Civic Engagement, and the Peace Registry. You will find articles, pictures and stories of interest that are sure to spark hope and the spirit of cooperation.

We are participating in the Global Alliance for Ministries and Departments of Peace providing training for activists involved with the Peace Alliance , campaigning for a U.S. Department of Peace; facilitating and participating in youth retreats for leadership in a culture of peace; partnering with other groups around the International Day of Peace and much more.

Thank you for your support and participation. It will take all of us working together to create a world that works for everyone. We wish you all the best as the journey continues, and look forward to our continuing cooperation for peacebuilding.

In the Spirit of Peace,
Dot

Dot Maver, Executive Director
The Peace Alliance Foundation

===============================
MEMO FROM THE EDITOR

Welcome to the Inaugural Edition of the Peace Alliance Foundation Newsletter!

As your editor, I want to thank you for taking the time to read about our activities and involve yourself in the most important process you will ever undertake ­ the movement for peace on our planet, in our nation, and in our hearts.

Although I have only been involved with the Foundation for about a year, I have been inspired to learn of the positive and creative approaches by so many to make the world a better place. I hope that you will come away from each edition of our newsletter with the same determination to make a difference.

I invite your suggestions, advice, and corrections. Please email me with any input that you wish to contribute, no matter how large or minute. Each of us is an important and valuable part of the evolution to a kinder and gentler future.

Theresa

Theresa McGallicher, Newsletter Editor
The Peace Alliance Foundation
editor@peacealliancefound.org

===============================
GLOBAL ENGAGEMENT

The Peace Alliance Foundation’s Global Engagement initiative helps strengthen and expand the worldwide grassroots movement for a culture of peace through research; education about peacebuilding technologies; demonstrations of nonviolent approaches to local, national, and international conflicts; and building community with counterpart organizations in the U.S. and around the world to grow a global network of people and organizations who together can reveal and foster the existence of an expanding culture of peace. Find out about the Foundation’s Global Engagement activities by clicking here .

This month we shine the newsletter spotlight on one of those activities. The Global Alliance for Ministries and Departments of Peace , which the Peace Alliance Foundation participates in, presented a program on June 25, 2006, to a standing-room-only crowd at the First World Peace Forum in Vancouver, Canada. This program was open to the public and included a panel, moderated by Marianne Williamson, of government leaders from around the world discussing the importance of and what it will take to establish ministries and departments of peace. Click here to see transcripts of the panelists’ remarks and audio interviews with Congressman Dennis Kucinich and Marianne Williamson of the United States and Assistant Secretary Timothy Al Paulus of Liberia.

===============================
THE PEACE REGISTRY

The Peace Registry
is a continually growing database of organizations and individuals all over the world who promote and act in accordance with principles of peace, nonviolence, compassion, and inclusion, thus both demonstrating that a culture of peace already exists and providing awareness and networking opportunities to foster its expansion. As such, it serves as a resource for the media, researchers, government officials, and the general public.

The Registry currently contains over 200 such listings and we invite you send in more. If you know of an organization working towards peace, nominate them at our website here .

Each edition of this newsletter highlights a group that is making a difference in a novel way. In this first edition, we introduce you to:

International World Peace Rose Gardens

VISION: To engage world citizens in activities that promote global peace.

MISSION: To advance peace and understanding amongst all the nations, cultures and religions of the world through the creation of rose gardens that become centers for community activities.

International World Peace Rose Gardens (IWPRG) is a catalyst in diverse communities around the world for peace. The non-profit organization was incorporated in 1988 for the purpose of creating beautiful rose gardens for peace on public, accessible sites. The gardens serve as places of inspiration and magnets for peaceful, community activities, including the IWPRG youth programs. The projects have impacted millions around the world.

Co-Creators TJ David and Sylvia Villalobos began cultivating their dream for peace by planting the first World Peace Rose Garden at the Gandhi Peace Memorial in California in 1984. The visionary team combined Mr. David’s love and expertise of roses and his business background with Ms. Villalobos’ passion for social justice, education, love of children, and organizational skills. Twenty years later, they have raised over $1,400,000 (including in-kind donations) for five major projects, donated over $340,000, and have volunteered over 20,000 hours.

===============================
IMAGINE A CULTURE OF PEACE: IMPRESSIONS OF YOUTH

The Peace Alliance Foundation is partnering with the Dalai Lama Foundation,, Voices in Wartime , and Opening of the Heart to invite young people, ages 5 to 25, from around the world to send us their artistic impressions of what a culture of peace can look like. Their poems, essays, photos, paintings, and drawings will be displayed on the Imagine a Culture of Peace website, and everyone will be encouraged to view them and then to use them to seed local, national, and global community dialogues in schools, churches, homes, and community centers around this very question. So, view and download the flyer , go to Imagine a Culture of Peace , and join us in imagining, as did John Lennon, “all the people living life in peace.” If we can imagine i!
t, we can create it!

===============================
PONDERING PEACE

“You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something,
build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.” Buckminster Fuller

===============================
YOU CAN HELP!

You can help bring about a culture of peace first and foremost by making a personal choice to live peace in your own daily life.

You can also help by making a one-time or monthly donation
to the work of the Peace Alliance Foundation.

In addition, every time you do a web search using the Goodsearch engine powered by Yahoo!), Goodsearch makes a small donation to the Peace Alliance Foundation. You can set this up by going to , typing “Peace Alliance Foundation” into the field that says “I’m supporting: Enter a charity here”, and making Goodsearch your default search engine.

===============================
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Update

If you have any problems viewing this page, you can read it online here: http://www.peacealliancefound.org/newsletters/aug_2006_newsletter.htm

Subscribe: If this newsletter was forwarded to you by a friend and you would like to get your own copy, you may subscribe by signing up here: http://www.peacealliancefound.org/component/option,com_wrapper/Itemid,118/

Updates: Need a name, an email address or phone number changed? Just reply to this newsletter with your changes and we will be happy to update our records. If changing an email address, be sure to tell us both the old and the new.

===============================
The Peace Alliance Foundation
PO Box 70095
Rochester Hills MI
48307-0002 USA
Tel. 586-754-8105
Fax 586-754-8106
Email inquiries: info@peacealliancefound.org

The WMD's DemocracyNews
Electronic Newsletter of the World Movement for Democracy - www.wmd.org

POSTING NEWS:
We welcome items to include in DemocracyNews. Please send an email message to world@ned.org with the item you would like to post in the body of the message.

*****************************************************************

Dear World Movement Participants:

The next issue of DemocracyNews will go out on September 13, 2006. In order to make DemocracyNews as useful as possible, we ask you to send us any items related to democracy work that you think would be of interest to others.

The next deadline for submitting items is ** September 8** Please send items to: world@ned.org.

You are encouraged to submit items under any area of democracy work. We welcome items announcing publications, upcoming events, reports on research, new Web sites, and other information, and we are most interested in posting requests for partnerships between organizations on collaborative projects, brief descriptions of collaborative projects already underway or completed, and ideas for new initiatives in which others may be interested. We hope DemocracyNews will be a source not only for information about participants' activities, but also for new ideas about strategies to advance democracy.

Please share this message with your colleagues.

*****************************************************************

To subscribe send an email to subscribe-democracynews@lyris.ned.org.

If you do not have access to the Web and would like to access the materials mentioned above, please contact us by e-mail (world@ned.org) or fax (202-293-0755).

DemocracyNews is an electronic mailing list moderated by the National Endowment for Democracy as the Secretariat of the World Movement for Democracy. The material presented in DemocracyNews is intended for information purposes only.

This article was brought to our awareness by Linda Hartling and Rick Slaven.
Thanks a lot!
Most warmly!
Evelin

In Chechen’s Humiliation, Questions on Rule of Law

By C. J. CHIVERS
Published: August 30, 2006
ARGUN, Russia, Aug. 26 — The humiliation of Malika Soltayeva, a pregnant Chechen woman suspected of adultery, was ferocious and swift.

Malika Soltayeva, shown in a recent photo, was tortured by men who served as the police.

Ms. Soltayeva, 23, had been away from home for a month and was reported missing by her family. When she returned, her husband accused her of infidelity and banished her from their apartment. The local authorities found her at her aunt’s residence. They said they had a few questions.

What followed was no investigation. In a law enforcement compound in this town in east-central Chechnya, the men who served as Argun’s police sheared away her hair and her eyebrows and painted her scalp green, the color associated with Islam. A thumb-thick cross was smeared on her brow.

Ms. Soltayeva, a Muslim, had slept with a Christian Russian serviceman, they said. Her scarlet letter would be an emerald cross. She was forced to confess, ordered to strip, and beaten with wooden rods and hoses on her buttocks, arms, legs, hands, stomach and back.

“Turn and be condemned by Allah,” one of her tormentors said, demanding that she position herself so he could strike her more squarely.

The torture of Ms. Soltayeva, recorded on a video obtained by The New York Times, and other recent brutish acts and instances of religious policing, raise questions about Chechnya’s direction.

Please read the entire article at http://www.nytimes.com/

Jean Baker Miller Fall Intensive Training Institute Intensive Training Institute

Please mark your calendars…

****JEAN BAKER MILLER FALL INSTENSIVE TRAINING INSTITUTE****

Founding Concepts and Recent Developments in Relational-Cultural Theory and Practice
Friday-Sunday, October 27-29, 2006
Wellesley College Club, Wellesley, MA
14 continuing education credits
Lead Faculty: Judith V. Jordan, Ph.D., Amy Banks, MD, Janet Surrey, Ph.D.,
Maureen Walker, Ph.D., Marilyn Downs, MSW, Yvonne M. Jenkins, Ph.D.,
Lynne Lieberman, LICSW, and Linda Hartling, Ph.D.

Designed for psychologists, social workers, licensed mental health counselors, and marriage and family therapists by our nationally recognized faculty, this program is a unique opportunity for the intensive study of Relational-Cultural Theory and the applications of this approach in clinical and other settings.

Developed at the Stone Center, Relational-Cultural Therapy is based on the power of connection to bring about change in people's lives. This approach rests on the premise that growth-fostering connections are the central human necessity and disconnections are the source of psychological problems. In particular, relationships are profoundly influenced by cultural contexts.

The Fall Intensive three day program will include interactive presentations and experiential activities that will illuminate the core processes and topics. Each session will feature contributions by a collaborative group of faculty led by senior faculty.

If you, your colleagues, or your students would like to attend, please visit our website http://www.wellesley.edu/JBMTI/fti.html. Or call the JBMTI at 781-283-3800.

****A SPECIAL OFFER FOR JBMTI EMAIL LIST MEMBERS!****

Because you are a member of the JBMTI email list, we are offering a $25 discount. All you need to do is identify yourself as a member of JBMTI email list when you register online, or when you register by phone. This can be combined with regular discounts and save you up to $75 off of the tuition price! ($425)

REGULAR DISCOUNTS…
Register with a friend or colleague and receive $25 off the regular tuition.
Register before October 6 and receive an early registration discount of $25.

We hope you can join us!

Yours in Connection…
Jean Baker Miller Training Institute
Web site: http://www.jbmti.org
e-mail: jbmti@wellesley.edu Phone: 781-283-3007
24-hr registration: 781-283-3800

Wellesley Centers for Women
www.wcwonline.org
Wellesley College, 106 Central Street, Wellesley, MA 02481

World Psychiatric Association Regional Meeting - Nairobi: 21st to 23rd March 2007, Safari Park Hotel

Dear Colleague,

RE: WORLD PSYCHIATRIC ASSOCIATION REGIONAL MEETING – NAIROBI: 21ST TO 23RD MARCH 2007 – SAFARI PARK HOTEL

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

We would like to invite you to submit your proposals for symposia in the above mentioned conference whose main theme is Mental Health in Development. The sub-themes include:

- Provision of Mental Health Care in Low Resourced Countries:
- Challenges and Opportunities
- Mental Health Within General Health Service: Peculiarities and Needs
- Mental Health Economics and Policies
- HIV, the Brain, and Development
- Mental Health Workforce
- Psychopathology, Disability, and Wellbeing

Kindly confirm your interest to do a symposium and let us have the title and an indication of when you can expect to submit the full details of your co-presenters and their presentations. You may also visit the conference website on www.wpa2007nairobi.com for further information on the submission process.

Signed,
Prof. Oye Gureje
Chair, Scientific Committee
Email address: ogureje @ comui.edu.ng
www.wpa2007nairobi.com

Dear colleagues,

Community-Campus Partnerships for Health 10th Anniversary Conference
"Mobilizing Partnerships for Social Change"
April 11 - 14, 2007 in Toronto ON Canada
Details at: www.ccph.info

How do we combine the knowledge and wisdom in communities and in academic institutions to solve the major health, social and economic challenges facing our society? How do we ensure that community-driven social change is central to service-learning and community-based participatory research?

Community-Campus Partnerships for Health (CCPH) is convening our 10th anniversary conference, April 11-14, 2007 in Toronto, to nurture a growing network of community-campus partnerships that are striving to achieve the systems and policy changes needed to address the root causes of health, social and economic inequalities. The conference seeks to build knowledge, skills and actions for achieving healthy and just societies.

We invite you to share your knowledge, experience and lessons learned with hundreds of colleagues who - like you - are passionate about the power of partnerships to transform communities and academe.

The conference planning committee is looking for proposals that address one or more of these sub-themes:

*Understanding and Addressing the Social Determinants of Health
*From Grassroots Movements to Policy Change
*Communities as Centers of Learning, Discovery and Engagement
*Developing the Science of Community-Based or Practice-Based Evidence

Proposals are sought for these session formats:

*Pre-conference intensive workshops
*Skill-building workshops
*Story sessions
*Challenges consultation sessions
*Film screening and discussion sessions
*Posters
*Thematic posters

This CCPH conference in particular is notable for a number of reasons:

*It celebrates our 10th anniversary, allowing us to reflect on our history and evolution and engage stakeholders in determining our future directions.

*It is our first conference held in Canada, presenting unprecedented opportunities to learn from Canadian experiences with community-campus partnerships and the social determinants of health, and to explore synergies across North America and beyond.

*It takes place in one of the most diverse cities in the world, enabling us to explore critical issues of race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, wealth and culture.

*It represents an important product of our partnership with the Wellesley Institute (www.wellesleyinstitute.com), the Toronto-based organization that advances the social determinants of health through rigorous community-based research, reciprocal capacity building, and the informing of public policy.

We hope you can join us in Toronto next spring! Please forward this announcement to colleagues who may be interested!

For more information, visit www.ccph.info

For information on financial support for conference participants, visit
http://depts.washington.edu/ccph/conf-support.html

For information about being a conference exhibitor or cosponsor, visit
http://depts.washington.edu/ccph/conf-exhibiting.html or contact Annika Sgambelluri at annikalr@u.washington.edu

*****************************************************************

Community-Campus Partnerships for Health promotes health (broadly
defined) through partnerships between communities and higher educational
institutions. Become a member today at www.ccph.info

*****************************************************************

DemocracyNews- August 2006
The WMD's DemocracyNews
Electronic Newsletter of the World Movement for Democracy - www.wmd.org
August 2006

POSTING NEWS:
We welcome items to include in DemocracyNews. Please send an email message to world@ned.org with the item you would like to post in the body of the message.

*****************************************************************

CONTENTS

28. WORLD MOVEMENT PARTICIPATING NETWORKS, ORGANIZATIONS AND INDIVIDUALS MENTIONED IN THIS ISSUE

DEMOCRACY ALERTS/APPEALS

1. Iran government Bans Leading Human Rights Organization
On August 2, Iran's Interior Ministry banned the Defender of Human Rights Center (DHRC), one of the country's most prominent minority rights groups. Based in Tehran, the organization has been active in defending rights of women, political prisoners and minorities in Iran.  The organization was founded by several prominent Iranian lawyers including Abdolfattah Soltani, Mohammad Seifzadeh, Mohammad Ali Dadkhah, Mohammad Sharif and, most notably, 2003 Nobel laureate Shirin Ebadi, who is currently president of the Center.  The Center is a member of the International Federation for Human Rights and was the recipient of the 2003 Human Rights Award from the French National Commission of Human Rights.
In a message posted on the Center’s Web site, Ms. Ebadi called for solidarity with members of the Center whose responsibilities include reporting human rights violations that take place in Iran, defending political prisoners, and supporting families of prisoners financially and spiritually.  Members of the Center have been threatened with arrest should they attempt to resume activities.
A call for solidarity from the President of the Defender of Human Rights Center (DHRC) is posted at:
http://www.payvand.com/news/06/aug/1093.html
For more information related to the banning of the Center go to:
http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2006/08/E81DC00E-FC38-45AA-BC2B-246F00889AA0.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/08/AR2006080801312.html
http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2006/08/activists-condemn-iran-for-banning.php
http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/view.php?StoryID=20060809-094503-4365r
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/HRW/fb847e9023d98e98325d023315a825c5.htm
Statement from Human Rights Watch -- http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2006/08/08/iran13928.htm
Other relevant sources:
Shirin Ebadi’s personal website in Persian (the English version is still under construction) -- http://www.shirinebadi.ir/
Nobel Prize page http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2003/ebadi-lecture.html

2. Human Rights Watch Calls on Vietnamese Government to Promote Fundamental Human Rights and Political Pluralism
On July 12, Human Rights Watch (HRW) issued an open letter to Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung of Vietnam commending the Vietnamese government for strides made on economic growth, health, education, and poverty alleviation, but urges the government to seize this opportunity to launch legislative and policy reforms to firmly establish respect for human rights as a central tenant of the administration. HRW identifies the government’s control over freedom of expression and the internet; restrictions on freedom of association and religion; and arbitrary arrest, torture, and unfair trials as the key areas the Vietnamese government should set as priorities to improve its promotion and protection of human rights.
Go to: http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/07/12/vietna13728.htm

ANNOUNCEMENTS AND EVENTS

3. 2006 International Conference on the State of Affairs of Africa
The International Institute for Justice and Development (IIJD) is planning the 2006 International Conference on the State of Affairs of Africa (ICSAA), which will be held in Boston on October 26-28, 2006, and will feature President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf of Liberia as the keynote speaker. The conference will address current issues facing Africa, such as poverty, political turmoil, and economic stagnation that continues despite years of international aid. The objective of the 2006 ICSAA is to increase international collaboration among African development efforts to address these issues more efficiently. By bringing together politicians, academics, NGOs, experts from international institutions, and other persons directly involved in development efforts, IIJD hopes the conference will facilitate the sharing of experiences and expertise and produce an integrated plan for more effective future work.
For registration and more information go to: www.icsaa.iijd.org

4. Calls for Nominations for 2007 Conrad N. Hilton Humanitarian Prize
The Conrad N. Hilton Foundation invites nominations for the 2007 Conrad N. Hilton Humanitarian Prize for organizations that have made extraordinary contributions toward alleviating human suffering anywhere in the world. The $1.5 million prize—the world’s largest humanitarian award—is presented annually to an established nonprofit, charitable, or nongovernmental organization.  Nominated organizations must have an operating budget larger than $500,000. The prize is not a grant based on future goals, but an award for recent and historic accomplishments.  Final selections are made by an independent international panel of jurors.  The 2007 prize will be announced in the fall of 2007. Nominations must be received or postmarked by November 6, 2006.
For guidelines on nominators and nominees go to: www.hiltonfoundation.org/main.asp?id=43&side=1

5. Individu-land Announces Updated Web Site
August 11 2006, marks the one year anniversary of Individu-land’s work in Pakistan. Individu-land is a cyber space community in which the individual is considered most important, and was founded to re-claim the space for individuals the around the world.  Individu-land considers itself a space for liberal, secular individuals who believe that the state is for the individual and not vice versa, championing minimal government, private entrepreneurship, open markets, and globalization. It has been working as a political advocacy, resource and analyst group for one year in Pakistan. Now, Individu-land plans to consolidate its work and begin work on new initiatives, including launching an updated version of its Web site on August 11, which includes a new publications section and a new section titled “Individuals Talk,” featuring audio interviews with subject specialists.
Go to: http://www.individualland.com/

6. Center on Philanthropy and Civil Society Calls for Applications for Emerging Leaders Program
The Center on Philanthropy and Civil Society’s Emerging Leaders International Fellows Program is calling for 2007 applications. The program provides leadership training through applied research and professional mentorships for young scholar-practitioners in the nonprofit sector. The program is open to scholars and practitioners interested in building Third-Sector capacity in the United States and overseas. This year’s Fellows will be selected from abroad and communities of color under-represented in the U.S. grant-making sector. Fellows are based at the Graduate Center of The City University of New York, where they design and pursue an individualized research project and participate in a seminar with Third-Sector leaders. The research topic for applicants to the 2007 Emerging Leaders Program is “community foundations.” A limited number of fellowships for research on Diaspora or corporate philanthropy are also available for applicants based outside the United States. Fellows participate in a 3-month seminar, March 1 to May 31, 2007, on U.S. and international voluntary sectors. Fellows are expected to produce a 25-page research paper on their findings, which will be presented in the seminar. They will learn about the work of key agencies, meet with foundation and nonprofit representatives, and attend selected workshops or conferences. Each fellowship covers the cost of tuition, includes a monthly stipend, and provides single-room dormitory accommodations, as well as economy round-trip air travel to and from the United States. Application materials must be received no later than September 15, 2006.
Go to: http://philanthropy.org/programs/intnl_fellows_program.html

7. Human Rights Leadership Training Program Announced
The Global Human Rights Leadership Development Institute (GHRLDI) launches a Web based Human Rights Leadership Training Program, a capacity building program for activists and community advocates. The online course will be held from October 2 – December 9, 2006, and will provide participants with understanding and skills to equip human rights educators and advocates to integrate knowledge of politics, economics, cultural diversity, and gender issues into human rights work; strategize training and methodologies for human rights training; and establish a global network of trainers on human rights education. Participants will receive a Certificate of Participation and a printed copy of the workshop proceedings upon successful completion of the course. The online course costs US$200 with scholarships available for qualified applications. The deadline for applications is September 20, 2006.
Go to: http://www.justicegroup.org/training/application.htm

8. New Carnegie Arabic-Language Web Portal
The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace has launched the Carnegie Arabic Web Portal. The portal is an Arabic-language resource designed to reach new audiences to broaden access to Carnegie’s growing volume of Arabic publications. Through these publications, the Middle East Program at the Carnegie Endowment hopes to build knowledge about political and economic reform, help political actors in the Arab world better understand the challenges facing them internationally, and add a comparative dimension to the understanding of reform in Arab countries. The main feature of the Carnegie Arabic Web Portal is the Arabic-language version of the Arab Reform Bulletin, an online monthly journal on the latest political reform developments from Arab and Western perspectives. The Web portal also contains Arabic translations of select Carnegie Papers, commentaries on the Middle East and related subjects, such as nuclear nonproliferation, as well as writings originally published in Arabic.
To access the Arab Reform Bulletin, go to: http://www.carnegieendowment.org/programs/arabic/publications/arb.htm

9. Call for Applications: Reagan-Fascell Democracy Fellowships
The Reagan-Fascell Democracy Fellows Program at the Washington, DC-based National Endowment for Democracy welcomes applications from candidates throughout the world for fellowships in 2007-2008. Established in 2001, the program enables democracy activists, practitioners, scholars, and journalists from around the world to deepen their understanding of democracy and enhance their ability to promote democratic change. The program is intended primarily to support activists, practitioners, and scholars from new and aspiring democracies; distinguished scholars from the United States and other established democracies are also eligible to apply. Projects may focus on the political, social, economic, legal, and cultural aspects of democratic development and may include a range of methodologies and approaches. A working knowledge of English is an important prerequisite for participation in the program. The application deadline for fellowships in 2007-2008 is Wednesday, November 1, 2006.
For further information about the program, available in English, Arabic, Russian, and Spanish, go to: www.ned.org/forum/fellows.html

CIVIL SOCIETY STRENGTHENING

10. Civic Bangladesh Launches Web site
Civic Bangladesh, a non-profit, non-partisan civil society organization, has launched its Web site. Civic Bangladesh seeks to empower civil society and civic participation to promote democratic governance in Bangladesh, consolidate democratic norms and processes, promote human rights and the rights of women, and encourage civic engagement in establishing transparent and accountable governance.  To achieve these objectives it is working to develop free associations and autonomous institutions, build civic networks and coalitions, and engage citizens in advocacy campaigns. The new Web site describes the organization, current programs, and contains the organization’s contact information.
Go to: http://www.civicbd.org/

11. Amman Center for Human Rights Studies Workshop on Non-Governmental Organization
The Amman Center for Human Rights Studies organized a workshop, entitled "The Mechanisms of the Non-Governmental Organization: Reality and Prospects," in which fourteen working papers were discussed on such topics as: the challenges and concerns faced by human rights organizations in Syria; challenges faced by non-governmental organizations; the reality of women's organizations in Syria; and civil society and its role in change. Fifteen participants from 10 human rights and civil society organizations participated in the workshop, and ACHRS will publish the papers.
Go to: http://www.achrs.org/english/CenterNewsView.asp?CNID=205

CONFLICT RESOLUTION

12. Radio for Peace Building, Africa, 2006 Awards
The Radio for Peace Building Africa seeks to recognize through its 2006 awards the best radio programs that contribute to peace. Radio for Peace is looking for programs that reduce tensions in groups and communities, enhance shared interests, break down listener stereotypes, and provide positive role models. The awards are open to all African radio broadcasters. Prizes will be awarded in the following categories: Drama, Talk-shows, and Youth Radio. Four prizes will be awarded in each category. First place is 800 euros and the others are 300 euros each. Candidates are limited to one program per category. Entries must be in English or French, or must be accompanied by a full translation in one of these two languages. Entries must have been broadcast in Africa in 2005 or 2006. Candidates must enter by September 30th, 2006.
To obtain an entry form contact: radiopeaceafrica@sfcg.be
For more information on Radio for Peace Building, Go to: http://www.radiopeaceafrica.org/

13. Israel/Palestine Center for Research and Information Issues Policy Paper on Current Middle East Crisis
On July 25, the Israel/Palestine Center for Research and Information (IPCRI) issued a policy paper to encourage decision makers to use the current Middle East crisis as an opportunity for political change to bring the region into a new era of regional and bilateral negotiations. The paper suggests the opportunities created by the crisis include greater will of all parties involved to replace the paradigm of violence with one of political dialogue and negotiations; the implementation of UN Resolutions; creating a peace process between Israel, Lebanon, and Syria; stabilizing a long-term Israeli-Palestinian ceasefire leading to the renewal of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process; and the utilization of international forces in various effective peacekeeping roles. The paper suggests that the comprehensive approach of dealing with bilateral tracks involving the three nations and Palestine in parallel enables the entire process to be concluded by addressing the root causes of the conflict.
Go to: http://www.ipcri.org/

ECONOMIC REFORM AND THE BUSINESS SECTOR

14.Centerfor International Private Enterprise Releases Overseas Report
The Center for International Private Enterprise (CIPE) has released its summer issue of the Overseas Report, including a feature story on Pakistan’s IT sector, an article on promoting small business in Senegal, a sample post from the CIPE Development Blog, an update on economic reform in Egypt, and indigenous initiatives in Ecuador. The center spread features a report on CIPE’s current work in Afghanistan. CIPE was founded by the US Chamber of Commerce in the belief that economic and political freedoms are intertwined. CIPE partners with business associations, think tanks, and other private sector organizations in countries where there is both a need for progress and an opportunity for reform.
Go to: http://www.cipe.org/publications/overseas/pdf/OR_Summer_2006.pdf

HUMAN RIGHTS

15. Third Edition of Human Rights in the World Community Published
The University of Pennsylvania Press has printed the third edition of the textbook, HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE WORLD COMMUNITY: ISSUES AND ACTIONS, edited by Richard P. Claude and Burns H. Weston. The text will be featured at the American Political Science Association’s short course on “Teaching Human Rights.” This textbook seeks to introduce students to human rights, while promoting their critical and analytical skills. The textbook features in-depth scholarly introductions to each chapter; questions for discussion and reflection; and an extensive bibliography and annotated filmography. Sample chapters include: Basic Decencies and Participatory Rights, Human Needs as Security Rights, International Approaches to Human Rights, and National Approaches to Human Rights Implementation.
Go to: http://www.upenn.edu/pennpress/book/14271.html

16. Distance Learning Course on the Inter-American System of Human Rights Protection and Promotion
Human Rights Education Associates offers a distance learning course to provide participants with practical guidance on how to protect human rights through the Inter-American human rights system, and specifically the institutions and treaties of the Organization of American States (OAS). Participants will be introduced to the main Inter-American human rights conventions and jurisprudence, primarily as developed through the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights (Washington D.C.) and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (San Jose, Costa Rica). The course addresses human rights standards as they apply to civil and political rights; economic, social and cultural rights; and the rights of minorities. Case studies include freedom of expression; violence against women; victims of torture; the rights of Afrodescendants; and the rights of refugees and internally displaced persons. The course involves approximately 60 hours of reading, online working groups, interaction among students and instructors, and assignments. It is offered over a 12-week period beginning on September 18. Participants should have a good written command of English (the course language is English), have high competence and comfort with computer and Internet use, and have regular access to e-mail and the Internet. The tuition fee is US$ 525 (tuition for auditors is US$ 200). Full and partial scholarships are available for applicants from the Americas based on financial need. Applications are due August 21, 2006.
Go to: http://www.hrea.org/courses/11E.html

17. Nominations for 2007 International Human Rights Lawyer Award
Nominations are sought for the 2007 International Human Rights Lawyer Award, formerly the International Rule of Law Award. The award is presented annually by the American Bar Association’s Section of International Law to recognize distinguished foreign lawyers who have suffered persecution because of their professional activities. Presentation of the Award serves to publicize unheralded efforts and human rights issues deserving greater awareness. Nominations should identify and describe the reasons in support of eligibility of the nominee, the human right issue addressed, and the nature of persecution suffered. The 2007 Award will be presented at either the Spring or Annual Meeting.  Nominations are due by September 15, 2006.
Nominations and questions should be emailed to: Russell@kerrlawfirm.com.

18. International Human Rights Colloquium Seeks Applications
Conectas Human Rights, based Sao Paulo, Brazil, invites interested parties to participate in the VI International Human Rights Colloquium, an annual capacity-building and peer-learning event designed for young activists from the “Global South” (Africa, Asia and Latin America). The objective of the Colloquium is to strengthen the impact of human rights activists’ work and offer an opportunity to build new collaborative networks among activists and academics. The Colloquium offers lectures, seminars, and working groups on topics including the role of constitutional courts in protecting human rights, human rights litigation strategies, documenting and denouncing human rights violations, and designing strategies for sustainable financing. The Colloquium is organized by Conectas Human Rights and SUR – Human Rights University Network. Young candidates from the Global South who demonstrate commitment to the human rights cause and have at least two years of work experience in the area are encouraged to apply. Candidates can apply online or can download the application form. Applications will be accepted until September 3, 2006.
Go to: http://www.conectas.org/coloquio/

19. Distance Learning Course on Using Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) for Human Rights Work
The Human Rights Education Associates is offering an e-learning course, from September 20 – December 12, 2006, intended for staff members of human rights and social justice NGOs who are responsible for information and communication within their organization. Participants will be introduced to proven methods of using ICTs to promote human rights work. They will become equipped with the knowledge and tools to more effectively design and implement listservs, Web sites, databases or multi-media for advocacy campaigns, training and information management. This course involves 60 hours of reading and online working groups. The course is based on a participatory, active learning approach, with an emphasis on peer-to-peer learning. Participants will receive a Certificate of Participation upon successful completion of the course. Deadline for applications is August 15, 2006.
Go to: http://www.hrea.org/courses/3E.html

INTERNATIONAL DEMOCRACY ASSISTANCE AND SOLIDARITY

20. Campaign of Support to Civic Resistance in Cuba Launched
A new campaign of support to civic resistance in Cuba was launched, according to Directorio, a non-profit organization that works for democracy in Cuba. The “non-cooperation with the dictatorship” initiative, is a partnership among the Plantados organization, Mothers and Anti-Repression Women (MAR) for Cuba, and the Cuban Democratic Directorate, seeks to mobilize and prompt the Cuban population to refuse to participate in acts of repudiation against political dissidents and generate activities of civil disobedience in favor of democratic change. The campaign is based on six slogans incorporated in signs and stickers which will circulate inside Cuba: I do not follow (I do not belong to the Communist Party, Committees for Defense of the Revolution (CDRs) and the  Union of Young Communists (UJC)); I do not repress (I am not a part of the repressive government apparatus); I do not attend (the mass acts summoned by the regime); I do not squeal (I do not betray my countrymen), I do not cooperate (with the economic production activities of the regime); and I do not repudiate (I do not participate in the acts of repudiation). A seventh slogan summarizes the pattern of conduct towards national democratization: I do want change. This first stage of the campaign will last a year.
Go to:  http://www.directorio.org/coverage/coverage.php?note_id=1113

21. Club of Madrid Holds Strategy Meeting
The Club of Madrid, an organization composed of 68 democratically elected former heads of state that focuses on leadership for democracy and acts as a consultative body for governments, leaders and institutions involved in the process of political transition, held a strategy session in New York City on July 19- 21. The strategy meeting was attended by four Club members: its Secretary-General, Kim Campbell, former prime minister of Canada; Joaquim Chissano, former president of Mozambique; Mary Robinson, former president of Ireland; and Ben Mkapa, former president of Tanzania. Additionally, partners from peer organizations including the United Nations Development Programme, the Netherlands Institute for Multiparty Democracy, the National Democratic Institute, the UN Democracy Fund, and the International Center for Transitional Justice, among others, participated. Additionally, the possibility of bringing the political capital of the Club to bear on countries back sliding from democracy was also considered. It was suggested that strategy meetings of peer organizations should be held more regularly to enhance greater coherence in the approaches of the different organizations.
Go to: http://www.nimd.org/default.aspx?menuid=0&type=newsitem&contentid=326&special

INTERNET, MEDIA, AND FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

22. African Network on Freedom of Expression Issues Warning
The Network of African Freedom of Expression Organizations (NAFEO) has warned that the state of free expression and freedom of the press is deteriorating rapidly across the African continent. NAFEO says there is a "marked increase in the arrests, detention, repression and general harassment of journalists, media and other communications workers."  The coalition also notes that many governments have either introduced new legislation or have intensified the application of laws that criminalize journalistic work and free expression. Six countries stand out as leading violators of free expression: the Gambia, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Swaziland, Tunisia, and Zimbabwe.  NAFEO has urged Nigerian President Olusegun Obansanjo to use his influence within the African Union to persuade leaders of these countries of the need to respect and protect freedom of expression and freedom of the press. NAFEO says it is planning a campaign aimed at pressuring governments to repeal laws criminalizing press offenses and to free individuals who have been detained or imprisoned for exercising their free speech rights. NAFEO invites human rights groups, media organizations, and other civil society organizations to join the campaign.
Go to:  http://www.misa.org/cgi-bin/viewnews.cgi?category=1&id=1150272690

LABOR UNIONS AND WORKER RIGHTS

23. New Solidarity Center Report Exposes Dangers Faced by Colombian Trade Unionists
On June 15, the US.-based Solidarity Center unveiled a new report, “Justice for All: The Struggle for Worker Rights in Colombia,” at a panel discussion at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. The report found that over the past 20 years, more than 4,000 Colombian trade unionists have been killed for their activism. According to the report, Colombia is the most dangerous country in which to be a trade-union member; more union activists are killed in one year in Colombia than in the rest of the world combined. “Imagine accepting a union leadership post during a labor conflict around conditions and respect in the workplace, knowing that the last four previous leaders had been murdered while seeking the same dignity and fairness you seek for yourself and your co-workers,” said AFL-CIO Executive Vice-President Linda Chavez-Thompson, who offered the opening remarks at the panel discussion. “This is a reality for workers in Colombia.” The report includes sections on the historical context of worker rights in Colombia, child worker rights, and suggestions for advancing worker rights in the country.
For the full text of the report, go to: http://www.solidaritycenter.org/files/ColombiaFinal.pdf

LEGISLATIVE DEVELOPMENT AND ASSISTANCE

24. New Governance and Social Development Resource Center Online
The Governance and Social Development Resource Centre (GSDRC), based in the UK, has launched a Web page to provide information to support international development projects, program planning, and policymaking. The GSDRC, established by the UK Department for International Development (DFID) in 2005, offers access to research and training in governance, conflict, and social development, as well as advice on demand, including rapid response research and consultant finding. Services offered include: document library supporting independent research needs; topic guides providing overviews of current knowledge in various thematic areas; an organization directory with contact information for organizations active in relevant issues; conferences and training directory to support professional development needs; and an email bulletin with announcements of new publications and other news.
Go to: http://www.gsdrc.org/

POLITICAL AND CIVIC PARTICIPATION OF YOUTH

25. 13th Human Rights Annual Internship for Arab and Egyptian University Students
On July 11-30, the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS) held the 13th Annual Human Rights Internship. The internship program, “Towards Activating the Role of Young People in Democratization,” drew 80 participants from seven Arab countries. Covering themes such as human rights, rights of women, and regional crisis, the annual internship featured 38 lectures, 10 training sessions and round tables, and 7 student-led taskforces. Field visits were made to human rights organizations and centers in Egypt. The activities were led by a host of intellectuals, university professors, judges, journalists, and human rights activists. 
Go to: http://www.cihrs.org/Press_details_en.aspx?per_id=113&pr_year=2006

POLITICAL PARTIES AND POLITICAL LEADERSHIP

26. National Front for Democracy-Bhutan Proposes Peoples’ Constitution
On July 17, the National Front for Democracy - Bhutan (NFD- Bhutan), a coalition of Bhutanese political parties, unveiled an alternative Constitution for the Kingdom of Bhutan. The coalition wrote the People’s Constitution in the form of suggestions as a response to their disappointment in the contents of the "Draft Constitution" unveiled by the royal regime on March 26, 2005. NFD- Bhutan is protesting the Draft’s dismissal of the interests of 20 percent of Bhutanese citizens who live as refugees in India and Nepal. The NFD- Bhutan appealed on April 26, 2005 to the King of Bhutan urging him to review the contents of the "Draft Constitution" to make it more inclusive by providing space to all sections of Bhutanese society regardless of caste, religion, language, or ethnicity, but the requests of NFD- Bhutan were ignored. As a result, the NFD- Bhutan spent a year drafting the Peoples’ Constitution to contain more democratic and inclusive elements.          
Go to: http://www.wmd.org/documents/aug06-Bhutan.doc

WOMEN’S ISSUES

27. New Handbook on Women in Parliament: Beyond Numbers
The International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International IDEA) has released a revised handbook entitled “Women in Parliament: Beyond Numbers.” This updated edition provides a three-step approach to strengthening the role of women in parliament by identifying the obstacles women confront upon entering parliament; providing strategies for overcoming these obstacles; and outlining strategies that women parliamentarians can implement to influence politics once they are elected. This edition includes case studies from Argentina, Burkina Faso, Ecuador, France, Indonesia, Rwanda, South Africa and Sweden, regional overviews from the Arab World, Latin America, South Asia, and a case study on the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU).
Go to: http://www.idea.int/publications/wip2/

28. WORLD MOVEMENT PARTICIPATING NETWORKS, ORGANIZATIONS AND INDIVIDUALS MENTIONED IN THIS ISSUE
•           Amman Center for Human Rights Studies (ACHRS) - www.achrs.org
•           Israel/Palestine Center for Research and Information (IPCRI) - www.ipcri.org
•           Center for International Private Enterprise (CIPE) - www.cipe.org
•           Club of Madrid - www.clubmadrid.org
•           Directorio - www.directorio.org
•           Individu-land - www.individualland.com
•           Solidarity Center - www.solidaritycenter.org
•           Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS) - www.cihrs.org
•           International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International IDEA) - www.idea.int

************************************************************************

To subscribe send an email to subscribe-democracynews@lyris.ned.org.
If you do not have access to the Web and would like to access the materials mentioned above, please contact us by e-mail(world@ned.org.
DemocracyNews is an electronic mailing list moderated by the National Endowment for Democracy as the Secretariat of the World Movement for Democracy.
The material presented in DemocracyNews is intended for information purposes only.
The WMD's DemocracyNews
Electronic Newsletter of the World Movement for Democracy - www.wmd.org

Common Ground News Service
Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH)
for constructive & vibrant Muslim-Western relations
27 August - 03 September 2006

The Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH) aims to promote constructive perspectives and dialogue about Muslim–Western relations. CGNews-PiH is available in Arabic, English, French and Indonesian. To subscribe, click here. (http://www.sfcg.org/template/lists.cfm)
For an archive of past CGNews articles and other information, please visit our website at www.commongroundnews.org.
Unless otherwise noted, copyright permission has been obtained and articles may be reprinted by any news outlet or publication. Please acknowledge both the original source and the Common Ground News Service (CGNews).

Inside this edition

1) by David Ignatius
Syndicated columnist, David Ignatius, describes a recent conversation with Ahmed Sheikh, the editor in chief of Al-Jazeera television, about different views in the Middle East on the fifth anniversary of 9/11. Admitting that as a journalist himself he has often found Al-Jazeera’s coverage “tries too hard to present the Arab news, rather than just the news,” he is struck in his meeting by how difficult it is to cover the region and quotes what Sheikh claims is one of the biggest challenges, "all the threads and problems are intertwined…it's very difficult to trace where they begin and end." Describing some of the complexities facing the satellite channel in its reporting, Ignatius remains a supporter: “Al-Jazeera is confronting one of the abiding truths of honest journalism - that the world is damned complicated, and that it's very hard to know who the good guys and bad guys are.”
(Source: Daily Star, 24 August 2006)

2) by Rana Sweis
Rana Sweis, a journalist and recent graduate of Hofstra University, provides a review of John Updike’s recent best-seller Terrorist. Replete with portrayals of harsh stereotypes that are brought to the fore through various characters and providing a window for Western readers in the mind of a frustrated Arab-American youth, the book is an uncomfortable read at times. However, Sweis concludes it “does go a long way toward exploring, and potentially helping bridge, the ever-growing gap of misunderstanding between the Arab world and Americans.”
(Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 29 August, 2006)

3) by Zaenal Abidin Eko Putro
Executive Director of the Center for Asian Studies (CeNAS) in Jakarta, Zaenal Abidin Eko Putro, provides an interesting perspective on the old argument about whether democracy can be implemented in predominantly Muslim countries. Sharing the example of Indonesia’s democratic system and the inclusion of Islamic parties in the democratic process, he urges the West to continue to support democratic reform in the Muslim world and to work closely with Muslim scholars to refine and adapt Western-style democracy for the needs and unique circumstances of these countries.
(Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 29 August, 2006)

4) by Mohammad Yazid
Mohammad Yazid, staff member on The Jakarta Post's Opinion Desk, looks at the various ways in which jihad is understood in the Muslim world and contends that the most difficult form of jihad is "the war against one's own desires.” Arguing that the current global context requires a different way of performing jihad, he looks to prominent Muslim thinkers in Indonesia who suggest that today’s jihad could take the form of “continuing to exert political pressure on the United Nations to stop Israel's attacks”, sending peacekeeping forces to Lebanon, and even prayer.
(Source: Jakarta Post, 18 August 2006)

5) by Joshua Mitnick
Christian Science Monitor correspondent, Joshua Mitnick, examines the thorny issue often claimed to be at the root of the long-standing conflict between Israel and Lebanon, the dispute over the Shebaa Farms. Although it would not act as the be-all-and-end-all in Lebanese-Israeli relations, the resolution of this issue, which will shortly be discussed by the UN Security Council, could help to bring some stability to the region. "I am not sure if Hizbullah is willing to lay down its arms if Shebaa Farms is returned," says Adib Farha, a former aide to Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora who today resides in the US, "but the Lebanese government's hand will be strengthened tremendously and the Lebanese public - even those who support Hizbullah - are going to start questioning the justification of the alleged resistance."
(Source: Christian Science Monitor, 22 August 2006)

1) Al-Jazeera faces the ambiguities of a complex world
David Ignatius

Washington, D.C. - What do people in the Middle East think five years after the September 11, 2001, attacks? To get a quick snapshot, I paid a visit to Ahmed Sheikh, the editor in chief of Al-Jazeera television. It was reassuring, in a perverse way, that he views the situation in his region the same way that most Americans would - as a dangerous mess.

Sheikh told me he had been mulling this week over how Al-Jazeera should cover the 9/11 anniversary. "Five years after that catastrophe, the Arab world is much more divided than it used to be," he reflected. "The image of Islam has been tarnished to a great extent. We are weaker than we used to be against Israel. Development is absent." When he stands back and looks at the region, Sheikh says, "all the threads and problems are intertwined. It's very difficult to trace where they begin and end."

Sheikh fears that Iraq is headed toward a calamitous civil war that will spill over to other countries that have mixed Shiite-Sunni populations, such as Kuwait, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia. "If the Americans can prevent civil war from happening, their presence would be useful," he says. But after three years of American failure to stabilise the country, he is doubtful.

Al-Jazeera's editor remains militant about Arab causes. "What doesn't change for our viewers is indignation against US and Israeli policies," he says. But with the exception of the Palestinian struggle and the Iraqi resistance to American occupation, he says, most of the so-called jihadist battles have actually produced what the Arabs call fitna, or self-destructive internal strife.

Sheikh works out of a small office just off the main newsroom. He joined Al-Jazeera when it was founded in 1996 after working for the BBC and other television news channels. Dressed in shirtsleeves, just back from the morning story conference with his editors, he looks a bit like an Arab version of Lou Grant.

Al-Jazeera has been attacked by American officials as a propaganda tool for Osama bin Laden and other Muslim radicals. And as a journalist, I have often found its coverage unbalanced. It tries too hard to present the Arab news, rather than just the news. That said, I was struck talking to Sheikh how complicated it has become for Al-Jazeera to cover this part of the world.

Take coverage of Iran: Al-Jazeera recently reopened its bureau there after it was closed by the Iranian authorities for 18 months. The network's crime was that it sent a camera crew into southwestern Iran and reported complaints of the Arab minority there that they were unfairly treated by the central government. After the broadcast aired, there were protests and civil unrest in the region - and the Iranians decided to pull the plug.

Iraq poses a worse problem. Because Al-Jazeera reported from behind the lines of the Sunni insurgency, Iraqi Shiites became indignant about its coverage. The Shiite-led government expelled the network in September 2004, but Sheikh says he would be reluctant to go back now. Relations with the US military are better, but because of Shiite anger, it would be "very, very dangerous" for Al-Jazeera.

"People say we are the channel of the insurgents. It's not true. We are the channel of everybody. We are critical and balanced. That is what a journalist is supposed to do - not drum the official point of view but criticise, try to evaluate."

Syria and Lebanon also pose tricky problems for an Arab satellite network. After Al-Jazeera broadcast an exclusive hour-long interview with Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, leader of the Shiite militia Hizbullah, it was attacked by Sunni Salafists, who back Al-Qaeda and consider the Shiites apostates. And after Syrian President Bashar Assad denounced other Arab leaders as "half-men" for failing to support Hizbullah against Israel, Sheikh says it was hard to find a balanced on-air commentator.

I've been a proponent of Al-Jazeera, despite its tendency to spin coverage, because it was the first step toward real broadcast journalism in the Arab world, as opposed to the old state-run propaganda channels. And my conversation with Sheikh reinforces that conviction. After 10 years, Al-Jazeera is confronting one of the abiding truths of honest journalism - that the world is damned complicated, and that it's very hard to know who the good guys and bad guys are.

That's a start. If we can have common standards for covering the news in the Middle East, maybe we can eventually do something to fix the problems we all agree are there.

###
* David Ignatius is a syndicated columnist. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org).
Source: Daily Star, 24 August 2006; www.dailystar.com.lb (http://www.dailystar.com.lb).
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

2) ~Youth Views~ Book review: Terrorist by John Updike
Rana Sweis

Amman, Jordan - John Updike’s new novel, Terrorist, released a few weeks ago in the United States, is selling like “hot cakes”. Perhaps it became an instant best-seller because it is a John Updike novel. Or perhaps because the life and mind of a terrorist fascinates Americans.

The book opens with thoughts running through the mind of an Arab-American, high school student, named Ahmad, an intolerant, conservative, aloof but shrewd critic of the American way of life.

His mother is Irish-American. His father, absent from his life since childhood, is an Egyptian. A sensitive and bright senior in high school, Ahmad seems to be failing to live up to his potential when he reveals to his Jewish guidance counsellor, Jack - the novel’s other main character - that he is planning a career merely as a truck driver.

The novel often reads like non-fiction because of its depiction of real political events and identity issues. There is the story of 9/11, the mention of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and more importantly, the tale of a confused adolescent living between two worlds, Muslim and American.

The reader witnesses Ahmad’s growing resentment and lack of healthy social relationships evolve into something far more unhealthy than normal adolescent angst – Ahmad is considering becoming a suicide bomber. Jack senses Ahmad’s potential and intelligence but is unable to stop the process, partly because of his sympathetic views of some of Ahmad’s criticisms of American society. His interest in Ahmad leads him also down his own path of self-assessment and strange encounters.

Updike’s prose is vivid, luring the reader into Ahmad’s streets, neighbourhood and school: “The halls of the high school smell of perfume and bodily exhalations, of chewing gum and impure cafeteria food, and of cloth—cotton and wool and the synthetic materials of running shoes.”

Unfortunately, clichés and stereotypes at times stifle the novel, despite Updike’s gifted way with words. As the title suggests, sometimes it seems that Updike’s portrayal of Ahmad involves stereotypes that border on racism, and whether these are Updike’s perceptions or merely those of his characters is not clear. Even the cover illustration is that of a shadowy figure, with no clear features, walking away.

Witness a Federal agent discussing the difficulties of investigating suspects: “Damn!” he explodes…“I hate losing an asset. We got so few in the Muslim community…We don’t have enough Arabic speakers, and half of those we do have don’t think like we do. There’s something weird about the language – it makes them feeble-minded, somehow…The explosives team…they are not talking, or else the translator isn’t telling us what they’re saying. They all cover for each other, even the ones on our payroll, you can’t trust your own recruits anymore…”

Still, this novel remains a page-turner and worthy read despite these flaws. Updike’s use of Arabic words and quotations from the Qur’an demonstrate substantial research on his part, lending an impression of credence to a portrayal that many Arab readers may feel uncomfortable with. Unfortunately, a few young Muslim men do take Ahmad’s path, and Updike does a respectable and scholarly job of exploring the twisted interpretations of Islam that result in such destructive actions.

Ultimately, Updike’s hopeful end, rushed though it may be, does suggest that violence and terrorism can be avoided and that inter-cultural understanding is possible: it is the American guidance counsellor, not the team of heavily armed American FBI agents, who ultimately saves the day, because Jack is able to empathize with and understand Ahmad.

Uncomfortable as the novel is at times, it does go a long way toward exploring, and potentially helping bridge, the ever-growing gap of misunderstanding between the Arab world and Americans. Updike deconstructs these issues and presents them eloquently, albeit painfully. At the same time, Updike seems equally interested in using Ahmad’s point-of-view to criticise contemporary American society as he is in writing a post-9/11 thriller. For both Muslim and Western audiences, there is much to be learned from this novel.

###
* Rana Sweis is a journalist and recent graduate of Hofstra University. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org).
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), August 29, 2006; www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org).
Copyright permission has been granted for republication.

3) What democracy means in Muslim-Western relations
Zaenal Abidin Eko Putro

Jakarta – Many today argue that the world is engulfed in a terrifying "clash of civilisations" between the Muslim world and the West. Even though many refute the idea of such an international clash, it is clear that Muslim-Western tensions are playing out today in some parts of the world, with the most recent instance being the fighting between Israel and Hizbullah in Lebanon.

Another example of such a clash is a non-physical one that has occurred in the discourse on democracy. Most Western countries have accepted the idea of democracy and applied democratic political systems. However, only a small number of Muslim countries have adopted Western-style democracy. Some Muslim countries even reject this term and have created their own political systems based on Islamic principles of governance.

In addition, when some Muslim countries embraced democratic principles, the results were sometimes surprising and often viewed with dissatisfaction by the Western world. Specifically, the establishment of certain governments which came to power in free elections has resulted in Western criticism on several counts. One well-known example occurred in Algeria in 1990 when the Front Islamique du Salut (FIS) won the election, only to be overthrown by a West-supported military. A more recent controversial election victory was Hamas’– a persona-non-grata in the eyes of the United States- which is still categorised as a terrorist organisation despite winning a free election in Palestine. The Hamas government has yet to receive any support from Western countries under the influence of the United States.

Misperceptions about the principles and implementation of democracy have caused a great deal of misunderstanding between Muslim and Western cultures. Many Muslim peoples fear democracy in their countries will result in the erosion of moral and religious values and would represent yet another invasion of Western cultures and norms. Many Western cultures wonder whether democracy is compatible with Islam and fear the rise of Islamic extremist parties. And one specific concern that Western and Muslim academics have often differed on is whether democracy has room for shari‘a (Islamic law).

Yet regardless of these obstacles, the Western world should continue to work with Muslim countries to help them build their unique versions of democracy. Efforts toward greater understanding of the various definitions and perceptions of democracy and toward the practical implementation of democracy in predominantly Muslim countries should be met with greater Western support of these processes.

One country that is often held up as a positive example of a democratic political system in a predominantly Muslim state is Indonesia. Following its independence in 1945, Indonesia decided not to become an Islamic state as such, but a democratic nation-state, and has not seen a rise in Islamic extremism or violence. Indonesia's experience with the emergence of the Party of Justice and Prosperity (PKS) as the sixth runner up in the last parliamentary election is an interesting case in point. In the 2004 parliamentary election, no less than 8.3 million voters gave their support to the party and helped establish its 45 representatives in parliament. The party was also successful in placing prominent members as ministers in a cabinet led by President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and Vice President Jusuf Kalla.

The accusation that overwhelming success by the PKS would cultivate Islamic radicalism and spawn terrorist groups was unfounded. On the contrary, the result of a survey conducted by Kompas Daily about this party in June 2005 showed that while most people tended to be pessimistic over the future implementation of political platforms in Indonesia, this opinion did not apply to the PKS. No less than 60.4 percent of respondents expressed their optimism about the positive image of the party. For many people, the victory of PKS and the emergence of other Islamic parties are considered a positive move that will result in constructive change.

Unfortunately, this example has mistakenly been seen as the emergence of Islamic radicalism and terrorism in Muslim world by some. Yet, the Indonesian example fits with a trend that other countries have also seen when more radical groups, such as the IRA in Northern Ireland, have found room to participate in government, resulting in a decrease in violence and extremism. This suggests that the West should not impede the integration of radical Islamic groups into political systems.

What is clear is that a new perspective of democracy in predominantly Muslim countries, based on the needs of both the Muslim world and the West, must be developed in an effort to achieve long-term peace. Furthermore, Muslim and Western populations should aim for greater understanding and empathy towards the other. Above all, the Western world should take its first concrete step by giving more opportunity to Muslim scholars, governments, and civil society activists to practice their understanding about democracy in their own countries and consider opportunities to merge shari‘a law with the idea of democracy. Some Western intellectuals such as John L. Esposito, John O. Voll, Jeff Haynes, and Martin E. Marty have tried to push the adoption of democracy in Islamic countries. In fact, many believe that there is a democratic system that is compatible with the basic principles of shari‘a.

There are hopeful signs that the next steps in building mutual understanding between the Muslim and Western worlds are taking shape so that the current “clash” over the term democracy may yield a new hybrid version that combines the benefits of democracy in the West with the unique needs and circumstances of predominantly Muslim countries.

###
* Zaenal Abidin Eko Putro is Executive Director of the Center for Asian Studies (CeNAS) in Jakarta. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org).
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), August 29, 2006; www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org).
Copyright permission has been granted for republication.

4) Jihad in Mideast could mean unholy war
Mohammad Yazid

Jakarta - During the life of the Prophet Muhammad, Muslims at one point misunderstood the meaning of jihad (literally “struggle”, though often translated as “holy war”). This happened after Muhammad, for the first time, led Muslims to military victory in the Battle of Badr in 623. During this fight, Muslim troops, consisting of 313 mostly ill-armed males, fought against the well-armed and well-equipped polytheist Quraish troops of Mecca, numbering over 1,000 and led by several experienced generals. This war broke out because the polytheists drove away the Muslims and seized all their belongings so that the latter had to move to Medina.

After this battle, Muhammad, in a sermon to the warriors of Badr, some 150 kilometres southwest of Medina, said, "In fact, we have returned from a minor jihad to fight the major jihad." His words took his comrades by surprise so that one of them asked him, "Which major jihad do you mean, oh Prophet?" And the Prophet responded, "the jihad against one's own desires.”

Today, about 14 centuries later, Muslims, in several respects, have once again misunderstood the meaning of jihad. That this misunderstanding exists is easily observed from the great number of plans made in our country to dispatch volunteers to Palestine and Lebanon in response to Israeli attacks. Most of these jihadis have been mustered by such groups as the Indonesian Mujahidin Council (MMI), the Islamic Defenders Front (FPI) and the Islamic Youth Movement (GPI).

Unfortunately, the recruitment system employed and the combat training provided to these volunteers show that the war against Israel is considered to be something like the Battle of Badr, namely one involving face-to-face combat. They apparently fail to realise that this war is conducted using super-sophisticated technology and is very different from the type of war that took place during the time of the Prophet Muhammad.

In terms of weapons technology alone, for example, Muslims lag compared with Israel, which enjoys the support of the United States. Israel also demonstrates superiority over Muslim armies in other respects, such as diplomatic skills. Should these volunteers fail to pay attention to these aspects, this would be tantamount to failing to understand Muhammad's teachings, which lend great significance to the strategy of war and mental preparation.

The Prophet's message can be understood if one studies the strategy adopted in the Battle of Uhud, which took place the year after Badr, in which Muhammad stationed a number of skilled archers on Uhud Hill, some six kilometres south of Medina, after he studied the battle formations and strengths of each side. This battle was once again provoked by the Meccan Quraish, who were greatly upset after they were defeated at Badr.

What this means is that if Muslims fail to pay attention to various important aspects of winning a war in this modern age, they will have again misunderstood the meaning of jihad. Jihad, therefore, has changed in meaning from a holy into an unholy war leading to meaningless and unnecessary deaths due to a misunderstanding of its true meaning.

There are a host of things to be taken into account for those wishing to become jihadi volunteers, such as whether or not they are married, and whether they have made suitable arrangements for their families left behind in Indonesia amid the current economic difficulties. A misunderstanding that is based on a failure to think things through honestly and deeply is just the same as the failure of the Prophet Muhammad's comrades to understand the meaning of “major jihad”, namely the war against one’s own desires.

Jihad, which means hard work in the terminology of the ulama (religious leaders), means mobilising all existing capabilities and all that one possesses to uphold truth and virtue, and fight against iniquity and evil, with the expectation of receiving God's blessing in the process.

However, jihad has been interpreted by different groups according to their own understanding of the term. To a number of militant Muslim leaders, such as Osama bin Laden and Maulana Masood Azhar, the leader of Jaish-e-Mohammed, a banned militant outfit in Pakistan, jihad means killing.

If you look at chapter 29 verse 69 of the Qur’an, you will find that jihad does not mean killing, or being killed, but is about how to work hard so as to receive God's blessing. Jihad, for groups or individuals, is something that is essential as part of the journey toward spiritual progress.

While jihad has received different interpretations among Muslims, the plans hatched in Indonesia to dispatch jihadis to the Middle East has been criticised by a number of Muslim figures here.

Muhammadiyah chairman Din Syamsuddin is of the opinion that while conducting jihad is what he terms a human right, "... I need to remind all that the battlefield [in the Middle East] involves the use of modern weaponry. That's why military skills are necessary."

There are still many other areas where jihad could be waged, he suggests, by those wishing to assist the Palestinians and the Lebanese. Political jihad may be resorted to by continuing to exert political pressure on the United Nations to stop Israel's attacks. In the economic arena, jihad could be conducted by providing financial assistance. Or, one can also conduct a spiritual jihad by offering up prayers.

Meanwhile, Hasyim Muzadi, who chairs Nahdlatul Ulama, the country's largest Muslim organisation, has said that it is necessary for Muslims to unite. Arab countries, in particular, must join forces to stop the attacks by Israel. He argues that it would be better to dispatch peacekeeping troops to the Lebanon as a solution, rather than sending jihadi volunteers.

Taking into account the opinions of ulama and the correct understanding of jihad, jihadi volunteers should heed the government's suggestion that now is not the right time for them to go to the Lebanon. The most practical and realistic way forward for Indonesia would be to act constructively by contributing to the peacekeeping force in Lebanon and Palestine when this is established by the United Nations.

As Foreign Minister Hassan Wirayuda has put it, Indonesia is a country whose citizens are free to travel anywhere. Therefore, the government cannot prevent people from travelling. The only action that can be taken is to issue an advisory warning Indonesian citizens of the dangers they would face should they agree to be sent willy-nilly on a jihad to the Lebanon.

###
* The writer is a staff member on The Jakarta Post's Opinion Desk. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org).
Source: Jakarta Post, 18 August 2006; www.thejakartapost.com (http://www.thejakartapost.com).
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

5) Behind the dispute over Shebaa Farms
Joshua Mitnick

Kibbutz Dan, Israel - Until six years ago, the mountain range that rises beyond the verdant orchards of this farming collective at Israel's northern tip was best known as the site where Abraham received his divine covenant in the Old Testament.

Few Lebanese or Israelis knew the range as the location of the Shebaa Farms, the site of an arcane border dispute that ultimately unravelled into a month-long war between Hizbullah and Israel.

"It's an arid piece of land," says Adib Farha, a former aide to Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora and a native of the southern Lebanese village of Marjayoun. "Most Lebanese had never heard of it until Hizbullah brought it up in 2000."

The UN Security Council is scheduled to revisit the thorny question of whom Shebaa Farms belongs to. A diplomatic solution, analysts say, could eventually bolster stability along the Israel-Lebanese border by weakening Hizbullah's justification for holding onto its weapons.

"It would lead to the marginalisation" of Hizbullah's militia, says Gidi Grinstein, the president of the Reut Institute, a Tel Aviv think tank. "The goal of eliminating Hizbullah from Lebanon is not achievable, therefore we should make Hizbullah's life more difficult through the politics of legitimacy."

Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora has often called for the resolution of the Shebaa Farms conflict as a means of neutralising Hizbullah's military wing. In a seven-point plan he unveiled last month during the height of the war, he called for Israel to withdraw from the farms and for the 12-square mile territory to be placed under UN guardianship pending a formal agreement between Lebanon and Syria over its sovereignty.

At the time when Israel withdrew from Lebanon in 2000, Hizbullah seized on claims that the farms belonged to Lebanon, thus justifying its attacks against Israeli forces occupying the territory. Israel and the UN said the real estate was part of the Golan Heights captured from Syria in the 1967 Six Day War. Damascus has declared that the Shebaa Farms belong to Lebanon. But it has never attempted to formally ratify the sovereignty of the mountainside with the Lebanese to gain UN recognition and acceptance of the new border.

From Kibbutz Dan, a series of Israeli military lookout towers are barely visible along the western slope of a mountain range stretching northeast toward the strategic Hermon peaks.

The outposts overlook the 1926 border that lies at the root of the confusion over Shebaa Farms. When the French created Lebanon, they drew a border with Syria that severed Lebanese villages like Shebaa from fields on the mountain range to the south where villagers owned land.

Yossi Lev Ari, a Kibbutz Dan resident, recalls how a few months after the Six Day War, he met Lebanese villagers carrying white flags who were allowed to cross the border to work their land.

Israel closed the border in the early 1970s after Palestinian guerrillas from Yasser Arafat's Fatah militia used the mountains to stage raids on farming villages such as Kibbutz Dan. The mountain range also enables Israel to peer into southern Lebanese villages. "To withdraw would be suicidal" in the absence of a peace treaty, says Mr. Ari.

When Israel withdrew from Lebanon in 2000, a UN team confirmed the French-drawn border. Hizbullah, as well as the Lebanese government, took issue with that decision, pointing to the old Lebanese-owned plots of land on the other side. To draw attention to Shebaa Farms, Hizbullah guerrillas abducted and killed three Israeli soldiers in a cross-border ambush in October 2000. The bodies were returned in a prisoner swap in January 2004.

Now, even if Israel were to give the territory back to Lebanon, few expect Hizbullah to forswear its fight against the Jewish state. "They don't have a territorial, or political, or economic quarrel with Israel, but a fundamental objection to Israel's right to exist. Part of the logic of the permanent resistance is to always find a new pretext," says Mr. Grinstein. "Shebaa Farms is a symptom of this phenomenon. When you think about it, that Shebaa Farms would be a pretext for a conflict between Lebanon and Israel is ridiculous."

Hizbullah has said in the past few years that it will not dismantle its military wing, even if the Shebaa Farms are returned to Lebanon. It argues that its battle-hardened fighters provide the only viable defence against Israel and they can't be disarmed until Israel no longer represents a threat to Lebanon.

But even if Hizbullah wouldn't be won over to the peace camp by a resolution to the Shebaa Farms dispute, some argue that the issue can still be used to pressure the militia into disarming. The average Lebanese citizen is likely to be less sympathetic to Hizbullah's ideology of waging an open-ended struggle against Israel.

"I am not sure if Hizbullah is willing to lay down its arms if Shebaa Farms is returned," says Farha, who today resides in the US, "but the Lebanese government's hand will be strengthened tremendously and the Lebanese public - even those who support Hizbullah - are going to start questioning the justification of the alleged resistance."

###
* Joshua Mitnick is a correspondent with the Christian Science Monitor. Fellow correspondent Nicholas Blanford contributed to this piece from Beirut. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org).
Source: Christian Science Monitor, 22 August 2006; www.csmonitor.com (http://www.csmonitor.com).
Copyright (c) The Christian Science Monitor. For reprint permission please contact lawrenced@csps.com. Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

Youth Views
CGNews-PiH also regularly publishes the work of student leaders and journalists whose articles strengthen intercultural understanding and promote constructive perspectives and dialogue in their own communities. Student journalists and writers under the age of 27 are encouraged to write to Chris Binkley (cbinkley@sfcg.org) for more information on contributing.

About CGNews-PiH
The Common Ground News Service - Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH) provides news, op-eds, features and analysis by local and international experts on a broad range of issues affecting Muslim-Western relations. CGNews-PiH syndicates articles that are balanced and solution-oriented to news outlets worldwide. With support from the Norwegian government and the United States Institute of Peace, this news service is a non-profit initiative of Search for Common Ground, an international NGO working in the field of conflict transformation.

This news service is one outcome of a set of working meetings held in partnership with His Royal Highness Prince El Hassan bin Talal of Jordan in June 2003.

The Common Ground News Service also commissions and distributes balanced and solution-oriented articles by local and international experts to promote constructive perspectives and encourage dialogue about current Middle East issues. This service, Common Ground News Service - Middle East (CGNews-ME), is available in Arabic, English, and Hebrew. To subscribe, click here. (http://www.sfcg.org/template/lists.cfm)

The views expressed in these articles are those of the authors, not of CGNews-PiH or its affiliates.

Common Ground News Service
1601 Connecticut Avenue, NW Suite #200
Washington, DC 20009 USA
Ph: +1(202) 265-4300
Fax: +1(202) 232-6718

Rue Belliard 205 Bte 13 B-1040
Brussels, Belgium
Ph: +32(02) 736-7262
Fax: +32(02) 732-3033

E-mail: cgnewspih@sfcg.org
Website: www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org/index.php?sid=1&lang=en)

Editors
Emad Khalil (Amman)
Juliette Schmidt (Beirut)
Chris Binkley (Dakar)
Emmanuelle Hazan (Geneva)
Medhy Hidayat (Jakarta)
Leena El-Ali (Washington)
Andrew Kessinger (Washington)

CGNews is a not-for-profit news service.

28th Annual Ethnography in Education Research Forum
“Ethnography and Education in Trying Times”

Center for Urban Ethnography
University of Pennsylvania
Graduate School of Education
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

***CALL for PAPERS***

ONLINE SUBMISSIONS OPEN: August 1, 2006
SUBMISSION DEADLINE: October 15, 2006
NOTIFICATION: Early November 2006
PRESENTATION SCHEDULE: Early January 2007

In most parts of the world attempts to homogenize education must compete with ever-expanding cultural and linguistic diversity. Standardized educational
goals and assessments are becoming dominant as school systems seek to prepare students to participate in broad national and international markets. Yet
students and teachers also live their lives in rich and vibrant local communities, which do not conform to standardized knowledges and practices. The 28th Ethnography in Education Research Forum seeks to explore directions for education in these trying times. What are the implications of educational standardization for the value of local knowledges in education? How can ethnographers put local knowledges and practices back on national and international agendas?

The Ethnography in Education Research Forum invites papers that explore these
issues by ethnographically documenting grassroots responses to varying levels
of educational policy, describing teacher-researcher collaboration in the
development of equitable educational practices, making theoretical and
methodological connections between the study of societal level phenomena and
local processes, bringing to light covert responses to overt policy decisions,
and critically examining relationships between academic and public interests.

Plenary Speakers:
Marilyn Cochran-Smith, Boston College
Frederick Erickson, University of California at Los Angeles
Gloria Ladson-Billings, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Susan Lytle, University of Pennsylvania

All proposals may be submitted online beginning August 1:
http://www.gse.upenn.edu/cue/forum.php

TYPES OF PRESENTATIONS:
Proposals are requested for presentations in the following categories:

1. Individual Paper (Traditional or Work-in-Progress)
2. Group Sessions (Traditional or Work-in-Progress)
3. Data Analysis Consultation

Practitioner Research: For Individual Papers and Group Sessions, you may
choose to designate your presentation as PRACTITIONER RESEARCH. Practitioner research presentations focus on research by teachers and other practitioners in educational settings (e.g., school principals, counselors, non-teaching aides, parents, students, and other members of school communities).
Practitioner research presentations are particularly featured on Saturday,
known as Practitioner Research Day.

1. Individual Papers (15 minutes)
Individual papers by one or more authors. Either final analyses, results, and
conclusions (Traditional) or preliminary findings and tentative conclusions
(Work-in-Progress) may be submitted. Indicate practitioner research, if you
so choose.

2. Group Sessions (75 minutes)
A full session of no fewer than three and no more than six presenters,
including a discussant. These sessions may vary in organization: a set of
individual papers, a panel discussion, a plan for interaction among members of
the audience in discussion or workshop groups are possible formats. Either
final analyses, results, and conclusions (Traditional) or preliminary findings
and tentative conclusions (Work-in-Progress) may be submitted. Indicate
practitioner research, if you so choose.

3. Data Analysis Consultation (30 minutes)
Individual submissions only. Presenters offer data along with questions about
analysis for consultation with expert researchers and conference
participants. Data analysis consultation is by definition Work-in-Progess.
Presenters must follow specific guidelines available online:
http://www.gse.upenn.edu/cue/dacinstructions.php

PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA:

1. Significance for education
2. Conceptual orientation
3. Methodology
4. Interpretation
5. Quality of analysis
6. Depth and clarity

FORMAT OF PROPOSALS:

Everyone must submit:

A. Summary (limit 100 words)
This should be a brief overview of the work to be presented.

B. Description (limit 1500 words)
Selection is based on the description. A detailed description of the work to
be presented should be submitted including conceptual orientation, data
collection and analysis methods, data interpretation, and significance to
education.

Special Instruction for Group Sessions
Submit Summary and Description of the session overall, as specified above. If
the session consists of a set of individual papers, the group session proposal
must also include a description for each individual presentation.

All proposals must be submitted online:
http://www.gse.upenn.edu/cue/forum.php

Questions
E-mail: cue @ gse.upenn.edu

Universitetet i Oslo, Det juridiske fakultet, Norsk senter for menneskerettigheter

Nasjonalt etterutdanningskurs for ansatte i lærerutdanningen og lærere, arrangert av Norsk senter for menneskerettigheter og Falstadsenteret 26.-28.10.2006.

Utdanningsenheten ved Norsk senter for menneskerettigheter (SMR) og Falstadsenteret inviterer høsten 2006 til et nasjonalt etterutdanningskurs om menneskerettigheter. Kurset er særlig rettet mot ansatte i lærerutdanningen på høgskoler og universiteter, men lærere i skoleverket kan også søke.

En hovedintensjon for kurset er å bidra til å sette lærerutdanningen i stand til å møte krav som stilles i de nye læringsplanene under Kunnskapsløftet. I læreplanen for samfunnsfaget i grunnskolen er formålet med faget formulert slik: ”Hensikten med samfunnsfaget er å bidra til forståelse av og oppslutning om grunnleggende menneskerettigheter, demokratiske verdier og likestilling, og stimulere til aktivt medborgerskap og demokratisk deltakelse.” Dette perspektivet er også inkludert i andre relevante fagplaner, og er nedfelt i Læringsplakaten. Læringsplakaten ble foreslått gjennom St.meld. nr 30 (2003-2004) ”Kultur for læring” og vil få status som forskrift. Denne definerer grunnleggende prinsipper og krav som skal forplikte og prege alle skoler og øvrige opplæringssteder.

Kurset er utviklet på bakgrunn av dette, og skal bidra til at ansatte innen lærerutdanningen får en grundig innføring i menneskerettigheter. Dette vil skje gjennom forelesninger om menneskerettighetene fra henholdsvis juridisk, statsvitenskapelig, historisk, filosofisk og antropologisk perspektiver. Det tas også opp konkrete og didaktiske problemstillinger knyttet til undervisning i menneskerettigheter. Forelesere kommer fra UiO Norsk Senter for Menneskerettigheter og Falstadsenteret. Programmet for kurset er vedlagt i denne meldingen

Praktiske opplysninger:

Kurset vil finne sted i lokalene til Falstadsenteret på Ekne utenfor Levanger. Det vil være mulig for kursdeltakere å overnatte på Falstadsenteret. Prisen for dette er 1580,- kroner for to overnattinger og inkluderer full pensjon. Under kurset vil det bli servert formiddagsmat, forfriskninger og fredag arrangeres det felles middag. For kursdeltakere som ikke ønsker overnatting er prisen 550,- kroner. Det er ingen ordinær kursavgift utover dette. Da Falstadsenteret er i ferd med å utvikle sitt serverings og overnattingskonsept må vi ta forbehold om at de oppgitte prisene kan bli noe justert.

Det tas opp maksimalt 30 deltagere. Påmeldinger sendes til e-post: baf@falstadsenteret.no . Merk e-postmeldingen ”mr-kurs”. Det gjøres løpende opptak inntil de 30 plassene på kurset er fylt. Angi i påmeldingen hvorfor du er interessert i å delta på kurset, og eventuell erfaring du har med menneskerettigheter som fagområde (undervisning, forskning eller annet).
Det vil bli lagt inn tid til spørsmål og diskusjon. Kursdeltagerne forventes å delta aktivt. Kursmateriell og program vil bli distribuert kort tid etter påmelding til de som tas opp.

Kontaktpersoner:

Bård Anders Andreassen
Kursansvarlig
Førsteamanuensis, UiO SMR
b.a.andreassen@nchr.uio.no

Bjørn A. Flatås
Studieleder Falstadsenteret
Postboks 278, 7601 Levanger
baf@falstadsenteret.no

Øyvind Henden
Studiekonsulent, UiO SMR
oyvind.henden@nchr.uio.no

SMR er et tverrfaglig forskningssenter ved Universitetet i Oslo; et uavhengig, nasjonalt senter for menneskerettigheter; et senter for internasjonalt orientert prosjektarbeid; og et senter for undervisning innen menneskerettigheter. http://www.humanrights.uio.no/

Falstadsenteret er et nasjonalt opplærings- og dokumentasjonssenter på Ekne i Levanger. Senteret er lokalisert i hovedbygningen i en tidligere tysk fangeleir. Hovedoppgaver er utvikling og formidling av kunnskap om krigens fangehistorie og menneskerettigheter gjennom dokumentasjon, forskning og formidling. http://www.falstadsenteret.no/

Bjørn A. Flatås
Studieleder
Stiftelsen Falstadsenteret
7624 Ekne
Tlf: 74028043
http://www.falstadsenteret.no

INVITATION TO Columbia University 9/11 Events

from
Afghanistan to Zimbabwe
Creative Responses to Conflict
www.tc.edu/PeaceEd/911

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How can we challenge the widely held assumption that violence can only be countered with greater violence?

What are some of the ways to move from tragedy toward transformation, preventing further occurrences of violence?

On the fifth anniversary of 9/11…
two events will take place on the campus of Columbia University. Both events are free and open to the public. We invite you, your family, friends, co-workers and colleagues to attend.

Together with September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows, Columbia’s Center for International Conflict Resolution at the School for International and Public Affairs and the Peace Education Center at Teachers College… we’ll have the unique opportunity to envision possibilities for breaking cycles of violence by learning from the real world experiences of a group of international guests (http://www.tc.edu/peaceed/911/guests.htm) who have developed their own creative, non-violent responses. Please join us on September 11th to hear their tragic and inspiring stories, and to discuss alternative responses to violence.

In addition, Peaceful Tomorrows, an organization of family members of 9/11 victims who have united to turn their grief into action for peace, is sponsoring several events in and around New York City from Sept. 8-14. Click here to download a schedule of these various public events.

For more information please visit the event website at www.tc.edu/PeaceEd/911

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

12:00 NOON – 2:00 PM
Interactive Workshop

Location: 15th Floor
(SIPA) School of International and Public Affairs
420 West 118th Street

This panel will introduce Peaceful Tomorrows and their international partners to the Columbia University community. Workshop participants will form small groups and share their perspectives with the guest speakers. We will discuss and identify the common themes of the presenters’ responses to terrorism, violence, and war: What was it that made them react by trying to break the cycle of violence? What were the common challenges they faced in taking their stands? What were the common solutions they identified for ending violence?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

7:00 PM – 8:30 PM
Panel Discussion
“From Tragedy to Transformation: Alternative Responses to Violence”

8:30 PM – 9:30 PM
Living Memorial and Reception

Location: Altschul Auditorium
SIPA (School of International and Public Affairs)
420 West 118th Street

We invite you to attend this interactive panel featuring a special group of international guests of the September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows who, as family members of victims of violence will share with the audience their experiences, ideas, and ongoing efforts and initiatives in promoting non-violent responses to tragedy.

Panelists include: Raed Jarrar, Iraq; Father Michael Lapsley, South Africa; Julia Duany, Sudan; Anne Mulderry, United States.

We invite our guests to join us after the panel to participate and contribute to a “Living Memorial” honoring the victims of 9-11, as well as other violent tragedies, and to celebrate the creative non-violent alternative visions that give us hope for a more peaceful tomorrow.

Internasjonale trender innen medisin og empirisk samfunnsvitenskap

Alle kurs er forhåndsgodkjent eller vil bli søkt godkjent som viderutdannings- eller spesialiseringskurs, og rettet mot psykologer, leger, psykiatere, sykepleiere og medlemmer av FO. Forskere og eksperter innen andre relevante fagområder oppmuntres til å delta.

Foredragsholdere
Alan G. Marlatt, Ph.D. University of Washington
Mindfulness and Harm Reduction
Deltagere: Alle som arbeider med forebygging, opplysningsarbeid, skadereduksjon, behandling (PUT, DPS, BUP, PPT, sykehus, etc.) eller FoU innen rus og avhengighet.

Norge, Våren 2007

Edna Foa, Ph.D. University of Pennsylvania
Behandling av PTSD
Deltagere: Alle som arbeider klinisk med traumatiserte pasienter (PUT, DPS, BUP, PPT, sykehus, etc.) eller FoU innen traumer, og dobbelt-diagnose lidelser som f.eks. borderline og rus. Eksperter innen stressmedisinsk psykiatri og forskere innen psykoterapi vil også ha utbytte av seminaret.
Oslo: SAS Radisson, 3-dager, våren 2007

John H. Halpern, M.D., Harvard University
Hallusinogener: Skader, muligheter og forskning
Deltagere: Alle som arbeider med forebygging, opplysningsarbeid, behandling (PUT, DPS, BUP, PPT, sykehus, etc.) eller FoU innen rus og avhengighet. Eksperter innen narkotikapolitiet, offentlig forvaltning, forskere innen psykoterapi, psykofarmakologi, toksikologi og nevropsykologi.
Oslo, Trondheim og Bergen: SAS Radisson, November 2006

Stefan G. Hofmann, Ph.D., Boston University
State-of-the-art: Sosial angst og panikklidelse
Deltagere: Alle som arbeider klinisk med barn/ungdom eller voksne (PUT, DPS, BUP, PPT, sykehus, etc.), eller mer spesialiserte pasientgrupper med dobbelt diagnostikk ( f.eks. rus og personlighetsproblematikk).
Oslo, SAS Panorama: 10-11 November 2006

Pål-Ørjan Johansen, Psykolog, Cand. Ph.D. NTNU
DBT og Borderline
Deltagere: Alle som arbeider klinisk med barn/ungdom eller voksne (PUT, DPS, BUP, PPT, sykehus, etc.), med multiple og alvorlig problematikk knyttet til regulering av følelser, impulsivitet, og selvskading.
Trondheim: 26-27 Oktober

Målgrupper: Vil variere noe ifra seminar til seminar. Men de fleste seminarene er relevante for alle som arbeider klinisk med barn/ungdom eller voksne (PUT, DPS, BUP, PPT, sykehus, etc.), eller mer spesialiserte pasientgrupper med dobbelt diagnostikk (f.eks. rus og personlighetsproblematikk) med rusforebygging og opplysningsarbeid, eller FoU innen rus og avhengighet. Eksperter innen narkotikapolitiet, offentlig forvaltning og forskere innen psykoterapi, psykofarmakologi, toksikologi og nevropsykologi.

Evidence Knowledge Exchange
Postboks 9031
7014 Trondheim, Norway
www.evidence.no

Telefon: +47 922 93 108
Epost: kontakt@evidence.no

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Evidence Knowledge Exchange: Gjennom formidling av internasjonal forskning og trender på et tidlig stadium, arbeider vi for økt kunnskap, ferdigheter, bevissthet og debatt på aktuelle områder. Evidence er en ideel forening, dersom driften fører til overskudd vil foreningen dele ut stipender til forskning og formidling etter foreningens formål, for ytterligere informasjon besøk vår webside: evidence.no

An Article With Concern About Humiliation,
kindly forwarded to us by Floyd Rudmin.

Asian MEP says he was 'treated like a terrorist while travelling'
By Andrew Grice, Political Editor
Published: 24 August 2006
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article1221299.ece

An Asian member of the European Parliament who claims he has repeatedly been treated as a suspected terrorist while travelling has warned the European Union against moving towards a system of "ethnic profiling" following the alleged plot to blow up transatlantic planes.

Claude Moraes, a London Labour MEP, has told how he has twice been detained and subjected to a full body search at airports for "travelling while Asian". One on occasion, security staff at Charles de Gaulle airport in Paris did not believe he was an MEP even though he was carrying the special diplomatic passport members are allowed.

On another two occasions, he was almost thrown off overbooked planes - once in front of fellow MEPs at Strasbourg - but staff backed down when he stood his ground. Mr Moraes insisted last night he was not seeking to complain about his own treatment and had tried to protest on behalf of many people from ethnic minorities who had suffered similar experiences. He said the issue was a "twilight zone" because race relations laws did not apply at airports and people were wary of complaining as they acknowledged the need for heightened security.

His campaign about the treatment of ethnic minorities while travelling has been backed by the Liberal Democrat MEPs Baroness Ludford and Sajjad Karim.

Writing in tomorrow's issue of the left-wing weekly Tribune, Mr Moraes says that the frequent "stops and searches" he faces are an inconvenience to him but "nothing compared" to the problems faced by ordinary people who have been "strip-searched" because of the "profiling" he says already takes place."This is not merely inconvenient. The effects can stay with the victims forever," he says.

The MEP is opposing calls by some aviation experts and airline bosses for a system of "ethnic profiling" in the wake of this month's alleged terrorist plot. He believes that in practice this would mean "taking people out of queues because they look Muslim" but is convinced that it would be a "blunt instrument" that would prove counterproductive.

Mr Moraes argues that good intelligence and policing, better aviation security and community support are the best ways to combat terrorism, while large-scale profiling would do more harm than good.

"By branding whole communities as suspect, ethnic profiling can legitimise prejudice," he says. "It can also engineer feelings of humiliation and resentment among targeted groups ... Intelligence gained from communities can dry up through lack of co-operation among the overwhelming moderate majority."

Although EU home affairs ministers rejected a formal European-wide system of "ethnic profling" at their emergency meeting in London last week, Mr Moraes is concerned that the idea is backed by France, Germany and the Netherlands. He says it already happens in Britain even though the Government opposes such a system, and the question now is whether it is extended.

His warning comes as the Government calls for a "mature" debate over immigration amid rising tension in some regions. Ruth Kelly, the Communities Secretary, is to launch a new Commission for Integration and Cohesion today, which will report next year. She will say: "Alongside the debate, we need action nationally but just as importantly in local communities themselves to build united communities and root out all forms of extremism."

Ms Kelly will acknowledge that for some communities, life in Britain feels different than it did two weeks ago. "Integration and cohesion are not states but processes. They need to be worked at, built on and nurtured," she will argue.

An Asian member of the European Parliament who claims he has repeatedly been treated as a suspected terrorist while travelling has warned the European Union against moving towards a system of "ethnic profiling" following the alleged plot to blow up transatlantic planes.

Claude Moraes, a London Labour MEP, has told how he has twice been detained and subjected to a full body search at airports for "travelling while Asian". One on occasion, security staff at Charles de Gaulle airport in Paris did not believe he was an MEP even though he was carrying the special diplomatic passport members are allowed.

On another two occasions, he was almost thrown off overbooked planes - once in front of fellow MEPs at Strasbourg - but staff backed down when he stood his ground. Mr Moraes insisted last night he was not seeking to complain about his own treatment and had tried to protest on behalf of many people from ethnic minorities who had suffered similar experiences. He said the issue was a "twilight zone" because race relations laws did not apply at airports and people were wary of complaining as they acknowledged the need for heightened security.

His campaign about the treatment of ethnic minorities while travelling has been backed by the Liberal Democrat MEPs Baroness Ludford and Sajjad Karim.

Writing in tomorrow's issue of the left-wing weekly Tribune, Mr Moraes says that the frequent "stops and searches" he faces are an inconvenience to him but "nothing compared" to the problems faced by ordinary people who have been "strip-searched" because of the "profiling" he says already takes place."This is not merely inconvenient. The effects can stay with the victims forever," he says.

The MEP is opposing calls by some aviation experts and airline bosses for a system of "ethnic profiling" in the wake of this month's alleged terrorist plot. He believes that in practice this would mean "taking people out of queues because they look Muslim" but is convinced that it would be a "blunt instrument" that would prove counterproductive.
Mr Moraes argues that good intelligence and policing, better aviation security and community support are the best ways to combat terrorism, while large-scale profiling would do more harm than good.

"By branding whole communities as suspect, ethnic profiling can legitimise prejudice," he says. "It can also engineer feelings of humiliation and resentment among targeted groups ... Intelligence gained from communities can dry up through lack of co-operation among the overwhelming moderate majority."

Although EU home affairs ministers rejected a formal European-wide system of "ethnic profling" at their emergency meeting in London last week, Mr Moraes is concerned that the idea is backed by France, Germany and the Netherlands. He says it already happens in Britain even though the Government opposes such a system, and the question now is whether it is extended.

His warning comes as the Government calls for a "mature" debate over immigration amid rising tension in some regions. Ruth Kelly, the Communities Secretary, is to launch a new Commission for Integration and Cohesion today, which will report next year. She will say: "Alongside the debate, we need action nationally but just as importantly in local communities themselves to build united communities and root out all forms of extremism."

Ms Kelly will acknowledge that for some communities, life in Britain feels different than it did two weeks ago. "Integration and cohesion are not states but processes. They need to be worked at, built on and nurtured," she will argue.

The Art of Possibility

Boston, Mass. : Harvard Business School Press
2000

ROSAMUND ZANDER
runs workshops for individuals and organizations to formulate vision and direction. She has developed a presentation on leadership and creativity in collaboration with Benjamin Zander that has been delivered to major corporations around the world. She maintains a private practice in psychotherapy and an Accomplishment Program for people wishing to complete a major project.

Common Ground News Service (http://www.commongroundnews.org/?lang=en) - Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH)
22 August 2006

The Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH) aims to promote constructive perspectives and dialogue about Muslim–Western relations. CGNews-PiH is available in Arabic, English, French and Indonesian. To subscribe, click here. (http://www.sfcg.org/template/lists.cfm)
For an archive of past CGNews articles and other information, please visit our website at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org/index.php?sid=1&lang=en).
Unless otherwise noted, copyright permission has been obtained and articles may be reprinted by any news outlet or publication. Please acknowledge both the original source and the Common Ground News Service (CGNews).

Inside this edition

5) by Paul Sullivan
Paul Sullivan, Professor of Economics, National Defense University and Adjunct Professor, Security Studies, Georgetown University, considers those who stand up to say “enough” in the midst of terrible human tragedy: “Enough. That is the call of the peacemakers, and that takes great courage. Enough. That is the feeling deep in the souls of some great thinkers and great leaders. Enough. That is the sense, one can be sure, that Christians, Jews, Muslims and others must feel when they pray to their God, and when they see how dark the world has become, when there could be so much light.” He argues that these peacemakers must not be pitied for their difficult task, but honoured for the actions they take.
(Source: Middle East Times, 15 August, 2006)

1) The Islamic civil war
Abdul Aziz Said and Jim Zanotti

Washington, D.C. - Shortly after the recent outbreak of violence in Lebanon and Israel, Newt Gingrich made headlines by proposing that existing threats against American interests throughout the world constitute the early stages of World War III. Gingrich may not necessarily be wrong when he points out parallels between the storms gathering today and those that preceded the first two world wars. Nevertheless, the confrontational, fatalistic mindset that this analogy is bound to produce in Americans should be avoided at all costs.

The better analogy is that the Middle East is embroiled in an Islamic Civil War that is approaching its climactic stages. The parties to this Civil War, which is outwardly visibleonly in fits and starts — from Morocco to Afghanistan — but has persisted underground for decades, are fighting for the right to define and govern Muslim societies.

The increasing boldness with which opportunistic actors around the world (in places such as North Korea, Sudan and Venezuela) challenge U.S. interests with impunity is directly related to the diminution of the United State’s influence, caused by its precarious gamble on the political fate of the Middle East. Although problems for the US in other regions are not entirely peripheral, they are largely connected to the outcome of the Islamic Civil War.

The recent violence in Lebanon and Israel is so noteworthy because it involves every major state and faction with a stake in the Islamic Civil War. More significant still is how the political fault lines forming in response to this latest round of fighting are beginning to crystallise, pitting non-state militants who embrace religious extremism (Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood, Hizbullah, Al Qaeda) against autocratic states friendly with the West (Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the Gulf states).

The hardening of fault lines favours the extremists over the pro-Western autocrats because the broader Muslim population, lacking moderate alternatives, will invariably choose the side untainted by ties with outsiders. Strikingly, extremism is now starting to transcend Sunni-Shi‘a divisions previously thought unbridgeable. Hamas and Hizbullah (whether directly or indirectly) have coordinated the timing of raids to kidnap Israeli soldiers, and Al Qaeda’s leaders have issued calls for its adherents to support Hizbullah.

A decade ago, with authoritarian regimes firmly ensconced throughout the Middle East, extremist movements were languishing in their provincial hubs, unable to capture the imagination of the broader Muslim public. Slogans such as “Islam is the solution” did not appeal to the disaffected youths they targeted, because such slogans lacked a compelling presentation of how the extremists’ version of Islam could empower people. Iran’s example demonstrated that the reality of rule under theocrats was no more likely to be utopian or prosperous than in Mubarak’s Egypt.

And then came Osama bin Laden’s idea. Go directly after the external powers that support the autocratic regimes, instead of the regimes themselves. This accomplished two things. First, the terrorist attacks produced unprecedented images of power —explosions followed by aftermath scenes of scared, disoriented Westerners unaccustomed to being on the receiving end of violence — that dramatically portrayed the extremists as men of action and consequence, differentiating them from the status quo in the eyes of the masses. Second, retaliatory responses from the United States appealed to Muslims’ inclination to close ranks against outsiders.

The United States failed to perceive that bin Laden was dragging it into the Islamic Civil War primarily to weaken his Civil War adversaries — the pro-Western regimes and the advocates of moderation and pluralism within the region. Had the United States recognised its own interest in prioritising the aims of bin Laden’s Muslim adversaries, it could have more effectively marginalised Al Qaeda and other extremist groups by taking a supporting, not leading, role that featured a more measured combination of force and diplomacy.

Instead, the United States overcommitted itself, visibly imposing its own strategic goals on the conflict and, in the case of Iraq, blowing wide open a previously incontestable front in the Islamic Civil War. The predictable refusal of Muslims to accept an external solution to their Civil War has led to widespread support for extremists, squeezing out moderate movements such as those led by Fatah in the Palestinian territories and Ayman Nour in Egypt. Imagine the furore that would have erupted during the American Civil War had England claimed the right to impose a solution to slavery upon the North and South.

Now Israel is falling into the same trap as the US. Hizbullah has already gained in stature in Lebanon and the Muslim world since the fighting began. Lebanon’s prime minister, Fouad Siniora, a Sunni who during a recent visit to Washington had spoken of the need to disarm Hizbullah, now speaks for a large segment of the Lebanese population when he praises the Shi‘a militants as honourable defenders of the homeland. Shelved for the foreseeable future (and perhaps longer) amidst the violence is the referendum that was to express the Palestinians’ authoritative opinion on a two-state solution.

This may be the last chance for the United States in the Middle East. The fault lines in the Islamic Civil War have not yet fully rigidified. By using its energies in service of the strategic goals of the extremists’ Muslim and local adversaries (Mahmoud Abbas, the Lebanese government, those Shi‘as and Sunnis committed to a political solution in Iraq), the United States can court Muslim populations much more effectively than through the direct imposition of its own goals by military or politically manipulative means. The extremist groups understand that without a critical mass of popular support, they cannot prevail against existing regimes, which will leave the door open for advocates of moderation who know that traditional autocratic rule cannot last forever in the Middle East in the face of its youthful demography, technological advancement and deepening world engagement.

Characterising current global problems as the beginning of World War III only provokes further confrontation, which plays into the hands of extremist groups desperately struggling to win the Islamic Civil War. The American people have an uncanny knack for transforming their visions into reality. If it is World War III that we envision, then, it seems likely it is World War III that we will ultimately get.

###
* Abdul Aziz Said is Professor and Director of the Center for Global Peace at American University in Washington, D.C. Jim Zanotti is a Research Associate of the Center for Global Peace. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org).
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 22 August, 2006
Visit Common Ground News online: www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org)
Copyright permission has been granted for republication.

2) ~Youth Views~ Growing peace
Justin Schair

Hempstead, NY - If you were invited to sit down with your enemy for a cup of tea and discuss your conflicting views, would you do it?

Since the start of the programme, over 2,500 Israeli, Palestinian, Egyptian, Pakistani and Indian kids, among others, have done just that. In fact, they spent three weeks with their “enemies” at a summer camp in the United States arguing, understanding, and ultimately coming to respect the humanity behind every face – even the humanity of their enemies. The programme that makes this happen calls these youth Seeds of Peace.

A select group of teenagers, normally forced by circumstances to take different sides in some of the world’s most intractable conflicts, have stepped away from everything they know to be true, defied the seemingly irreversible logic of ethnic and religious hatred and sat face to face with an adversary often portrayed as sub-human at home.

This quiet and unique diplomacy has been taking place at the Seeds of Peace International Camp in western Maine for over 13 years.

The programme’s strategy is simple: by forging personal bridges between adversaries, like Israelis and Palestinians, there is an immediate platform for dialogue. Taking it a step further, these parties come to know and respect each other as individuals and not just Israelis, Palestinians, Christians, Hindus, Jews or Muslims. These bonds have a tremendous ripple effect when the “seeds” return home. Their families and friends, more often than not, cannot fathom the notion of meeting the enemy to talk peace, and are eager to hear stories.

In long-standing conflicts, expired treaties, broken promises and pervasive tensions have left little room for optimism. But it’s hard to be anything but optimistic when you meet these "seeds of peace” and learn what they are doing. Armed with rare and powerful sensibility, they are embracing the fundamental values of humanity to dissipate the power of hatred and misunderstanding that lies behind their conflicts. By recognising the human face they are able to respect and talk with their enemy. These are necessary conditions for peace. Without respect there is no dialogue. And without dialogue there is no progress.

“Israel will not die and Palestine will come for sure but we need to realise our dreams without losing each other,” Yusuf Bashir, a Palestinian graduate of Seeds of Peace, said in a recent article he wrote for the organisation’s Olive Branch Magazine. A year before Bashir came to the camp he had been shot by an Israeli soldier.

Situated at the edge of a quiet lake surrounded by woods, the camp could be any other American summer camp, save for the international flags and the Maine State Police guarding the gate.

These “campers” often come from terrifying environments where the possibility of an explosion outside their front door is very real. Riding the bus or walking down the sidewalk entails risks unimaginable to most people.

While at the Seeds of Peace Camp these youth enjoy security, something none of them has at home. They also have the freedom to speak openly and criticise their own side’s positions without fear of reprisal from family and community. Questioning the dogmas of their society is not a luxury most of these youth enjoy. The camp is a refuge from chaos and allows for the exploration of perspectives rarely considered at home.

In 2004 I met with Zeina, a 16-year-old Palestinian, who attended the camp in Maine. She recalled the impact she felt when after returning home to Palestine she and her Israeli friend from camp met in Jerusalem along with their families. Her uncle no longer speaks to her immediate family. “He couldn’t understand,” she remarked.

Campers attend “conflict resolution” sessions where they get to the heart of their differences and debate them with the opposing side. It’s not easy and nobody forgets why they are there and where they came from, but for the first time in their lives they have the chance to step outside of the environment that has so strongly shaped their views. The programme offers these kids, indeed anyone visiting the camp, a much larger perspective on their conflicts.

As most of the Seeds of Peace staff will tell you, this is not some camp where kids hold hands, hug each other and then go home. They deal with the issues on the most basic levels. It’s humbling and profoundly educational when you listen to someone tell you why they hate you.

Seeds of Peace continues to keep in touch with participants through follow-up programmes in the home regions of the graduates.

In an interview one year after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks in the United States, Pakistani Seeds of Peace graduate Sana Shah, then 16, was interviewed by Time Magazine. “Before going to camp, I was scared. I didn’t want to associate with Jews and Hindus,” she remarked. “But we all became good friends.” On Sept. 12, 2001 Shah wore her Seeds of Peace t-shirt to her school in Lahore, Pakistan.

Shah, like many of her fellow Seeds graduates developed a deep sense of respect for dialogue without abandoning her faith and values.

Seeds of Peace is shaping the next generation of leaders who the programme’s operators hope will be far better equipped to communicate, negotiate and resolve conflicts than their predecessors, proving that it is possible, even for those living in conflict, to overcome their circumstances and explore new paths for peace.

###
* Justin Schair is a graduate of Hofstra University, where he studied journalism. You may e-mail the author at jschair@aol.com. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org).
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 22 August 2006
Visit Common Ground News online: www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org)
Copyright permission has been granted for republication.

3) Us vs. them: the basics of citizen diplomacy
Tamar Miller

Cambridge, Massachusetts - At the beginning of the 2nd intifada in 2000, there were simultaneous protests in Harvard Yard. On the steps of the library stood 50 MIT and Harvard members of the Arab Students Associations. Each wore black, silently holding signs with the names of the first 50 casualties in today's Palestine. On the opposite side of the Yard, a rally was under way supporting Israel for suffering yet another round of violence. I grew up an Orthodox Jew, spent a good deal of time in Jerusalem and identify deeply with my people. But with whom would I stand? Why were there separate rallies? In the end, I stood awkwardly in the middle holding a small sign that read, "I support life for Israelis and Palestinians."

Six years later, as people are wounded beyond recognition and dying beyond hope in Lebanon and Israel, I would rather not argue historical grievances, compare traumas, nor let my imagination run riot with messianic yearning. My temporarily defeated spirit wants to do away with public conversations that define Israel's war with Hizbullah as one between us vs. them.

At the core, most of us want to live in dignity and security. For the few pathologically evil people, there is little hope of repair. There are, however, many more of us than them and I cannot believe that war is inevitable. My aching heart knows that citizen diplomacy, among Christians, Jews and Muslims anywhere, would have helped limit the consequences of hate and fear by drying up the sea of sympathy around those who believe in violence. Framing the conflict in terms of us vs. them frustrates, if not completely kills, imaginative solutions.

Citizen diplomacy would have lessened the likelihood of this war and now as it dies down, I would like to make attempts to reshape public discourse in ways that do not perpetuate polarisation and unholy ideological traps. As my friend Yitzhak Frankenthal, founder of the Israeli and Palestinian Bereaved Families Forum puts it, “my son died because there is no peace.”

Citizen diplomacy is not a collection of saccharine and inconsequential gestures, but rather of powerful agents for confronting pain and then healing it. Recently, scores of imams and rabbis conversed and debated in Seville as part of a process sponsored by the French organisation Hommes de Parole; Hartford Seminary offers newly created courses in Building Abrahamic Partnerships; the Coexistence Center of Amman just visited the Pluralism Project at Harvard University; Festive meals and text study at local mosques, churches and synagogues are increasing in frequency, sponsored by the Center for Jewish-Muslim Relations in Boston; an American rabbi recently spoke before thousands of Muslims in Syria, and many Iraqi refugees also who greeted him warmly even in the midst of war; community service projects of the Interfaith Youth Core based in Chicago are catching on all over the United States; and the Israel Palestine Center for Research and Information provides peace education training for Palestinian and Israeli school teachers. There are hundreds more citizen initiatives like these that are the best-kept secrets of peacemaking.

I know that privately many of my Jewish relatives, friends and colleagues are agonising over Lebanese civilian deaths. Yet, most public statements by the Jewish community include only the slightest mention of Lebanese suffering. Because nearly everything in our public arena is framed as us vs. them, the discourse takes on a defensively arrogant tone. A powerful air force does nothing to extinguish the existential terror of many Israelis and Jews. There is little undisturbed public space to reflect on the deep fear about Israel "being wiped off the face of the earth" (as Nasrallah and Ahmadinejad declare) and, at the same time, express what we really feel -- grief and despair over dead Lebanese women, children and men and profound uncertainty about how to fight a fatal threat.

Citizen diplomacy is not what my brother calls (with a funny mixture of deference and disdain) a "hug-a-terrorist programme". It is rather an invitation to speak and act peaceably toward one another when the logic of war is so compelling. Citizen diplomacy is possible because nations are made up of people. Nations are not monoliths: "something large and immovable, something massive and unchanging and of uniform character and difficult to deal with on a human level" (Webster Dictionary). Nations are a collection of many of us, the peaceable majority and, only a few of them, the irredeemably hateful minority. That is a root cause for hope.

###
* Tamar Miller is a social entrepreneur in Cambridge, MA. She is a former co-director of the New Israel Fund/New England and former Executive Director of the Institute for Social and Economic Policy at Harvard University. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org).
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 22 August 2006
Visit Common Ground News online: www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org)
Copyright permission has been granted for republication.

4) Why I did not support the migration amendment bill in Australian Parliament
Maria Vamvakino

Canberra - The decision last week by the Australian Prime Minister, John Howard, to scrap the government's proposed Migration Amendment Bill is a significant victory for those of us in the Australian Parliament, and the Australian public, who refuse to support this government's demonstrated willingness to completely disregard Australia's basic obligations under the 1951 Refugee Convention, and to instead play crude political games with the lives and welfare of refugees seeking asylum in Australia.

Under the proposed Bill, all unauthorised refugees who arrive by boat to Australia would automatically be processed offshore, where they would remain in detention until a third country for resettlement was arranged. Alarmingly, the amendments contained in the Bill would see Australia excluded as a possible third country of resettlement for those deemed to be legitimate refugees.

The excision of the Australian mainland from its own migration zone, and its removal as a potential third country of resettlement for those who are found to be legitimate refugees, are measures that have no precedent.

One reason why I did not support the Migration Amendment Bill is the damage it will further do to Australia's already troubled international reputation. This Bill has no moral or legal justification, and only demonstrates the Australian government's continuing disregard for the rights and welfare of those who come here seeking asylum.

Whilst Australia has enjoyed an international reputation as a compassionate and welcoming country, one that has embraced multiculturalism as a policy that officially recognises and celebrates Australia's diverse ethnic, religious and cultural make up, today we are in danger of losing that reputation.

It is of no credit to this country that for the last decade, Australia has led the way internationally in implementing some of the most extreme and punitive refugee policies ever seen, including the mandatory detention of children.

The Australian government's attempt to sell these measures to the Australian public as essential to border protection and Australia's national security are consistent with the way this government has often manipulated and misrepresented the plight of refugees for its own political gain.

Already, some in the government are publicly mourning the defeat of the Migration Amendment Bill as a weakening of Australia's anti-terrorism measures. In insinuating that refugees pose a potential threat to Australia's national security, despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of asylum seekers arriving in Australia are found to be legitimate refugees, the government is simply trying to convince Australians that they should accept whatever policy measures it claims necessary to protect Australia's "national security" no matter the cost.

Unfortunately, it is only base stereotypes associated with the religious and ethnic background of those who have predominantly come here seeking asylum, namely Afghans and Iraqis, that makes such claims seem plausible.

Rather than try to undermine these stereotypes, the government continually tries to use them to legitimise some of its more extreme policies.

The motivations behind this Bill are another reason why I did not support the Migration Amendment Bill.

It is clear that the government drafted this Bill as a response to Indonesia's reaction over Australia's decision to grant asylum to 43 West Papuans. As the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs, Amanda Vanstone, herself stated, excluding Australia as a possible country of resettlement for refugees arriving by boat means that in the future, refugees from neighbouring countries would not be able to "use the Australian mainland as a means of voicing protests about other countries."

Not only does this contradict the right of free speech in Australia, but by changing Australia's immigration policy in response to Indonesia's concerns, this government is effectively saying that it is prepared to abdicate its own responsibility for making decisions about Australia's immigration policy.

As Tony Burke, the opposition Shadow Minister for Immigration, has rightly pointed out, this is not a policy of border protection, but a policy of "border surrender."

There was no demand from the Australian public for this legislation, and the perception that Indonesia is able to dictate the terms of Australia's immigration policy only threatens to foster public resentment. Surely the Indonesian people would equally resent the idea that Australia was able to dictate key policy decisions taken by the Indonesian government.

Just as the proposed Bill was never in Australia's interests, it was never in Indonesia's interests either.

It is important that the concerns of the Indonesian government be taken into consideration. It is also important to emphasise that Australia needs to develop closer relations with the people and the government of Indonesia.

Indonesia is our closest and most important neighbour, and closer relations will always benefit both countries. As someone who has visited Indonesia, and who represents an electorate with a large Muslim minority, I know and understand the importance and the value of the relationship between our two countries.

However, Indonesia's concerns have to be addressed in a way that is consistent with Australia's legal and moral obligations to refugees as per the 1951 Refugee Convention to which Australia is a signatory.

###
* Maria Vamvakinou is the Federal Member for Calwell. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org).
Source: The Jakarta Post, 22 August 2006
Visit the website at www.thejakartapost.com (http://www.thejakartapost.com)
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

5) Do not pity the peacemakers
Paul Sullivan

Washington, D.C. - In a region where one can be killed because he or she is Sunni, Shi‘a, Christian or Jew, in a region where one's village could be bombed because one is African or Arab, and in a region where a small child can suffocate in ruins because she happened to be in the sights of a "tactical operation", should we pity the peacemakers?

In a region where one's name could bring hatred, should we pity the peacemakers? In a world where ideologues and extremists control powerful means of violence, and spout hatred and bigotry toward those who are different, should we pity the peacemakers? In a region where the people are silent out of intimidation and fear, coming from many sides, should we pity the peacemakers?

In a world where so many are silent as they watch young girls and boys, and their moms and dads, get slaughtered in the name of some idea, should we pity the peacemakers? In a world where so many well-educated and well-fed remain silent in the face of poverty, bigotry and violence, should we pity the peacemakers? In a world where great religions are hijacked toward gaining power, wealth and who knows what else, should we pity the peacemakers?

In a world where faith is used to point guns and plant bombs, should we pity the peacemakers? In a world where if one tries to show the goodness of those who are different, one is considered to be a traitor by some, should we pity the peacemakers? In a world where God is a battle cry rather than part of a prayer, should we pity the peacemakers?

In a world where more is spent on weapons than on making the poor better off, should we pity the peacemakers? In a world where justice, freedom, and honour -- yes, honour -- have lost their way in so many places, should we pity the peacemakers?

No, we should not pity the peacemakers because they see something others do not. They can see the piling human costs. They can see where much of the hatred and bloodshed, the blood feuds and vendettas are going. They can see where the money is poured into shedding blood and shredding families, rather than creating jobs and giving hope.

They are the ones carrying medicines and food across rapids, bombed-out roads, malarial forests, and through areas where at any time their lives could be cut short. They are the ones who are not silent in the face of evil. They are the ones who are not silent while their leaders herd populations into empty "victories", Pyrrhic ties and devastating losses -- and for what?

They are not the ones you should pity. They are the ones you should honour in this post-honour world.

Surely countries and peoples should defend themselves. Sometimes war is the only way. Sometimes evil must be confronted, and defeated. But as the world devolves and dissolves, as our community of civilised nations heads more toward the brink of a clash of civilisations, which we will all lose, we should salute the peacemakers and the moderates, for they may be our only hope.

They can be found in the fields of battle, even in uniform. They can be found in the tiny clinics with bullet holes in them. They could be the fathers carrying their babies across bombed out villages when they say: "Enough, kifaya, enough."

Enough. That is the call of the peacemakers, and that takes great courage. Enough. That is the feeling deep in the souls of some great thinkers and great leaders. Enough. That is the sense, one can be sure, that Christians, Jews, Muslims and others must feel when they pray to their God, and when they see how dark the world has become, when there could be so much light.

That light will come from the peacemakers whatever their creed, whatever their clothing, whatever their language and whatever their colour. That light will come from those with the greatest of courage: those willing to speak out when so many others are silent, complacent, and silently cowering as others decide the world's fate for them.

Don't pity the peacemakers. Honour them.

###
*Paul Sullivan is Professor of Economics, National Defense University and Adjunct Professor, Security Studies, Georgetown University, Washington, DC. He taught and researched at the American University in Cairo and is the author of numerous publications. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org).
Source: Middle East Times, 15 August, 2006
Visit the Middle East Times at www.metimes.com (http://www.metimes.com)
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

Youth Views
CGNews-PiH also regularly publishes the work of student leaders and journalists whose articles strengthen intercultural understanding and promote constructive perspectives and dialogue in their own communities. Student journalists and writers under the age of 27 are encouraged to write to Chris Binkley (cbinkley@sfcg.org) for more information on contributing.

About CGNews-PiH
The Common Ground News Service - Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH) provides news, op-eds, features and analysis by local and international experts on a broad range of issues affecting Muslim-Western relations. CGNews-PiH syndicates articles that are balanced and solution-oriented to news outlets worldwide. With support from the Norwegian government and the United States Institute of Peace, this news service is a non-profit initiative of Search for Common Ground, an international NGO working in the field of conflict transformation.
This news service is one outcome of a set of working meetings held in partnership with His Royal Highness Prince El Hassan bin Talal of Jordan in June 2003.
The views expressed in these articles are those of the authors, not of CGNews-PiH or its affiliates.Common Ground News Service
1601 Connecticut Avenue, NW Suite #200
Washington, DC 20009 USA
Ph: +1(202) 265-4300
Fax: +1(202) 232-6718

Rue Belliard 205 Bte 13 B-1040
Brussels, Belgium
Ph: +32(02) 736-7262
Fax: +32(02) 732-3033

E-mail: cgnewspih@sfcg.org
Website: www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org/index.php?sid=1&lang=en)

Editors
Emad Khalil (Amman)
Juliette Schmidt (Beirut)
Chris Binkley (Dakar)
Medhy Hidayat (Jakarta)
Leena El-Ali (Washington)
Emmanuelle Hazan (Washington)
Andrew Kessinger (Washington)

CGNews is a not-for-profit news service.

Le français suit
Espanol sigue

AMARC Delegation Successfully Ends Coverage of XVI International HIV-AIDS Conference

Montreal, August 22nd, 2006 - The World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters (AMARC) ensured worldwide broadcast of the XVI International HIV-AIDS Conference, which was held from the 13th-18th of August 2006 in Toronto, Canada. Community Radio journalists from Brazil, Canada, Gambia, Haiti, Nepal, Peru and Senegal reported from the conference site to the community radio network of AMARC. Listen to the audio pieces produced during the broadcast at http://aids.amarc.org.

A delegation comprising more than twenty journalists representing community radios from Latin America, North America, Africa, and Asia-Pacific ensured coverage of the discussions, panels and demonstrations at the 16th International Conference on HIV-AIDS. Transmission in English, Spanish, Portuguese, French and Nepalese were coordinated by Pulsar, AMARC's information agency in Latin America; by SIMBANI, AMARC's news agency in Africa; and by representatives of community radios from all regions served by AMARC. To listen to the individual audio files, please go to: http://www.aids.amarc.org.

The AMARC world coverage of the international HIV-AIDS Conference is ensured in partnership with the International AIDS society, the International Development Research Centre (IDRC), participating community radio stations and NGO partners.

AMARC is an international non-governmental organization serving community radio movement in more than 110 countries, providing a worldwide network for exchange and solidarity and promoting the right to communicate at the international, regional and local levels. For further information please go to: http://www.amarc.org

For more information visit: www.aids.amarc.org or contact: Sophie
Toupin, sophie@amarc.org, (514) 982-0351.

La délégation de l'AMARC termine avec succès la couverture de la XVI conférence internationale sur le VIH-SIDA

Montréal, 22 août 2006. L'Association mondiale des radiodiffuseurs
communautaires (AMARC) a couvert la 16ième conférence internationale sur le VIH-SIDA qui s'est tenu du 13 au 18 août 2006 à Toronto, Canada. Des
journalistes de radios communautaires du Brésil, Canada, Gambie, Haïti,
Népal, Pérou, Sénégal étaient présentEs sur les lieux de la conférence
pour faire des reportages au réseau des radios communautaires de
l'AMARC. Pour écouter les reportages visitez : http://aids.amarc.org.

Une délégation d'une vingtaine de journalistes des radios communautaires de l'Amérique latine et de l'Amérique du Nord, de l'Afrique, et de
l'Asie-Pacifique ont assuré la couverture des discussions, des panels et des manifestations qui ont eu lieu lors de la conférence internationale sur le VIH-SIDA. La radiodiffusion internationale a été produite en français, anglais, espagnol, portugais et népalais et a été coordonnées par Pulsar, l'Agence d'information de l'AMARC en Amérique Latine; par SIMBANI, en Afrique; et par des représentantEs de radios de toutes les régions de l'AMARC. Pour écoutez les programmes audio, visitez le site web suivant: http://aids.amarc.org.

La couverture mondiale réalisée par l'AMARC lors de la Conférence
internationale sur le VIH-SIDA se fait en partenariat avec la société
internationale du SIDA, le Centre de recherches pour le développement
international (CRDI) et les stations de radio communautaires
participantes et les ONGs partenaires. Pour plus d'information visitez http://www.amarc.org

AMARC est une organisation internationale non-gouvernementale servant le mouvement de la radio communautaire dans plus de 110 pays, alimentant un réseau mondial d'échanges et de solidarité et
préconisant le droit à communiquer aux niveaux international, national,
régional et local.

Pour plus d'information visitez: http://aids.amarc.org ou contactez:
Sophie Toupin, sophie@amarc.org, (514) 982-0351.

La Delegación de AMARC Termina Exitosamente la Cobertura de la XVI Conferencia Internacional Sobre el VIH-SIDA

Montreal, 22 de agosto, 2006 - La Asociación Mundial de Radios Comunitarias (AMARC) realizó una transmisión internacional desde
la XVI Conferencia Intenacional sobre el VIH-SIDA, del 13 al 18 de agusto, 2006, desde la ciudad de Toronto, Canadá. Periodistas de radios comunitarias de Brasil, Canadá, Gambia, Haití, Nepal, Perú y Senegal reportaron desde la conferencia para la comunidad de radios comunitarias de AMARC. Para escuchar los programas visite http://aids.amarc.org.

Una delegación de más de 20 periodistas representando a radios comunitarias en América latina, Norteamérica, África y Asia-Pacífico, cubrieron las discusiones, los paneles de discusión y las manifestaciones de la XVI Conferencia Internacional sobre el VIH/SIDA. Las transmisión en inglés, francés, español, portugués y nepalí fueron coordinadas por PULSAR, la Agencia de noticias de AMARC en América latina; por SIMBANI, la Agencia de noticias de AMARC en África, así como por representantes de las radios comunitarias de todas las regiones donde AMARC tiene miembros. Para escuchar los programas individuales: http://aids.amarc.org.

La cobertura internacional de AMARC durante la XVI Conferencia Internacional sobre el VIH-SIDA fue posible gracias a la colaboración de la Sociedad Internacional del SIDA. El Centro de Investigaciones para el Desarrollo (IDRC), y las radios comunitarias y ONGs participantes.

AMARC es una organización internacional no gubernamental que sirve el movimiento de las radios comunitarias en más de 110 países, alimentando una red mundial de intercambio y solidaridad y favoreciendo el derecho a la comunicaciôn a nivel internacional regional y local. Para mayores informaciones sobre AMARC visite http://www.amarc.org

Si desea mayores informes visite: http://aids.amarc.org o contacte:
Sophie Toupin, sophie@amarc.org, (514) 982-0351.

From Degrading to De-Grading
By Alfie Kohn
HIGH SCHOOL MAGAZINE
March 1999

You can tell a lot about a teacher’s values and personality just by asking how he or she feels about giving grades. Some defend the practice, claiming that grades are necessary to “motivate” students. Many of these teachers actually seem to enjoy keeping intricate records of students’ marks. Such teachers periodically warn students that they’re “going to have to know this for the test” as a way of compelling them to pay attention or do the assigned readings – and they may even use surprise quizzes for that purpose, keeping their grade books at the ready.

Frankly, we ought to be worried for these teachers’ students. In my experience, the most impressive teachers are those who despise the whole process of giving grades. Their aversion, as it turns out, is supported by solid evidence that raises questions about the very idea of traditional grading.

Three Main Effects of Grading

Researchers have found three consistent effects of using – and especially, emphasizing the importance of – letter or number grades:

1. Grades tend to reduce students’ interest in the learning itself. One of the most well-researched findings in the field of motivational psychology is that the more people are rewarded for doing something, the more they tend to lose interest in whatever they had to do to get the reward (Kohn, 1993). Thus, it shouldn’t be surprising that when students are told they’ll need to know something for a test – or, more generally, that something they’re about to do will count for a grade – they are likely to come to view that task (or book or idea) as a chore.

While it’s not impossible for a student to be concerned about getting high marks and also to like what he or she is doing, the practical reality is that these two ways of thinking generally pull in opposite directions. Some research has explicitly demonstrated that a “grade orientation” and a “learning orientation” are inversely related (Beck et al., 1991; Milton et al., 1986). More strikingly, study after study has found that students -- from elementary school to graduate school, and across cultures – demonstrate less interest in learning as a result of being graded (Benware and Deci, 1984; Butler, 1987; Butler and Nisan, 1986; Grolnick and Ryan, 1987; Harter and Guzman, 1986; Hughes et al., 1985; Kage, 1991; Salili et al., 1976). Thus, anyone who wants to see students get hooked on words and numbers and ideas already has reason to look for other ways of assessing and describing their achievement.

2. Grades tend to reduce students’ preference for challenging tasks. Students of all ages who have been led to concentrate on getting a good grade are likely to pick the easiest possible assignment if given a choice (Harter, 1978; Harter and Guzman, 1986; Kage, 1991; Milton et al., 1986). The more pressure to get an A, the less inclination to truly challenge oneself. Thus, students who cut corners may not be lazy so much as rational; they are adapting to an environment where good grades, not intellectual exploration, are what count. They might well say to us, “Hey, you told me the point here is to bring up my GPA, to get on the honor roll. Well, I’m not stupid: the easier the assignment, the more likely that I can give you what you want. So don’t blame me when I try to find the easiest thing to do and end up not learning anything.”

3. Grades tend to reduce the quality of students’ thinking. Given that students may lose interest in what they’re learning as a result of grades, it makes sense that they’re also apt to think less deeply. One series of studies, for example, found that students given numerical grades were significantly less creative than those who received qualitative feedback but no grades. The more the task required creative thinking, in fact, the worse the performance of students who knew they were going to be graded. Providing students with comments in addition to a grade didn’t help: the highest achievement occurred only when comments were given instead of numerical scores (Butler, 1987; Butler, 1988; Butler and Nisan, 1986).

In another experiment, students told they would be graded on how well they learned a social studies lesson had more trouble understanding the main point of the text than did students who were told that no grades would be involved. Even on a measure of rote recall, the graded group remembered fewer facts a week later (Grolnick and Ryan, 1987). A brand-new study discovered that students who tended to think about current events in terms of what they’d need to know for a grade were less knowledgeable than their peers, even after taking other variables into account (Anderman and Johnston, 1998).

More Reasons to Just Say No to Grades

The preceding three results should be enough to cause any conscientious educator to rethink the practice of giving students grades. But as they say on late-night TV commercials, Wait – there’s more.

4. Grades aren’t valid, reliable, or objective. A “B” in English says nothing about what a student can do, what she understands, where she needs help. Moreover, the basis for that grade is as subjective as the result is uninformative. A teacher can meticulously record scores for one test or assignment after another, eventually calculating averages down to a hundredth of a percentage point, but that doesn’t change the arbitrariness of each of these individual marks. Even the score on a math test is largely a reflection of how the test was written: what skills the teacher decided to assess, what kinds of questions happened to be left out, and how many points each section was “worth.”

Moreover, research has long been available to confirm what all of us know: any given assignment may well be given two different grades by two equally qualified teachers. It may even be given two different grades by a single teacher who reads it at two different times (for example, see some of the early research reviewed in Kirschenbaum et al., 1971). In short, what grades offer is spurious precision – a subjective rating masquerading as an objective evaluation.

5. Grades distort the curriculum. A school’s use of letter or number grades may encourage what I like to call a “bunch o’ facts” approach to instruction because that sort of learning is easier to score. The tail of assessment thus comes to wag the educational dog.

6. Grades waste a lot of time that could be spent on learning. Add up all the hours that teachers spend fussing with their grade books. Then factor in all the (mostly unpleasant) conversations they have with students and their parents about grades. It’s tempting to just roll our eyes when confronted with whining or wheedling, but the real problem rests with the practice of grading itself.

7. Grades encourage cheating. Again, we can continue to blame and punish all the students who cheat -- or we can look for the structural reasons this keeps happening. Researchers have found that the more students are led to focus on getting good grades, the more likely they are to cheat, even if they themselves regard cheating as wrong (Anderman et al., 1998; Milton et al., 1986).

8. Grades spoil teachers’ relationships with students. Consider this lament, which could have been offered by a teacher in your district:

I’m getting tired of running a classroom in which everything we do revolves around grades. I’m tired of being suspicious when students give me compliments, wondering whether or not they are just trying to raise their grade. I’m tired of spending so much time and energy grading your papers, when there are probably a dozen more productive and enjoyable ways for all of us to handle the evaluation of papers. I’m tired of hearing you ask me ‘Does this count?’ And, heaven knows, I’m certainly tired of all those little arguments and disagreements we get into concerning marks which take so much fun out of the teaching and the learning. . . (Kirschenbaum et al., 1971, p. 115).

9. Grades spoil students’ relationships with each other. The quality of students’ thinking has been shown to depend partly on the extent to which they are permitted to learn cooperatively (Johnson and Johnson, 1989; Kohn, 1992). Thus, the ill feelings, suspicion, and resentment generated by grades aren’t just disagreeable in their own right; they interfere with learning.

The most destructive form of grading by far is that which is done “on a curve,” such that the number of top grades is artificially limited: no matter how well all the students do, not all of them can get an A. Apart from the intrinsic unfairness of this arrangement, its practical effect is to teach students that others are potential obstacles to their own success. The kind of collaboration that can help all students to learn more effectively doesn’t stand a chance in such an environment.

Sadly, even teachers who don’t explicitly grade on a curve may assume, perhaps unconsciously, that the final grades “ought to” come out looking more or less this way: a few very good grades, a few very bad grades, and the majority somewhere in the middle. But as one group of researchers pointed out, "It is not a symbol of rigor to have grades fall into a 'normal' distribution; rather, it is a symbol of failure -- failure to teach well, failure to test well, and failure to have any influence at all on the intellectual lives of students” (Milton et al., 1986, p. 225).

The competition that turns schooling into a quest for triumph and ruptures relationships among students doesn’t just happen within classrooms, of course. The same effect is witnessed at a schoolwide level when kids are not just rated but ranked, sending the message that the point isn’t to learn, or even to perform well, but to defeat others. Some students might be motivated to improve their class rank, but that is completely different from being motivated to understand ideas. (Wise educators realize that it doesn’t matter how motivated students are; what matters is how students are motivated. It is the type of motivation that counts, not the amount.)

Grade Inflation . . . and Other Distractions

Most of us are directly acquainted with at least some of these disturbing consequences of grades, yet we continue to reduce students to letters or numbers on a regular basis. Perhaps we’ve become inured to these effects and take them for granted. This is the way it’s always been, we assume, and the way it has to be. It’s rather like people who have spent all their lives in a terribly polluted city and have come to assume that this is just the way air looks – and that it’s natural to be coughing all the time.

Oddly, when educators are shown that it doesn’t have to be this way, some react with suspicion instead of relief. They want to know why you’re making trouble, or they assert that you’re exaggerating the negative effects of grades (it’s really not so bad – cough, cough), or they dismiss proven alternatives to grading on the grounds that our school could never do what others schools have done.

The practical difficulties of abolishing letter grades are real. But the key question is whether those difficulties are seen as problems to be solved or as excuses for perpetuating the status quo. The logical response to the arguments and data summarized here is to say: “Good Heavens! If even half of this is true, then it’s imperative we do whatever we can, as soon as we can, to phase out traditional grading.” Yet many people begin and end with the problems of implementation, responding to all this evidence by saying, in effect, “Yeah, yeah, yeah, but we’ll never get rid of grades because . . .”

It is also striking how many educators never get beyond relatively insignificant questions, such as how many tests to give, or how often to send home grade reports, or what grade should be given for a specified level of achievement (e.g., what constitutes “B” work), or what number corresponds to what letter. Some even reserve their outrage for the possibility that too many students are ending up with good grades, a reaction that suggests stinginess with A’s is being confused with intellectual rigor. The evidence indicates that the real problem isn’t grade inflation; it’s grades. The proper occasion for outrage is not that too many students are getting A’s, but that too many students have accepted that getting A’s is the point of going to school.

Common Objections

Let’s consider the most frequently heard responses to the above arguments – which is to say, the most common objections to getting rid of grades.

First, it is said that students expect to receive grades and even seem addicted to them. This is often true; personally, I’ve taught high school students who reacted to the absence of grades with what I can only describe as existential vertigo. (Who am I, if not a B+?) But as more elementary and even some middle schools move to replace grades with more informative (and less destructive) systems of assessment, the damage doesn’t begin until students get to high school. Moreover, elementary and middle schools that haven’t changed their practices often cite the local high school as the reason they must get students used to getting grades regardless of their damaging effects -- just as high schools point the finger at colleges.

Even when students arrive in high school already accustomed to grades, already primed to ask teachers, “Do we have to know this?” or “What do I have to do to get an A?”, this is a sign that something is very wrong. It’s more an indictment of what has happened to them in the past than an argument to keep doing it in the future.

Perhaps because of this training, grades can succeed in getting students to show up on time, hand in their work, and otherwise do what they’re told. Many teachers are loath to give up what is essentially an instrument of control. But even to the extent this instrument works (which is not always), we are obliged to reflect on whether mindless compliance is really our goal. The teacher who exclaims, “These kids would blow off my course in a minute if they weren’t getting a grade for it!” may be issuing a powerful indictment of his or her course. Who would be more reluctant to give up grades than a teacher who spends the period slapping transparencies on the overhead projector and lecturing endlessly at students about Romantic poets or genetic codes? Without bribes (A’s) and threats (F’s), students would have no reason to do such assignments. To maintain that this proves something is wrong with the kids – or that grades are simply “necessary” – suggests a willful refusal to examine one’s classroom practices and assumptions about teaching and learning.

“If I can’t give a child a better reason for studying than a grade on a report card, I ought to lock my desk and go home and stay there.” So wrote Dorothy De Zouche, a Missouri teacher, in an article published in February . . . of 1945. But teachers who can give a child a better reason for studying don’t need grades. Research substantiates this: when the curriculum is engaging – for example, when it involves hands-on, interactive learning activities -- students who aren’t graded at all perform just as well as those who are graded (Moeller and Reschke, 1993).

Another objection: it is sometimes argued that students must be given grades because colleges demand them. One might reply that “high schools have no responsibility to serve colleges by performing the sorting function for them” – particularly if that process undermines learning (Krumboltz and Yeh, 1996, p. 325). But in any case the premise of this argument is erroneous: traditional grades are not mandatory for admission to colleges and universities. (See Sidebar A.)

Making Change

A friend of mine likes to say that people don’t resist change – they resist being changed. Even terrific ideas (like moving a school from a grade orientation to a learning orientation) are guaranteed to self-destruct if they are simply forced down people’s throats. The first step for an administrator, therefore, is to open up a conversation – to spend perhaps a full year just encouraging people to think and talk about the effects of (and alternatives to) traditional grades. This can happen in individual classes, as teachers facilitate discussions about how students regard grades, as well as in evening meetings with parents, or on a website -- all with the help of relevant books, articles, speakers, videos, and visits to neighboring schools that are farther along in this journey.

The actual process of “de-grading” can be done in stages. For example, a high school might start by freeing ninth-grade classes from grades before doing the same for upperclassmen. (Even a school that never gets beyond the first stage will have done a considerable service, giving students one full year where they can think about what they’re learning instead of their GPAs.)

Another route to gradual change is to begin by eliminating only the most pernicious practices, such as grading on a curve or ranking students. Although grades, per se, may continue for a while, at least the message will be sent from the beginning that all students can do well, and that the point is to succeed rather than to beat others.

Anyone who has heard the term “authentic assessment” knows that abolishing grades doesn’t mean eliminating the process of gathering information about student performance – and communicating that information to students and parents. Rather, abolishing grades opens up possibilities that are far more meaningful and constructive. These include narratives (written comments), portfolios (carefully chosen collections of students’ writings and projects that demonstrate their interests, achievement, and improvement over time), student-led parent-teacher conferences, exhibitions and other opportunities for students to show what they can do.

Of course, it’s harder for a teacher to do these kinds of assessments if he or she has 150 or more students and sees each of them for 45-55 minutes a day. But that’s not an argument for continuing to use traditional grades; it’s an argument for challenging these archaic remnants of a factory-oriented approach to instruction, structural aspects of high schools that are bad news for reasons that go well beyond the issue of assessment. It’s an argument for looking into block scheduling, team teaching, interdisciplinary courses – and learning more about schools that have arranged things so each teacher can spend more time with fewer students (e.g., Meier, 1995).

Administrators should be prepared to respond to parental concerns, some of them completely reasonable, about the prospect of edging away from grades. “Don’t you value excellence?” You bet – and here’s the evidence that traditional grading undermines excellence. “Are you just trying to spare the self-esteem of students who do poorly?” We are concerned that grades may be making things worse for such students, yes, but the problem isn’t just that some kids won’t get A’s and will have their feelings hurt. The real problem is that almost all kids (including yours) will come to focus on grades and, as a result, their learning will be hurt.

If parents worry that grades are the only window they have into the school, we need to assure them that alternative assessments provide a far better view. But if parents don’t seem to care about getting the most useful information or helping their children become more excited learners – if they demand grades for the purpose of documenting how much better their kids are than everyone else’s, then we need to engage them in a discussion about whether this is a legitimate goal, and whether schools exist for the purpose of competitive credentialing or for the purpose of helping everyone to learn (Kohn, 1998; Labaree, 1997).

Above all, we need to make sure that objections and concerns about the details don’t obscure the main message, which is the demonstrated harm of traditional grading on the quality of students’ learning and their interest in exploring ideas.

High school administrators can do a world of good in their districts by actively supporting efforts to eliminate conventional grading in elementary and middle schools. Working with their colleagues in these schools can help pave the way for making such changes at the secondary school level.

In the Meantime

Finally, there is the question of what classroom teachers can do while grades continue to be required. The short answer is that they should do everything within their power to make grades as invisible as possible for as long as possible. Helping students forget about grades is the single best piece of advice for creating a learning-oriented classroom.

When I was teaching high school, I did a lot of things I now regret. But one policy that still seems sensible to me was saying to students on the first day of class that, while I was compelled to give them a grade at the end of the term, I could not in good conscience ever put a letter or number on anything they did during the term – and I would not do so. I would, however, write a comment – or, better, sit down and talk with them – as often as possible to give them feedback.

At this particular school I frequently faced students who had been prepared for admission to Harvard since their early childhood – a process I have come to call “Preparation H.” I knew that my refusal to rate their learning might only cause some students to worry about their marks all the more, or to create suspense about what would appear on their final grade reports, which of course would defeat the whole purpose. So I said that anyone who absolutely had to know what grade a given paper would get could come see me and we would figure it out together. An amazing thing happened: as the days went by, fewer and fewer students felt the need to ask me about grades. They began to be more involved with what we were learning because I had taken responsibility as a teacher to stop pushing grades into their faces, so to speak, whenever they completed an assignment.

What I didn’t do very well, however, was to get students involved in devising the criteria for excellence (what makes a math solution elegant, an experiment well-designed, an essay persuasive, a story compelling) as well as deciding how well their projects met those criteria. I’m afraid I unilaterally set the criteria and evaluated the students’ efforts. But I have seen teachers who were more willing to give up control, more committed to helping students participate in assessment and turn that into part of the learning. Teachers who work with their students to design powerful alternatives to letter grades have a replacement ready to go when the school finally abandons traditional grading – and are able to minimize the harm of such grading in the meantime.

__________________________________________________________

SIDEBAR A: Must Concerns About College Derail High School Learning?

Here is the good news: college admissions is not as rigid and reactionary as many people think. Here is the better news: even when that process doesn’t seem to have its priorities straight, high schools don’t have to be dragged down to that level.

Sometimes it is assumed that admissions officers at the best universities are 80-year-old fuddy-duddies, peering over their spectacles and muttering about “highly irregular” applications. In truth, the people charged with making these decisions are often just a few years out of college themselves and, after making their way through a pile of interchangeable applications from 3.8-GPA, student-council-vice-president, musically-accomplished hopefuls from high-powered traditional suburban high schools, they are desperate for something unconventional. Given that the most selective colleges have been to known to accept home-schooled children who have never set foot in a classroom, secondary schools have more latitude than they sometimes assume. It is not widely known, for example, that at least 280 colleges and universities [more than 700 as of 2005] don’t require applicants to take either the SAT or the ACT (“ACT/SAT Optional,” 1997).

Admittedly, large state universities are more resistant to unconventional applications than are small private colleges simply because of economics: it takes more time, and therefore more money, for admissions officers to read meaningful application materials than it does for them to glance at a GPA or an SAT score and plug it into a formula. But I have heard of high schools approaching the admissions directors of nearby universities and saying, in effect, “We’d like to improve our school by getting rid of grades. Here’s why. Will you work with us to make sure our seniors aren’t penalized?” This strategy may well be successful for the simple reason that not many high schools are requesting this at present and the added inconvenience for admissions offices is likely to be negligible. Of course, if more and more high schools abandon traditional grades, then the universities will have no choice but to adapt. This is a change that high schools will have to initiate rather than waiting for colleges to signal their readiness.

At the moment, plenty of admissions officers enjoy the convenience of class ranking, apparently because they have confused being better than one’s peers with being good at something; they’re looking for winners rather than learners. But relatively few colleges actually insist on this practice. When a 1993 NASSP survey asked 1,100 admissions officers what would happen if a high school stopped computing class rank, only 0.5 percent said the school’s applicants would not be considered for admission, 4.5 percent said it would be a “great handicap,” and 14.4 percent said it would be a “handicap” (Levy and Riordan, 1994). In other words, it appears that the absence of class ranks would not interfere at all with students’ prospects for admission to four out of five colleges.

Even more impressive, some high schools not only refuse to rank their students but refuse to give any sort of letter or number grades. Courses are all taken pass/fail, sometimes with narrative assessments of the students’ performance that become part of a college application. I have spoken to representatives of each of the following five schools, and all assure me that, year after year, their graduates are accepted into large state universities and small, highly selective colleges. Even the complete absence of high school grades is not a barrier to college admission, so we don’t have that excuse for continuing to subject students to the harm done by traditional grading.

Any school considering the abolition of grades might want to submit a letter with each graduating student’s transcript that explains why the school has chosen this course (see Sidebar B). In the meantime, feel free to contact any of these successful grade-free schools:

Metropolitan Learning Center / 2033 NW Glisan / Portland, OR 97209 / 503/916-5737 /www.teleport.com/~mlc

Poughkeepsie Day School / 39 New Hackensack Rd. / Poughkeepsie, NY 12603 / 914/462-7600

Waring School / 35 Standley St. / Beverly, MA 01915/ 978/927-8793 / Contact: Peter Smick

Carolina Friends School / 4809 Friends School Rd. / Durham, NC 27705 / 919/383-6602

Saint Ann’s School / 129 Pierrepont St. / Brooklyn Heights, NY 11201 / 718/522-1660 /www.saintanns.k12.ny.us

__________________________________________________________

SIDEBAR B: A Letter for Colleges

We at ______________ High School believe our graduates are uniquely qualified to take advantage of what your institution of higher learning has to offer because they are interested in what they will be able to learn rather than in what grade they will be able to get. By the time they leave us, our students have grown into scholars, and that's due in large part to the absence of traditional ratings. Students in other schools spend much of their time and mental effort keeping track of their grade-point averages, figuring out what is required for an A and then doing only that and no more. At ___________, that time and energy are devoted exclusively to encountering great ideas and great literature, using the scientific method, thinking like an historian or a mathematician, and learning to speak and write with precision. Our students not only think clearly - they take joy in doing so . . . precisely because their efforts have not been reduced to letters or numbers.

The enclosed transcript includes a wealth of other information about the applicant - a descriptive list of the courses s/he has completed and the special projects and extracurricular activities s/he has undertaken, as well as what selected members of our staff have to say about the student as a thinker and as a person. We believe that these data, together with the personal essay you may request and the interview we hope you will conduct, will give you a rich and complete portrait of this applicant such that a list of grades would add little in any case.

REFERENCES

“ACT/SAT Optional Colleges List Soars to 280.” FairTest Examiner, Summer 1997: 5. (Available at www.fairtest.org.)

Anderman, E. M., T. Griesinger, and G. Westerfield. “Motivation and Cheating During Early Adolescence.” Journal of Educational Psychology 90 (1998): 84-93.

Anderman, E. M., and J. Johnston. “Television News in the Classroom: What Are Adolescents Learning?” Journal of Adolescent Research 13 (1998): 73-100

Beck, H. P., S. Rorrer-Woody, and L. G. Pierce. “The Relations of Learning and Grade Orientations to Academic Performance.” Teaching of Psychology 18 (1991): 35-37.

Benware, C. A., and E. L. Deci. “Quality of Learning With an Active Versus Passive Motivational Set.” American Educational Research Journal 21 (1984): 755-65.

Butler, R. “Task-Involving and Ego-Involving Properties of Evaluation: Effects of Different Feedback Conditions on Motivational Perceptions, Interest, and Performance.” Journal of Educational Psychology 79 (1987): 474-82.

Butler, R. “Enhancing and Undermining Intrinsic Motivation: The Effects of Task-Involving and Ego-Involving Evaluation on Interest and Performance.” British Journal of Educational Psychology 58 (1988): 1-14.

Butler, R., and M. Nisan. “Effects of No Feedback, Task-Related Comments, and Grades on Intrinsic Motivation and Performance.” Journal of Educational Psychology 78 (1986): 210-16.

De Zouche, D. “’The Wound Is Mortal’: Marks, Honors, Unsound Activities.” The Clearing House 19 (1945): 339-44.

Grolnick, W. S., and R. M. Ryan. “Autonomy in Children's Learning: An Experimental and Individual Difference Investigation.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 52 (1987): 890-98.

Harter, S. “Pleasure Derived from Challenge and the Effects of Receiving Grades on Children's Difficulty Level Choices.” Child Development 49 (1978): 788-99.

Harter, S. and Guzman, M. E. The Effect of Perceived Cognitive Competence and Anxiety on Children’s Problem-Solving Performance, Difficulty Level Choices, and Preference for Challenge. Unpublished manuscript, University of Denver. 1986.

Hughes, B., H. J. Sullivan, and M. L. Mosley. “External Evaluation, Task Difficulty, and Continuing Motivation.” Journal of Educational Research 78 (1985): 210-15.

Johnson, D. W., and R. T. Johnson. Cooperation and Competition: Theory and Research. Edina, Minn.: Interaction Book Co., 1989.

Kage, M. “The Effects of Evaluation on Intrinsic Motivation.” Paper presented at the meeting of the Japan Association of Educational Psychology, Joetsu, Japan, 1991.

Kirschenbaum, H., S. B. Simon, and R. W. Napier. Wad-Ja-Get?: The Grading Game in American Education. New York: Hart, 1971.

Kohn, A. No Contest: The Case Against Competition. Rev. ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1992.

Kohn, A. Punished by Rewards: The Trouble with Gold Stars, Incentive Plans, A’s, Praise, and Other Bribes. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1993

Kohn, A. “Only for My Kid: How Privileged Parents Undermine School Reform.” Phi Delta Kappan, April 1998: 569-77.

Krumboltz, J. D., and C. J. Yeh. “Competitive Grading Sabotages Good Teaching.” Phi Delta Kappan, December 1996: 324-26.

Labaree, D. F. How to Succeed in School Without Really Learning: The Credentials Race in American Education. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1997.

Levy, J., and P. Riordan. Rank-in-Class, Grade Point Average, and College Admission. Reston, Va.: NASSP, 1994. (Available as ERIC Document 370988.)

Meier, D. The Power of Their Ideas: Lessons for America from a Small School in Harlem. Boston: Beacon, 1995.

Milton, O., H. R. Pollio, and J. A. Eison. Making Sense of College Grades. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1986.

Moeller, A. J., and C. Reschke. “A Second Look at Grading and Classroom Performance: Report of a Research Study.” Modern Language Journal 77 (1993): 163-69.

Salili, F., M. L. Maehr, R. L. Sorensen, and L. J. Fyans, Jr. “A Further Consideration of the Effects of Evaluation on Motivation.” American Educational Research Journal 13 (1976): 85-102.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Copyright © 1999 by Alfie Kohn. This article may be downloaded, reproduced, and distributed without permission as long as each copy includes this notice along with citation information (i.e., name of the periodical in which it originally appeared, date of publication, and author's name).

Universality of Humiliation

© Bill Templer, July 2006
Rajamangala University of Technology Lanna
Bankrang village
Phitsanulok province, Thailand

Humiliation will be universal but has an ethnography that can be distinctive. I am in a culture of very rigorous ‘face-saving’ in Thailand, where many acts of criticism and other dimensions of interpersonal interaction are perceived as highly damaging to ‘face’ and thus humiliating or gravely insulting. That is common in particular patterning for various East Asian cultures.

‘Face’ is fairly identical with ‘ego’ and ‘preserving one another’s ego’ is a basic rule of all Thai interactions, up and down a power pyramid, something known in Thai discourse as kreng jai. Very central to interpersonal behavior dynamics, is adherence to ‘respect’, coupled with ‘criticism avoidance’, whose violation is also perceived as an act of insult that will border on humiliation. What ‘respect’ encompasses is of course an ethnography anywhere.

There is a probing discussion of this in Suntaree Komin, The Psychology of the Thai People: Values and Behavioral Patterns (Bangkok: NIDA 1990, esp. pp. 160 ff). Komin has done a lot of empirical work. A good article online that looks at some of this is S, Niphon, ‘The Thai Character’ (http://thaiwebsites.com/thaicharacter.asp). Niphon draws heavily on Komin; see some discussion at http://lox1loxinfo.co.th/%7Esniphon/, especially section 5.1. To what extent there is a Theravada Buddhist matrix here is a further question. Words like ‘insult’, ‘hurt’ to feelings appear in this analysis, but perhaps not the lexical term humiliation.

My own interest in this complex was sparked in exploring why many Thai, with quite critical minds, seem so reluctant to openly criticize what is obviously wrong, on the job, in schools, as students and colleagues. Even perhaps as teachers are reluctant to give students an ‘F’.* Kreng jai is a great ‘barrier’ to critique and change. My sense is that my Muslim students also follow kreng jai cultural precepts closely. Of course Islam, in West Asia and East, is a whole separate universe for a typology of what is considered insult and humiliation.

In any event, East Asian cultures of ‘face-saving’ should be looked at in the context of the question Don raises, because any ethnography of ‘humiliation’ will have to perhaps operate with a typology and decline of ego damage and its degrees. It is very important here not to be Eurocentric. Inside science, there is a lot of Eurocentricity embedded in the discourse, the method and much else.

_________________________________
*As perhaps in Alfie Kohn’s ‘From Degrading to De-grading’ (http://www.alfiekohn.org/teaching/fdtd-g.htm) , grading as a tool of ‘humiliation’ in the schools. This article does not contain the word ‘humiliation’ but certainly the concept.

Humiliation, Iran, and the Middle East Crisis

Introduction

Currently, the world is glued to the television screen, watching what is called the “Middle East Crisis” (except those inside the Middle East, who, in the midst of destruction, might have no television sets left anymore). When we see pictures of people dying and losing their homes, on all sides, our hearts bleed. And when we watch all participants yearn for “victory,” and solemnly confirm that they “must” do as they do, we do not know what to say. We only know that we will be branded as “traitors” whenever we take sides.

Daily, our network, Human Dignity and Humiliation Studies (HumanDHS), receives messages, calling upon us to stand up in these times of crisis. I cannot speak on behalf of the members of our network, who have diverging opinions – but let me give you my thoughts in this paper.

I write this text in the middle of August, during the first days of the United Nations Resolution 1701 that calls for “a full cessation of hostilities,” and just after the London “jet terror plot.”

However, as many warn, the crisis may only really start at the end of August, when Iran will not comply with the United Nations deadline to stop uranium enrichment. The Israel-Lebanon confrontation may represent but a prelude.

I am frequently asked to condemn what is happening in the Middle East. I reply as follows: Of course, I condemn mayhem and suffering. I also condemn earthquakes. There is no question, I think, that we, Homo sapiens (sapiens = wise) ought to be able to solve our problems without killing each other. Who doubts that? The question is not whether I condemn what is happening – indeed it is obscene and I am ashamed of being part of our species. The question is, WHAT NOW?

A very good friend, a Holocaust survivor, has the following to say to the widespread obsession with calling for “condemnation.” He explains this with a joke, told in two pictures. The first picture shows an office in a terrible mess. “We need order!” is the outcry from the employees. Then there is the second picture: the office is now impeccable. But there is a new outcry, “Now that we have order – WHAT DO WE DO NOW?”

In other words, when we have finished putting everybody into their place, here the “enemies,” and there the “friends,” and “we” feel justified to do what we “must” do, because our “enemies” forced us into it – WHAT THEN? Or, in my case, when I have finished condemning all mayhem and violence – WHAT THEN?

When I open my emails, I do find some excellent analytical texts about the “what then.” But most messages I receive everyday are full of hand-wringing and finger-pointing, putting the situation “in order.” Yet, this leads to no change, only to a ubiquitous bath in feelings of shock, depression, despair, indignation, and hatred. Reflection on “what then” is drowned out by a competition as to who can feel more shocked and morally indignated. And this, while reality demands, and trauma research shows, that crisis has a chance to be managed constructively only if we face it pro-actively, not by re-acting and not by waiting to be overwhelmed.

I propose therefore that we leave the finger-pointing behind and embark on proactive bridge building. Condemnations and finger-pointing were perhaps sufficient in former times. They are no longer. On the contrary, today they may aggravate the situation. When a marriage breaks up and the spouses, after a lot of finger-pointing, hate each other’s guts, they can move out of each other’s neighborhood and never meet again. Humankind does not have this option. We live in new times of global interdependence. We have to stay together even after divorce. And in order to make this viable, we have to turn down the heat and refrain from digging graves of moral indignation and hatred for each other.

What makes me most sad in this situation is, therefore, that so many intelligent people around the world do nothing more than use their passion for justice to wallow in emotions which have polarizing effects, instead of devising action that brings us all together and makes “life after divorce” feasible. I feel personally ashamed and humiliated not only by the crisis itself, but also when I witness people who abuse it for gaining moral high ground by self-serving “indignation-entrepreneurship.”

What is this crisis about? Many involved in the Middle East crisis (as well as in the “war on terror”) are adamant that the other side chooses to attack them without any reason, out of pure evil, nothing but evil, thus forfeiting all rights to respectful treatment. Everybody re-acts, everybody is an outraged victim, a victim of the other’s evil. Whatever one side describes as “necessary and heroic defense” is seen from the other side as “cold-blooded aggression.” “Oppression” on one side is “benevolent patronage” on the other.

Every victim also attacks me and the rest of the world for neglecting their plight and allowing their respective enemy to slaughter them. Every death is judged to be caused not just by the “enemy,” but also by a “negligent international community” – only very few turn their gaze also to their own camp.

I agree that the so-called international community has to do more, more than shedding tears of “why can we not all love each other,” or calling for victory for either side. If this were sufficient, this paper would be redundant. However, calling upon “friends” to stand together against “enemies” does not solve the crisis, not in the short term and surely not in the long term.

I feel sad and humiliated when Middle East politicians declare that nobody cares about their lives. Because I do care. I dedicate my entire life to help finding constructive ways to build a more dignified world. And millions of people around the global do care. However, helplessness dominates their reactions, helplessness as to what we can do to improve the situation.

This text posits that it is essential to place current crises into a larger historic context, if we wish to guide them constructively, and that there is only one way to start this process, namely by taking a step back. We need to understand how the human condition has evolved over a longer historic time period, how humans have adapted to changing conditions, and which new adaptations we need to develop at the present point in time.

I often compare humankind with the Titanic, just before sinking. Renowned physicist and leading expert in string theory, formulates this beautifully in his book on Parallel Worlds. He concludes his book with the following paragraph:

The generation now alive is perhaps the most important generation of humans ever to walk the Earth. Unlike previous generations, we hold in our hands the future destiny of our species, whether we soar into fulfilling our promise as a type I civilization [meaning that humankind manages to build a sustainable planet, both ecologically and socially] or fall into the abyss of chaos, pollution, and war. Decisions made by us will reverberate throughout this century. How we resolve global wars, proliferating nuclear weapons, and sectarian and ethnic strife will either lay or destroy the foundations of a type I civilization. Perhaps the purpose and meaning of the current generation are to make sure that the transition to a type I civilization is a smooth one. The choice is ours. This is the legacy of the generation now alive. This is our destiny (Kaku, 2005, p. 361).

In other words, here we are all together on the “Titanic,” which is about to go down, and what do we do? We fight between the cabins. We leave bloody trails instead of cooperating for building a future for coming generations that is sustainable, both ecologically and socially. We invest our energy into the wrong problems. And humankind’s very survival is the price we might have to pay.
We need to learn to view a wider horizon. In order to achieve this, please take the time, disengage from current crises for a moment, and make a journey together with me, a journey through human history.

The Normative Universe of Honor

I propose that the despair many feel in current times of crises can be mitigated by more knowledge. Even a severely ill cancer patient – instead of frantically rolling on the floor – can exit from panic by studying the features of her new disease and by devising a careful therapy plan. Let us therefore begin exiting from panic by collecting knowledge. The current Middle East crisis, for example, or the “war on terror” are embedded into a large-scale normative transition of humankind. In order to guide these crises constructively, it is important to understand both worlds – the old and the new world.

During the past 10,000 years, honor has dominated human communities all over the globe. I define honor as the ranking of human worthiness and value, as the acceptance that there are higher beings who preside over lesser beings.

William Ury (1999), anthropologist, and director of the Harvard University Project on Preventing War, draws up a simplified depiction of history. He pulls together elements from anthropology, game theory and conflict studies to describe three major types of society: a) simple hunter-gatherers (during the first 90 percent of human history), b) complex agriculturists (lasting for roughly the past 10,000 years), and c) the currently emerging knowledge society.
In Ury’s system, during the first 90 percent of human history, humankind lived as simple hunter-gatherers. They enjoyed a world of coexistence and open networks, within which conflicts were negotiated, rather than addressed by coercion. The abundance of wild food represented an expandable pie of resources that did not force opponents into win-lose paradigms.

Around 10,000 years ago, however, this rather benign situation came to an end. It was the point in time when many easily accessible parts of the globe had been populated and the “next valley” was no longer untouched. The next valley was now inhabited by other people (circumscription is the anthropological term). Homo sapiens had filled up the globe – the first round of globalization had come upon humankind, so to speak. This, together with climate change, brought to the fore a new way of life, for most of humankind, namely agriculture: when I can no longer find uninhabited wild nature, I have to use the land on which I stand more efficiently (intensification is the anthropological term).

Agriculture was quite a shrewd human adaptation to new conditions, one could say, however, it had serious side effects. It created what political scientists call the security dilemma: As soon as the resource I live on is land (and no longer freely available wild food), I have to defend my land against you, against the greed of my neighbor.

In other words, the normative world of honor, of honorable domination/submission, could be regarded as an adaptation to the fear of attack, which emanated from the fact that land became the resource of most of humankind, a resource that by definition is not expandable.

I have based my work on humiliation on Ury’s work – see Lindner (2006b) (see also many full online texts on http://www.humiliationstudies.org/whoweare/evelin02.php). In a world of honorable domination/submission, everybody accepts that it is God’s will or nature’s order that masters hold down underlings. Intricate cultural practices were devised during the past 10,000 years, in different cultures in different ways, to keep this ranking system in place. Underlings learned to kow-tow, they learned to accept being beaten regularly, or even killed. This was meant to “remind” underlings where they “belonged,” namely “below their masters.” Humiliation was routine and seen as legitimate. Even the most atrocious methods of holding underlings down were regarded as “honorable medicine,” good for the victims and good for society. Humiliation was not yet judged to be a violation. Only the masters themselves, when their privileged position was questioned, could define being put down as illegitimate humiliation of their honor and try to repair it, for example, by going to duel. In times of Apartheid, for example, the downtrodden had no right to protest, while the elites cried “foul” whenever their supremacy was questioned.

The word “civilians” did not exist; the common man and woman did not count. They were puppets in their rulers’ hands. For thousands of years, rulers fought their wars, and the suffering of their people went unmentioned. People died, their homelands were devastated, their homesteads destroyed, their men killed and their women raped or taken away. Nobody asked whether they felt traumatized. For the common man and woman the actions of their rulers were like natural disasters. My grandmother said to me once, “Wir kleinen Leute können ja sowieso nichts tun. Die da oben machen ja doch was sie wollen,“ meaning that the masses, the “little people“ as she called it, had no power. This was how my grandmother felt, this is what dominated her view of life and the world.

The moral world of honor can be starkly illustrated by the practice of so-called honor killings. Let us look at the following case from the UK, so as to get a feeling of the normalcy and legitimacy that this moral order had (and still has) among its followers:

Greengrocer Azhar Nazir, 30, and his cousin Imran Mohammed, 17, stabbed Samaira Nazir, a 25-year-old recruitment consultant, 18 times at the family home in Southall in April 2005. The attack was barbaric, and witnessed by two young nieces. Samaira tried to flee but her brother dragged her back into the house where the assault continued. Samaira was killed after she asked to marry an Afghan man – instead of marrying someone in the Pakistani family circle. She fell in love with Salman Mohammed, who befriended the family after arriving in the UK in 2000. The relationship was kept secret at first, but when Samaira asked for permission to marry him, her family reacted angrily. Her fiancé was warned by Nazir: “We can get you anywhere if you get married, even if you are not in this country.” Samaira had tried to talk to her mother about the problem at a relative’s house, but her mother refused. A neighbor heard Samaira shout, “You are not my mother any more.” Samaira’s father was arrested and bailed during the investigation but fled to Pakistan. The judge said to Samaira’s brother: “You claimed to have loved your sister but were guilty of orchestrating her murder.” (I summarized this story from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/5179162.stm).

The judge’s words illustrate how an honor system is different from a system of equal dignity: In an honor system, the brother ought to love his sister by killing her – killing her is his duty, even if he finds it difficult and would rather spare his sister. In a world of equal dignity, he ought to love his sister by not killing her – in that case not killing her is his duty, even if he hates her. As it becomes clear, both systems are diametrically opposed to each other. They cannot coexist. It is either, or. It is like driving on the right side of the road or the left side – one cannot have both.
Let us now have a look at the new world of dignity.

The Normative Universe of Equal Dignity for All

Ury posits that a knowledge society resembles the hunter-gatherer model because the pie of resources – knowledge – appears to be infinitely expandable (there are always new ideas to be developed), lending itself to win-win solutions. This type of society moves away from rigid hierarchical structures toward the open network of our earliest hunter-gatherer ancestors. Negotiation and contract replace command lines, and coexistence is the primary strategy.

In other words, the vision of a future global knowledge society entails a surprisingly benign promise. As soon as land is not longer the main resource, all are freed from the security dilemma and from having to fight against neighbors. All can cooperate, together increase the pie of resources, and everybody gains. No longer do masters have to keep armies of underlings to fight enemies. A global knowledge society entails the potential to liberate both, masters and underlings, from having to force everybody into a ranked system. All are called upon to throw their creativity into the task of forging better ways to protect our shared home, planet Earth, and build a world where all can live dignified lives.

And indeed, human rights are the new moral adaptation to the new conditions of an increasingly interdependent globalizing world. Many accuse the West of wanting to force human rights down the throat of the rest, but it may rather be that norms of ranked honor lose their utility under the new conditions.

The first sentence in Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights reads, “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.” This means that nobody ought to be humiliated – humiliation is now a violation of dignity that is illegitimate. For the past 10,000 years, honor has ranked people in higher and lesser beings; human rights un-rank them again, masters are called upon to descend and underlings to rise, all meet in the middle, in equal dignity, connected in shared humility, back to what seems to have been the rule prior to 10,000 years ago.

Formerly, when underlings staged revolutions, they merely replaced their masters and kept the hierarchical system in place – former inferiors soon acted as new tyrants. The human rights revolution is different, and recognizing this fact is essential for efficient crisis management today. The human rights revolution entails two parts, first the dismantling of humiliators, and second the dismantling of the very humiliating system, including our own humiliating behavior. What was “benevolent patronage” before, transmutes into “oppression,” and now this oppression has to be dismantling by non-dominating means – see the work by Morton Deutsch (2006), and Philip Pettit (1996), or by Howard Zehr (2002), and John Braithwaite (2002).

Honor codes had their place in a world that did not yet experience the coming-together of humankind into one single global community; they have their place in a world of many fragmented units pitched against each other. Human rights represent a normative framework that is better adapted to an emerging global knowledge society.

Human rights defenders no longer can humiliate others, not even humiliators. Looking down on others and treating them as lesser beings is no longer legitimate. This entails that also those people, who still endorse honor codes, wherever in the world, may not be looked down upon. The brother who kills his sister has his place in the old world of honor, and from the point of view of human rights, he deserves everybody’s respect as a human being, even though his deeds are rejected. Mandela walked out of 27 years of humiliation in prison and many of his guards had become his friends.

Brave heroism and sacrifice in the old world of honor meant standing up against our enemies, it meant accepting to be part of a hierarchically organized ingroup, united in patriotic love for our ingroup, pitted against threatening outgroups. Brave heroism and sacrifice in the new world of dignity means standing up united in humanizing love for a vision of one united family of humankind, where everybody deserves to be respected as equal in dignity, a world without enemies and outgoups, a world of neighbors, who together find a way to live together even if they do not love each other, even after “divorce.”

The Transition

Probably the most touching depiction of the transition from a moral universe of ranked honor to a moral universe of equal dignity is given to us by Ernest Gordon (1962) in his book Through the Valley of the Kwai. Ernest Gordon spent three years in a Japanese prisoner of war camp during World War II, and his experiences as a prisoner informed both the film The Bridge on the River Kwai, starring Alec Guinness, and the new film To End All Wars directed by David Cunningham.

On the surface, Gordon’s message is that of forgiveness, however, if we analyze his predicament deeper, it is the transition from ranked collectivist honor to equal dignity for each human being. He later served as a visiting lecturer at universities around the world, among them at International Christian University in Tokyo, Japan, the country of his torturers, whom he had forgiven.

The film To End All Wars does an excellent job in dramatically contrasting the universe of honor with the moral framework of equal dignity for everybody. One of the most elaborated codes of honor is bushido, a Japanese code of conduct meaning the “way of the warrior,” the “way of the Samurai.” Under the bushido ideal, if a samurai fails to uphold his honor he can regain it by performing seppuku (ritual suicide). Bushido ethics informed Japanese fighting spirit during World War II, to reinforce readiness for self-sacrifice and loyalty among the soldiers and the population at large. It reached its peak with the self-sacrifice of the kamikaze pilots.

In the film To End All Wars, the code of honor is represented by the Japanese camp guards, but also by some of the prisoners, with Campbell as their leader (played by Robert Carlyle). Campbell puts everybody’s life in danger through his insistence on not bowing to Japanese domination – in line with bushido, which stipulates that accepting to be captured alive is the deepest shame for a soldier.

The new moral universe of equal dignity is represented by Ernest Gordon himself, who succeeds, not unlike Mandela, to forge links of humanity with some of the Japanese torturers. Gordon and the guard/translator Takashi Nagase, for example, became friends and met after the war. Devout Buddhist Takashi Nagase devoted his life after the end of World War II to making up for the Japanese army’s treatment of prisoners of war.

Thus, the significant cleavage in this film is not between the Japanese and their prisoners, but between two moral codes. Both moral universes come to a dramatic stand-off when the war is ending and wounded Japanese soldiers seek help. For Gordon, they are human beings who deserve help. For Campbell they are “the enemy,” undeserving of pity. Campbell’s refusal to help is in line with the honor code of the Japanese guards, who try to drive away their wounded comrades. Only Gordon, to the astonishment of the Japanese guards, steps forward and gives them water. Campbell tries to stop him: “Come back to your men!” Campbell, however, loses the battle for the hearts and minds of his comrades, and the prisoners take Gordon’s side. They follow Gordon to help the wounded Japanese.

Campbell, on his part, disappears into a corner of the camp, where he mistreats Ito, the now powerless head of the Japanese camp guards, in revenge for all the cruelty Ito had perpetrated on the prisoners. Gordon approaches and tries to stop Campbell. Ito uses the moment of confusion, snatches the sword and commits seppuku. At that moment, Campbell experiences a moment of deep revelation. He takes the head of dead Ito to his chest, realizing that he and this “enemy” had their honor orientation in common, in contrast to Ernest’s insistence that all human beings deserve to be treated as equal in dignity.

The film beautifully depicts the deep earnest, with which both Campbell and Gordon hold on to their respective ethical orientations. Both are brave, both are noble. Nobody is mad or insane. But Campbell stands for an ethical orientation that is no longer viable in a world of mutual interdependence, while Gordon makes a case for the ethics that can make our world livable in the future.

The binding nature of the interdependence that increasingly characterizes our globe is expressed in the film through the fact that nobody can flee. The camp is surrounded by impenetrable jungle and all are caught together. The urgency of WHAT THEN is brilliantly depicted when Campbell, continuously making plans to escape, is being asked (I paraphrase): “Ok, let us assume that we have killed and captured our Japanese prison guards. WHAT THEN? The jungle is impenetrable! Admit that your plan is a suicide mission for us all!”

Today’s World Is Defined by Three Clashes of Humiliation

Today’s world is defined by three clashes of humiliation: First, clashes of humiliation between opponents who both adhere to the normative universe of honor, second, clashes of humiliation where one side adheres to the honor code, and the other to human rights, and, third, we have clashes of humiliation between opponents who both adhere to human rights ethics.

By keeping these three scenarios apart, I suggest, we can find a way to realize the second part of the human rights revolution, the most difficult part, namely respecting every human being, even those with whom we profoundly disagree.

1. Clashes of humiliation in a world of honor
One of my young Israeli friends told me (2003, in Jerusalem): “Always in history, some people have pushed out other people of their land. Ours is a power struggle that is not new. The strongest will win, and it will be us this time. We will prevail.” He added that God had promised Palestine to his people. “Pity for the Holocaust is no argument,” he explained, “this is our Promised Land, and I am ashamed of all the Jews who abandoned it cowardly during the past two thousand years. I am no coward; this time, I want to stand up bravely!”

On August 7, 2006 (in BBC World HARDtalk with Noel Thompson), Israel’s former Prime Minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, made the point that if London were to be the target of hundreds of rockets, it would react in the same way as Israel, perhaps even stronger. After all, Churchill bombed Dresden. If there had been television cameras at that time, to document the devastation of Dresden, the Allied Forces might have lost the war, to the detriment of the world’s own good. Today, Netanyahu explained, in the case of Lebanon, Israel is showing extreme restraint, relative to the damage it could inflict. However, still Israel is wronged and criticized. And due to its restraint, it does not attain its objective, namely the elimination of Hezbollah. Perhaps it would be better for Israel, Netanyahu suggested, using more military force, in order to actually reach the goals, since criticism was forthcoming anyhow.

And, so Netanyahu continued, many moderate leaders around the Arab world wish Israel to win against Hezbollah, because they know that they will be next. Furthermore, not to forget, the West should be careful to criticize Israel, because if Israel were to fail, the West will be next. Iran will attack the West. And facing a hostile Iran will not be as benign as facing the Soviet Union in the Cold War, since the Soviet Union always backed down when its survival was threatened. In contrast, Iran, with its fundamentalist ideology, will not balk from behaving in suicidal ways. According to him, so Netanyahu stated, UK Prime Minister Tony Blair’s views are correct, that there is a dangerous arc of extremism that stretches across the Middle East, which can be defeated only by an alliance of moderation encompassing Muslims, Jews and Christians.
If we look at Netanyahu’s stance, he is “right” within the logic of the past, when the world was still caught in the security dilemma, not yet as interdependent as today, and human rights were still marginal. He acknowledges this, albeit regarding it as disadvantageous, when he grants that a bombing campaign similar to the bombing of Dresden in World War II might not be as popular today.

Netanyahu clearly is a man of resolve. Every inch of his demeanor and body language, the way he moves his head, his eyes wide open and confrontational, portray a man who projects honor, bravery and heroism, a man, who is intent on not bowing to pressure. Similar to Campbell in the film To End All Wars, as long as we judge him from within his moral boundaries, he is a man of moral nobility.

I am writing this paper in Japan, a few days after visiting the controversial Yasukuni Shrine. This Shrine if filled with praise for patriotic bravery. Descriptions abound of how military leaders died heroically while leading their men despite their own wounds. Bushido is everywhere, it permeates Yasukuni Shrine, and its fabric is made of noble heroism.

In the world of honor, not only Netanyahu is “right” and “brave,” all the Rumsfelds of this world are “right” in trying to secure their interest against others, with as much overpowering might as possible. Seymour Hersh (2006) explains in an article in The New Yorker, that the Israeli military action of August 2006 was planned long before the kidnapping of the Israeli soldiers. He explains how many in the U.S. regard this campaign to be in the American interest, because “it would be a demo for Iran.” He reports a U.S. government consultant with close ties to Israel saying, “The Israelis told us it would be a cheap war with many benefits… Why oppose it? We’ll be able to hunt down and bomb missiles, tunnels, and bunkers from the air. It would be a demo for Iran” (Hersh, 2006).

I myself am born as a “refugee child” into a family of displaced people from Silesia – see Lindner (2006a). Even today, sixty years later, my parents have not recovered. My parents’ trauma of having lost their homeland informed my life. I grew up with the typical “minus-identity” of refugees, an identity of not belonging and of feeling alienated from humanity.

Within the world of honor, it would be “right” for me to instigate war against Poland and attempt to re-conquer Silesia. I would be “justified” in defining the loss of my father’s farm and the humiliation of my parents as unacceptable humiliation of their honor. I could call for the humiliation of “our enemy-humiliators.” Any suffering of civilians would not concern me. I could reject as weak and cowardly any pity with the “enemy” and could refuse any definition of humiliation in terms of human rights. And, if fellow Silesians were to criticize my “patriotic love for my Silesian homeland,” I could brand them as being sickly obsessed with self-hatred.

Also the bin Ladens of this world have their place in the moral universe of collectivistic honor, wherever we might find them, in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Hezbollah, Hamas, the U.K. or the U.S.: “You have occupied our land, defiled our honor, violated our dignity, shed our blood, ransacked our money, demolished our houses, rendered us homeless and tampered with our security. We will treat you in the same way” (Osama Bin-Laden, tape of January 19, 2006, translated by the British Broadcasting Corporation, January 21, 2006).

Bertram Wyatt-Brown adds (in a personal message, August 18, 2006): “I think that you might include in your telling analysis the role of family and tribe within the honor code. And, of course, what you say about the Middle East and Japan are also true about the present day big city street gangs and the determination of their leaders and members not to be ‘disrespected’ or ‘dissed,’ as they say. That’s the root cause of so much violence and murder here in Baltimore and elsewhere. The gang becomes – in the absence of parental interest or protection – a teenager’s ‘family,’ and he or even she must uphold the dignity of that group no matter what the cost or lose face and be disgraced or killed.”

“An eye for an eye,” “might is right,” and “humiliation for humiliation,” all this is part and parcel of the world of honor that characterized most of humankind’s existence for the past 10,000 years. And if Iran were to be attacked by the West in September 2006 “in order to render it less dangerous,” this would also be part and parcel of the world of honor.

2. Clashes of humiliation between the world of honor and the world of equal dignity for all
Clashes of honor-humiliation are clashes within the old world. Now, let us look at four kinds of clashes between the old and new world. We find two scenarios in which opponents feel humiliated by the other side’s moral orientation and two scenarios where the other side’s moral setup is exploited.

Let us begin with the case of human rights being exploited for honor. We find those in today’s world, who adhere to the honor code, but use human rights arguments to vilify their “enemy” and bolster their own “honorable” strategies. In such cases, usually, the “enemy” is branded as violating human rights. When the “enemy” kills “civilians,” for example, the “enemy” is accused of violating human rights and this is taken as proof of the “enemy’s” moral inferiority. As soon as “my camp of honor” kills civilians, however, this is “collateral damage,” and therefore not diminishing “my side’s” moral high ground. In other words, in a world where human rights are “on offer,” they can easily be abused by adherents of the old honor code. The argument of dignity humiliation is exploited to promote honor-humiliation and its scripts.

Let us now look at the case where human rights are felt to humiliate honor. While some believe that human rights are universal, others brand them as an imperialistic attempt on the part of the West to humiliate the rest. Particularly in Asia, this opinion can be heard, however, usually all elites, around the world, tend to hold that view – even though this view is often disguised, for example, in a specific usage of the term “freedom,” as to be observed, for example, in the framework of so-called Southern Honor – see Bertram Wyatt-Brown (1982). Human rights aim at dismantling privileges of elites, and one way for dominators to resist being humbled is to discredit the moral justifications of this call. (As I explained earlier, I believe that human rights offer the only ethical framework for One World to construct a viable future.)

The third case is the inverse of the second. Human rights defenders feel humiliated by every detail in the honor script. The very idea that some people may arrogate superiority over others in an Apartheid style is humiliating for the humanity of all human rights advocates, not only on their own behalf but also on behalf of all the downtrodden around the world. However, as mentioned earlier, precisely since human rights do not condone arrogating superiority, human rights defenders have the difficult task of refraining from taking a stance of superiority over people of honor.

Fourth, some people employ honor strategies to defend human rights and this has humiliating effects. People, who advocate human rights and rave at human rights violators in humiliating ways, betray their own moral stance. They need to learn from Mandela and Gandhi how to walk the talk. As I said in the introduction, I feel personally humiliated by people who use the methodology of honor-humiliation in order to supposedly remedy dignity-humiliation and defend human rights. In the same vein, the instrument of war and violence to uphold human rights (even in self-defense) is humiliating and counterproductive to its own goals, first because honor strategies discredit human rights, but also because fear of attack reverses the transition toward human rights backward, back to a fragmented world pitched against each other in the honor code.

3. Clashes of humiliation in a world of equal dignity for all
The honor code was the dominating moral framework for the past 10,000 years, but it is no longer. Binyamin Netanyahu recognizes that bombing Dresden was a viable strategy only because there were no television screens available through which the entire world could pour their feelings into a local conflict. What was feasible once, “eradicating our enemy,” is therefore no longer so. Not only survivors, but people in the entire world may feel humiliated by ways of identifying with a local conflict, and some might retaliate with violence. Hezbollah, for example, has never been as popular in the entire Arab world as at the current point in time when I write this text, August 2006.
As we see, in times of global interdependence, a local conflict, if subjected to “solutions” of violence, will merely turn into a global conflict and set on fire the whole world. Monty Marshall (1999) writes remarkably on protracted conflict and how insecurity gets diffused. The increasing interdependence of our world, today, puts human kind into a larger frame and turns former “might is right” into “might is suicide.”

In the film To End All Wars, Campbell cannot reply to the question as to whether he is devising a suicide mission. Indeed, he endangers everybody by not seeing the larger picture. Every adherent of the old honor code – be it among the Netanyahus or the Hezbollah-followers of this world – treads in these suicidal footsteps, even though this is not their intention. They have just not yet internalized that the world is in the process of changing profoundly, something that causes the old honor code to become not only morally obsolete but also counterproductive to self-defense, self-preservation, survival – in short, suicidal.

I am writing these lines while listening to the BBC World’s coverage of the speech given by Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad on August 15, 2006. He uses the word humiliation in about every second sentence. He explains that United Nations Security Council decisions are not “divine” and that national interest and national sovereignty are to be regarded as more important, even if this leads to war. Clearly, we see collective suicide looming. Evidently, the Security Councils will truly promote peace only after the international community has developed it into an impartial and inclusive institution; only then will it be able to save humankind from collective suicide.

In the world of human rights, the very thought that it might be possible to achieve peace by humiliating “enemies” into submission, is obscene and humiliates the dignity of all humankind. The new world is a world of coexistence, even in the face of antagonism, of negotiation and open networks, of democratic structures, globally and locally, structures, which make “might-is-right” strategies redundant at all levels.

In a world of equal dignity for all, no longer is it possible to march into other people’s territory and say, “I deem this to be my land, and since I am mightier than you, you better succumb.” To take my case as an example again, I cannot just march into Poland and take my father’s farm back like a feudal lord. My sadness over my father’s losses does not give me the right to act like a bully. What I have to do, is acknowledge that we all are in one boat, all humankind, and that Polish citizens are as worthy of being respected as equal in dignity as everybody else. Poland was victimized by Germany in World War II and deserves all the apologies that Willy Brand extended to it. And it deserves all the time it needs to ponder this apology. Aaron Lazare (2004) wrote most insightfully on apology and explains that forgiveness needs time. After an apology, I cannot just stride about and demand that I ought to be forgiven. It is not sufficient that I praise my own moral high ground and overlook that the other side needs more time to ponder my apologies. I cannot stay in monologic unilateral bubbles where I define what the other side ought to feel. My impatience and monologic isolation would be disrespectful and have humiliating effects. I need to engage in dialogue and considerate politeness, in self-reflective humble patience (not submissiveness). I might politely ask, for example, if I may visit my father’s farm, and indeed, since Poland is part of the European Union, borders have lost their political significance, starting to do what they should do, namely giving dignity to cultural diversity. And I am well advised to recognize that knowledge is the new resource in today’s world and no longer land. Indeed, in my case, I have followed Judith Viorst (1987) suggestion that there are necessary losses. I am part of the global knowledge society and have no desire to be a farmer. I have no desire to attach my self to a little piece of land. I am a global citizen. The entire planet Earth is my home. It is such a tiny planet, cutting it up and fighting over every inch is absurd. I do not want my father’s land back.

In the new world, grievances need to be addressed in an all inclusive way. The Office of the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland, for example, is an independent body dealing with complaints against the police, set up to create a climate of policing acceptable to all of Northern Ireland’s deeply scarred communities. Or, on UN Indigenous People’s Day (August 9) in 2006, the UN Human Rights Council’s, in a historic vote, supported the declaration on indigenous people’s rights.

This is the way into the future: away from land toward knowledge, and away from old deadly Blood Borders – see Ralph Peters (2006) – to a united world where borders are benignly administrative and cultural. The European Union can serve as an example – it takes age-old deadly enmity out the European borders and leaves them with the much more benign task of protecting and celebrating cultural diversity. The crisis in the Middle East, and the looming Iran crisis, all crises need to be contained within a larger global framework and it is everybody’s responsibility to build and strengthen the necessary global mechanisms for such crisis containment. If the United Nations were not there, we would have to invent them, and whenever they fail, it is not their fault, but the fault of those who do not strengthen and support them sufficiently, the fault of us all, who fail to make them fit for the job. Joseph Preston Baratta (2004) explains, how a world federation could work constructively.

Whatever we do, we have to heed that dismantling honor structures needs to be done in dignified ways, which, again, takes time. Haste can have humiliating effects. In old times, changes could be implemented in the blink of the eye, just by applying force. This is no longer possible in times of human rights. Inclusiveness, consensus, negotiation, and contract are the new buzzwords. Many Indians believe that India has an edge over China, not in the short-term, but in the long-term, precisely because of the inclusiveness, though relative slowness, of their democratic procedures. Patience is necessary, and patience has to be given its space and not denigrated as “failing to act.” Slow and careful action is also action. Cautious and well-planned action, embedded in dialogue and respect, is the very blueprint of what action means within the human rights framework. Israel, for example, accused the Lebanese government of “failing to act and dismantle Hezbollah.” Indeed, what the Lebanese government had tried was to avoid civil war by carefully including and moderating Hezbollah. Such action needs time. In a statement by Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, in the Daily Star (Lebanon), on July 17, 2006, said, “As we were preparing for a new phase of reform and development, here we are again facing Israeli attacks that have killed civilians, destroyed the country’s roads and airport, hit its main ports and violated Lebanon’s sovereignty and its citizens’ rights and dignity.”

Seymour Hersh (2006) writes in his article in The New Yorker, that even those who continue to support Israel’s war against Hezbollah agree that it is failing to achieve one of its main goals – to rally the Lebanese against Hezbollah. Hersh quotes John Arquilla, a defense analyst at the Naval Postgraduate School, as saying, “Strategic bombing has been a failed military concept for ninety years, and yet air forces all over the world keep on doing it…The warfare of today is not mass on mass … You have to hunt like a network to defeat a network. Israel focused on bombing against Hezbollah, and, when that did not work, it became more aggressive on the ground. The definition of insanity is continuing to do the same thing and expecting a different result” (Hersh, 2006).

What hurts human rights most is being stuck in “double standards.” Empty human rights rhetoric discredits the very human rights message. Promises that are not kept hurt deeper than no promises. Whoever wishes to promote human rights is well advised to check their conduct for consistency. Dominating behavior is not compatible with the message of equal dignity for all. Human rights are not achieved by fooling opponents with pretty words, while abusing their hope for equal dignity to get the upper hand in old-fashioned honor ways. Many human rights advocates do not understand this dynamic and apply honor strategies to promote human rights, some in blissful ignorance, and others in a Machiavellian spirit. Whatever the source, such behavior is humiliating and destructive.

Often, the media are accused of making matters worse. However, there is a host of films that try to bring the message that we ought to stand up for the larger common good. We have classics like High Noon that promoted this principle for a city, or, more recently, on a much larger scale, Spaceship/starship Enterprise. I am writing this paper in Japan, where the old television series FBI (1965-1974) with Efrem Zimbalist Jr. as Inspector Lewis Erskine is being shown. The Butcher (1968) depicts a gang of thugs, who make a living from kidnapping. A boy is kidnapped. The father is a butcher, a man of honor. He pays the ransom for his son and gets him back alive. Soon, another boy is kidnapped. Inspector Erskine approaches the butcher for help – his son could provide the FBI with valuable information. The butcher declines. He does not trust that the FBI will be able to protect his family in case the kidnappers find out that he cooperated with the FBI. However, to his surprise, the butcher’s own family fails to obey him. He yells at his family, telling them that he is “doing the thinking” for the family and that he is not prepared to accept mutiny. When Inspector Lewis Erskine has left the house, the butcher’s wife turns against her husband and reproaches him. She says (I paraphrase): “You are wrong! These kidnappers have to be stopped and we can help!” At the end, the father is persuaded, reluctantly. Later, Inspector Erskine turns to him and praises his son, “what a great son you have.” The butcher admits, yes, perhaps his son is of a higher moral fabric than he is - he himself did not wish to help wider society to get rid of dangerous kidnappers, while his son, his wife and daughter, were ready to put themselves into harm’s way in order to serve the safety of the larger community. At the end, the viewer feels lifted up, morally.

The lesson is always that we have to work together to help build a strong superordinate structure, like the sheriff, or the FBI, that safeguards the security for all, so that it is no longer necessary that everybody looks only at their immediate self-interest. Serving common interest serves self-interest best. At the current point in time, it is no longer the local level, the FBI, but the highest global level that needs to be strengthened. The United Nations need to be made capable of doing the job.

The Way Out

It is absurd, when Titanic goes down, to squabble in the cabins or between them. Times of global crises demand that we build strong global institutions and mechanisms that can contain local crises, so that the global ones can be affronted. If we fail, humankind’s very survival will be the price we have to pay.

It is equally absurd to descend into psychiatric language. Nobody is insane or mad when espousing a moral framework. A human rights defender is not a coward and an appeaser, and the bravery of an adherent of the old honor code is not madness or evilness either. We compound an already difficult transition unnecessarily when we descend into mutual insults – we merely create feelings of humiliation on all sides at our peril.

Particularly the human rights avant-garde has the responsibility to guide this transition in dignified ways, in a Mandela-like spirit, without losing heart in depression, and surely without spewing insults in psychiatric terminology. Mandela could have instigated insult, mayhem and genocide against the white elite in South Africa. He did not. It is natural that those at the forefront of a transition and those who are slow, have opposing positions. The task for human rights defenders is precisely to take this transition on in dignified ways and not compound its inherent difficulties with their personal immaturity.

What do we have to learn then? We have to learn the dignified firmness of a Mandela. To do that, we first have to calm down, in a next step we need to build common ground between all of us so that the transition towards a better world can proceed more constructively, we furthermore have to explain the advantages of a “better world” to those who hesitate and cling to old times, and, last but not least, descending in hopeless depression and pessimism is obsolete because this can turn into self-fulfilling prophecy and remove the very drop of energy that might otherwise enable us to save the situation.

1. Calm down: there is no need to despair
We need to calm down and recognize that there is no need to despair at human nature. Some think that “man is aggressive by nature” and will always fight. This is a misconception. There is no archeological evidence for systematic war prior to 10,000 years ago. There is no proof of organized fighting during ninety percent of human history – among early hunters and gatherers – see Ury (1999).

Human nature is rather the ability to learn and unlearn. During the past 10,000 years, everybody learned to be part in a system of domination and submission. This we have to unlearn. Still, our cultures today have not adapted to new times. Building new cultures and learning new skills that give life to human rights are the task of the currently living generations.

Many human rights defenders are angry people, frustrated at the uncoordinated slowness of the human rights revolution. Some get all heated up and waste their energy on depression, indignation, or righteous anger. Some lash out. They try to achieve the first part of the human rights revolution (dismantling the tyrant) by forgetting the second (dismantling tyranny, including our own tyrannical habits and traditions). They forget that tyrants, supremacists, adherents of the old honor order, must be humbled with respect and dignity, and that we have to unlearn humiliating people. We have to learn to walk our talk and understand that human rights bestow dignity on every human being, including those who are slow to grasp the new times. Recognizing this will help us all calm down and guide the transition toward new times more constructively.

2. Build common ground with the other side
During the past thirty years, I lived as a global citizen, in the West and in the Non-West (I lived for seven years in Egypt, for example) and in my medical doctorate on quality of life, I compared Egypt and Germany – see Lindner (1994). What I found was that there is ample common ground among all of humankind. We are much more similar than we think. We all yearn for recognition and feel humiliated if disrespected. We all wish for a sustainable future for our children. The only difference is the width of our moral boundaries – see Susan Opotow (1995). As long as we lived in a fragmented world, caught in the security dilemma, our moral boundaries included “us” and excluded “them;” we thought that we had to secure our children’s future by keeping outgroups out. But the world has changed. Today, our moral boundaries must include all humanity (and even reach beyond humanity). Today, we secure our children’s future not by keeping humanity fragmented, but by uniting it, even in the face of disagreement and ill feelings.

3. Explain that everybody is better off in a world of equal dignity for all
Some days ago, the BBC World radio phoned me, and I was disappointed at myself. I was unable to explain my stance to my satisfaction, namely my views that a new normative world of human rights requires more from all of us than mere finger-pointing, and that the solution lies in teaching all the world the Mandela way out of humiliation.

May failing underlines that, indeed, the task is not easy. However, there is no reason to give up something just because it is difficult.

What we need to explain to everybody is that globalization, if harnessed by human rights, entails a great potential. It can lead to a benign future. Human rights are more than a fancy moral ideal. They can bring about a better life for all. They free valuable human abilities that were suppressed under the conditions of the security dilemma. During the past 10,000 years, elites dominated inferiors, and this handicapped all participants. The talents for leadership of subordinates were wasted, as were the talents of elites for caring. Fathers, for example, had no access to domestic life. They never tasted the pleasure of playing with there children and see them mature. In the same vein, their wives never had the chance to show their talent for leadership in public life but had to accept their husbands’ definitions of the world. Both were at a loss. Also society at large was at a loss. Talent and innovative creativity were wasted at all fronts. And all this changes with human rights. Human rights are deeply humanizing. It is not least therefore that human rights are universal and not just a Western scheme.

4. Do not lose hope, be patient, keep working
Human rights are the adequate moral system for a world that is coming together. Human rights can dignify globalization. But the human rights revolution is not self-executing. It requires everybody’s help. Every inhabitant of the globe needs to abandon “we/them” differentiations and define themselves as “we,” as “we humanity,” who, rather than pointing fingers, jointly searches for the best ways to provide our children with a livable world. So far, the global village is a ramshackle village, a “Titanic” about to sink, full of humiliation – millions of poor watching a few rich wallow in wealth, all suffering from environmental degradation that could have been avoided, and local cycles of humiliation endangering us all.

Moral emotions are strong. The urge to protect them is fierce. We feel that the core of our very being is being soiled when our moral code is violated. A man, who is intent on defending his honor by going to war and killing his “enemies” to attain “victory,” feels an almost obsessive certainty that he “must” go down this path. Denying him war is like denying the bottle to an alcoholic. At the same time, the disgust felt by human rights defenders at such “honorable violence,” is as passionate. The strength of moral emotions makes them difficult to be managed. However, a difficult task is a challenge and no reason to give up; the fact that the glass is only half full does not mean that it cannot be filled; and when progress is too slow this is no reason to stop. Hand-wringing is the worst we can do. We need to get to work.

I received two kinds of counter reactions to an earlier draft of this text from the “honor camp,” both describing world affairs as a stand-off between “evil terrorists” and “evil America” respectively. One message warns, for example, that my “philosophical musings on the psychology of aggression/forgiveness” need to be “contrasted to the realities of ‘real-politick’ as practiced now by the USA and its lackeys.” The mirror type of messages warns that human rights are too weak to stop terrorists.
Both types of messages are steeped in the old honor code, in the old definition of Realpolitik that conceptualizes life as a confrontation that requires instant counter-confrontation. For many, it is difficult to grasp that Mandela’s way was not a personal fancy, but entails a blueprint for a path that goes beyond both confrontation and forgiveness. Mandela stepped out of the master-slave dyad and designed action rather than re-action. 27 years in prison is not an ad-hoc solution. Martial arts provide related approaches, namely the stepping out of the way and letting opponents fall by their own efforts. Medicine and psychotherapy often use similar strategies, namely solving a problem by strengthening the entire immune system and building up alternative ways of living that “crowd out” the problem. It took the Church 300 years to vindicate Galileo: the inquisition was “crowded out” by new movements and their weight. Similarly, today, old world views need to be “crowded out” instead of given limelight through re-action. We need to work for a new world, using a long-term time horizon, rather than get bogged down in ad-hoc reactionism against old enemies.

Iran, the Middle East, global warming, poverty, all these problems can only be solved within a global framework of dialogue and negotiations, embedded into institutions that are based on human rights. We need to build a decent global community, in the spirit of Avishai Margalit (1996) and his call for a Decent Society.

A decent global village is a place where coercion is used in novel ways. Pacifism no longer means the rejection of force. Gandhi disliked the words and ideas of “passive resistance.” The term satyagraha (non-violent action), is a combination of satya (truth-love) and agraha (firmness/force). United Nations peace keeping missions need a stronger mandate than hitherto in order to be able to prevent and police regional and local conflicts – and a strong mandate means precisely the interlink of coercion with respect. Respectful firmness is indeed the only way to stop sectarian extremists who are in the business of turning spirals of humiliation into an abyss that can swallow us all.

Human rights defenders, Mandelas, Gandhis, moderates, take the lead!
Contain local conflicts with respectful firmness so that we all can take on the global challenges that we face and that endanger us all.

References

Baratta, Joseph Preston (2004). The Politics of World Federation: Vol.1: The United Nations, U.N. Reform, Atomic Control. Vol. 2: From World Federalism to Global Governance. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Braithwaite, John (2002). Restorative Justice & Responsive Regulation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Deutsch, Morton (2006). A Framework for Thinking About Oppression and Its Change. In Social Justice Research, 19 (1), pp. 7-41.

Gordon, Ernest (1962). Through the Valley of the Kwai. New York, NY: Harper & Row.

Hersh, Seymour M. (2006). Watching Lebanon: Washington's Interests in Israel's War. In The New Yorker, (21 August), retrieved from http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060821fa_fact on August 14, 2006.

Lazare, Aaron (2004). On Apology. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Lindner, Evelin Gerda (1994). Lebensqualität Im Ägyptisch-Deutschen Vergleich. Eine Interkulturelle Untersuchung an Drei Berufsgruppen (Ärzte, Journalisten, Künstler). Hamburg: Department of Psychological Medicine, University of Hamburg, Doctoral Dissertation in Medicine.

Lindner, Evelin Gerda (2006a). How Becoming a Global Citizen Can Have a Healing Effect. Tokyo: Paper presented at the 2006 ICU-COE Northeast Asian Dialogue: Sharing Narratives, Weaving/Mapping History, February 3-5, 2006, International Christian University (ICU), Tokyo, Japan, http://www.humiliationstudies.org/whoweare/evelin02.php#gallagher.

Lindner, Evelin Gerda (2006b). Making Enemies: Humiliation and International Conflict. Westport, CT, London: Greenwood Press and Praeger Publishers.

Margalit, Avishai (1996). The Decent Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Marshall, Monty G. (1999). Third World War: System, Process, and Conflict Dynamics. Lanham, MD, and London: Rowman and Littlefield.

Opotow, Susan (1995). Drawing the Line: Social Categorization, Moral Exclusion, and the Scope of Justice. In Bunker, Barbara Benedict and Rubin, Jeffrey Z. (Eds.), Cooperation, Conflict, and Justice: Essays Inspired by the Work of Morton Deutsch, pp. 347-369. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Peters, Ralph (2006). Blood Borders: How a Better Middle East Would Look. In Armed Forces Journal, retrieved from http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2006/06/1833899 on August 15, 2006.

Pettit, Philip (1996). Freedom As Antipower. In Ethics, 106, pp. 576-604.

Ury, William (1999). Getting to Peace. Transforming Conflict at Home, at Work, and in the World. New York, NY: Viking.

Viorst, Judith (1987). Necessary Losses: The Loves, Illusions, Dependencies and Impossible Expectations That All of Us Have to Give Up in Order to Grow. New York, NY: Fawcett Gold Medal.

Wyatt-Brown, Bertram (1982). Southern Honor: Ethics and Behavior in the Old South. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Zehr, Howard (2002). The Little Book of Restorative Justice. Intercourse, PA: Good Books.

Dear Colleagues:

The 2007 Conference of the International Academy for Intercultural Research
will be held in Groningen, The Netherlands on July 9-12, 2007.

You are invited to submit proposals for papers, panels, or symposia. The website is: http://www.interculturalacademy.org/groningen_2007.html. The deadline for proposals is November 15, 2006.
We hope to see many of you there.

Dan Landis
Emeritus Professor of Psychology (University of Mississippi)
Affiliate Professor of Psychology
University of Hawaii at Hilo
Affiliate Professor of Culture and Community Psychology and Social Psychology, University of Hawaii at Manoa
Editor-in-Chief, International Journal of Intercultural Relations
Executive Director, International Academy for Intercultural Research
200 W.Kawili Street
Hilo, HI 96720 USA
Tele: 808-966-9891
Fax: 808-966-5039
http://www.interculturalacademy.org

Find how to submit proposals for the 2007 Academy conference in Groningen, The Netherlands. Go to: www.interculturalacademy.org/groningen_2007.html

CONFERENCE ANNOUNCEMENT
MELANCHOLIC STATES

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE
with PAPERS, EXHIBITIONS, PERFORMANCES

The concept of melancholia has assumed widespread and varied currency across numerous fields. Sometimes used to refer to a state of mind or to an affective state; sometimes used to speak of racialised, gendered, or queer subjectivity; other times used as a tool of analysis of political states or as a mobilising tool to convene constituencies of solidarity; yet other times, melancholia founds collective memory and associated artefactual practices, or describes the conditions of professional practice organised around a public service ethic. Positioned as a condition to be claimed, transcended, or negotiated, ‘melancholic states’ seemingly speaks to the contemporary zeitgeist – the post/neo-colonial era.

The provenance of the concept of melancholia in psychoanalysis and the proliferation of its use elsewhere, offer grounds for revisiting the potential and limits of the concept – this conference aims to explore the ways in which the idea of ‘melancholic states’ speaks to the complexity of the present.

We encourage papers from various inter-disciplinary backgrounds namely women studies, postcolonial, critical race, critical psychology, politics, international relations, sociology, anthropology, geography, art and design, queer studies, that address, among others, the following questions:

· what is the relationship between melancholia and the turn to questions of affect, emotion, and feeling within the social sciences and humanities?

· what new analytical avenues are potentially opened up or closed down by the mobilisation or deployment of the concept of melancholia?

· is its analytical traction geographically, temporally, and politically limited and limiting?

· is melancholia imbricated in the current preoccupation with borders and border identities, within academic debates and politics rhetorics?

· does melancholia provide the grounds for a critical and theoretically informed response to a political present increasingly organised around the axis of democracy/terror?

· in what ways might it offer the grounds for the formation of solidarities and constituencies of belonging ‘locally’ and/or transnationally, in which feeling is identified as a legitimate and central axis?

· what might the limitations of such solidarities be, especially in a context in which it is increasingly difficult to articulate clear political identities in the current conjunction of global/national political agendas?

· can melancholic states further or renew an understanding of identifications involved in responses to international calls for aid?

· to what extent is melancholia and/or hope the condition motivating NGO’s in their work on poverty and/or the environment?

· are the subjectivities of public sector professionals increasingly characterised by melancholia in the context of the demise of the public service ethic?

· in what ways is collective memory organised around melancholia and how might this impact on the selection, design and production of objects and practices of remembrance?

· is a melancholic state a productive site for artistic practices that interrogate forms of subjection and violence?

· are melancholic states and various forms of spiritual practice mutually imbricated or mutually exclusive?

· can it help grasp the complexities of historical and contemporary subjectivities as produced and lived at the intersection of numerous modalities of difference?

· to what extent are melancholic subjects produced by competing social imaginaries, and how are these played out in everyday life?

· is melancholia the condition of the desiring subject of the 21st century?

Abstracts of no more than 500 words to be submitted by 23 APRIL 2007. Please send to: Gail Lewis g.a.lewis@lancaster.ac.uk; or Nayanika Mookherjee n.mookherjee@lancaster.ac.uk

Emotions and Multilingualism
by Pavlenko, Aneta
Series: Studies in Emotion and Social Interaction
Publisher: Cambridge University Press, 2006

Reviewer: Julie Bruch, Department of Languages, Literature, and
Communication, Mesa State College

Emotions and Multilingualism provides a comprehensive overview of research
done in the field of emotions and language, which is analyzed and added to
with the author's own work and thinking. Three main uses of this book are
obvious. It is appropriate for use in graduate courses in
psycholinguistics, anthropological linguistics, or second language
acquisition (SLA) theory and bilingualism. It will also be of use as a
model and reference for anyone interested in doing research on either
emotions or multilingualism. And third, bilingual or multilingual
individuals who are interested in interpreting their own experiences, will
find this book to be of great significance. (From here, the word
''bilingual'' will be used generically to refer to both bilinguals and
multilinguals.) The book includes two perspectives on the topic: one from
the field of emotion studies and one from the field of multilingualism. In
this way, specialists in one field who may not be deeply studied in the
other are given sufficient grounding to understand the research and ideas
presented. The author states in the preface that the traditional approach
to both linguistic inquiry and inquiry about the human mind has been based
on a monolingual ideal speaker, and since a real minority of the world's
language users are not monolingual, the resulting theories cannot be truly
representative of what is a ''messy, heteroglossic, and multilingual''
reality (p. xii).

The first chapters of the book introduce how emotions studies are
necessary for studies of multilingualism and vice versa, and later
chapters go in-depth through the levels of language sounds, semantics and
concepts, and discourse as they correlate with and express emotions, and
finally, the neurophysiology of emotions and the social influences on
emotions are related to language and multilingualism. In the eighth and
last chapter of the book, suggestions are presented for integrating the
two fields of emotions studies and multilingualism studies.

SUMMARY

In the first chapter, the Pavlenko raises questions about Chomsky's using
an idealized monolingual native speaker to make generalizations about
language and human cognition. She suggests that the Chomskian tradition
has been the source of a deep-seated inherent bias in research methodology
and analyses, much in the same way that gender bias in the past affected
research models in many different fields. She suggests that language
competence (even in L1) is not the homogeneous and relatively unchangeable
property that many researchers seem to presuppose (e.g., MacWhinney 1997).
She emphasizes that many factors point to an opposing reality; that is,
bilingual speakers have a uniquely formed linguistic and emotional system
that rather than being composed of two monolingual systems, is in fact a
compound and dynamic system of multicompetence (as theorized by others as
well, namely, Cook (1991) and Grosjean (1998)). The author's argument is
that the study of bilingualism is a necessary component in the study of
emotions in the fields of linguistics, psychology, and anthropology, and
she advocates an overall reassessment of research methodology and
reporting procedures.

Chapter two argues that the fields of SLA and bilingualism can be greatly
enriched by the study of emotions, and Pavlenko surveys extant work in
this area. She points out that extant research demonstrates that in
monolingual societies, bilinguals have been avoided or treated as
problematic, and in multilingual societies, bilingualism has been ignored
since it is the norm. Other work from the field of psychology shows a
long history of looking at correlations between pathological identity
formation and discriminating use of first language (L1) and second
languages (L2) by subjects. It is these metaphors of a split identity that
have somewhat incorrectly informed writing on SLA and bilingualism. The
author suggests that while Krashen's well-known Monitor Model (most
recently in 1994) and others have developed theories relating affect and
the acquisition of second languages, they are reductionist in nature. She
notes that affective constructs such as anxiety, motivation, self-esteem,
risk-taking, and tolerance of ambiguity that are frequently cited in the
literature on language learning and acquisition may be relevant to
classroom learners in a monolingual society, but they are not
representative of the diverse emotional factors that play a role in
bilingualism in the greater contexts of language learning and use.
Pavlenko then outlines the few studies that do indeed consider more
contextualized aspects of bilingualism point toward the existence of
distinct emotional repertories connected to distinct languages, and
summarizes the methodology used in her own large-scale study (a two-year
web questionnaire involving 1,039 bilingual participants). Her main
premise in suggesting the need for revised research models is that ''there
is no single coherent story to be told about the relationship between
emotions and multilingualism,'' and she strongly asserts that future work
should avoid the traditional unitary and narrow views of affect and
language that were common in the past.

Chapter three is the first of three chapters that break language into its
components for analysis of their interaction with emotions. This chapter
explains ways in which vocal cues signal emotions in different languages
and explores the ways in which both monolinguals and bilinguals interpret
the emotions behind vocal cues in different languages. Pavlenko provides
numerous examples of pitch, intonation, stress and loudness, and rhythm
that signal different emotional states across different languages. She
stresses that vocal cues are inherently ambiguous and dependent on
individual speaker and context, but she summarizes work that demonstrates
that interpreting emotions based on vocal cues is accurate to a degree
greater than chance even for non-native speakers of a language. She also
gives examples of how the misinterpretation of vocal cues across languages
can be problematic, including the context of psychological evaluations.
She points out that many more studies comparing the prosody of
conventionalized emotional signals are needed, both intralanguage and
cross-linguistically. Very importantly, in this chapter, Pavlenko
summarizes and comments on numerous research models, concluding that
future work on affective cues in language needs to delineate more
carefully a multitude of factors such as linguistic and cultural
background of participants, level of anxiety, gender, length of speech
samples, etc. At a practical level, she mentions the fact that although
vocal cues are often the most important aspect of expressing and
interpreting affect and are often part of language transfer from L1 to L2,
vocal cues to emotions are not usually taught in language classrooms.

Chapter four moves into the area of mental lexicon and semantic concepts
as they relate to emotions. Pavlenko offers several subjective accounts of
language users who have learned to feel different emotions through
different languages, and she makes the point that since emotion terms do
not correspond neatly across languages, these subjective accounts make
sense. She goes on to present three competing paradigms currently used for
conceptualizing the relationship between emotion terms in language, the
mental representations of those terms, and the experiences of language
users. The author argues in detail for her stance of defining and framing
her approach based on ''a process view of emotions'' (p. 80), in which
emotion concepts are formed through experience (relativist paradigm) and
through physiological or biological states that accompany them
(universalist paradigm). She goes on to summarize findings to date on
cross-linguistic comparisons of emotion terms, which leads her to ask how
bilinguals represent emotions. Ten studies based on a variety of research
methodologies are outlined and critiqued. Some of the most interesting
results of these studies point toward the fact that bilinguals appear to
reconceptualize their emotions as they become socialized into their other
language(s). Several studies indicate that emotion categories themselves
are borrowed across languages together with the borrowing of words or with
code switching. At the practical level, the author highlights the
importance of this type of knowledge for legal, clinical, and academic
contexts. She ends the chapter by suggesting ways to refine and improve
future research and adds some questions that still need to be addressed in
the research.

In chapter five, the author covers the discourse level of language and
emotions. Discourse has only recently become the subject of study for
emotions because it was long perceived as too difficult to objectify. Two
currently developing paradigms for research are introduced, and Pavlenko
adopts the view that instead of communicating emotions, we ''perform
affect'' (p. 115) in various ways. She indicates that we use discourse
strategies such as: terms of address, hedges, intensifiers, pronoun
choice, diminutives, tag questions, tense, mood, voice, word order,
narrative structures, register, and turn-taking to assume different
affective personae in different contexts. This leads to several questions
in the case of bilinguals. Do they use distinct affective styles in their
distinct languages, and if so, how are those choices made? Is there
cross-linguistic influence? Results of studies of discourse show that
bilinguals often feel that one of their languages is better suited for
capturing or experiencing certain emotions, that language attrition may be
accompanied by attrition of certain types of emotion frames, and that
there is bidirectional influence of languages on emotion
conceptualization. Again the author closes the chapter by suggesting that
foreign language classes need to teach learners how to perform affect, and
she presents ways in which to improve future research.

Chapter six moves away from the components of language into the area of
neurophysical responses related to emotions when different languages are
used by bilingual speakers. There is evidence here that L1 is more closely
attached to the limbic system of the brain (which processes emotions), and
other evidence points to the idea that emotional memories are more
strongly associated with L1. Pavlenko explains the ''L2 detachment
effect'' (p. 158), which both allows bilinguals to undergo psychotherapy
for trauma in the second language and allows bilinguals to use taboo words
more easily in the second language. Other interesting findings are the
''language congruity effect'' and the ''language specificity effect'' (p.
177) which both relate memories elicited by L1 to higher emotional
intensity. There is a discussion of translingual writers and their choices
of which language they use in their writing. The author ends the chapter
with a criticism of most studies as still holding the view that a
bilingual is two isolated monolinguals in one body, and says that many
other dynamics need to be factored into future research.

Chapter seven explores how language choices are based on social identities
and power relations, which by nature are tied to emotions. Pavlenko
details the ways in which emotional investments are made in particular
languages by bilinguals because of the social or cultural character types
linked to those languages. She presents case studies of L1 rejection and
attrition linked to emotional attitudes (specifically German speakers
during the Nazi occupation). Also presented are studies of deep love for
new language tied to romantic allegiances. Since language use is always at
some level an act of identity, and our identities are constantly in flux,
the author suggests that as our emotions change over time, so our language
investments will be complex and even contradictory at times.

In chapter eight, Pavlenko sketches some general directions for
integrating multilingual approaches into the study of language and
emotions and some directions for integrating the study of emotions into
the study of multilingualism. She emphasizes the importance of
triangulation in future work. She calls for increased naturalistic studies
and more collaborative analyses that involve communication between
participants, informants, native speakers, and researchers as part of
research. She also explains the overall need for much more careful
reporting that will make analytic choices, criteria, results, and contexts
more explicit. She ends with a plea for theorists to stop believing that
sufficient data can be garnered from monolinguals, saying that it is
irresponsible not to use bilinguals for linguistic and psychological
theory building.

EVALUATION

Each chapter of this book resonates with ideas, questions, experiences,
and emotions that will be intimately familiar to many bi/multi-lingual
language users. The author's strategy of viewing emotions through
different lenses, varying through the viewpoints of emotions as states, as
mental concepts, as processes, or as relationships is very effective in
achieving her stated purpose of changing the unitary way we think about
affect in language. While running the risk of sounding
self-contradictory, she successfully enables the reader to approach the
subject from multi-faceted viewpoints, which contributes to understanding
rather than causing confusion.

The author organizes the book systematically and effectively. She opens
each chapter with subjective accounts and personal experiences of
individuals in order to lead into key questions to be explored in the
chapter. She explicitly states the goals of each chapter, presents the
extant theoretical paradigms, summarizes key pieces of evidence, lists and
discusses noteworthy factors found in the research, and finally summarizes
the findings of studies and their implications and suggests directions for
future research. (The last section in each chapter is entitled
''Conclusions and Implications for Future Research.'' I found these
sections to be reiterative enough that I felt part of the section title
should be ''Summary'' rather than ''Conclusions.'') Studies ranging from
several decades ago up to the most recent work are listed in tables in
each chapter. The tables include both research procedures and findings.

In chapter three (the first of the language component chapters), there are
a great number of studies, examples, and narratives, which are all
interesting, but this reviewer found them to be too extensive in that they
reiterate over and over the point that vocal cues are problematic to
interpret within and across languages a point on which many readers do not
need much convincing. However, her outlining of many studies is valuable
in that it offers a number of research designs which can be taken as
models for further research.

In chapter four, Pavlenko defends her rather revolutionary view of
conceptualizing emotions very successfully. She carefully formulates four
valid arguments to support her view of emotions as processes. Especially
convincing is her argument that emotion concepts are by nature embedded in
other systems, such as moral or power systems, which are context-dependent
and negotiable. Again, in this chapter, she lists ample examples of
various types of research already done, and she makes insightful and
practical suggestions for how better to approach research on emotion
conceptualization and language.

In chapter five, the author continues her pattern of summarizing important
studies in the field, critiquing them, and suggesting ways to improve. She
stated at the beginning of the book that her stance is nontraditional,
with a multifaceted approach. I found this approach through the three
chapters on components of language to be refreshing and well-suited to the
complexities of the topic. There are just a couple of spots where details
of Spanish were incorrect (p. 84 states that the verb ''ser'' is used to
express location) or oversimplified (p. 118 states that ''mamita'' means
daughter), but other language examples from Japanese appear to be
accurate.

Overall, the book is user-friendly, comprehensive, insightful, and
though-provoking. Its perspective being interdisciplinary, many types of
readers will find it useful. I recommend it most highly.

REFERENCES

Cook, V. (1991) The poverty of the stimulus argument and multicompetence.
Second Language Research, 7, 2, 103-117.

Grosjean, F. (1998) Studying bilinguals: Methodological and conceptual
issues. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1, 2, 131-149.

Krashen, S. (1994) The input hypothesis and its rivals. In N. Ellis (ed.)
Implicit and explicit learning of languages. New York: Academic Press, pp.
45-77.

MacWhinney, B. (1997) Second language acquisition and the competition
model. In DeGroot, A. and J. Kroll (eds.) Tutorials in bilingualism:
Psycholinguistic perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 113-142.

ABOUT THE REVIEWER Julie Bruch is Associate Professor of English and
Linguistics at Mesa State College in Colorado, U.S.A. Her research
interests are second language acquisition and cross-cultural comparisons
of aspects of discourse.

AfricAvenir News are kindly sent out by Eric Van Grasdorff:

Liebe Freunde,

Im Rahmen der Filmreihe "African Perspectives" laden AfricAvenir International und die Initiative Südliches Afrika (INISA) am Sonntag, den 27. August, um 17.15 Uhr zur Filmvorführung von Darrell Roodts preisgekrönten Film "Yesterday " in das Berliner Filmtheater Hackesche Höfe ein. Im Anschluss besteht die Möglichkeit zur Diskussion mit Kenneth Kambule, einem der Hauptdarsteller. Der Eintritt ist frei.

Yesterday
Regie: Darrell Roodt
Südafrika, 96 min, OmEnglU

Am: Sonntag, den 27. August 2006
Beginn: 17.15 Uhr
Ort: Filmtheater Hackesche Höfe (Rosenthaler Str. 40/41; 10178 Berlin)
Vorbestellung: 030/283 46 03 (Mo-Sa ab 14.30 Uhr/So ab 10.30 Uhr)
Eintritt: FREI

Kurzinhalt
Yesterday (Leleti Khumalo) lebt mit ihrer 7-jährigen Tochter Beauty (Lihle Mvelase) in einem abgelegenen Dorf in Südafrika. Ihr Mann John (Kenneth Kambule) arbeitet in Johannesburg in den Minen. Als sie krank wird und dann erfährt, dass sie von ihrem Mann mit HIV infiziert wurde, kämpft sie mit bewundernswertem Lebenswillen dafür, den ersten Schultag ihrer Tochter zu erleben. Der Film beeindruckt mit einer bewegenden Geschichte und großartigen Bildern der südafrikanischen Landschaft. Er ist der erste international gezeigte Film, der in isiZulu gedreht wurde. (mehr Infos zum Film unter http://www.yesterdaythemovie.co.za)

Diskussionsgast
Kenneth Kambule (im Film: Yesterdays Mann) ist Schauspieler, Sänger, Tänzer und Dichter. Regelmäßig spielt er in den bekannten südafrikanischen Seifenopern „Generations“ und „Backstage“ mit. Er hatte außerdem Rollen in „I Dreamed of Africa“ mit Kim Basinger und in „Africa“ mit Elizabeth Berkley. Auf der Bühne spielte er u.a. in „Mad Dogs“, „African Renaissance Poet“ und „Vikela“ mit.

Auszeichnungen/Preise (Auszug)
- Oscar 2004, Nominierung: Bester ausländischer Film (erster südafrikanischer Film, der für einen Oscar nominiert wurde)
- Emmy Awards 2006, Nominierung: Bester im Fernsehen gezeigter Film
- Venice Film Festival 2004, Gewinner des „Eiuc Awards“
- Toronto International Film Festival 2004, Official Selection
- Independent Spirit Awards 2005, Nominiert: Bester ausländischer Film
- New Zealand Film Festival 2005, Official Selection
- Young Artist Awards 2005, Nominierung: Bester internationaler Spielfilm

Pressestimmen (Auszug)
„Yesterday is much more than a movie: it’s a transcendent experience that catapults the audience from the confines of their lives into the heart and daily routine of a rural mother with HIV“ (Sunday Times)

-----

Nächste Termine:

17. September: Sometimes in April (Eintritt frei)
R: Raoul Peck, USA/GB 2005, OmEnglU, 139 min.
Das Leben und das Wiedersehen zweier Brüder, die den Genozid in Ruanda 1994 unterschiedlich erfahren haben: der eine als Agitator des Massakers, der andere als Ehemann einer MaTutsi.

15. Oktober: Le Malentendu Colonial
R: Jean-Marie Teno, Kamerun/F/D 2004, OmDtU, 78 min.
Der Dokumentarfilm rekonstruiert die Wechselwirkungen zwischen christlichem ‚Ethos', kaufmännisch-kolonialen Interessen der Deutschen und den traumatischen Erlebnissen der Missionierten.

26. November: Les Saignantes
R: Jean-Pierre Bekolo, Kamerun/F 2005, OmEnglU, 92 min.
Dieser komplexe und eigenwillige Science-Fiction Satire-Thriller folgt zwei Frauen durch eine post-apokalyptische Landschaft in Kamerun im Jahr 2025.

17. Dezember: Heremakono - En attendant le bonheur
R: Abderrahmane Sissako, Mauretanien/F 2002, OmDtU, 96 min.
Eine Erzählung über das Warten, den Raum und die Zeit. Ein junger Mann besucht vor seiner Abreise nach Europa noch einmal seine Mutter in der mauretanischen Kleinstadt Nouadhibou.

21. Januar: Angola - Saudades from the one who loves you
R: Richard Pakleppa, Angola/Südafrika 2005, OmEnglU, 65 min.
Diese Verbindung aus Dokumentation und Lyrik führt mit eindringlichen Bildern durch die Parallelwelten eines zwischen Aufbruchstimmung und Hoffnungslosigkeit schwankenden Landes.

------------

African Perspectives ist eine monatlich stattfindende Filmreihe, in deren Rahmen aktuelle afrikanische Filme präsentiert werden.

'Yesterday' wird in Kooperation mit dem Filmtheater Hackesche Höfe und mit freundlicher Unterstützung der South African Airways, der Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung und des Weltfriedensdienst gezeigt.

Medienpartner: Radio Multikulti

Ständig aktuelle Informationen auf:
www.africavenir.com/africavenir/berlin/film/film-presentations.php
www.inisa.de
-----

AfricAvenir International e.V.
Dresdener Str. 13
10999 Berlin

Tel/Fax: +49 (0)30 885 08 57
Mobile: +49 (0)177 75 45 788
Mail: info[a]africavenir.org

Web: http://www.africavenir.org

www.AfricAvenir.org
Wollen Sie Fördermitglied von AfricAvenir International e.V. werden?
Kontaktieren Sie Ann Kathrin Helfrich, Fon: 030-80906789, a.helfrich@africavenir.org

Redaktion des Newsletters: Eric Van Grasdorff, e.vangrasdorff@africavenir.org
AfricAvenir International e.V. ist nicht für die Inhalte externer Webseiten verantwortlich.

Working for Peace: A Handbook of Practical Psychology and Other Tools
edited by Rachel M. MacNair in collaboration with Psychologists for Social Responsibility

is now available for purchase from the publisher:

http://www.impactpublishers.com/books/Working_for_Peace.html

and also available through other book outlets.

Description from publisher:

The most complete guidebook yet to social activism. Forty active peace workers -- psychologists, social workers, communication specialists and other professionals -- offer detailed practical guidance on getting yourself together, maintaining an effective group of volunteers, and getting the word out to the larger community.
Thirty-two information-packed chapters include: Cultivating Inner Peace; Overcoming Anger and Anxiety; Overcoming Helplessness and Discouragement; Overcoming Burnout; Motivating Others; Effective Group Meetings and Decision Making; Using Conflict Creatively; Promoting Peaceful Interaction; Nonviolent Communication; Conflict Transformation Skills; From Anger to Peace; Preparing for Nonviolent Confrontations; Effective Media Communication; Techniques of Behavior Change; Humor for Peace.

DIGNITY INTERNATIONAL MONTHLY NEWSBULLETIN - August 2006

Dignity News
* Latin America: Applications Now Open!
*Countdown - East Africa Programme!
* Mumbai Project - Well under Way

DIGNITY NEWS

*** Latin America: Applications Now Open!
CDES, COHRE – Americas Programme, Dignity International, DECA Equipo Pueblo y Social Watch are pleased to announce that the application procedure to the second Linking & Learning Programme on ESC Rights for the Latin America Region, which will take place in Quito, Ecuador, from 2 to 10 November 2006, is now OPEN.
For the second time, this Latin American programme is being organised, with the support of People’s World Relief and Development Fund of the Anglican Church of Canada (PWRDF).
The Programme aims to equip selected participants with the knowledge and skills necessary to integrate human rights in their daily work. Activists from social and economic justice movements and those working directly with persons living in poverty are encouraged to apply. The programme will bring together ‘catalysts’ from all the different Latin American countries. These persons will be in a position to spread knowledge and skills they have acquired from the programme and to introduce/implement what they have acquired within their own organisations or environment.
Information Document (English (http://www.dignityinternational.org/dg/RC/projects/2006_LA_informative_doc.pdf) / Spanish (http://www.dignityinternational.org/dg/RC/projects/2006_cursoDESC_doc_informativo.pdf)) & Application Form (http://www.dignityinternational.org/dg/RC/projects/2006_cursoDESC_formulario_candidatura.doc)
Documents also available for download at Social Watch (http://www.socialwatch.org) and Dignity International (http://www.dignityinternational.org).
If you have difficulties accessing the documents from the website and would like the documents to be sent via e-mail, please send a mail to: curdesc@socialwatch.org.
You can apply by filling the application form and sending it to curdesc@socialwatch.org.
DEADLINE FOR APPLICATIONS: 1 September 2006

*** Countdown - East Africa Programme!
Invitation to the Regional Roundtable on “Human Rights Based Approaches: Another Dish of the Day or Solutions for Lasting Change”
In a few weeks time (4-14 September) the development activists from the East Africa region will gather at the Landmark Hotel, Dar Es Salaam for the Regional Learning Programme on Human Rights in Development.
 As part of the programme there will be a roundtable on 11 September from 09.00-13.00 entitled “Human Rights Based Approaches: Another Dish of the Day or Solutions for Lasting Change” . If you are based in Tanzania and interested to participate in this roundtable please contact Thomas Nzumbi, Regional Coordinator of Dignity International at thomas@dignityinternational.org
The programme will be organised by Dignity International in partnership with Tanzania Council on Social Development (TACOSODE) and Hakijamii (Centre for Economic and Social Rights) with the financial support of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Finland and Oxfam NOVIB.

*** Mumbai Project – Well Under Way
Following the funding confirmation from the Netherlands based CORDAID, the action research, capacity building and advocacy project to support the people whose right to housing have been affected by the Mumbai Urban Transport Plan (MUTP) is now well underway. The three partners Youth for Unity and Voluntary Action (YUVA), Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) and Dignity International (by phone) met at the YUVA office on 25 July to share expectations, share results of the literature review, discuss potential members of the advisory committee, and to finalise and sign the Memorandum of Understanding among the three partner organisations.
Further information of the project can be obtained from Dignity International (http://dignityinternational.org/dg/RC/projects/2006_MUTP_Mumbai.pdf)

OTHER NEWS

*** Coca Cola and PepsiCo Banned from Kerala ( India)
Coca Cola and PepsiCo two of the world’s largest transnational corporations have been banned in the southern Indian state of Kerala. Neither of the two manufacturers can now produce, distribute nor sell their soft-drinks in that state. The reason for the state-wide ban in Kerala is the dangerous levels of pesticides found in those soft drinks produced in India. The Supreme Court of India has given the companies six weeks to disclose the ingredients in their beverages or face a possible national ban.
Communities and activists worldwide have welcomed the Kerala ban as a victory in the fight against corporate-led globalisation (or as some say, re-colonisation) and its destructive consequences on both humans and the environment. Whether it is seeds, crops, water supplies or human labor, the Global South pays heavily for the runaway greed of transnational corporations as they scour the globe in a race to the bottom.
This week international corporations got a clear message from the Indian state of Kerala - the people and environment of the Global South are not available for you to exploit and destroy as you accumulate obscene levels of profit.
More on the subject at India Resource Centre (http://www.indiaresource.org/index.html%20)
Source: Global Exchange Newsletter (http://www.globalexchange.org/index.html))

*** America Latina – 2 urgent appeals from OMCT
Last July, the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) denounced violations of economic, social and cultural rights together with child rights’ violations in Latin America.

Guatemala: Social Cleansing In Marginalised Areas
Last May 18, the UN Committee Against Torture, had called the attention of the State of Guatemala upon “the social cleaning and the brutal assassinate of street children and children from the most marginalised communities, as well as the increase in the number of murdered, raped and tortured women”.
As the national authorities did not take any action, the number of victims (especially women and children) from street violence has been constantly increasing. The victims have the same characteristics: indigenous origin, lack of education, lack of job and coming from the poorest level of the society.
As the media describes all chid living in the most deprived and marginalised areas as delinquent, people do get frightened and, to defend their lives, houses or shops, they pay professionals to kill those kids. Police does not intervene and when they, those poor kids are put into detention centres.

Ecuador: Violent Evictions in La Yuca, Cantón del Palenque
120 families were violently evicted in La Yuca, in the region of Cantón del Palenque, Ecuador, by a massive police operation armed with bulldozers as well as tear gas to stop any reaction from the residents. According to denounces, at least 12 houses were destroyed, including the school. Nobody was allowed to enter the settlement, including lawyers, to avoid witnesses.
In La Yuca live almost 120 families - all have legal ownership of their plot of land, also pay the respective taxes. The same land is now claimed by some private person; the authorities do not recognise any more the legal ownership of the residents.
12 households were already destroyed, 120 are in danger of being destroyed.
See how you can act at OMCT (http://www.omct.org%20) (World Organisation Against Torture)

*** WSF – Some Updates:
* Consultation Postponed Until August 30 - t he preparatory consultation is the first step in the organisation of the 7th WSF program, which will take place in Nairobi, Kenya, from January 20 to 25, 2007. The consultations are useful to map actions, campaigns and contests in which those entities, organisations, social movements and networks that participate on WSF are engaged.
To learn more about visit the Consultation's Page (http://consultation.wsf2007.org)

* 2nd Triple Frontier Social Forum - T he 2nd Triple Frontier Social Forum took place on July 21st to 23rd at the Ciudad del Este, Paraguay - the so-called Triple frontier is the one linking Paraguay, Argentina and Brazil. The activities in the encounter were organised around three main topics: Sovereignty, militarisation and natural resources (water, energy, earth and biodiversity); Integration and alternatives for the peoples facing the neo-liberal capitalism (ALCA, debts payment) and Human Rights (equality, sexual, cultural, and educational) and communications diversity.
See the World Social Forum Webpage (http://www.forumsocialmundial.org.br/dinamic.php?pagina=ii_foro_frontera_esp%20)

*** HR High commissioner: Still Lower Priority to ESC Rights
The legal protection countries give economic, social and cultural (ESC) rights is considerably weaker than in the case of other rights and should be strengthened, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHCHR) – Louise Arbour - says in a report presented to the Economic and Social Council at its current session. The High Commissioner recalls the Vienna Declaration and the value of ESC rights as legally binding obligations, and not of mere policy objectives or moral commitments.
The High Commissioner states the importance of the legal protection of ESC rights. Case law from all regions of the world show that legal protection can be an effective means of protecting economic, social and cultural rights, she says. The report aims to clarify the main forms of legal protection and how judicial, quasi-judicial and administrative remedies can play an important role in providing redress for individuals whose rights have been violated and in stimulating greater understanding of and respect for ESC rights.
Louise Arbour also draws attention to how the drafting of an Optional Protocol (OP) to the International Covenant on ESC Rights could stimulate strengthened legal protection of ESC rights. An optional protocol, providing for a complaints mechanism similar to existing mechanisms under the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights and other human rights treaties, would enhance the ability of the Committee on ESC Rights to assist States in their realisation of economic, social and cultural rights.
Read the Louise Arbour's full declaration (http://www.unhchr.ch/huricane/huricane.nsf/view01/BD0C068DEC846C07C12571B9001DE8E3?opendocument%20)
You can read more on the OP at Choike (http://www.choike.org/nuevo_eng/informes/4689.html%20)

*** Human Rights Committee – Last Session Conclusions
The 87 th session of the United Nations Human Rights Committee took place last July. During this session, the Committee examined State reports from Central African Republic, United States of America, UNMIK (Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo), Bosnia and Herzegovina, Madagascar, Ukraine as well as on the country situation (absence of report) of San Marino.
Read the Committee Concluding Observations (http://www.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrc/hrcs87.htm%20) now available online.

*** G8 Summit – NGO Reactions
The Group of Eight (G8) consists of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Together, these countries represent about 65% of the world’s economy. The hallmark of the G8 is an annual political summit meeting of the heads of government with international officials, though there are numerous subsidiary meetings and policy research. The Presidency of the group rotates every year. For 2006 it was held by Russia, in Saint Petersburg from July 15 to July 17.
On the agenda, the main priority topics to be discussed were: Global Energy Security, Infection Diseases/Health and Education. For human rights NGOs it was shocking the simple fact of not having human rights as a topic on the agenda. And, during the summit itself, the G8 only affirmed their commitment to human rights in the area of fighting against terrorism and working towards better security.
By the end of the summit, there was satisfaction mingled with disappointment as civil society organisations analysed the outcome of the G8 summit.

On Corruption:
Transparency International - Jesse Garcia: "We have reason to be satisfied with the G8's statement on fighting high-level corruption because it points to a growing understanding of corruption”. Garcia was referred to a statement of the heads of government of the G8 in which they renewed their commitment to fight corruption, in particular at the highest levels, and to improve transparency and accountability.

On Africa:
ActionAid - Alexandre Polack: “To begin with Africa was not on the agenda. After G8 leaders promised to make poverty history last year, this summit has been a damp squib.” Commenting on the G8 decision to pause on Africa until the next summit in Germany, Polack said it was good news that German Chancellor Angela Merkel would be putting Africa back on the agenda in the G8 Summit of 2007, but without immediate action there would be little progress, he said.

On HIV/AIDS:
Trans-Atlantic Partners Against AIDS (TPAA) - John Tedstrom: “The results of the summit were less exciting than in the years past, but this is mostly a reflection of the following considerations: first, the priority issues of energy security, the Middle East peace and the war on terror, and secondly, the AIDS fight is moving into a phase of consolidation of prior commitments and pledges and initiatives. Until those are met, it would be difficult to get big new commitments from governments. I think the summit missed the opportunity to put AIDS in ' Eurasia' on the agenda in a strategic way. The epidemics in Russia, China and India, in particular, need more attention - both from national governments and from the international community. The G8 leaders mostly renewed their commitment to deliver promises made at the previous summits to reverse the spread of HIV/AIDS through the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (Global Fund). The leaders said in a joint statement that the commitments would be carried out though “mobilising support for the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria” and “continuing to pursue as close as possible the universal access to HIV/AIDS treatment for all who need it by 2010.”
Source: Inter Press Service (http://www.ipsnews.net/new_focus/g8/index.asp)
G8 Summit 2006 official website (http://en.g8russia.ru/%20)

PUBLICATIONS

*** New report - Corruption and Governance Measurement Tools in Latin American Countries
This new report, produced by Transparency International (TI) and commissioned by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), presents the international, national and local tools used to measure corruption and good governance in Latin American countries. The report includes nearly 100 different corruption measurement tools in 17 countries: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, México, Nicaragua, Panamá, Paraguay, Perú, Uruguay and Venezuela. The report only includes measurement tools completed by the end of 2005.
In producing this report TI and UNDP seek to counterbalance the predominance of international cross-country corruption surveys that have emerged in the past several years by locating and presenting the local or domestic surveys and index tools measuring corruption. In order to use measurement tools for positive change, an understanding of the corruption phenomenon and its impact in the local context is required to inform the necessary policies and decisions to tackle the problem.
Report available online in English (http://www.transparency.org/content/download/8686/56295/file/TI2006_Corruption_Governance_Measurement_Tools_LA.pdf) and Spanish. (http://www.transparency.org/content/download/8687/56298/file/TI2006_Herramientas_Medir_Corrupción_Gobernabilidad.pdf)

ANNOUNCEMENTS

*** Human Rights Tools - New Website for Human Rights Professionals
The Human Rights Tools website is a new website produced by a small and independent group of volunteers who aim to facilitate the use of information on human rights available on the Internet. The editors call upon any suggestion you might have, regarding resources to add, other areas to cover, etc. Please send your comments to Daniel at editors@humanrightstools.org.
The website offers services as a library of carefully selected and commented resources; key resources for country analysis and daily updated human rights headlines as well as a newsletter with updates on human rights documentation.
Visit Human Rights Tools (http://www.humanrightstools.org%20)

*** Amnesty’s Special Programme on Africa - website redesigned
The webpage of the SPA - Special Programme on Africa (Amnesty International Netherlands) has been redesigned. The page contains general information on SPA as well as information on the activities from early 2005 to date. All SPA publications can now been downloaded in English, French and Portuguese.
See Amnesty International Netherlands (http://www.amnesty.nl/spa%20)

FORTHCOMING EVENTS - HIGHLIGHTS

*** World Bank & IMF Annual Meetings
The Annual Meetings of the Boards of Governors of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank Group are the largest gathering of global financial representatives in the world, and are held outside their Washington, D.C. base every third year. This year, the meetings will be taking place in Singapore, from 11 to 20 September.
Each country’s delegation usually includes its Minister of Finance and the head of the Central Bank or their respective equivalents. The rest of the delegation is comprised of advisors and other government representatives, totalling approximately 3,500 participants from all delegations.
Annual Meetings 2006 Official webpage (http://www.singapore2006.org/sections/annual_meet/about_annual2006.html%20)

*** XVI International AIDS Conference – Time to Deliver
The Conference is co-organised by UNAIDS, the Global Network of People Living with HIV/AIDS, ICW and ICASO among others, and aims at bringing together the movement of people responding to the HIV/AIDS epidemic to share their lessons and together stake out the road ahead. The AIDS 2006 theme - "Time to Deliver" - underscores the continued urgency in bringing effective HIV prevention and treatment strategies to communities the world over. Te magnitude of this epidemic demands increased accountability from all stakeholders to fulfill their commitments, be they financial, programmatic or political. The conference will take place in Toronto , Canada, from 13 to 18 August 2006.
All information available at Aids 2006 (http://www.aids2006.org/%20)

*** International Seminar on Domestic Workers
This Seminar is organised by Irene-Network, European Trade Union confederation (ETUC), Committee for Asian Women (CAW) and Women in Informal Employment: Globalizing and Organizing (WIEGO). It will take place from 8 to 10 November 2006, in Amsterdam, Holland.
Domestic workers’ employment situation is considered not to ‘fit’ the general framework of existing employment laws. This is because most work done by them is generally invisible, done in private houses (not considered as workplaces) owned by private persons (not considered as employers). So, domestic workers are not normally considered as employees, their work is undervalued, and their working conditions remain, in essence, unregulated.
Adding to that is the fact that domestic workers stem from the poorer parts of the population, migrate within countries, migrate to other countries, are predominantly women; also repeatedly they are still children. Trade unions working on the national and international level and the NGOs, which network nationally and internationally, can give the strong impetus for common strategies towards legal protection of domestic workers like fighting for: an ILO convention; workers’ rights for all domestic workers; work permits for domestic workers in receiving countries; protection for migrant workers, amongst others.
See Irene Network (http://www.irene-network.nl/download/domestic1eng.pdf)

*** VI International Human Rights Colloquium: Strengthening Human Rights in the South
The Colloquium is organised by Conectas together with SUR–Human Rights University Network Human Rights and will take place in Sao Paulo , Brazil , from 11 to 17 November 2006. The annual International Human Rights Colloquium is a forum that brings together human rights activists and academics, for a week each year, to learn from their peers and experts in the field, obtain a fresh perspective on their work, and lay the foundation for professional alliances down the road (networking). The objective of the VI International Human Rights Colloquium is to strengthen the impact of human rights activists and academics work in Latin America, Africa and Asia.
Applications will be accepted until September 3rd, 2006
All information available at Conectas (http://www.conectas.org/coloquio)

This is a monthly electronic news bulletin of 'Dignity International: All Human Rights for All'. Dignity International does not accredit, validate or substantiate any information posted by members to this news bulletin. The validity and accuracy of any information is the responsibility of the originator.

If you are working in the area of human rights with a special attention to different aspects of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, we would love to hear from you. To contribute, email us at info@dignityinternational.org

Common Ground News Service - Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH)
15 August 2006

The Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH) aims to promote constructive perspectives and dialogue about Muslim–Western relations. CGNews-PiH is available in Arabic, English, French and Indonesian.
For an archive of past CGNews articles and other information, please visit our website at www.commongroundnews.org.
Unless otherwise noted, copyright permission has been obtained and articles may be reprinted by any news outlet or publication. Please acknowledge both the original source and the Common Ground News Service (CGNews).

Inside this edition

5) by Jane Perlez
New York Times writer, Jane Perlez, talks about how Nia Dinata, an Indonesian filmmaker, is has brought the controversial topic of polygamy to the cinema: "Unlike most families in Indonesia where they try to cope, I was trying to say what I felt." Bringing the honest stories of women to the big screen for the first time, she is met with hostility from men and silence from women, demonstrating the ongoing sensitivity towards this topic while also increasing public awareness on the topic.
(Source: International Herald Tribune, 09 August 2006)

1) Let the voice of moderation speak
HRH El Hassan bin Talal

Amman - How much aggression in our region has been justified by the mantra that Western interests are under threat? The battle cries claim that all is at stake and every strike is a final defence of freedom and stability. But the premise behind this thinking has become all too obvious. Arabs and Muslims of whatever race or hue are not to be trusted. They are not to be dealt with fairly and the "liberal values" that protect the righteous of Israel or the United States are not for our defence or our protection. It seems that even the moderates in Arab societies lack the fibre that would grant them equality under international law. We are all as one, barbarians at the gate to be cowed and bullied into silent submission.

But we should be thankful that Arab moderation fights on with stoicism. Moderation will continue to battle for the hearts of those millions for whom this war on terror is an offence to their existential realities. Boaz Ganor, the prominent Israeli thinker, addressed the question of terrorism and demanded that there be "no prohibition without definition." Terrorism must be defined objectively, based upon accepted international laws and principles regarding what behaviour is permitted in conventional wars between nations.

The roots of that Arab anger and disillusionment which allows legitimacy to be handed over to extremists cannot be ignored. Terrorism is a tactic borne out of a perversion of lines of representation. If we do not allow the many to speak, then the violent few will scream to be heard. It may be difficult for most Israelis to admit, but the Shi'a of southern Lebanon became politicised and militarised only in response to repeated Israeli aggression. The citizens of Israel and the other states in the Middle East must be honest about the effects of decades of abuse of people and of international law, unless you believe that we Arabs possess a unique terrorist gene, which has ignited our responses in recent decades. If this is the case, then throw firewood on the blaze and let our region burn until you have killed or exiled every last Arab in your neighbourhood.

The founders of Israel and, indeed, the United States, fought what they perceived as an occupation. Recently, Israelis commemorated the bombing of the King David Hotel in 1946 as a landmark act in ending the British Mandate. But surely this must be defined as an act of terror. A statement in the British House of Commons at the time described the attack, in which 92 people were murdered, as "one of the most dastardly and cowardly crimes in recorded history."

The Lebanese have been damned to repeat this phrase to describe attacks on their country. But in our world, righteousness belongs to the victor. If this is the way of the new world order, and international law no longer has a place - then, by all means, the extremists on all sides must fight to the death. The question is what can usefully be won in such a scenario? The evils of pain, suffering and moral bankruptcy are all the spoils of our new-world fighters.

The traumatic effects of the collective punishment of civilian populations will be felt for generations to come. The Israeli Defence Force has made terror a daily reality for the civilian populations of Palestine and Lebanon, populations who have lived and continue to live during illegal occupation. For the other side of this global war on terror, violence is most often something to read about. The threat of terror is fetishised by media and politicians, and provides a scant excuse for policies that make terror a daily reality in the lives of millions of people in the Middle East.

No one can ignore the pain and suffering of the Israeli people in recent weeks, but the policies of disproportionate reprisal and abuse of humanitarian norms can only beget further violence. Jordan is a country that fought two world wars on the side of the Allies. We have suffered from the shockwaves of aggression on all sides and we have endured threats and terror right up to Zarqawi's terrible attacks on Amman. So do not patronise us by dubbing us allies in the war on terror and then dismiss our words when we question your policies.

The politics you entertain in this region are the product of a false perception. Our regional perspective is being ignored and, all the while, empowered extremists are gaining greater control. We must not be fooled into thinking that a new Middle East can be devised by political strategists and imposed from top down. The promotion of participatory democracy has been curtailed by a fear of empowering moderate Arabs and moderate Islamists. Regimes within the region and powers outside attempt to stifle the protests of dismayed populations - protests that should be aired through banners and the ballot box. But the moderates are now shouting also. The evolution of freedoms cannot be controlled from above, nor blasted into alien forms that poorly represent the needs of those seeking freedom. With the ever-increasing polarisation of hate, we should be grateful that exasperation has not stifled the protest of moderates.

###
HRH El Hassan bin Talal is brother of the late King Hussein of Jordan and president of the Arab Thought Forum. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org).
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), August 15, 2006
Visit the website at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org)
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

2) Thumbs up to living in Malaysian diversity
Patricia Martinez

Kuala Lumpur - It is a fact of life that even in exemplary democracies, elites or those in leadership roles speak on behalf of the citizenry. Whether from government or civil society, or either side of the political divide, speaking on behalf of people in terms such as "Malaysians should...", "women need...", "Muslims want..." are often based on assumptions and generalisations about what ordinary people think, want and need.

However, assumptions are also simply presumptions based on conversations or one’s personal observation, without a method to gauge proportions or the intensity of such needs and wants. These assumptions can then be described as an appropriation of the voices of those on whose behalf one speaks.

Surveys — the technology of asking a numerically representative group of people questions in order to elicit information — are a useful tool for revealing the "voice" of a large group of people. Yet there are obvious limitations to this technology.

For example, there is an inherent bias in all questions, and surveys too are premised on projecting for the group from a representative sample. Despite these limitations, surveys can be fairly accurate indicators of what a large group of people feel, want and think about themselves.

Between December 15 and 18 of 2005, a survey of over 1,000 randomly selected Muslims was conducted across Peninsular Malaysia. The telephone survey sought to obtain information about identity, issues and concerns, as well as what Muslims thought about suicide bombing and the countries that are often described as constituting "the West", namely the United States, Europe and Australia.

The survey questionnaire, in Bahasa Malaysia, was devised through three focus groups in consultation with academics, policy-makers and civil society.

The survey was pre-tested before being administered by the Merdeka Centre.

The Merdeka Centre sampled respondents on the basis of the proportions of the Muslim population (by state and by gender) as indicated in the updated census published in 2003 by the Department of Statistics.

The results of the survey indicate that the majority of Muslims in Peninsular Malaysia are defined primarily by Islam rather than by their national identity as Malaysians, but are comfortable with living alongside people of other faiths.

The results also confirm what has been described as growing orthodoxy. For example, the majority feel that shari‘a in Malaysia is not strict enough, and 57.3 per cent want the hudud, the shari’a punishments for different crimes, to be implemented.

However, a majority, 63.3 per cent, also opted for the shari‘a to remain under the Constitution in Malaysia (the other answer or option given to the question was, "the shari‘a to replace the Constitution in Malaysia").

In terms of identity, when asked to choose which defined them most, being Malay, Muslim or Malaysian (ethnicity, religion or nationality), 72.7 per cent chose being Muslim as their primary identity. As their second choice of identity, more respondents chose being Malaysian (14.4 per cent) than being Malay (12.5 per cent).

When asked if they felt all three identities, 99.4 per cent replied "yes". In an effort to verify the answer to the question about which identity defined them the most, respondents were asked in a subsequent question to rank the components "Malay", "Muslim" and "Malaysian" in importance. Seventy-nine per cent again ranked being Muslim first.

One interpretation of this result is a heightened self-consciousness about being Muslim, since Islam dominates public discourse.

Another interpretation is that after 49 years of nationhood, Malaysians have adopted many aspects of Malay culture — food, dress and language — thus blurring the boundaries that differentiate Malays from the rest of the population of predominantly Chinese and Indian origins. Islam then becomes the defining element of Malay identity.

Therefore, since racial differentiation is all of politics, policy and a fact of life in Malaysia, perhaps the mostly-Malay respondents of the survey chose being Muslim as indicating the boundaries of their identity.

Another reason could also be the intense emotion that a love for one’s religion evokes, hence identifying oneself primarily by that religion rather than by nationality or ethnicity.

Whatever the reasons, most of our policies and programmes on nation-building and unity focus largely on overcoming the schisms of ethnicity. Perhaps we should note that it is not just race which differentiates us as Malaysians; religion is clearly confirmed as also a key factor.

However, this does not mean that Muslim respondents choose to be defined as Muslims rather than as Malaysians in order to be exclusive or separate.

In response to the question "Is it acceptable for Malaysian Muslims to live alongside people of other religions?" a resounding 97.1 per cent said "yes".

In response to other questions, 79.5 per cent said that Muslims should learn about other religions in Malaysia and 83.8 per cent responded that Muslims could participate in dialogues with people of other faiths.

These findings indicate a greater level of acceptance of the reality of Malaysia’s diversity than appears in current public discourse. The responses can also be interpreted as the security and confidence that Muslims have regarding their religious identity, and the innate tolerance and justice of Islam.

These results indicate also an outcome of the daily interaction of ordinary Malaysians who are not cocooned in their chauffeured cars but who travel, study, shop and work alongside each other.

In other words, Muslims are able to come to terms with what it actually means to live in a multi-religious nation, without detracting from their strong sense of identity as Muslims.

This is how Malaysia is unique among Muslim nations, and why Malaysian Muslims are often described as moderate because of their successful negotiation of the racial and religious diversity that is their context.

It is a diversity that reflects the reality of an increasingly globalised world with no nation able to claim that its population comprises only one racial or religious group, and with all of humanity having to find the skills and will to live together.

Other responses in the survey indicate that the strongest influence on them as Muslims are their parents (73 per cent), with religious teachers coming in a far second at 9.4 per cent, and religious lectures and sermons at 3.2 per cent.

Ninety-three per cent had heard about Islam Hadhari, but only 53.3 per cent were able to state that they understood it. Islam Hadhari is a mid-twentieth century theory of government based on the principles of Islam as derived from the Qur'an, currently being promoted by the Malaysian Prime Minister, Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.

A slim majority of only 53.7 per cent correctly identified the rulers as the heads of Islam in Malaysia, with over 40 per cent describing either the mufti, the director of a State department for Islam or the Prime Minister as the head of Islam.

A total of 77.3 per cent want stricter shari‘a laws in Malaysia, and 44.1 per cent feel that the authority to monitor and punish the immoral behaviour of Muslims should be with the State religious authorities, with the family coming second at 33.3 per cent.

However, if these results depict conservative attitudes, it should be noted that that 76.6 per cent answered "yes" to the question "In Islam, do men and women have equal rights?"

More men than women answered in the affirmative. But only a slim majority, 55.5 per cent, stated that women can be shari‘a court judges.

Finally, as for suicide bombing, 62.1 per cent chose the option that it was the "wrong action for Muslims", only11.6 per cent chose shaheed or martyr, and a high percentage — 24.8 per cent — chose "don’t know" (which, because of its significant size, can be interpreted as respondents not being willing to state their point of view).

In terms of their feelings regarding the US, Europe and Australia, the options of "like", "OK", "dislike" and "hate" were provided.

Thirty-nine per cent chose "hate" to describe their feelings towards the US, with 44.5 per cent choosing "dislike". In other words, 83.5 per cent of Muslims in Peninsular Malaysia have a negative attitude towards America.

For Europe, 18.8 per cent chose "hate" to describe their feelings, with 38.2 per cent choosing "dislike", so over 50 per cent have a negative attitude towards the continent.

However, 34.3 per cent chose the option "OK", more than double the number (13.4 per cent) who did so to describe their feelings towards the United States.

For Australia, 18.3 per cent chose "hate", 36.6 per cent chose "dislike" and 35.1 per cent chose "OK".

It is significant that negativity defines Malaysian Muslim attitudes towards what constitutes "the West", and this finding is in consonance with other global surveys on Muslim attitudes, such as those conducted by the Pew Research Centre (which does not poll Malaysians although it has studies on Indonesia).

The survey results show the complexity of Muslim attitudes in Peninsular Malaysia, and how this complexity reflects their real engagement with various aspects of national life.

The results also discredit some of the assumptions and generalisations about Malaysian Muslims.

As such, claims writ large about who Muslims in Malaysia are and what they want, feel and need, are sometimes exaggerations if not generalisations.

The results are mixed, neither confirming moderation alone nor indicating overwhelming conservatism. But what the survey results do confirm, hearteningly, is that Muslims are able to live with the diversity that is Malaysia, and the reality that is our world.

###
Patricia Martinez is an associate professor at the Asia-Europe Institute of the University of Malaya. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org).
Source: New Strait Times, 10 August 2006
Visit the website at www.nst.com.my (http://www.nst.com.my)
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

3) Why the US supports Israel
Yusuf Mansur

Amman - The US has vetoed many of the UN Security Council resolutions restricting Israeli hegemony, supplied the Jewish state with more aid per its capita than any other country in the world, armed it with weapons that are otherwise forbidden to any other country, and seems resolutely biased towards the Israelis. This blind love for Israel is driven neither by public opinion polls in the US, nor a deep understanding of citizens of the Middle East by the average American. It is a manifestation of the power of the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee, better known as AIPAC, or the Israeli lobby.

Unbeknown to Arabs almost everywhere, the average American knows very little about the Middle East, be it Palestine, Iraq or Lebanon. Prior to 9/11, the average American did not know much about the region at all and still does not know enough.

Americans elect their representatives to Congress and the Senate to speak on their behalf, and only care about domestic politics and policies. In democracies, unlike dictatorships where everyone is a political guru, people leave politics to the politicians and go on about their own lives. When electing a president, it is the economy that takes first consideration.

Arabs in general, who view the US as totally biased towards Israel, cannot understand this apparent disregard for causes they believe are just, and ultimately blame the American people. To explain the maligned US policy towards Israel, Arabs concoct American conspiracies and speak of America’s desire to control their oil and the region. The Arabs thus take a reductionist approach, calling the US people the great evil, an undeserved accusation.

What Arabs generally fail to understand is that public opinion in the US does not matter, the justice of their cause is insignificant, and that their every action and lobbying, if not directed at the US political machine, will not make a difference. The American public simply does not know, does not care to know and even if they did know, their attitude would be nonchalant as in Europe. This is a sad but correct conclusion. The EU countries, because of their proximity to the region among other things, know more about its problems and are usually less biased in their media coverage and views, but at most give lip service. European support has not manifested itself into support for just Arab causes such as the implementation of UN Resolution 242, withdrawal from occupied territories and cessation of hostilities against Lebanon. A pro-Arab public opinion in the US would at best produce similar results and sympathy.

What is needed, in fact, is a US administration that supports Arab causes. The answer can be found in something similar to AIPAC, Israel’s power behind the power. Founded in 1953 as the American Zionist Committee for Public Affairs, with the stated purpose of lobbying the US Congress on issues and legislation that are in the best interests of Israel and the United States, AIPAC, with a current membership of 100,000, meets regularly with members of Congress and holds events where it can share its views with them. It analyses the voting records of US federal representatives and senators with regard to how they voted on legislation related to Israel; it never forgets or forgives; and it only backs congressional candidates who support Israel. Between 1978 and 2000, AIPAC directly donated almost $35 million to 1,732 congressional candidates. Official aid from the US to Israel since 1948 has exceeded $103 billion.

The power of AIPAC is manifested in the support it gained for Israel among members of Congress and White House administrations since the 1960s. Congressional candidates and incumbents who are pro-Israel receive campaign funding and favourable publicity through a myriad of AIPAC affiliates, organisations and media outlets, while politicians who do not favour policies benefiting Israel are targeted for replacement by pro-Israel supporters. AIPAC does not forget; to be black listed all one needs is an unfavourable vote on a pro-Israeli policy. Its support in tight campaigns can determine the outcome. Congressmen know this and they listen and act accordingly. The public does not care about how their representatives voted on Middle Eastern issues simply because such issues are not important to them and do not affect their daily lives.

Aware of the power of AIPAC and its ability to mobilise Congress members, the White House tows the line otherwise important domestic bills are never passed. When margins are tight, every congressional vote becomes important. When a US president has an agenda on an issue in the Middle East, he knows that congressional support can be garnered through AIPAC. When a president takes a tough stand on Israel, he knows that his domestic agenda will meet more hurdles than he can deal with in Congress. Worse still, come re-election year, he will definitely suffer if he does not support Israel. In short, it is political suicide to go against AIPAC, especially when the White House administration is weak.

Therefore, Arabs should not be surprised that on July 18 the Senate unanimously approved a non-binding resolution “condemning Hamas and Hizbollah and their state sponsors and supporting Israel’s exercise of its right to self-defence.” According to former Carter administration National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski, AIPAC basically wrote the resolution.

The upshot is if Arabs want a fairer stance from the US administration they have to have their own effective and equally strong lobby in Washington, instead of counting on public opinion. Public opinion in the US is irrelevant -- it does not matter, and it never did.

###
Yusuf Mansur is the Managing Partner of the Envision Consulting Group (EnConsult) and Former CEO of the Jordan Agency for Enterprise and Investment Development (JAED). This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org).
Source: Jordan Times, 08 August 2006
Visit the website at www.jordantimes.com (http://www.jordantimes.com)
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

4) Hezbollah has risen to fill a social need
Fawaz A. Gerges

Beirut - There is a misunderstanding in Israel and the United States that Israel can militarily rid Lebanon of Hezbollah, or the Party of God.

In the first place, Hezbollah is not just a militia or a conventional army, but a social and political movement deeply rooted in its society, with a big constituency within the Lebanese Shi‘a community that comprises about 40 percent of the country's 4 million people. Hezbollah has a welfare system that provides schools, clinics, day-care centres and jobs to hundreds of thousands of poor Shi‘a. Hezbollah provides the Shi‘a community, historically disadvantaged and marginalised in Lebanon, with a sense of identity and pride.

Second, Hezbollah is falsely portrayed as a rotten tooth that can easily be plucked out - a terrorist organisation that must be wiped out. In fact, it is one of the most pivotal political players on the Lebanese landscape. More than a million men and women vote for its candidates in elections. It has two ministers in the Cabinet, 14 seats in Lebanon's 128-seat parliament and a large base of support in Lebanon and the Muslim world.

Third, since the early 1980s Hezbollah has proved itself on the battlefield against Israeli military might. By 2000 it forced Israel to withdraw under fire from a small strip of land in southern Lebanon. This time, even weeks into the fighting, Hezbollah was proving resilient.

It is naive for President George W. Bush to view Lebanon as just another front in the war on terror. The root causes of the Israeli-Hezbollah confrontation lie in the unresolved Arab-Israeli conflict and stalled peace process. And it is unrealistic for Israel to think that it can destroy Hezbollah for good.

Before this war started, there was no shortage of men willing to join the fight against Israel. Israel's displacement of more than 1 million Lebanese people (most of whom are Shi‘a) and the killing of more than 900 civilians should guarantee an endless flow of recruits for years.

Another misunderstanding is that this is a proxy war against Iran and Syria. This is nonsense. Although armed and financed by Iran and Syria, Hezbollah has become more autonomous since Israel's 2000 withdrawal from Lebanon.

Not only has the charismatic leader Sayyid Hassan Nasrallah succeeded with an agenda inside Lebanon, he has made Hezbollah into the new vanguard of armed resistance to Israel and America in the eyes of tens of millions of Arabs and Muslims. A national poll conducted in Lebanon about two weeks ago by the Beirut Center for Research and Information showed a sharp rise in support for Hezbollah since the Israeli invasion. Eighty-seven percent of all respondents supported Hezbollah's military response (including 89 percent of Sunnis and 80 percent of Christians). Five months ago, just 58
percent supported Hezbollah's right to remain armed.

The carnage in Lebanon is also weakening pro-Western elements throughout the region. "The Arab people see Hezbollah as a hero because it is fighting Israel's aggression," said Jordan's King Abdullah II, a key U.S. ally who initially blamed Hezbollah for provoking the crisis.

The route to peace is not to militarily defeat Hezbollah - an impossible task - but to broker a comprehensive Arab-Israeli peace treaty and enable the Shi‘a community to fully integrate within Lebanese institutions. As long as a large segment of the Shi‘a community remains socially and politically marginalized in Lebanon, Hezbollah's radical vision will
prevail.

The best hope for a settlement rooted in reality is the plan from Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Siniora, which has been approved by the Cabinet, including the two Hezbollah ministers. This calls for a cease-fire, which will keep the Lebanese government from crumbling and effectively widen its authority, and for a multinational force in southern Lebanon to supplement the Lebanese army. The plan resolves the status of a tiny piece of land held by Israel and claimed by Lebanon, the Shab‘a Farms, and envisions a dialogue to integrate Hezbollah fighters into the Lebanese army, thus disarming the organization. A similar package has been floated by France and debated at the United Nations.

Instead of inaccurately dismissing the revolutionary organization as nothing but "terrorist" and relying solely on military muscle, Israel and the United States need to back negotiations that are rooted in a more nuanced understanding of the force they are out to destroy.

###
Fawaz A. Gerges is the author of "Journey of the Jihadist: Inside Muslim Militancy” and is a professor at Sarah Lawrence College. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org).
Source: Newsday, 06 August 2006
Visit the website at www.newsday.com (http://www.newsday.com)
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

5) Cinéma vérité: Portrait of Indonesian polygamy
Jane Perlez

Jakarta - Nia Dinata is, without much doubt, Indonesia's most talented new filmmaker: packed screenings of her latest movie on polygamy at Cannes attest to that.

More art-house than Hollywood, her success springs from a fearless drive to address issues of the day with poignancy, and touches of humour. In "Love for Share", viewers can also detect something else -- an authenticity bred of experience.

For Dinata, 36, a movie that showed the behind the scenes anguish of polygamous marriages, most particularly for women, was an obvious thing to do.

As more conservative strands of Islam take hold in Indonesia, polygamy is on the rise, flaunted in public by princesses and politicians. Dinata grasped the moment to show what she calls the sadness and denials behind the smiles of wives who say they accept being one of a crowd.

When she was 18, just starting her freshman year at college in the United States, she was unexpectedly called home: her father was taking a second wife.

"When my mother broke the news, I was shocked," said Dinata, sitting at a café terrace here, a cigarette in hand, at the end of a long day of shooting her fourth movie about the aftermath of a terror attack. "I asked them to get a divorce."

The parents, in turn, were shocked at her reaction, she recalled, because they assumed that all children wanted their parents to stay together, even if under different circumstances.

"Unlike most families in Indonesia where they try to cope, I was trying to say what I felt." Dinata's father married the second woman anyway, and her mother, who had trained as a doctor, adopted an outward facade of calm.

Most telling for Dinata was not only her mother's inner turmoil and outward bravery, but also the brevity of her father's second marriage. It lasted four years.

"For men, they have to divide their time, they lose all the fun." Many of the second and third marriages, torn by the tensions of the husband trying to accommodate all his wives, do not last, and those that do often result in domestic abuse, she said.

The underlying threads and emotions of her mother and father's relationship, combined with two years of research around Indonesia - interviewing women from different class backgrounds, visiting women's shelters - served as the backbone of "Love for Share". The movie deals with three polygamous Indonesian marriages: in a well-to-do family (representing, with variations, the Dinata situation), in a poor urban family and in a bourgeois Chinese household.

Some of the scenes that are loosely based on her family background reveal raw emotions. The first wife in the movie, Salma, a gynaecologist, is humiliated early on when she meets her husband's second wife at a public function. "Why did I have to meet her in front of so many people?" Salma asks her husband when the couple get home. "It means what people have been saying is true. It would have been better if I didn't know."

Her husband, a politician with all the trappings of an observant Muslim - he is referred to as Pak Haji, a title that indicates he has been to Mecca - says quite blandly: "You're perfect. I just wanted to avoid adultery."

Stoically, Salma goes about her life as a busy doctor, designing a new clinic, attending to women giving birth. "I try to act as though nothing has changed," she says.

But 10 years on, plenty has changed. Salma has adapted by wearing a Muslim headscarf, and by the end of the movie, Pak Haji has two more wives, each one younger than the last.

When he suffers a stroke, all three women turn up at the hospital, and the disapproving teenage son says scornfully: "Dad got his wish, all three wives are together."

To drive her point home, Dinata portrays Pak Haji on his death bed as remorseful. "It's a terrible mess," he tells his son. "When you marry, promise: only one wife."

For an irresistible finale, Dinata has a fourth wife turn up at the funeral, bearing a small child.

The backdrop to "Love for Share" is far broader than a personal tale of torment and sorrow.

No one keeps a tally of the numbers, but Dinata estimates that about 30 percent of Indonesian marriages are polygamous, significantly more than before the fall of the authoritarian regime of Suharto nearly 10 years ago.

In 1974, under the influence of his wife who was against polygamy, Suharto ruled that civil servants could not take extra wives without permission from the government, consent that was rarely granted.

But as Islam becomes a more powerful force here and the number of polygamous marriages increases, Dinata says the government is too afraid of increasingly-powerful religious leaders to do anything about it.

A recent vice president, Hamzah Haz, bragged about his polygamy, taking his three wives on trips to Mecca. A well-known entrepreneur, Puspo Wardoyo, calls polygamy a responsibility of wealthy Muslim men. He has four wives and serves "polygamy juice", a mixture of four tropical fruits, at his chain of chicken restaurants.

A princess in the House of Yogyakarta, Sitoresmi Trabuningrat, who is also a businesswoman, spoke recently about how being a member of a "team" of wives gave her more independence because they could share the chores.

"Love for Share" was well received in Jakarta and in Bandung nearby, although many in the audience were expatriates. In the rest of the country, the audiences were small. "They don't want to know," Dinata said. Those who did attend were mostly women sneaking covert viewings. "Women came with women in the middle of the day. They didn't want their husbands to know."

During her promotion tour around Indonesia, the callers on radio talk shows were maddeningly predictable, she said. "The men were so rude. They said: 'How dare you criticise us. We are doing good for women by marrying more than one.'" For the most part, she said, the women were too timid to touch the subject.

###
Jane Perlez is a writer for the New York Times. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org).
Source: International Herald Tribune, 09 August 2006
Visit the website at www.iht.com (http://www.iht.com)
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

Youth Views
CGNews-PiH also regularly publishes the work of student leaders and journalists whose articles strengthen intercultural understanding and promote constructive perspectives and dialogue in their own communities. Student journalists and writers under the age of 27 are encouraged to write to Chris Binkley (cbinkley@sfcg.org) for more information on contributing.

About CGNews-PiH
The Common Ground News Service - Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH) provides news, op-eds, features and analysis by local and international experts on a broad range of issues affecting Muslim-Western relations. CGNews-PiH syndicates articles that are balanced and solution-oriented to news outlets worldwide. With support from the Norwegian government and the United States Institute of Peace, this news service is a non-profit initiative of Search for Common Ground, an international NGO working in the field of conflict transformation.
This news service is one outcome of a set of working meetings held in partnership with His Royal Highness Prince El Hassan bin Talal of Jordan in June 2003.
The views expressed in these articles are those of the authors, not of CGNews-PiH or its affiliates.Common Ground News Service
1601 Connecticut Avenue, NW Suite #200
Washington, DC 20009 USA
Ph: +1(202) 265-4300
Fax: +1(202) 232-6718

Rue Belliard 205 Bte 13 B-1040
Brussels, Belgium
Ph: +32 (02) 736-7262
Fax: +32(02) 732-3033

E-mail: cgnewspih@sfcg.org
Website: www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org/index.php?sid=1&lang=en)

Editors
Emad Khalil (Amman)
Juliette Schmidt (Beirut)
Chris Binkley (Dakar)
Medhy Hidayat (Jakarta)
Leena El-Ali (Washington)
Emmanuelle Hazan (Washington)
Andrew Kessinger (Washington)

CGNews is a not-for-profit news service.

Humiliation, Iran, and the Middle East Crisis

Introduction

Currently, the world is glued to the television screen, watching what is called the “Middle East Crisis” (except those inside the Middle East, who, in the midst of destruction, might have no television sets left anymore). When we see pictures of people dying and losing their homes, on all sides, our hearts bleed. And when we watch all participants yearn for “victory,” and solemnly confirm that they “must” do as they do, we do not know what to say. We only know that we will be branded as “traitors” whenever we take sides.

Daily, our network, Human Dignity and Humiliation Studies (HumanDHS), receives messages, calling upon us to stand up in these times of crisis. I cannot speak on behalf of the members of our network, who have diverging opinions – but let me give you my thoughts in this paper.

I write this text in the middle of August, during the first days of the United Nations Resolution 1701 that calls for “a full cessation of hostilities,” and just after the London “jet terror plot.”

However, as many warn, the crisis may only really start at the end of August, when Iran will not comply with the United Nations deadline to stop uranium enrichment. The Israel-Lebanon confrontation may represent but a prelude.

I am frequently asked to condemn what is happening in the Middle East. I reply as follows: Of course, I condemn mayhem and suffering. I also condemn earthquakes. There is no question, I think, that we, Homo sapiens (sapiens = wise) ought to be able to solve our problems without killing each other. Who doubts that? The question is not whether I condemn what is happening – indeed it is obscene and I am ashamed of being part of our species. The question is, WHAT NOW?

A very good friend, a Holocaust survivor, has the following to say to the widespread obsession with calling for “condemnation.” He explains this with a joke, told in two pictures. The first picture shows an office in a terrible mess. “We need order!” is the outcry from the employees. Then there is the second picture: the office is now impeccable. But there is a new outcry, “Now that we have order – WHAT DO WE DO NOW?”

In other words, when we have finished putting everybody into their place, here the “enemies,” and there the “friends,” and “we” feel justified to do what we “must” do, because our “enemies” forced us into it – WHAT THEN? Or, in my case, when I have finished condemning all mayhem and violence – WHAT THEN?

When I open my emails, I do find some excellent analytical texts about the “what then.” But most messages I receive everyday are full of hand-wringing and finger-pointing, putting the situation “in order.” Yet, this leads to no change, only to a ubiquitous bath in feelings of shock, depression, despair, indignation, and hatred. Reflection on “what then” is drowned out by a competition as to who can feel more shocked and morally indignated. And this, while reality demands, and trauma research shows, that crisis has a chance to be managed constructively only if we face it pro-actively, not by re-acting and not by waiting to be overwhelmed.

I propose therefore that we leave the finger-pointing behind and embark on proactive bridge building. Condemnations and finger-pointing were perhaps sufficient in former times. They are no longer. On the contrary, today they may aggravate the situation. When a marriage breaks up and the spouses, after a lot of finger-pointing, hate each other’s guts, they can move out of each other’s neighborhood and never meet again. Humankind does not have this option. We live in new times of global interdependence. We have to stay together even after divorce. And in order to make this viable, we have to turn down the heat and refrain from digging graves of moral indignation and hatred for each other.

What makes me most sad in this situation is, therefore, that so many intelligent people around the world do nothing more than use their passion for justice to wallow in emotions which have polarizing effects, instead of devising action that brings us all together and makes “life after divorce” feasible. I feel personally ashamed and humiliated not only by the crisis itself, but also when I witness people who abuse it for gaining moral high ground by self-serving “indignation-entrepreneurship.”

What is this crisis about? Many involved in the Middle East crisis (as well as in the “war on terror”) are adamant that the other side chooses to attack them without any reason, out of pure evil, nothing but evil, thus forfeiting all rights to respectful treatment. Everybody re-acts, everybody is an outraged victim, a victim of the other’s evil. Whatever one side describes as “necessary and heroic defense” is seen from the other side as “cold-blooded aggression.” “Oppression” on one side is “benevolent patronage” on the other.

Every victim also attacks me and the rest of the world for neglecting their plight and allowing their respective enemy to slaughter them. Every death is judged to be caused not just by the “enemy,” but also by a “negligent international community” – only very few turn their gaze also to their own camp.

I agree that the so-called international community has to do more, more than shedding tears of “why can we not all love each other,” or calling for victory for either side. If this were sufficient, this paper would be redundant. However, calling upon “friends” to stand together against “enemies” does not solve the crisis, not in the short term and surely not in the long term.

I feel sad and humiliated when Middle East politicians declare that nobody cares about their lives. Because I do care. I dedicate my entire life to help finding constructive ways to build a more dignified world. And millions of people around the global do care. However, helplessness dominates their reactions, helplessness as to what we can do to improve the situation.

This text posits that it is essential to place current crises into a larger historic context, if we wish to guide them constructively, and that there is only one way to start this process, namely by taking a step back. We need to understand how the human condition has evolved over a longer historic time period, how humans have adapted to changing conditions, and which new adaptations we need to develop at the present point in time.

I often compare humankind with the Titanic, just before sinking. Renowned physicist and leading expert in string theory, formulates this beautifully in his book on Parallel Worlds. He concludes his book with the following paragraph:

The generation now alive is perhaps the most important generation of humans ever to walk the Earth. Unlike previous generations, we hold in our hands the future destiny of our species, whether we soar into fulfilling our promise as a type I civilization [meaning that humankind manages to build a sustainable planet, both ecologically and socially] or fall into the abyss of chaos, pollution, and war. Decisions made by us will reverberate throughout this century. How we resolve global wars, proliferating nuclear weapons, and sectarian and ethnic strife will either lay or destroy the foundations of a type I civilization. Perhaps the purpose and meaning of the current generation are to make sure that the transition to a type I civilization is a smooth one. The choice is ours. This is the legacy of the generation now alive. This is our destiny (Kaku, 2005, p. 361).

In other words, here we are all together on the “Titanic,” which is about to go down, and what do we do? We fight between the cabins. We leave bloody trails instead of cooperating for building a future for coming generations that is sustainable, both ecologically and socially. We invest our energy into the wrong problems. And humankind’s very survival is the price we might have to pay.
We need to learn to view a wider horizon. In order to achieve this, please take the time, disengage from current crises for a moment, and make a journey together with me, a journey through human history.

The Normative Universe of Honor

I propose that the despair many feel in current times of crises can be mitigated by more knowledge. Even a severely ill cancer patient – instead of frantically rolling on the floor – can exit from panic by studying the features of her new disease and by devising a careful therapy plan. Let us therefore begin exiting from panic by collecting knowledge. The current Middle East crisis, for example, or the “war on terror” are embedded into a large-scale normative transition of humankind. In order to guide these crises constructively, it is important to understand both worlds – the old and the new world.

During the past 10,000 years, honor has dominated human communities all over the globe. I define honor as the ranking of human worthiness and value, as the acceptance that there are higher beings who preside over lesser beings.

William Ury (1999), anthropologist, and director of the Harvard University Project on Preventing War, draws up a simplified depiction of history. He pulls together elements from anthropology, game theory and conflict studies to describe three major types of society: a) simple hunter-gatherers (during the first 90 percent of human history), b) complex agriculturists (lasting for roughly the past 10,000 years), and c) the currently emerging knowledge society.
In Ury’s system, during the first 90 percent of human history, humankind lived as simple hunter-gatherers. They enjoyed a world of coexistence and open networks, within which conflicts were negotiated, rather than addressed by coercion. The abundance of wild food represented an expandable pie of resources that did not force opponents into win-lose paradigms.

Around 10,000 years ago, however, this rather benign situation came to an end. It was the point in time when many easily accessible parts of the globe had been populated and the “next valley” was no longer untouched. The next valley was now inhabited by other people (circumscription is the anthropological term). Homo sapiens had filled up the globe – the first round of globalization had come upon humankind, so to speak. This, together with climate change, brought to the fore a new way of life, for most of humankind, namely agriculture: when I can no longer find uninhabited wild nature, I have to use the land on which I stand more efficiently (intensification is the anthropological term).

Agriculture was quite a shrewd human adaptation to new conditions, one could say, however, it had serious side effects. It created what political scientists call the security dilemma: As soon as the resource I live on is land (and no longer freely available wild food), I have to defend my land against you, against the greed of my neighbor.

In other words, the normative world of honor, of honorable domination/submission, could be regarded as an adaptation to the fear of attack, which emanated from the fact that land became the resource of most of humankind, a resource that by definition is not expandable.

I have based my work on humiliation on Ury’s work – see Lindner (2006b) (see also many full online texts on http://www.humiliationstudies.org/whoweare/evelin02.php). In a world of honorable domination/submission, everybody accepts that it is God’s will or nature’s order that masters hold down underlings. Intricate cultural practices were devised during the past 10,000 years, in different cultures in different ways, to keep this ranking system in place. Underlings learned to kow-tow, they learned to accept being beaten regularly, or even killed. This was meant to “remind” underlings where they “belonged,” namely “below their masters.” Humiliation was routine and seen as legitimate. Even the most atrocious methods of holding underlings down were regarded as “honorable medicine,” good for the victims and good for society. Humiliation was not yet judged to be a violation. Only the masters themselves, when their privileged position was questioned, could define being put down as illegitimate humiliation of their honor and try to repair it, for example, by going to duel. In times of Apartheid, for example, the downtrodden had no right to protest, while the elites cried “foul” whenever their supremacy was questioned.

The word “civilians” did not exist; the common man and woman did not count. They were puppets in their rulers’ hands. For thousands of years, rulers fought their wars, and the suffering of their people went unmentioned. People died, their homelands were devastated, their homesteads destroyed, their men killed and their women raped or taken away. Nobody asked whether they felt traumatized. For the common man and woman the actions of their rulers were like natural disasters. My grandmother said to me once, “Wir kleinen Leute können ja sowieso nichts tun. Die da oben machen ja doch was sie wollen,“ meaning that the masses, the “little people“ as she called it, had no power. This was how my grandmother felt, this is what dominated her view of life and the world.

The moral world of honor can be starkly illustrated by the practice of so-called honor killings. Let us look at the following case from the UK, so as to get a feeling of the normalcy and legitimacy that this moral order had (and still has) among its followers:

Greengrocer Azhar Nazir, 30, and his cousin Imran Mohammed, 17, stabbed Samaira Nazir, a 25-year-old recruitment consultant, 18 times at the family home in Southall in April 2005. The attack was barbaric, and witnessed by two young nieces. Samaira tried to flee but her brother dragged her back into the house where the assault continued. Samaira was killed after she asked to marry an Afghan man – instead of marrying someone in the Pakistani family circle. She fell in love with Salman Mohammed, who befriended the family after arriving in the UK in 2000. The relationship was kept secret at first, but when Samaira asked for permission to marry him, her family reacted angrily. Her fiancé was warned by Nazir: “We can get you anywhere if you get married, even if you are not in this country.” Samaira had tried to talk to her mother about the problem at a relative’s house, but her mother refused. A neighbor heard Samaira shout, “You are not my mother any more.” Samaira’s father was arrested and bailed during the investigation but fled to Pakistan. The judge said to Samaira’s brother: “You claimed to have loved your sister but were guilty of orchestrating her murder.” (I summarized this story from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/5179162.stm).

The judge’s words illustrate how an honor system is different from a system of equal dignity: In an honor system, the brother ought to love his sister by killing her – killing her is his duty, even if he finds it difficult and would rather spare his sister. In a world of equal dignity, he ought to love his sister by not killing her – in that case not killing her is his duty, even if he hates her. As it becomes clear, both systems are diametrically opposed to each other. They cannot coexist. It is either, or. It is like driving on the right side of the road or the left side – one cannot have both.
Let us now have a look at the new world of dignity.

The Normative Universe of Equal Dignity for All

Ury posits that a knowledge society resembles the hunter-gatherer model because the pie of resources – knowledge – appears to be infinitely expandable (there are always new ideas to be developed), lending itself to win-win solutions. This type of society moves away from rigid hierarchical structures toward the open network of our earliest hunter-gatherer ancestors. Negotiation and contract replace command lines, and coexistence is the primary strategy.

In other words, the vision of a future global knowledge society entails a surprisingly benign promise. As soon as land is not longer the main resource, all are freed from the security dilemma and from having to fight against neighbors. All can cooperate, together increase the pie of resources, and everybody gains. No longer do masters have to keep armies of underlings to fight enemies. A global knowledge society entails the potential to liberate both, masters and underlings, from having to force everybody into a ranked system. All are called upon to throw their creativity into the task of forging better ways to protect our shared home, planet Earth, and build a world where all can live dignified lives.

And indeed, human rights are the new moral adaptation to the new conditions of an increasingly interdependent globalizing world. Many accuse the West of wanting to force human rights down the throat of the rest, but it may rather be that norms of ranked honor lose their utility under the new conditions.

The first sentence in Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights reads, “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.” This means that nobody ought to be humiliated – humiliation is now a violation of dignity that is illegitimate. For the past 10,000 years, honor has ranked people in higher and lesser beings; human rights un-rank them again, masters are called upon to descend and underlings to rise, all meet in the middle, in equal dignity, connected in shared humility, back to what seems to have been the rule prior to 10,000 years ago.

Formerly, when underlings staged revolutions, they merely replaced their masters and kept the hierarchical system in place – former inferiors soon acted as new tyrants. The human rights revolution is different, and recognizing this fact is essential for efficient crisis management today. The human rights revolution entails two parts, first the dismantling of humiliators, and second the dismantling of the very humiliating system, including our own humiliating behavior. What was “benevolent patronage” before, transmutes into “oppression,” and now this oppression has to be dismantling by non-dominating means – see the work by Morton Deutsch (2006), and Philip Pettit (1996), or by Howard Zehr (2002), and John Braithwaite (2002).

Honor codes had their place in a world that did not yet experience the coming-together of humankind into one single global community; they have their place in a world of many fragmented units pitched against each other. Human rights represent a normative framework that is better adapted to an emerging global knowledge society.

Human rights defenders no longer can humiliate others, not even humiliators. Looking down on others and treating them as lesser beings is no longer legitimate. This entails that also those people, who still endorse honor codes, wherever in the world, may not be looked down upon. The brother who kills his sister has his place in the old world of honor, and from the point of view of human rights, he deserves everybody’s respect as a human being, even though his deeds are rejected. Mandela walked out of 27 years of humiliation in prison and many of his guards had become his friends.

Brave heroism and sacrifice in the old world of honor meant standing up against our enemies, it meant accepting to be part of a hierarchically organized ingroup, united in patriotic love for our ingroup, pitted against threatening outgroups. Brave heroism and sacrifice in the new world of dignity means standing up united in humanizing love for a vision of one united family of humankind, where everybody deserves to be respected as equal in dignity, a world without enemies and outgoups, a world of neighbors, who together find a way to live together even if they do not love each other, even after “divorce.”

The Transition

Probably the most touching depiction of the transition from a moral universe of ranked honor to a moral universe of equal dignity is given to us by Ernest Gordon (1962) in his book Through the Valley of the Kwai. Ernest Gordon spent three years in a Japanese prisoner of war camp during World War II, and his experiences as a prisoner informed both the film The Bridge on the River Kwai, starring Alec Guinness, and the new film To End All Wars directed by David Cunningham.

On the surface, Gordon’s message is that of forgiveness, however, if we analyze his predicament deeper, it is the transition from ranked collectivist honor to equal dignity for each human being. He later served as a visiting lecturer at universities around the world, among them at International Christian University in Tokyo, Japan, the country of his torturers, whom he had forgiven.

The film To End All Wars does an excellent job in dramatically contrasting the universe of honor with the moral framework of equal dignity for everybody. One of the most elaborated codes of honor is bushido, a Japanese code of conduct meaning the “way of the warrior,” the “way of the Samurai.” Under the bushido ideal, if a samurai fails to uphold his honor he can regain it by performing seppuku (ritual suicide). Bushido ethics informed Japanese fighting spirit during World War II, to reinforce readiness for self-sacrifice and loyalty among the soldiers and the population at large. It reached its peak with the self-sacrifice of the kamikaze pilots.

In the film To End All Wars, the code of honor is represented by the Japanese camp guards, but also by some of the prisoners, with Campbell as their leader (played by Robert Carlyle). Campbell puts everybody’s life in danger through his insistence on not bowing to Japanese domination – in line with bushido, which stipulates that accepting to be captured alive is the deepest shame for a soldier.

The new moral universe of equal dignity is represented by Ernest Gordon himself, who succeeds, not unlike Mandela, to forge links of humanity with some of the Japanese torturers. Gordon and the guard/translator Takashi Nagase, for example, became friends and met after the war. Devout Buddhist Takashi Nagase devoted his life after the end of World War II to making up for the Japanese army’s treatment of prisoners of war.

Thus, the significant cleavage in this film is not between the Japanese and their prisoners, but between two moral codes. Both moral universes come to a dramatic stand-off when the war is ending and wounded Japanese soldiers seek help. For Gordon, they are human beings who deserve help. For Campbell they are “the enemy,” undeserving of pity. Campbell’s refusal to help is in line with the honor code of the Japanese guards, who try to drive away their wounded comrades. Only Gordon, to the astonishment of the Japanese guards, steps forward and gives them water. Campbell tries to stop him: “Come back to your men!” Campbell, however, loses the battle for the hearts and minds of his comrades, and the prisoners take Gordon’s side. They follow Gordon to help the wounded Japanese.

Campbell, on his part, disappears into a corner of the camp, where he mistreats Ito, the now powerless head of the Japanese camp guards, in revenge for all the cruelty Ito had perpetrated on the prisoners. Gordon approaches and tries to stop Campbell. Ito uses the moment of confusion, snatches the sword and commits seppuku. At that moment, Campbell experiences a moment of deep revelation. He takes the head of dead Ito to his chest, realizing that he and this “enemy” had their honor orientation in common, in contrast to Ernest’s insistence that all human beings deserve to be treated as equal in dignity.

The film beautifully depicts the deep earnest, with which both Campbell and Gordon hold on to their respective ethical orientations. Both are brave, both are noble. Nobody is mad or insane. But Campbell stands for an ethical orientation that is no longer viable in a world of mutual interdependence, while Gordon makes a case for the ethics that can make our world livable in the future.

The binding nature of the interdependence that increasingly characterizes our globe is expressed in the film through the fact that nobody can flee. The camp is surrounded by impenetrable jungle and all are caught together. The urgency of WHAT THEN is brilliantly depicted when Campbell, continuously making plans to escape, is being asked (I paraphrase): “Ok, let us assume that we have killed and captured our Japanese prison guards. WHAT THEN? The jungle is impenetrable! Admit that your plan is a suicide mission for us all!”

Today’s World Is Defined by Three Clashes of Humiliation

Today’s world is defined by three clashes of humiliation: First, clashes of humiliation between opponents who both adhere to the normative universe of honor, second, clashes of humiliation where one side adheres to the honor code, and the other to human rights, and, third, we have clashes of humiliation between opponents who both adhere to human rights ethics.

By keeping these three scenarios apart, I suggest, we can find a way to realize the second part of the human rights revolution, the most difficult part, namely respecting every human being, even those with whom we profoundly disagree.

1. Clashes of humiliation in a world of honor
One of my young Israeli friends told me (2003, in Jerusalem): “Always in history, some people have pushed out other people of their land. Ours is a power struggle that is not new. The strongest will win, and it will be us this time. We will prevail.” He added that God had promised Palestine to his people. “Pity for the Holocaust is no argument,” he explained, “this is our Promised Land, and I am ashamed of all the Jews who abandoned it cowardly during the past two thousand years. I am no coward; this time, I want to stand up bravely!”

On August 7, 2006 (in BBC World HARDtalk with Noel Thompson), Israel’s former Prime Minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, made the point that if London were to be the target of hundreds of rockets, it would react in the same way as Israel, perhaps even stronger. After all, Churchill bombed Dresden. If there had been television cameras at that time, to document the devastation of Dresden, the Allied Forces might have lost the war, to the detriment of the world’s own good. Today, Netanyahu explained, in the case of Lebanon, Israel is showing extreme restraint, relative to the damage it could inflict. However, still Israel is wronged and criticized. And due to its restraint, it does not attain its objective, namely the elimination of Hezbollah. Perhaps it would be better for Israel, Netanyahu suggested, using more military force, in order to actually reach the goals, since criticism was forthcoming anyhow.

And, so Netanyahu continued, many moderate leaders around the Arab world wish Israel to win against Hezbollah, because they know that they will be next. Furthermore, not to forget, the West should be careful to criticize Israel, because if Israel were to fail, the West will be next. Iran will attack the West. And facing a hostile Iran will not be as benign as facing the Soviet Union in the Cold War, since the Soviet Union always backed down when its survival was threatened. In contrast, Iran, with its fundamentalist ideology, will not balk from behaving in suicidal ways. According to him, so Netanyahu stated, UK Prime Minister Tony Blair’s views are correct, that there is a dangerous arc of extremism that stretches across the Middle East, which can be defeated only by an alliance of moderation encompassing Muslims, Jews and Christians.
If we look at Netanyahu’s stance, he is “right” within the logic of the past, when the world was still caught in the security dilemma, not yet as interdependent as today, and human rights were still marginal. He acknowledges this, albeit regarding it as disadvantageous, when he grants that a bombing campaign similar to the bombing of Dresden in World War II might not be as popular today.

Netanyahu clearly is a man of resolve. Every inch of his demeanor and body language, the way he moves his head, his eyes wide open and confrontational, portray a man who projects honor, bravery and heroism, a man, who is intent on not bowing to pressure. Similar to Campbell in the film To End All Wars, as long as we judge him from within his moral boundaries, he is a man of moral nobility.

I am writing this paper in Japan, a few days after visiting the controversial Yasukuni Shrine. This Shrine if filled with praise for patriotic bravery. Descriptions abound of how military leaders died heroically while leading their men despite their own wounds. Bushido is everywhere, it permeates Yasukuni Shrine, and its fabric is made of noble heroism.

In the world of honor, not only Netanyahu is “right” and “brave,” all the Rumsfelds of this world are “right” in trying to secure their interest against others, with as much overpowering might as possible. Seymour Hersh (2006) explains in an article in The New Yorker, that the Israeli military action of August 2006 was planned long before the kidnapping of the Israeli soldiers. He explains how many in the U.S. regard this campaign to be in the American interest, because “it would be a demo for Iran.” He reports a U.S. government consultant with close ties to Israel saying, “The Israelis told us it would be a cheap war with many benefits… Why oppose it? We’ll be able to hunt down and bomb missiles, tunnels, and bunkers from the air. It would be a demo for Iran” (Hersh, 2006).

I myself am born as a “refugee child” into a family of displaced people from Silesia – see Lindner (2006a). Even today, sixty years later, my parents have not recovered. My parents’ trauma of having lost their homeland informed my life. I grew up with the typical “minus-identity” of refugees, an identity of not belonging and of feeling alienated from humanity.

Within the world of honor, it would be “right” for me to instigate war against Poland and attempt to re-conquer Silesia. I would be “justified” in defining the loss of my father’s farm and the humiliation of my parents as unacceptable humiliation of their honor. I could call for the humiliation of “our enemy-humiliators.” Any suffering of civilians would not concern me. I could reject as weak and cowardly any pity with the “enemy” and could refuse any definition of humiliation in terms of human rights. And, if fellow Silesians were to criticize my “patriotic love for my Silesian homeland,” I could brand them as being sickly obsessed with self-hatred.

Also the bin Ladens of this world have their place in the moral universe of collectivistic honor, wherever we might find them, in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Hezbollah, Hamas, the U.K. or the U.S.: “You have occupied our land, defiled our honor, violated our dignity, shed our blood, ransacked our money, demolished our houses, rendered us homeless and tampered with our security. We will treat you in the same way” (Osama Bin-Laden, tape of January 19, 2006, translated by the British Broadcasting Corporation, January 21, 2006).

“An eye for an eye,” “might is right,” and “humiliation for humiliation,” all this is part and parcel of the world of honor that characterized most of humankind’s existence for the past 10,000 years. And if Iran were to be attacked by the West in September 2006 “in order to render it less dangerous,” this would also be part and parcel of the world of honor.

2. Clashes of humiliation between the world of honor and the world of equal dignity for all
Clashes of honor-humiliation are clashes within the old world. Now, let us look at four kinds of clashes between the old and new world. We find two scenarios in which opponents feel humiliated by the other side’s moral orientation and two scenarios where the other side’s moral setup is exploited.

Let us begin with the case of human rights being exploited for honor. We find those in today’s world, who adhere to the honor code, but use human rights arguments to vilify their “enemy” and bolster their own “honorable” strategies. In such cases, usually, the “enemy” is branded as violating human rights. When the “enemy” kills “civilians,” for example, the “enemy” is accused of violating human rights and this is taken as proof of the “enemy’s” moral inferiority. As soon as “my camp of honor” kills civilians, however, this is “collateral damage,” and therefore not diminishing “my side’s” moral high ground. In other words, in a world where human rights are “on offer,” they can easily be abused by adherents of the old honor code. The argument of dignity humiliation is exploited to promote honor-humiliation and its scripts.

Let us now look at the case where human rights are felt to humiliate honor. While some believe that human rights are universal, others brand them as an imperialistic attempt on the part of the West to humiliate the rest. Particularly in Asia, this opinion can be heard, however, usually all elites, around the world, tend to hold that view – even though this view is often disguised, for example, in a specific usage of the term “freedom,” as to be observed, for example, in the framework of so-called Southern Honor – see Bertram Wyatt-Brown (1982). Human rights aim at dismantling privileges of elites, and one way for dominators to resist being humbled is to discredit the moral justifications of this call. (As I explained earlier, I believe that human rights offer the only ethical framework for One World to construct a viable future.)

The third case is the inverse of the second. Human rights defenders feel humiliated by every detail in the honor script. The very idea that some people may arrogate superiority over others in an Apartheid style is humiliating for the humanity of all human rights advocates, not only on their own behalf but also on behalf of all the downtrodden around the world. However, as mentioned earlier, precisely since human rights do not condone arrogating superiority, human rights defenders have the difficult task of refraining from taking a stance of superiority over people of honor.

Fourth, some people employ honor strategies to defend human rights and this has humiliating effects. People, who advocate human rights and rave at human rights violators in humiliating ways, betray their own moral stance. They need to learn from Mandela and Gandhi how to walk the talk. As I said in the introduction, I feel personally humiliated by people who use the methodology of honor-humiliation in order to supposedly remedy dignity-humiliation and defend human rights. In the same vein, the instrument of war and violence to uphold human rights (even in self-defense) is humiliating and counterproductive to its own goals, first because honor strategies discredit human rights, but also because fear of attack reverses the transition toward human rights backward, back to a fragmented world pitched against each other in the honor code.

3. Clashes of humiliation in a world of equal dignity for all
The honor code was the dominating moral framework for the past 10,000 years, but it is no longer. Binyamin Netanyahu recognizes that bombing Dresden was a viable strategy only because there were no television screens available through which the entire world could pour their feelings into a local conflict. What was feasible once, “eradicating our enemy,” is therefore no longer so. Not only survivors, but people in the entire world may feel humiliated by ways of identifying with a local conflict, and some might retaliate with violence. Hezbollah, for example, has never been as popular in the entire Arab world as at the current point in time when I write this text, August 2006.
As we see, in times of global interdependence, a local conflict, if subjected to “solutions” of violence, will merely turn into a global conflict and set on fire the whole world. Monty Marshall (1999) writes remarkably on protracted conflict and how insecurity gets diffused. The increasing interdependence of our world, today, puts human kind into a larger frame and turns former “might is right” into “might is suicide.”

In the film To End All Wars, Campbell cannot reply to the question as to whether he is devising a suicide mission. Indeed, he endangers everybody by not seeing the larger picture. Every adherent of the old honor code – be it among the Netanyahus or the Hezbollah-followers of this world – treads in these suicidal footsteps, even though this is not their intention. They have just not yet internalized that the world is in the process of changing profoundly, something that causes the old honor code to become not only morally obsolete but also counterproductive to self-defense, self-preservation, survival – in short, suicidal.

I am writing these lines while listening to the BBC World’s coverage of the speech given by Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad on August 15, 2006. He uses the word humiliation in about every second sentence. He explains that United Nations Security Council decisions are not “divine” and that national interest and national sovereignty are to be regarded as more important, even if this leads to war. Clearly, we see collective suicide looming. Evidently, the Security Councils will truly promote peace only after the international community has developed it into an impartial and inclusive institution; only then will it be able to save humankind from collective suicide.

In the world of human rights, the very thought that it might be possible to achieve peace by humiliating “enemies” into submission, is obscene and humiliates the dignity of all humankind. The new world is a world of coexistence, even in the face of antagonism, of negotiation and open networks, of democratic structures, globally and locally, structures, which make “might-is-right” strategies redundant at all levels.

In a world of equal dignity for all, no longer is it possible to march into other people’s territory and say, “I deem this to be my land, and since I am mightier than you, you better succumb.” To take my case as an example again, I cannot just march into Poland and take my father’s farm back like a feudal lord. My sadness over my father’s losses does not give me the right to act like a bully. What I have to do, is acknowledge that we all are in one boat, all humankind, and that Polish citizens are as worthy of being respected as equal in dignity as everybody else. Poland was victimized by Germany in World War II and deserves all the apologies that Willy Brand extended to it. And it deserves all the time it needs to ponder this apology. Aaron Lazare (2004) wrote most insightfully on apology and explains that forgiveness needs time. After an apology, I cannot just stride about and demand that I ought to be forgiven. It is not sufficient that I praise my own moral high ground and overlook that the other side needs more time to ponder my apologies. I cannot stay in monologic unilateral bubbles where I define what the other side ought to feel. My impatience and monologic isolation would be disrespectful and have humiliating effects. I need to engage in dialogue and considerate politeness, in self-reflective humble patience (not submissiveness). I might politely ask, for example, if I may visit my father’s farm, and indeed, since Poland is part of the European Union, borders have lost their political significance, starting to do what they should do, namely giving dignity to cultural diversity. And I am well advised to recognize that knowledge is the new resource in today’s world and no longer land. Indeed, in my case, I have followed Judith Viorst (1987) suggestion that there are necessary losses. I am part of the global knowledge society and have no desire to be a farmer. I have no desire to attach my self to a little piece of land. I am a global citizen. The entire planet Earth is my home. It is such a tiny planet, cutting it up and fighting over every inch is absurd. I do not want my father’s land back.

In the new world, grievances need to be addressed in an all inclusive way. The Office of the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland, for example, is an independent body dealing with complaints against the police, set up to create a climate of policing acceptable to all of Northern Ireland’s deeply scarred communities. Or, on UN Indigenous People’s Day (August 9) in 2006, the UN Human Rights Council’s, in a historic vote, supported the declaration on indigenous people’s rights.

This is the way into the future: away from land toward knowledge, and away from old deadly Blood Borders – see Ralph Peters (2006) – to a united world where borders are benignly administrative and cultural. The European Union can serve as an example – it takes age-old deadly enmity out the European borders and leaves them with the much more benign task of protecting and celebrating cultural diversity. The crisis in the Middle East, and the looming Iran crisis, all crises need to be contained within a larger global framework and it is everybody’s responsibility to build and strengthen the necessary global mechanisms for such crisis containment. If the United Nations were not there, we would have to invent them, and whenever they fail, it is not their fault, but the fault of those who do not strengthen and support them sufficiently, the fault of us all, who fail to make them fit for the job. Joseph Preston Baratta (2004) explains, how a world federation could work constructively.

Whatever we do, we have to heed that dismantling honor structures needs to be done in dignified ways, which, again, takes time. Haste can have humiliating effects. In old times, changes could be implemented in the blink of the eye, just by applying force. This is no longer possible in times of human rights. Patience is necessary, and patience has to be given its space and not denigrated as “failing to act.” Slow and careful action is also action. Cautious and well-planned action, embedded in dialogue and respect, is the very blueprint of what action means within the human rights framework. Israel, for example, accused the Lebanese government of “failing to act and dismantle Hezbollah.” Indeed, what the Lebanese government had tried was to avoid civil war by carefully including and moderating Hezbollah. Such action needs time. In a statement by Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, in the Daily Star (Lebanon), on July 17, 2006, said, “As we were preparing for a new phase of reform and development, here we are again facing Israeli attacks that have killed civilians, destroyed the country’s roads and airport, hit its main ports and violated Lebanon’s sovereignty and its citizens’ rights and dignity.”

Seymour Hersh (2006) writes in his article in The New Yorker, that even those who continue to support Israel’s war against Hezbollah agree that it is failing to achieve one of its main goals – to rally the Lebanese against Hezbollah. Hersh quotes John Arquilla, a defense analyst at the Naval Postgraduate School, as saying, “Strategic bombing has been a failed military concept for ninety years, and yet air forces all over the world keep on doing it…The warfare of today is not mass on mass … You have to hunt like a network to defeat a network. Israel focused on bombing against Hezbollah, and, when that did not work, it became more aggressive on the ground. The definition of insanity is continuing to do the same thing and expecting a different result” (Hersh, 2006).

What hurts human rights most is being stuck in “double standards.” Empty human rights rhetoric discredits the very human rights message. Promises that are not kept hurt deeper than no promises. Whoever wishes to promote human rights is well advised to check their conduct for consistency. Dominating behavior is not compatible with the message of equal dignity for all. Human rights are not achieved by fooling opponents with pretty words, while abusing their hope for equal dignity to get the upper hand in old-fashioned honor ways. Many human rights advocates do not understand this dynamic and apply honor strategies to promote human rights, some in blissful ignorance, and others in a Machiavellian spirit. Whatever the source, such behavior is humiliating and destructive.

Often, the media are accused of making matters worse. However, there is a host of films that try to bring the message that we ought to stand up for the larger common good. We have classics like High Noon that promoted this principle for a city, or, more recently, on a much larger scale, Spaceship/starship Enterprise. I am writing this paper in Japan, where the old television series FBI (1965-1974) with Efrem Zimbalist Jr. as Inspector Lewis Erskine is being shown. The Butcher (1968) depicts a gang of thugs, who make a living from kidnapping. A boy is kidnapped. The father is a butcher, a man of honor. He pays the ransom for his son and gets him back alive. Soon, another boy is kidnapped. Inspector Erskine approaches the butcher for help – his son could provide the FBI with valuable information. The butcher declines. He does not trust that the FBI will be able to protect his family in case the kidnappers find out that he cooperated with the FBI. However, to his surprise, the butcher’s own family fails to obey him. He yells at his family, telling them that he is “doing the thinking” for the family and that he is not prepared to accept mutiny. When Inspector Lewis Erskine has left the house, the butcher’s wife turns against her husband and reproaches him. She says (I paraphrase): “You are wrong! These kidnappers have to be stopped and we can help!” At the end, the father is persuaded, reluctantly. Later, Inspector Erskine turns to him and praises his son, “what a great son you have.” The butcher admits, yes, perhaps his son is of a higher moral fabric than he is - he himself did not wish to help wider society to get rid of dangerous kidnappers, while his son, his wife and daughter, were ready to put themselves into harm’s way in order to serve the safety of the larger community. At the end, the viewer feels lifted up, morally.

The lesson is always that we have to work together to help build a strong superordinate structure, like the sheriff, or the FBI, that safeguards the security for all, so that it is no longer necessary that everybody looks only at their immediate self-interest. Serving common interest serves self-interest best. At the current point in time, it is no longer the local level, the FBI, but the highest global level that needs to be strengthened. The United Nations need to be made capable of doing the job.

The Way Out

It is absurd, when Titanic goes down, to squabble in the cabins or between them. Times of global crises demand that we build strong global institutions and mechanisms that can contain local crises, so that the global ones can be affronted. If we fail, humankind’s very survival will be the price we have to pay.

It is equally absurd to descend into psychiatric language. Nobody is insane or mad when espousing a moral framework. A human rights defender is not a coward and an appeaser, and the bravery of an adherent of the old honor code is not madness or evilness either. We compound an already difficult transition unnecessarily when we descend into mutual insults – we merely create feelings of humiliation on all sides at our peril.

Particularly the human rights avant-garde has the responsibility to guide this transition in dignified ways, in a Mandela-like spirit, without losing heart in depression, and surely without spewing insults in psychiatric terminology. Mandela could have instigated insult, mayhem and genocide against the white elite in South Africa. He did not. It is natural that those at the forefront of a transition and those who are slow, have opposing positions. The task for human rights defenders is precisely to take this transition on in dignified ways and not compound its inherent difficulties with their personal immaturity.

What do we have to learn then? We have to learn the dignified firmness of a Mandela. To do that, we first have to calm down, in a next step we need to build common ground between all of us so that the transition towards a better world can proceed more constructively, we furthermore have to explain the advantages of a “better world” to those who hesitate and cling to old times, and, last but not least, descending in hopeless depression and pessimism is obsolete because this can turn into self-fulfilling prophecy and remove the very drop of energy that might otherwise enable us to save the situation.

1. Calm down: there is no need to despair
We need to calm down and recognize that there is no need to despair at human nature. Some think that “man is aggressive by nature” and will always fight. This is a misconception. There is no archeological evidence for systematic war prior to 10,000 years ago. There is no proof of organized fighting during ninety percent of human history – among early hunters and gatherers – see Ury (1999).

Human nature is rather the ability to learn and unlearn. During the past 10,000 years, everybody learned to be part in a system of domination and submission. This we have to unlearn. Still, our cultures today have not adapted to new times. Building new cultures and learning new skills that give life to human rights are the task of the currently living generations.

Many human rights defenders are angry people, frustrated at the uncoordinated slowness of the human rights revolution. Some get all heated up and waste their energy on depression, indignation, or righteous anger. Some lash out. They try to achieve the first part of the human rights revolution (dismantling the tyrant) by forgetting the second (dismantling tyranny, including our own tyrannical habits and traditions). They forget that tyrants, supremacists, adherents of the old honor order, must be humbled with respect and dignity, and that we have to unlearn humiliating people. We have to learn to walk our talk and understand that human rights bestow dignity on every human being, including those who are slow to grasp the new times. Recognizing this will help us all calm down and guide the transition toward new times more constructively.

2. Build common ground with the other side
During the past thirty years, I lived as a global citizen, in the West and in the Non-West (I lived for seven years in Egypt, for example) and in my medical doctorate on quality of life, I compared Egypt and Germany – see Lindner (1994). What I found was that there is ample common ground among all of humankind. We are much more similar than we think. We all yearn for recognition and feel humiliated if disrespected. We all wish for a sustainable future for our children. The only difference is the width of our moral boundaries – see Susan Opotow (1995). As long as we lived in a fragmented world, caught in the security dilemma, our moral boundaries included “us” and excluded “them;” we thought that we had to secure our children’s future by keeping outgroups out. But the world has changed. Today, our moral boundaries must include all humanity (and even reach beyond humanity). Today, we secure our children’s future not by keeping humanity fragmented, but by uniting it, even in the face of disagreement and ill feelings.

3. Explain that everybody is better off in a world of equal dignity for all
Some days ago, the BBC World radio phoned me, and I was disappointed at myself. I was unable to explain my stance to my satisfaction, namely my views that a new normative world of human rights requires more from all of us than mere finger-pointing, and that the solution lies in teaching all the world the Mandela way out of humiliation.

May failing underlines that, indeed, the task is not easy. However, there is no reason to give up something just because it is difficult.

What we need to explain to everybody is that globalization, if harnessed by human rights, entails a great potential. It can lead to a benign future. Human rights are more than a fancy moral ideal. They can bring about a better life for all. They free valuable human abilities that were suppressed under the conditions of the security dilemma. During the past 10,000 years, elites dominated inferiors, and this handicapped all participants. The talents for leadership of subordinates were wasted, as were the talents of elites for caring. Fathers, for example, had no access to domestic life. They never tasted the pleasure of playing with there children and see them mature. In the same vein, their wives never had the chance to show their talent for leadership in public life but had to accept their husbands’ definitions of the world. Both were at a loss. Also society at large was at a loss. Talent and innovative creativity were wasted at all fronts. And all this changes with human rights. Human rights are deeply humanizing. It is not least therefore that human rights are universal and not just a Western scheme.

4. Do not lose hope, be patient, keep working
Human rights are the adequate moral system for a world that is coming together. Human rights can dignify globalization. But the human rights revolution is not self-executing. It requires everybody’s help. Every inhabitant of the globe needs to abandon “we/them” differentiations and define themselves as “we,” as “we humanity,” who, rather than pointing fingers, jointly searches for the best ways to provide our children with a livable world. So far, the global village is a ramshackle village, a “Titanic” about to sink, full of humiliation – millions of poor watching a few rich wallow in wealth, all suffering from environmental degradation that could have been avoided, and local cycles of humiliation endangering us all.

Moral emotions are strong. The urge to protect them is fierce. We feel that the core of our very being is being soiled when our moral code is violated. A man, who is intent on defending his honor by going to war and killing his “enemies” to attain “victory,” feels an almost obsessive certainty that he “must” go down this path. Denying him war is like denying the bottle to an alcoholic. At the same time, the disgust felt by human rights defenders at such “honorable violence,” is as passionate. The strength of moral emotions makes them difficult to be managed. However, a difficult task is a challenge and no reason to give up; the fact that the glass is only half full does not mean that it cannot be filled; and when progress is too slow this is no reason to stop. Hand-wringing is the worst we can do. We need to get to work.

Iran, the Middle East, global warming, poverty, all these problems can only be solved within a global framework of dialogue and negotiations, embedded into institutions that are based on human rights. We need to build a decent global community, in the spirit of Avishai Margalit (1996) and his call for a Decent Society.

A decent global village is a place where coercion is used in novel ways. Pacifism no longer means the rejection of force. Gandhi disliked the words and ideas of “passive resistance.” The term satyagraha (non-violent action), is a combination of satya (truth-love) and agraha (firmness/force). United Nations peace keeping missions need a stronger mandate than hitherto in order to be able to prevent and police regional and local conflicts – and a strong mandate means precisely the interlink of coercion with respect. Respectful firmness is indeed the only way to stop sectarian extremists who are in the business of turning spirals of humiliation into an abyss that can swallow us all.

Human rights defenders, Mandelas, Gandhis, moderates, take the lead!
Contain local conflicts with respectful firmness so that we all can take on the global challenges that we face and that endanger us all.

References

Baratta, Joseph Preston (2004). The Politics of World Federation: Vol.1: The United Nations, U.N. Reform, Atomic Control. Vol. 2: From World Federalism to Global Governance. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Braithwaite, John (2002). Restorative Justice & Responsive Regulation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Deutsch, Morton (2006). A Framework for Thinking About Oppression and Its Change. In Social Justice Research, 19 (1), pp. 7-41.

Gordon, Ernest (1962). Through the Valley of the Kwai. New York, NY: Harper & Row.

Hersh, Seymour M. (2006). Watching Lebanon: Washington's Interests in Israel's War. In The New Yorker, (21 August), retrieved from http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060821fa_fact on August 14, 2006.

Lazare, Aaron (2004). On Apology. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Lindner, Evelin Gerda (1994). Lebensqualität Im Ägyptisch-Deutschen Vergleich. Eine Interkulturelle Untersuchung an Drei Berufsgruppen (Ärzte, Journalisten, Künstler). Hamburg: Department of Psychological Medicine, University of Hamburg, Doctoral Dissertation in Medicine.

Lindner, Evelin Gerda (2006a). How Becoming a Global Citizen Can Have a Healing Effect. Tokyo: Paper presented at the 2006 ICU-COE Northeast Asian Dialogue: Sharing Narratives, Weaving/Mapping History, February 3-5, 2006, International Christian University (ICU), Tokyo, Japan, http://www.humiliationstudies.org/whoweare/evelin02.php#gallagher.

Lindner, Evelin Gerda (2006b). Making Enemies: Humiliation and International Conflict. Westport, CT, London: Greenwood Press and Praeger Publishers.

Margalit, Avishai (1996). The Decent Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Marshall, Monty G. (1999). Third World War: System, Process, and Conflict Dynamics. Lanham, MD, and London: Rowman and Littlefield.

Opotow, Susan (1995). Drawing the Line: Social Categorization, Moral Exclusion, and the Scope of Justice. In Bunker, Barbara Benedict and Rubin, Jeffrey Z. (Eds.), Cooperation, Conflict, and Justice: Essays Inspired by the Work of Morton Deutsch, pp. 347-369. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Peters, Ralph (2006). Blood Borders: How a Better Middle East Would Look. In Armed Forces Journal, retrieved from http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2006/06/1833899 on August 15, 2006.

Pettit, Philip (1996). Freedom As Antipower. In Ethics, 106, pp. 576-604.

Ury, William (1999). Getting to Peace. Transforming Conflict at Home, at Work, and in the World. New York, NY: Viking.

Viorst, Judith (1987). Necessary Losses: The Loves, Illusions, Dependencies and Impossible Expectations That All of Us Have to Give Up in Order to Grow. New York, NY: Fawcett Gold Medal.

Wyatt-Brown, Bertram (1982). Southern Honor: Ethics and Behavior in the Old South. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Zehr, Howard (2002). The Little Book of Restorative Justice. Intercourse, PA: Good Books.

MIRROR NEURONS and imitation learning as the driving force behind "the great leap forward" in human evolution
By V.S. Ramachandran
http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/ramachandran/ramachandran_p1.html

V.S. RAMACHANDRAN is professor of Neuroscience and Psychology and Director of Center for Brain and Cognition at the University of California at San Diego. He also holds joint appointments at the Salk Institute in La Jolla and with the Cognitive Sciences Program at UCSD. He is also a physician. A dynamic speaker who rolls his r's and flourishes vowels, Dr. Ramachandran gives scientific talks the world over. His book Phantoms In The Brain (with Sandra Blakeslee) was selected as one of the best books of 1998 by The Economist and was a finalist for the Los Angeles Times Book Prize. It was on the "Editors Choice" list in Scientific American, Discover Magazine and The American Scientist.

The discovery of mirror neurons in the frontal lobes of monkeys, and their potential relevance to human brain evolution — which I speculate on in this essay — is the single most important "unreported" (or at least, unpublicized) story of the decade. I predict that mirror neurons will do for psychology what DNA did for biology: they will provide a unifying framework and help explain a host of mental abilities that have hitherto remained mysterious and inaccessible to experiments.

There are many puzzling questions about the evolution of the human mind and brain:

1) The hominid brain reached almost its present size — and perhaps even its present intellectual capacity about 250,000 years ago . Yet many of the attributes we regard as uniquely human appeared only much later. Why? What was the brain doing during the long "incubation "period? Why did it have all this latent potential for tool use, fire, art music and perhaps even language- that blossomed only considerably later? How did these latent abilities emerge, given that natural selection can only select expressed abilities, not latent ones? I shall call this "Wallace's problem", after the Victorian naturalist Alfred Russell Wallace who first proposed it.

2) Crude "Oldawan" tools — made by just a few blows to a core stone to create an irregular edge — emerged 2.4 million ago and were probably made by Homo Habilis whose brain size was half way (700cc) between modern humans (1300) and chimps (400). After another million years of evolutionary stasis aesthetically pleasing "symmetrical" tools began to appear associated with a standardization of production technique and artifact form. These required switching from a hard hammer to a soft (wooden?) hammer while the tool was being made, in order to ensure a smooth rather than jagged, irregular edge. And lastly, the invention of stereotyped "assembly line" tools (sophisticated symmetrical bifacial tools) that were hafted to a handle, took place only 200,000 years ago. Why was the evolution of the human mind "punctuated" by these relatively sudden upheavals of technological change?

3) Why the sudden explosion (often called the "great leap" ) in technological sophistication, widespread cave art, clothes, stereotyped dwellings, etc. around 40 thousand years ago, even though the brain had achieved its present "modern" size almost a million years earlier?

4) Did language appear completely out of the blue as suggested by Chomsky? Or did it evolve from a more primitive gestural language that was already in place?

5) Humans are often called the "Machiavellian Primate" referring to our ability to "read minds" in order to predict other peoples' behavior and outsmart them. Why are apes and humans so good at reading other individuals' intentions? Do higher primates have a specialized brain center or module for generating a "theory of other minds" as proposed by Nick Humphrey and Simon Baron-Cohen? If so, where is this circuit and how and when did it evolve?

The solution to many of these riddles comes from an unlikely source.. the study of single neurons in the brains of monkeys. I suggest that the questions become less puzzling when you consider Giaccamo Rizzollati's recent discovery of "mirror neurons' in the ventral premotor area of monkeys. This cluster of neurons, I argue, holds the key to understanding many enigmatic aspects of human evolution. Rizzollati and Arbib have already pointed out the relevance of their discovery to language evolution . But I believe the significance of their findings for understanding other equally important aspects of human evolution has been largely overlooked. This, in my view, is the most important unreported "story" in the last decade.

THE EMERGENCE OF LANGUAGE

Unlike many other human traits such as humor, art, dancing or music the survival value of language is obvious — it helps us communicate our thoughts and intentions. But the question of how such an extraordinary ability might have actually evolved has puzzled biologists, psychologists and philosophers at least since the time of Charles Darwin. The problem is that the human vocal apparatus is vastly more sophisticated than that of any ape but without the correspondingly sophisticated language areas in the brain the vocal equipment alone would be useless. So how did these two mechanisms with so many sophisticated interlocking parts evolve in tandem? Following Darwin's lead I suggest that our vocal equipment and our remarkable ability to modulate voice evolved mainly for producing emotional calls and musical sounds during courtship ("croonin a toon."). Once that evolved then the brain — especially the left hemisphere — could evolve language.

But a bigger puzzle remains. Is language mediated by a sophisticated and highly specialized "language organ" that is unique to humans and emerged completely out of the blue as suggested by Chomsky? Or was there a more primitive gestural communication system already in place that provided a scaffolding for the emergence of vocal language?

Rizzolatti's discovery can help us solve this age-old puzzle. He recorded from the ventral premotor area of the frontal lobes of monkeys and found that certain cells will fire when a monkey performs a single, highly specific action with its hand: pulling, pushing, tugging, grasping, picking up and putting a peanut in the mouth etc. different neurons fire in response to different actions. One might be tempted to think that these are motor "command" neurons, making muscles do certain things; however, the astonishing truth is that any given mirror neuron will also fire when the monkey in question observes another monkey (or even the experimenter) performing the same action, e.g. tasting a peanut! With knowledge of these neurons, you have the basis for understanding a host of very enigmatic aspects of the human mind: "mind reading" empathy, imitation learning, and even the evolution of language. Anytime you watch someone else doing something (or even starting to do something), the corresponding mirror neuron might fire in your brain, thereby allowing you to "read" and understand another's intentions, and thus to develop a sophisticated "theory of other minds." (I suggest, also, that a loss of these mirror neurons may explain autism — a cruel disease that afflicts children. Without these neurons the child can no longer understand or empathize with other people emotionally and therefore completely withdraws from the world socially.)

Mirror neurons can also enable you to imitate the movements of others thereby setting the stage for the complex Lamarckian or cultural inheritance that characterizes our species and liberates us from the constraints of a purely gene based evolution. Moreover, as Rizzolati has noted, these neurons may also enable you to mime — and possibly understand — the lip and tongue movements of others which, in turn, could provide the opportunity for language to evolve. (This is why, when you stick your tongue out at a new born baby it will reciprocate! How ironic and poignant that this little gesture encapsulates a half a million years of primate brain evolution.) Once you have these two abilities in place the ability to read someone's intentions and the ability to mime their vocalizations then you have set in motion the evolution of language. You need no longer speak of a unique language organ and the problem doesn't seem quite so mysterious any more.

(Another important piece of the puzzle is Rizzolatti's observation that the ventral premotor area may be a homologue of the "Broca's area" — a brain center associated with the expressive and syntactic aspects of language in humans).

These arguments do not in any way negate the idea that there are specialized brain areas for language in humans. We are dealing, here, with the question of how such areas may have evolved, not whether they exist or not.

Mirror neurons were discovered in monkeys but how do we know they exist in the human brain? To find out we studied patients with a strange disorder called anosognosia. Most patients with a right hemisphere stroke have complete paralysis of the left side of their body and will complain about it, as expected. But about 5% of them will vehemently deny their paralysis even though they are mentally otherwise lucid and intelligent. This is the so called "denial" syndrome or anosognosia. To our amazement, we found that some of these patients not only denied their own paralysis, but also denied the paralysis of another patient whose inability to move his arm was clearly visible to them and to others. Denying ones one paralysis is odd enough but why would a patient deny another patient's paralysis? We suggest that this bizarre observation is best understood in terms of damage to Rizzolatti's mirror neurons. It's as if anytime you want to make a judgement about someone else's movements you have to run a VR (virtual reality) simulation of the corresponding movements in your own brain and without mirror neurons you cannot do this .

The second piece of evidence comes from studying brain waves (EEG) in humans. When people move their hands a brain wave called the MU wave gets blocked and disappears completely. Eric Altschuller, Jamie Pineda, and I suggested at the Society for Neurosciences in 1998 that this suppression was caused by Rizzolati's mirror neuron system. Consistent with this theory we found that such a suppression also occurs when a person watches someone else moving his hand but not if he watches a similar movement by an inanimate object. (We predict that children with autism should show suppression if they move their own hands but not if they watch some one else. Our lab now has preliminary hints from one highly functioning autistic child that this might be true (Social Neuroscience Abstracts 2000).

THE BIG BANG OF HUMAN EVOLUTION

The hominid brain grew at an accelerating pace until it reached its present size of 1500cc about 200,000 years ago. Yet uniquely human abilities such the invention of highly sophisticated "standardized" multi- part tools, tailored clothes, art, religious belief and perhaps even language are thought to have emerged quite rapidly around 40,000 years ago — a sudden explosion of human mental abilities and culture that is sometimes called the "big bang." If the brain reached its full human potential — or at least size — 200,000 years ago why did it remain idle for 150,000 years? Most scholars are convinced that the big bang occurred because of some unknown genetic change in brain structure. For instance, the archeologist Steve Mithen has just written a book in which he claims that before the big bang there were three different brain modules in the human brain that were specialized for "social or machiavellian intelligence", for "mechanical intelligence" or tool use, and for "natural history" (a propensity to classify). These three modules remained isolated from each other but around 50,000 years ago some genetic change in the brain suddenly allowed them to communicate with each other, resulting in the enormous flexibility and versatility of human consciousness.

I disagree with Mithen ingenious suggestion and offer a very different solution to the problem. (This is not incompatible with Mithen's view but its a different idea). I suggest that the so-called big bang occurred because certain critical environmental triggers acted on a brain that had already become big for some other reason and was therefore "pre-adapted" for those cultural innovations that make us uniquely human. (One of the key pre adaptations being mirror neurons.) Inventions like tool use, art, math and even aspects of language may have been invented "accidentally" in one place and then spread very quickly given the human brain's amazing capacity for imitation learning and mind reading using mirror neurons. Perhaps ANY major "innovation" happens because of a fortuitous coincidence of environmental circumstances — usually at a single place and time. But given our species' remarkable propensity for miming, such an invention would tend to spread very quickly through the population — once it emerged.

Mirror neurons obviously cannot be the only answer to all these riddles of evolution. After all rhesus monkeys and apes have them, yet they lack the cultural sophistication of humans (although it has recently been shown that chimps at least DO have the rudiments of culture, even in the wild). I would argue, though, that mirror neurons are Necessary but not sufficient: their emergence and further development in hominids was a decisive step. The reason is that once you have a certain minimum amount of "imitation learning" and "culture" in place, this culture can, in turn, exert the selection pressure for developing those additional mental traits that make us human . And once this starts happening you have set in motion the auto-catalytic process that culminated in modern human consciousness.

A second problem with my suggestion is that it doesn't explain why the many human innovations that constitute the big bang occurred during a relatively short period. If its simply a matter of chance discoveries spreading rapidly,why would all of them have occurred at the same time? There are three answers to this objection. First,the evidence that it all took place at the same time is tenuous. The invention of music, shelters,hafted tools, tailored clothing, writing, speech, etc. may have been spread out between 100K and 5k and the so-called great leap may be a sampling artifact of archeological excavation. Second, any given innovation (e.g. speech or writing or tools) may have served as a catalyst for the others and may have therefore accelerated the pace of culture as a whole. And third, there may indeed have been a genetic change,b ut it may not have been an increase in the ability to innovate ( nor a breakdown of barriers between modules as suggested by Mithen) but an increase in the sophistication of the mirror neuron system and therefore in "learnability." The resulting increase in ability to imitate and learn (and teach) would then explain the explosion of cultural change that we call the "great leap forward" or the "big bang" in human evolution. This argument implies that the whole "nature-nurture debate" is largely meaningless as far as human are concerned. Without the genetically specified learnability that characterizes the human brain Homo sapiens wouldn't deserve the title "sapiens" (wise) but without being immersed in a culture that can take advantage of this learnability, the title would be equally inappropriate. In this sense human culture and human brain have co-evolved into obligatory mutual parasites — without either the result would not be a human being. (No more than you can have a cell without its parasitic mitochondria).

THE SECOND BIG BANG

My suggestion that these neurons provided the initial impetus for "runaway" brain/ culture co-evolution in humans, isn't quite as bizarre as it sounds. Imagine a martian anthropologist was studying human evolution a million years from now. He would be puzzled (like Wallace was) by the relatively sudden emergence of certain mental traits like sophisticated tool use, use of fire, art and "culture" and would try to correlate them (as many anthropologists now do) with purported changes in brain size and anatomy caused by mutations. But unlike them he would also be puzzled by the enormous upheavals and changes that occurred after (say) 19th century — what we call the scientific/industrial revolution. This revolution is, in many ways, much more dramatic (e.g. the sudden emergence of nuclear power, automobiles, air travel, and space travel) than the "great leap forward" that happened 40,000 years ago!!

He might be tempted to argue that there must have been a genetic change and corresponding change in brain anatomy and behavior to account for this second leap forward. (Just as many anthropologists today seek a genetic explanation for the first one.) Yet we know that present one occurred exclusively because of fortuitous environmental circumstances, because Galileo invented the "experimental method," that, together with royal patronage and the invention of the printing press, kicked off the scientific revolution. His experiments and the earlier invention of a sophisticated new language called mathematics in India in the first millennium AD (based on place value notation, zero and the decimal system), set the stage for Newtonian mechanics and the calculus and "the rest is history" as we say.

Now the thing to bear in mind is that none of this need have happened. It certainly did not happen because of a genetic change in the human brains during the renaissance. It happened at least partly because of imitation learning and rapid "cultural" transmission of knowledge. (Indeed one could almost argue that there was a greater behavioral/cognitive difference between pre-18th century and post 20th century humans than between Homo Erectus and archaic Homo Sapiens. Unless he knew better our Martian ethologist may conclude that there was a bigger genetic difference between the first two groups than the latter two species!)

Based on this analogy I suggest, further, that even the first great leap forward was made possible largely by imitation and emulation. Wallace's question was perfectly sensible; it is very puzzling how a set of extraordinary abilities seemed to emerge "out of the blue". But his solution was wrong...the apparently sudden emergence of things like art or sophisticated tools was not because of God or "divine intervention". I would argue instead that just as a single invention (or two) by Galileo and Gutenberg quickly spread and transformed the surface of the globe (although there was no preceding genetic change), inventions like fire, tailored clothes, "symmetrical tools", and art, etc. may have fortuitously emerged in a single place and then spread very quickly. Such inventions may have been made by earlier hominids too (even chimps and orangs are remarkably inventive...who knows how inventive Homo Erectus or Neandertals were) but early hominids simply may not have had an advanced enough mirror neuron system to allow a rapid transmission and dissemination of ideas. So the ideas quickly drop out of the "meme pool". This system of cells, once it became sophisticated enough to be harnessed for "training" in tool use and for reading other hominids minds, may have played the same pivotal role in the emergence of human consciousness (and replacement of Neandertals by Homo Sapiens) as the asteroid impact did in the triumph of mammals over reptiles.

So it makes no more sense to ask "Why did sophisticated tool use and art emerge only 40,000 years ago even though the brain had all the required latent ability 100,000 years earlier?" — than to ask "Why did space travel occur only a few decades ago, even though our brains were preadapted for space travel at least as far back Cro Magnons?". The question ignores the important role of contingency or plain old luck in human evolutionary history.

Thus I regard Rizzolati's discovery — and my purely speculative conjectures on their key role in our evolution — as the most important unreported story of the last decade.

HUMAN DIGNITY AND GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT: CURRENT CHALLENGES AND FUTURE PROSPECTS

Seminar organised by
Crown Prince and Crown Princess's Humanitarian Fund
and
Centre for Development and the Environment (SUM), University of Oslo

Over the past few years, the international development discourse has increasingly focused on questions of human rights and global justice. Indeed, the abolition of poverty is increasingly being spoken of as a matter of international redistributive justice and the promotion of human rights and ‘human dignity’.

An important reflection of this is the UN Millennium Declaration (2000), where world leaders reaffirmed that ‘in addition to our separate responsibilities to our individual societies, we have a collective responsibility to uphold the principles of human dignity, equality and equity at the global level’. Similarly, ‘dignity’ appears frequently in tandem – and is often used interchangeably – with the concepts of ‘freedom’, ‘equality’ and ‘respect’. But, what does ‘human dignity’ really imply, and how is it distinct from related terms? Further, how can we apply ‘dignity’ conceptually and operationally in development and poverty reduction efforts worldwide?

Programme:

'Respecting the Dignity of all Human Beings'

DR. THOMAS POGGE, Professor of Philosophy, Columbia University, Australian National University and University of Oslo

--

'Dignity, Human Rights and Global Development: Where Does the "Development Business" Fit In?'

MR. PATRICK van WEERELT, Human Rights Advisor, United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), New York

--

Ms. Tove Strand, Head of the Board of the Humanitarian Fund, will conclude the proceedings

--

The seminar is a part of a series of events organised to mark the fifth wedding anniversary of the Crown Prince and Crown Princess of Norway. It will be co-chaired by Dr. Henrik Syse and Dr. Dan Banik, both board members of the Crown Prince and Crown Princess’s Humanitarian Fund. Dr. Syse is Senior Researcher associated with the International Peace Research Institute, Oslo and the Ethics Programme at the University of Oslo. He currently serves as Head of Corporate Governance at Norges Bank. Dr. Banik is Associate Professor at the Centre for Development and the Environment, University of Oslo.

All are welcome! For optional registration, please click here.

Dear Friends!
Please see details about Catherine Filloux's award-winning work on genocide (her play LEMKIN'S HOUSE) on our World Literature for Equal Dignity project page!
Warmly!
Evelin

Body Politic Theater and Vital Theatre Company present the return of Catherine Filloux's award-winning play LEMKIN'S HOUSE, Directed by Jean Randich

"A call to action… a compelling, well-acted play" – New York Times

LEMKIN'S HOUSE runs September 13-October 8 at McGinn-Cazale Theatre (2162 Broadway at 76th Street), Wednesdays-Saturdays at 8pm; Sundays at 7pm. Tickets are $25 (10% off for groups of 10-29; 15% off for 30 or more). For reservations, call 212-352-3101 or visit www.theatermania.com (For group discounts please order by phone.)

* Highly recommended by The New York Times in The Listings February 2006
“The man who invented the word genocide, Raphael Lemkin, turns out to have an unsettled afterlife in the compelling drama by Catherine Filloux. He learns, through visitations by Tutsis and others, that the international law he campaigned for against genocide may not have accomplished anything. John Daggett is impressive as Lemkin.”
(1:20) (Genzlinger)

Winner of the 2006 Peace Writing Award from the OMNI Center for Peace, LEMKIN'S HOUSE had its US premiere at the 78th Street Theatre Lab in February, 2006, opening to strong critical and audience response. John Daggett returns as Raphael Lemkin. He is joined by original cast members Christopher Edwards, Laura Flanagan, Christopher McHale, and Connie Winston. The production also reunites its original design team: Sue Rees (Set Design); Matthew Adelson (Lighting Design); Camille Assaf (Costume Design); Robert Murphy (Sound Design).

On September 13, Ruth Messinger, former Manhattan Borough President and current President of the American Jewish World Service, which is currently involved in seeking justice for genocide victims in Darfur, will participate in a post-show talk-back. Additional talk-backs are to be announced.

http://theater2.nytimes.com/2006/02/13/theater/reviews/13lemk.html

PRAISE FOR LEMKIN’S HOUSE

"Catherine Filloux has brought Raphael Lemkin, who first identified and led the effort to criminalize genocide, to life for audiences who otherwise might never understand how important this man's contribution has been to humankind. We all need to walk into Lemkin's House and remind ourselves that we have to finish what Lemkin began - to end genocide forever."
- David Scheffer, former US Ambassador at Large for War Crimes Issues

“Over the past decade Catherine Filloux has created a powerful new theatrical sub-genre; plays exploring genocide. She avoids the polemic in favor of stories of individuals, translating the overwhelming horror of mass murder into gripping human tragedy.”
-- Elizabeth Becker, award-winning New York Times, Washington Post and NPR
reporter and author of "When the War was Over"

"Lemkin's House is more than just morally provocative and intellectually stunning theater - it also lays bare one of the greatest failures of imagination in history, the failure of us al to collectively imagine that our fellow human beings are worth saving from mass slaughter."
- Craig Etcheson, principal founder, Documentation Center of Cambodia and
author of "After the Killing Fields"

“One way to understand some of the worst horrors of the last sixty years is to be immersed in the story of the struggles of one man to define genocide and create a world that would stand up against this crime. The play reminds us of how far we yet have to go.”
- Ruth Messinger, president, American Jewish World Service

“Lemkin’s House is a thoughtful reflection on the terrible force of violence across cultures and times.”
-- Mahmood Mamdani, Herbert Lehman Professor of Government, Columbia
University and author of “When Victims Become Killers: Colonialism, Nativism,
and the Genocide in Rwanda”

"It is beautiful and stirring to a change so desperately needed in one of humanity's greatest unremitting shames: genocide. Even more powerful than the deft incisions made into our buffered sense of the world around us is Filloux’s use of humor. She treats us to a profound night in the theater.”
- Yael Danieli, Ph.D., director, Group Project for Holocaust Survivors and Their
Children and representative to the United Nations of the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies

On 10/08/2006, Dennis Rivers kindly wrote:

Dear Evelin,

Thank you so much for the birthday card you sent me.
...

One of the big recent discoveries in neuropsychology is the existence of "mirror neurons," which supports the idea that perception includes a strong element of mental re-enactment. If you Google for "mirror neurons" you will find many articles. I am wondering what the implications of this might be for humiliation studies, especially as relates to contagion processes, when the culture of humiliation spreads through an organization or school.
...
Right now in Sri Lanka, under the extreme stress of war, people all over the island are starting to see the same glowing colors emanating from the heart region of their local Buddha statue. So there are both positive and negative social contagions, but the positive ones are much rarer, something like seeing a double rainbow in the sky!

Many blessings,

Dennis

Dear Dennis!
I googled "Mirror Neurons" and found the following article to be particularly well written and informative:

MIRROR NEURONS and imitation learning as the driving force behind "the great leap forward" in human evolution
By V.S. Ramachandran
http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/ramachandran/ramachandran_p1.html

V.S. RAMACHANDRAN is professor of Neuroscience and Psychology and Director of Center for Brain and Cognition at the University of California at San Diego. He also holds joint appointments at the Salk Institute in La Jolla and with the Cognitive Sciences Program at UCSD. He is also a physician. A dynamic speaker who rolls his r's and flourishes vowels, Dr. Ramachandran gives scientific talks the world over. His book Phantoms In The Brain (with Sandra Blakeslee) was selected as one of the best books of 1998 by The Economist and was a finalist for the Los Angeles Times Book Prize. It was on the "Editors Choice" list in Scientific American, Discover Magazine and The American Scientist.

The discovery of mirror neurons in the frontal lobes of monkeys, and their potential relevance to human brain evolution — which I speculate on in this essay — is the single most important "unreported" (or at least, unpublicized) story of the decade. I predict that mirror neurons will do for psychology what DNA did for biology: they will provide a unifying framework and help explain a host of mental abilities that have hitherto remained mysterious and inaccessible to experiments.

There are many puzzling questions about the evolution of the human mind and brain:

1) The hominid brain reached almost its present size — and perhaps even its present intellectual capacity about 250,000 years ago . Yet many of the attributes we regard as uniquely human appeared only much later. Why? What was the brain doing during the long "incubation "period? Why did it have all this latent potential for tool use, fire, art music and perhaps even language- that blossomed only considerably later? How did these latent abilities emerge, given that natural selection can only select expressed abilities, not latent ones? I shall call this "Wallace's problem", after the Victorian naturalist Alfred Russell Wallace who first proposed it.

2) Crude "Oldawan" tools — made by just a few blows to a core stone to create an irregular edge — emerged 2.4 million ago and were probably made by Homo Habilis whose brain size was half way (700cc) between modern humans (1300) and chimps (400). After another million years of evolutionary stasis aesthetically pleasing "symmetrical" tools began to appear associated with a standardization of production technique and artifact form. These required switching from a hard hammer to a soft (wooden?) hammer while the tool was being made, in order to ensure a smooth rather than jagged, irregular edge. And lastly, the invention of stereotyped "assembly line" tools (sophisticated symmetrical bifacial tools) that were hafted to a handle, took place only 200,000 years ago. Why was the evolution of the human mind "punctuated" by these relatively sudden upheavals of technological change?

3) Why the sudden explosion (often called the "great leap" ) in technological sophistication, widespread cave art, clothes, stereotyped dwellings, etc. around 40 thousand years ago, even though the brain had achieved its present "modern" size almost a million years earlier?

4) Did language appear completely out of the blue as suggested by Chomsky? Or did it evolve from a more primitive gestural language that was already in place?

5) Humans are often called the "Machiavellian Primate" referring to our ability to "read minds" in order to predict other peoples' behavior and outsmart them. Why are apes and humans so good at reading other individuals' intentions? Do higher primates have a specialized brain center or module for generating a "theory of other minds" as proposed by Nick Humphrey and Simon Baron-Cohen? If so, where is this circuit and how and when did it evolve?

The solution to many of these riddles comes from an unlikely source.. the study of single neurons in the brains of monkeys. I suggest that the questions become less puzzling when you consider Giaccamo Rizzollati's recent discovery of "mirror neurons' in the ventral premotor area of monkeys. This cluster of neurons, I argue, holds the key to understanding many enigmatic aspects of human evolution. Rizzollati and Arbib have already pointed out the relevance of their discovery to language evolution . But I believe the significance of their findings for understanding other equally important aspects of human evolution has been largely overlooked. This, in my view, is the most important unreported "story" in the last decade.

THE EMERGENCE OF LANGUAGE

Unlike many other human traits such as humor, art, dancing or music the survival value of language is obvious — it helps us communicate our thoughts and intentions. But the question of how such an extraordinary ability might have actually evolved has puzzled biologists, psychologists and philosophers at least since the time of Charles Darwin. The problem is that the human vocal apparatus is vastly more sophisticated than that of any ape but without the correspondingly sophisticated language areas in the brain the vocal equipment alone would be useless. So how did these two mechanisms with so many sophisticated interlocking parts evolve in tandem? Following Darwin's lead I suggest that our vocal equipment and our remarkable ability to modulate voice evolved mainly for producing emotional calls and musical sounds during courtship ("croonin a toon."). Once that evolved then the brain — especially the left hemisphere — could evolve language.

But a bigger puzzle remains. Is language mediated by a sophisticated and highly specialized "language organ" that is unique to humans and emerged completely out of the blue as suggested by Chomsky? Or was there a more primitive gestural communication system already in place that provided a scaffolding for the emergence of vocal language?

Rizzolatti's discovery can help us solve this age-old puzzle. He recorded from the ventral premotor area of the frontal lobes of monkeys and found that certain cells will fire when a monkey performs a single, highly specific action with its hand: pulling, pushing, tugging, grasping, picking up and putting a peanut in the mouth etc. different neurons fire in response to different actions. One might be tempted to think that these are motor "command" neurons, making muscles do certain things; however, the astonishing truth is that any given mirror neuron will also fire when the monkey in question observes another monkey (or even the experimenter) performing the same action, e.g. tasting a peanut! With knowledge of these neurons, you have the basis for understanding a host of very enigmatic aspects of the human mind: "mind reading" empathy, imitation learning, and even the evolution of language. Anytime you watch someone else doing something (or even starting to do something), the corresponding mirror neuron might fire in your brain, thereby allowing you to "read" and understand another's intentions, and thus to develop a sophisticated "theory of other minds." (I suggest, also, that a loss of these mirror neurons may explain autism — a cruel disease that afflicts children. Without these neurons the child can no longer understand or empathize with other people emotionally and therefore completely withdraws from the world socially.)

Mirror neurons can also enable you to imitate the movements of others thereby setting the stage for the complex Lamarckian or cultural inheritance that characterizes our species and liberates us from the constraints of a purely gene based evolution. Moreover, as Rizzolati has noted, these neurons may also enable you to mime — and possibly understand — the lip and tongue movements of others which, in turn, could provide the opportunity for language to evolve. (This is why, when you stick your tongue out at a new born baby it will reciprocate! How ironic and poignant that this little gesture encapsulates a half a million years of primate brain evolution.) Once you have these two abilities in place the ability to read someone's intentions and the ability to mime their vocalizations then you have set in motion the evolution of language. You need no longer speak of a unique language organ and the problem doesn't seem quite so mysterious any more.

(Another important piece of the puzzle is Rizzolatti's observation that the ventral premotor area may be a homologue of the "Broca's area" — a brain center associated with the expressive and syntactic aspects of language in humans).

These arguments do not in any way negate the idea that there are specialized brain areas for language in humans. We are dealing, here, with the question of how such areas may have evolved, not whether they exist or not.

Mirror neurons were discovered in monkeys but how do we know they exist in the human brain? To find out we studied patients with a strange disorder called anosognosia. Most patients with a right hemisphere stroke have complete paralysis of the left side of their body and will complain about it, as expected. But about 5% of them will vehemently deny their paralysis even though they are mentally otherwise lucid and intelligent. This is the so called "denial" syndrome or anosognosia. To our amazement, we found that some of these patients not only denied their own paralysis, but also denied the paralysis of another patient whose inability to move his arm was clearly visible to them and to others. Denying ones one paralysis is odd enough but why would a patient deny another patient's paralysis? We suggest that this bizarre observation is best understood in terms of damage to Rizzolatti's mirror neurons. It's as if anytime you want to make a judgement about someone else's movements you have to run a VR (virtual reality) simulation of the corresponding movements in your own brain and without mirror neurons you cannot do this .

The second piece of evidence comes from studying brain waves (EEG) in humans. When people move their hands a brain wave called the MU wave gets blocked and disappears completely. Eric Altschuller, Jamie Pineda, and I suggested at the Society for Neurosciences in 1998 that this suppression was caused by Rizzolati's mirror neuron system. Consistent with this theory we found that such a suppression also occurs when a person watches someone else moving his hand but not if he watches a similar movement by an inanimate object. (We predict that children with autism should show suppression if they move their own hands but not if they watch some one else. Our lab now has preliminary hints from one highly functioning autistic child that this might be true (Social Neuroscience Abstracts 2000).

Please continue reading at http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/ramachandran/ramachandran_p4.html.

Dear Friends and Colleagues,

I am pleased to tell you about Child Trauma Institute’s latest news and
upcoming programs. Information on the following topics is included below,
with more detail on our web site, http://www.childtrauma.com.
Please post and distribute this freely.

• New home study programs - for CEUs and EMDRIA CEs

• New “shopping cart” capability on our web site; books and assessment
instruments available on line; also course registrations

• Schedule of upcoming programs

---------------
New Home Study Programs

The following home study programs are now available on our web site at
http://www.childtrauma.com/trhs.html:

• Child Trauma Handbook (18 CEUs; 12 EMDRIA CEs)
• EMDR in Child &
Adolescent Psychotherapy (7 CEUs, 7 EMDRIA CEs)
• EMDR Within a Phase Model of Trauma-informed Treatment (9 CEUs, 9 EMDRIA CEs)

---------------
Books, Assessment Instruments, and Workshop Registrations - All on our web
site

We have finally modernized our web site to offer on-line “shopping cart”
sales for Dr. Greenwald’s books and child trauma assessment instruments, as
well as home study programs and workshop registration. We hope you’ll
appreciate the convenience as well as the free shipping on all orders!

---------------
Schedule of Upcoming Programs

Our programs apply to all ages - adults and kids - unless otherwise
specified. Many of the listed programs offer substantial early registration
discounts. For more information on the programs listed below, go to
http://www.childtrauma.com/tr.html.

Child & Adolescent Trauma Treatment Intensive.

• Monday - Friday, September 25-29, 2006, Buffalo, NY.
• Sunday - Friday, January 15-20, 2007, Big Sur, CA. Esalen Institute.
• Monday - Friday, April 16-20, 2006, Greenfield, MA.

The Fairy Tale Model of Trauma Treatment.

• Saturday, September 16, 2006, San Diego, CA.
• Thursday, March 1, 2007, Greenfield, MA.
• Wednesday, March 28, 2007, Honolulu, HI.
• Thursday, June 7, 2007, Greenfield, MA.

EMDR - the complete course - for therapists working with *all ages*

• Fall, 2006, State College, PA. Starts Friday, September 15, 2006.
• Fall, 2006, Carlisle, PA. Starts Monday, October 16, 2006 • Fall, 2006,
Washington, DC. Starts Friday, October 20, 2006.
• Spring, 2007, Greenfield, MA. Starts Thursday, March 22, 2007.

EMDR for Children & Adolescents.

• Thursday-Friday, March 1-2, 2007, Greenfield, MA.
• Thursday-Friday, June 7-8, 2007, Greenfield, MA.

Self-Control/Anger Management. Motivation - Adaptive Skills - Trauma
Resolution (MASTR) Protocol for adolescents (and adults) with problem
behaviors.

• Thursday- Friday, April 12-13, 2007, Greenfield, MA.

Other Programs for professionals, para-professionals, and parents.

• Monday, September 11, 2006, Greenfield, MA. EMDR Group Consultation.
• Friday, October 27, 2006, Saratoga Springs, NY. Helping Children with the
Traumas and Losses that Life Brings. Special full-day workshop for social
workers, therapists, foster and adoptive parents, and others.
• Tuesday, November 14, 2006, Cromwell, CT. The structure of trauma
treatment: The Fairy Tale Model. Invited workshop at the NASW/CT Fall
Specialty Conference.
• Monday, June 4, 2006, Greenfield, MA. Fairy Tale Model Refresher.
Review, practice, and group consultation.
• Wednesday, June 6, 2006, Greenfield, MA. EMDR Group Consultation.

Certificate Program in Child & Adolescent Trauma Treatment.

• Starts Monday September 11, 2006, Greenfield, MA. (This one is now closed,
sorry.) • Starts Monday September 25, 2006, Buffalo, NY. (Still some room.)

Trauma Trainers Retreat - for senior trauma-oriented therapists ready to
make the next step(s): providing supervision, consultation, and/or training.

• Starts Sunday May 6, 2007, Western MA.

We also offer training programs for your agency on location. Please inquire.

Common Ground News Service - Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH)
08 August 2006

About CGNews-PiH
The Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH) aims to promote constructive perspectives and dialogue about Muslim–Western relations. This news service is available in Arabic, English, French and Indonesian. 
For an archive of past CGNews articles and other information, please visit our website at www.commongroundnews.org.
Unless otherwise noted, copyright permission has been obtained and articles may be reprinted by any news outlet or publication. Please acknowledge both the original source and the Common Ground News Service (CGNews).

CGNews PiH Current Edition

5) by Tzvi Elush
In Haifa, Israeli patients receive medical care for Hezbollah rocket injuries from a most unexpected source – Doctor Nasrallah. A light-hearted look into the humorous and sometimes ironic moments of human existence.
(Source: Ynet News, 26 July 2006)

1) History will judge us all on our actions
Michel Aoun

Rabieh - While aircraft, sea-craft, and artillery pound our beloved Lebanon, we Lebanese are left, as usual, to watch helplessly and pay a heavy price for a war foisted upon us due to circumstances beyond our control.

Considering that this crisis could have been avoided, and considering that there is -- and has been -- a solution almost begging to be made, one cannot but conclude that all of this death, destruction and human agony will, in retrospect, be adjudged as having been in vain.

No matter how much longer this fight goes on, the truth of the matter is that political negotiations will be the endgame. The solution that will present itself a week, a month or a year from now will be, in essence, the same solution as the one available today, and which, tragically, was available before a single shot was fired or a single child killed. Given this reality, a more concerted effort is required sooner rather than later to stop the death and destruction on both sides of the border.

From the outset, this dispute has been viewed through the differing prisms of differing worldviews. As one who led my people during a time when they defended themselves against aggression, I recognize, personally, that other countries have the right to defend themselves, just as Lebanon does; this is an inalienable right possessed by all countries and peoples.

For some, analysis as to this conflict's sources and resolutions begins and ends with the right to self-defence; for others, Israel's claimed self-defensive actions are perceived as barbaric and offensive acts aimed at destroying a country and liquidating a people. Likewise, some view Hezbollah's capture of two Israeli soldiers as fair military game to pressure Israel to return Lebanese prisoners; yet others perceive it as a terrorist act aimed at undermining Israel's sovereignty and security.

These divergences, and the world's failure to adopt different paradigms by which Middle East problems can be fairly analyzed and solved, have produced, and will continue to produce, a vicious cycle of continuing conflict. If the approach remains the same in the current conflict, I anticipate that the result will be the same. This, therefore, is a mandate to change the basis upon which problems are judged and measured from the present dead-end cycle to one which is based on universal, unarguable principles and which has at least a fighting chance to produce a lasting positive result.

My own personal belief is that all human life is equal and priceless -- I look upon Israeli life as the same as Lebanese life. This belief stems not from my Catholic religion, but rather, from basic human values which have their historic home in Lebanon. It is no coincidence that a leading figure in the drafting and adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was Charles Malek, a Lebanese citizen.

I ask, will other Arab countries and leaders have the courage to acknowledge that Israeli life is equal to Arab life? Will Israel have the courage as well to acknowledge that Lebanese life is equal to Israeli life, and that all life is priceless? I believe that most Israeli and Arab citizens would answer in the affirmative. Can we get their governments and their leaders to do the same?

Acknowledgement of equality between the value of the Lebanese and the Israeli people can be a starting point and a catalyst. The universal, unarguable concept of the equality of peoples and of human life should be the basis upon which we measure and judge events, and should provide the common human prism through which the current conflict, and old seemingly everlasting conflicts, are viewed and resolved. This is the only way to peace, prosperity and security, which is, after all, what all human beings desire, regardless of their origin.

The ideological, political and religious differences between the party that I lead, the Free Patriotic Movement, and Hezbollah, could have been addressed either through confrontation, or through internal dialogue. Recognizing the value of human life, the obvious choice was the second option. We sat down with Hezbollah to discuss our differences.

After many months of extensive negotiations, we came up with an understanding that included 10 key items which laid down a roadmap to resolve 10 of the most contentious points of disagreement. For example, Hezbollah agreed for the first time that Lebanese who collaborated with Israel during Israel's occupation of south Lebanon should return peacefully to Lebanon without fear of retribution. We also agreed to work together to achieve a civil society to replace the present confessional system which distributes power on the basis of religious affiliation. Additionally, Hezbollah, which is accused of being staunchly pro-Syrian, agreed for the first time that the border between Lebanon and Syria should be finally delineated, and that diplomatic relations between the two countries should be established.

We also agreed that Palestinian refugees in Lebanon should be disarmed, that security and political decision-making should be centralized with the Lebanese government, and that all Lebanese political groups should disengage themselves from regional conflicts and influences.

Last but not least, our extensive negotiations with Hezbollah resulted in an articulation of the three main roadblocks regarding resolution of the Hezbollah arms issue. First, the return of Lebanese prisoners in Israeli prisons. Second, the return of the Shebaa farms, a tiny piece of Lebanese territory still occupied by Israel. And third, the formulation of a comprehensive strategy to provide for Lebanon's defence, centred upon a strong national army and central state decision-making authority in which all political groups are assured a fair opportunity to participate.

This structure, if joined together with international guarantees which forbid the nationalization of Palestinian refugees in Lebanon and which protect Lebanon from Israeli incursions, and if tied on the internal level to a new, fair and uniform electoral law, is the best hope for peacefully resolving the Hezbollah weapons issue.

This is the essence of the comprehensive solution we seek. Because it embodies a shift from a policy based on military force to one founded upon human values and reconciling the rights of parties, it would stand the test of time. If rights are respected, and if parties are treated with the deference that they implicitly deserve as human beings, then the long-term result will be not only physical disarmament, but also a disarmament of minds on both sides.

Our party presented this solution internally to all Lebanese political groups, the Lebanese government, and the international community -- including the U.S. administration -- repeatedly, for an entire year before this crisis began.

Rather than help us to resolve the weapons issue peacefully and avoid the current agony our country is now enduring, the international community and Lebanese government flatly ignored the proposed solution. Many of Lebanon's main political players cast us aside as "pro-Syrian" "allies" of Hezbollah. No matter. These are the same individuals who -- only a year before -- branded me a "Zionist agent" and brought treason charges against me when I dared to testify before a Congressional subcommittee that Syria should end its occupation of my country.

You see, after Lebanon was liberated from Syrian occupation, the international community (apparently enamoured by the quixotic images of the Cedar Revolution) demanded that the Lebanese elections take place immediately and "on time"; it brushed off our grave concerns about the electoral law in force, which had been carefully crafted by Syria and imposed upon Lebanon in the year 2000 to ensure re-election of Syria's favourite legislators.

This flawed electoral law -- initially imposed upon us by Syria and then reimposed upon us by the international community -- has had disastrous results. It brought to power a Lebanese government with absolute two-thirds majority powers, but which was elected by only one-third of the populace. With a legislative and executive majority on one side, and a popular majority on the other side, the result was absolute gridlock. Currently in Lebanon, there is no confluence of popular will with government will, and therefore the government cannot deal effectively with this or any other problem.

History will judge us all on our actions, and especially on the unnecessary death and destruction that we leave behind. The destruction currently being wrought upon Lebanon is in no way measured or proportional -- ambulances, milk factories, power stations, television crews and stations, U.N. observers and civilian infrastructure have been destroyed.

Let us proceed from the standpoint that all human life is equal, and that if there is a chance to save lives and to achieve the same ultimate result as may be achieved without the senseless killings, then let us by all means take that chance.

###
Mr. Aoun, a former prime minister of Lebanon and commander of its armed forces, is currently a deputy in the Lebanese parliament. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org.
Source: Free Patriotic Movement or www.tayyar.org, 31 July 2006
Visit the website at www.tayyar.org
Distributed by the Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH).
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

2) The role of media in Muslim-Western dialogue
Eko Maryadi

Jakarta - The fluctuating relations between the Muslim and Western worlds are now seemingly more difficult, especially since the attacks on the World Trade Centre in New York City on September 11, 2001, popularly known as 9/11. Right after the tragedy which resulted in thousands dead and thousands more injured, condemnation emerged from around the world. Soon after that, Western media began what has been called the “opinion war” which tended to blame Muslims unreservedly for the attacks.

Through quoting the U.S. President George W. Bush extensively, Western media became a funnel for anger toward Islam which, unassailably, was the religion of the bombing suspects. In response, the media in many Muslim countries embarked upon counter-attacks by mobilizing negative reactions toward any issue pertaining to the Western world. Suspicion, distrust, anger and hatred were suddenly spreading between these two different civilizations.

Besides repeatedly presenting news coverage on the one big topic of “Islam and Violence” while employing words such as “Islamic terrorist”, “fundamentalist”, “extremist”, “radical Islam” or “militant Muslim”, Western media also became a pivotal means of campaigning for the “Global War on Terror”. Meanwhile, massive military “counter” attacks on Muslim countries were launched, such as in Afghanistan and Iraq. Western media also got involved in this scene by sending several journalists to report live on how Western military operations were destroying terrorist networks. Since then, it seems that the former “Holy War” of Muslim against Christian has given way to the war of “Western media against Muslim terrorists.”

As part of the global community, Indonesian media also absorbed Western media news coverage, which increasingly tended to be anti-Islam. The prejudice and hatred exchanged between Muslims and Westerners in Indonesia became stronger, especially after the first Bali bombing, of October 2002. Even though most Indonesian media tried to present balanced and prudent news, some tried to pump up the anger of Indonesian Muslims toward the West. These kinds of media sources also presented analytical articles which sided with Muslims and criticized Western leaders, interviewed Indonesian Muslim figures who were for the attack and who even supported similar “jihadist” attacks in the future.

These days are the hardest for the media in Indonesia, finding themselves in a conflict of interest as relating to Islam and the West. It is difficult for the media to present balanced and impartial news and opinions as the majority of the audience in Indonesia is Muslim. Many media sources want to appeal to their Muslim readers and as a result, some Indonesian media deliberately choose to become partisans of Muslim voices.

When ethnic and religious conflicts broke out in Ambon (1999), Poso (2000), Sampit (2001) and Aceh (1989-2005), some Indonesian media became a strategic means of public communication for Muslim groups. Rather than act as mediators and conflict transformation agents, some media – both printed and electronic – actually got involved in the dissemination of provocative ideas and language. The saying of a Bosnian journalist that “the journalist who hides behind pens and microphones to propose wars is actually more wicked than the people who kill each other” rings true and certainly applied to Indonesia at that time.

By keeping their position independent and at a distance from religious prejudice, media can actually play an important role in encouraging dialogue between the Muslim and Western worlds. By creating balanced public dialogue opportunities, sharing togetherness and broadening the room for tolerance through their news coverage, media can bridge the gap and encourage the common need to live side by side peacefully.

Just as the public needs an atmosphere of sound dialogue, media needs professional and mature journalists as well. Media and its journalists should obey journalism’s code of ethics, maintain information sources accurately, look for competent persons as resources and write their reports using professional news coverage techniques.

It is interesting to note that recently, an Indonesian newspaper was named by a research institution as the most popular media outlet because of its prudent and anti-violence way of reporting. This newspaper, which is surely reporting on the same Muslim-Western conflict issues in Indonesia, does not present any form of pro-Western or even pro-Muslim coverage. When asked why his paper has chosen this impartial style of reporting, a senior journalist said, “We just try to write with integrity and keep our messages away from prejudice. We run the risk of being labelled cowards, of being accused of not being involved or sometimes even of being anti-Islam by the majority of our readers because we do not show favouritism toward them. We just carry out our belief that media should not be involved in any conflict.”

Perhaps that should be the role of media in the “clash of civilization” era, as a channel of balanced, constructive and solution-oriented messages between the Muslim and Western worlds. Furthermore, as the relations between the two are volatile, the media should create an honest, equal and transparent dialogue venue for the public. Media should focus not on the conflict itself, but on the creation of peaceful dialogue and the usage of non-violent means to resolve conflict and ease tensions. By doing this, we hope that media will play an important role in encouraging dialogue between Muslims and the West.

###
Eko Maryadi is a freelance journalist for international media outlets and Coordinator of Advocacy in the Indonesian Journalists Alliance (AJI). This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org.
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 08 August 2006
Visit the website at www.commongroundnews.org
Distributed by the Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH).
Copyright permission is granted for republication.

3) Islands in Arabia
Patrick McGreevy

Beirut - Sitting on my balcony staring down at the Sea Gate of the American University of Beirut, and to the Mediterranean beyond, I am in no danger. The bombs are in the distance. The fighting is in the south. In Tel Aviv, Israeli citizens are staring at the same sea, in perfect safety. The missiles are landing in Haifa and farther north. And those following this war from living rooms around the world are in utter cocoons of safety. Most of us are separated from the violence that undergirds our world and its order. But are we safe from fear? And does our fear make us wish for an order more and more strongly undergirded?

AUB, like the State of Israel, is an implantation on the Levant from the West. Israel's unilateral attempt to disengage and retreat behind its enormous wall, as if it were an island in a sea of Arabs, reminds me of New Orleans dreaming of safety behind its levees. But New Orleans is an artificial island that is actually below sea level. Is Israel below sea level as well? AUB has evolved in a very different direction with regard to its surroundings. Might the Israelis learn something from its experience?

The American missionaries who first arrived in the eastern Mediterranean in 1820 were inspired by the revivalism of the Second Great Awakening. As historian Ussama Makdisi puts it, they sought "to evangelise the world in order to facilitate the Second Coming of Christ." They also saw themselves as representatives of the most enlightened, most advanced, most modern of civilisations—the truth of their religion being the centrepiece of this superiority. They founded schools because Christians needed to read the Bible. They introduced Western medical practices and what later became the standard Arabic script.

When they founded the Syrian Protestant College in 1866 (later AUB), these missionaries hoped to attract students by teaching them about medicine, agriculture and the arts. The entire enterprise was a failure in terms of its goal of gaining converts: there were hardly any. But their inadvertent philanthropy had a profound impact. Many Arabs embraced the modern notions they learned at the college. In 1882, a huge controversy erupted when the Presbyterian Board of Trustees in the US forbad the teaching of the theory of evolution, and eventually dismissed two promising Arab scientists who had dared embrace modernity more thoroughly than the university's trustees. As the years passed, the university's mission became increasingly secular and its faculty and administration increasingly Arab.

In 1920, the college changed its name to the American University of Beirut. John Munro, who has written a history of the university, suggests that the word "of" in its name became more and more representative of reality. The university played an important role in the revival of Arabic literature and Arab nationalism. Partly because of AUB, most Arabs held favourable views of the US, at least until the 1967 war. Even during the horrors of Lebanon's long civil war, all sides spared the AUB campus and hospital. The University has walls and gates, but its guards do not carry guns. Its walls serve to designate it as a particular place where students from all of the region’s religions and ethnic groups can openly debate and pursue knowledge. As AUB student Randy Nahle put it in his prize-winning Founders’ Day essay in 2004, the university provided “an open forum where Occidental and Oriental streams of thought could meet and debate and reshape each other.”

When AUB’s Center for American Studies and Research that I direct decided to offer a course called “The Holocaust in American Literature and Culture” last semester, we were aware that, though our decision was not without controversy, AUB was a free and open space where even this topic could be approached in a scholarly way. Instead of remaining an isolated island, AUB has continued to evolve. If it is an American institution, it is not because it slavishly serves the agenda of any presidential administration, but because it openly embraces ideals that have motivated the most admired of US achievements.

Can Israel evolve and become a country “of” its region rather than an island “in” it? A country where people of all religions have absolute equality? A country with “liberty and justice for all”? If so, both Israel and its neighbours have a great deal to gain.

In the Levant, endless empires have come and gone. Living here naturally turns one’s mind to the long view. In August of 2006, the American University of Beirut may seem vulnerable and Israel invincible, but the future is determined by the choices we make today. Perhaps now is a time to think about these most basic issues: what kind of island is likely to persist and prosper, one with open gates, or one with high walls? One that is a meeting place of cultures, or one that strives to seclude itself from those around it who are different from itself? The answer surely lies in widening the horizons of our minds.

###
* Patrick McGreevy is Director of the Prince Al Waleed Bin Talal Center for American Studies & Research (CASAR) at the American University of Beirut, or AUB. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org.
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 08 August 2006
Visit the website at www.commongroundnews.org
Distributed by the Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH).
Copyright permission is granted for republication.

4) ~Youth Views~ Translating American political thought into Arabic
Andrew Barr

Phoenix, AZ -- The neo-conservative vision of remaking the Arab world by simply introducing American-style democracy has largely failed because of the inability of all sides to understand the basic tenets that mould our collective consciousnesses. Few American policy makers understand Arab thoughts on governing, just as few Arab leaders understand the ideas that inspired America’s founding, the same ideas the US is trying to instil in Iraq and Afghanistan. This is partly due to the fact that the literature that formed the American political mind -- the Federalist Papers, the writings of Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin and more recently Martin Luther King Jr. -- are not available in Arabic.

After all, it might be well and good to argue for principles such as separation of powers in government and inalienable human rights, but if the concepts are unfamiliar and the reasoning behind them is unknown, they are likely to have little influence.

The White House did not anticipate this problem, and has done little to fix it, but a group of University of Michigan professors took it on when they created the Global Americana Institute and the Americana Translation Project with the goal of translating famous books of American political thought into Arabic and widely distributing affordable copies in Arab bookstores.

While living in the Arab world, Juan Cole, Professor of History at Michigan and President of the Global Americana Institute who oversees the project, was “struck by the lack of American political books in Arab book stores.” Cole noticed some American literature available in small distribution, including the works of Mark Twain and William Faulkner, but that books on American political thought were not.

The shelves of Arab bookstores are not completely barren of Western political thought. “Arabs tend to know about Rousseau and Voltaire and French [political] history,” Cole said in an interview. “It’s not that Arabs don’t know about Enlightenment thought, they just don’t know the American end of it.” One key difference Cole feels is important for the Muslim world to understand is that the American democratic tradition, while secular, has always been more accommodating to religion than the French tradition, which was explicitly anti-clerical during the French revolution and has remained so to this day, with expressions of faith frowned upon in French political society. If this is the only picture of democracy the Muslim world has had access to, no wonder democracy has made little headway in the religious Arab societies.

After September 11, Cole thought that the Arab world not having access to the American side of Enlightenment philosophy was “very dangerous”. By searching through various databases, Cole confirmed that almost none of the most influential works of American political thought had even been translated, let alone published or distributed.

Cole did find that the U.S. Information Agency was operating a small translation project out of Jordan and Egypt. The USIA programme had translated a few works, including the Federalist Papers, but they were, according to Cole, “not distributed at all, as far as I can tell.”

The situation prompted Cole, along with seven other University of Michigan professors who are on the Institute’s Board of Directors, to undertake the translation project.

After “working hard on getting through all the federal and state hurdles”, the project recently received 501(c)(3) status as a charitable non-profit organization, making all donations tax deductible. Even though the project has “really just begun”, it has raised $20,000 since April. According to Cole, people are “very enthusiastic about this project.”

With some funds secured, and more fundraising efforts to come, Cole is hopeful that the first translations will be available in two years. Each book will take roughly a year to translate and edit. The works of the Founding Fathers are particularly troublesome because “18th century English is hard to translate into Arabic.”

The first book planned to be available will be a collection of essays by Thomas Jefferson focused on freedom of religion, separation of powers and inalienable rights. Following the Jefferson essays will be Ben Franklin’s autobiography. The major speeches and writings of Martin Luther King Jr and Susan B. Anthony will also be among the first translations.

Unfortunately, the Institute faces the hurdle of distributing the translations in Arab bookstores. “Distribution of American books is often limited,” Cole told me. Many Arab governments are “suspicious” of American books. In some Arab countries, governments influence what books end up on the shelves of bookstores.

After finding its niche in the Arab book market, the Institute hopes to commission several other translation projects, including an expanded collection of works by the American Founding Fathers. The Institute also hopes to produce a book about the American Jewish community, and other American minority groups, for the Arab market. The Institute even hopes to translate histories of the Arab world, especially Iraq, written by Western authors into Arabic.

Cole hopes to provide the Arab world with “a window into what the American political tradition thinks, especially on individual and social rights.” This is a great and sorely needed step forward – after all, how can we expect the Arab world to respect and understand us if virtually none of the philosophy behind our system of government is understood? Luckily, the Institute’s project is opening that window. Hopefully it is not too late.

###
Andrew Barr is a senior at Claremont McKenna College where he studies Government. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org.
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 08 August 2006
Visit the website at www.commongroundnews.org
Distributed by the Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH).
Copyright permission is granted for republication.

5) Doctor Nasrallah treats rocket injuries
Tzvi Elush

Haifa - At the Rambam Medical Center, Haitam Nasrallah, 28, is talked of with respect. A young, good-looking man, Nasrallah spent seven years studying medicine in Italy, and is currently doing an internship in Haifa.

Doctors at the medical centre are certain that his future in Haifa is bright, despite his unique name.

Soldiers and patients who encounter the name tag on the young doctor for the first time glance at it for a moment with a little curiosity and even suspicion.

They were just rushed to hospital because of Hassan Nasrallah's rockets, and now another Nasrallah awaits them in the emergency room?

But the suspicious look is very quickly replaced with a smile and even a laugh.

Doctor Haitam Nasrallah is a Christian resident of Shfaram who is planning to marry his fiancé, also a resident of Shfaram.

'I'm proud of my name'

He does not plan to change his name. "First of all because this is my name. And secondly, that one from Beirut should change his name," Haitam says. "Why me? Me and my family have been proudly going with this name for a number of generations. The name means “victory of God”, and I have no problem with it, except for these (rocket-induced) shakings."

When Nasrallah watches television with his colleagues, doctors and specialists, the Hizbullah leader appears on the screen. "Yalla (come on), talk to your cousin and tell him to stop with these missiles…" says a colleague in jest.

After one of his patients was released from hospital, he approached the doctor and said: "You can be sure, I will never forget your name…"

"Of course I hope they know me due to my work and not only because of this name," Haitam explains.

"I treat whoever arrives at the Rambam hospital, without consideration of origin, religion, or nationality. I am Israeli and I am a resident of Israel – and I'm proud of that and the wonderful relations that exist in the Rambam hospital between all of the staff and patients, without regard for race or nationality," he says.

Dozens of Israeli Arab doctors work alongside Nasrallah at the Rambam hospital: Muslims, Christians, and Druze. One of his colleagues, Doctor Hani Bahous, 42, hopes that peace in the Middle East will happen soon, and that good relations are established between all peoples, as exist in the Rambam hospital, and in Haifa generally.

And while we are conversing with Doctor Nasrallah, the air raid sirens again go off in Haifa. After receiving a number of insistent looks, Doctor Nasrallah smiles: "Okay, okay, I will call him and ask him to stop."

###
This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org.
Source: Ynet News, 26 July 2006
Visit the website at www.ynetnews.com
Distributed by the Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH).
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

About CGNews-PiH
The Common Ground News Service - Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH) provides news, op-eds, features and analysis by local and international experts on a broad range of issues affecting Muslim-Western relations. CGNews-PiH syndicates articles that are balanced and solution-oriented to news outlets worldwide. With support from the Norwegian government and the United States Institute of Peace, this news service is a non-profit initiative of Search for Common Ground, an international NGO working in the field of conflict transformation.

This news service is one outcome of a set of working meetings held in partnership with His Royal Highness Prince El Hassan bin Talal of Jordan in June 2003.

Youth Views

CGNews-PiH also regularly publishes the work of student leaders and journalists whose articles strengthen intercultural understanding and promote constructive perspectives and dialogue in their own communities. Student journalists and writers under the age of 27 are encouraged to write to cbinkley@sfcg.org for more information on contributing.
The views expressed in these articles are those of the authors, not of CGNews-PiH or its affiliates.Common Ground News Service

1601 Connecticut Avenue, NW Suite #200
Washington, DC 20009 USA
Ph: +1(202) 265-4300
Fax: +1(202) 232-6718

Rue Belliard 205 Bte 13 B-1040
Brussels, Belgium
Ph: +32 (02) 736-7262
Fax: +32(02) 732-3033

E-mail: cgnewspih@sfcg.org
Website: www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org/index.php?sid=1&lang=en)

Editors
Emad Khalil (Amman)
Juliette Schmidt (Beirut)
Chris Binkley (Dakar)
Medhy Hidayat (Jakarta)
Leena El-Ali (Washington)
Emmanuelle Hazan (Washington)

Staff
Andrew Kessinger (Washington)

CGNews is a not-for-profit news service.

Human Relatoins
Forthcoming special issues
"Workers, risk and the new economy"
The editors of Human Relations intend to publish a special issue of the journal on the subject of Workers, risk and the new economy.

Guest editors: Paul Edwards (Warwick Business School), Monder Ram (De Montfort University), Vicki Smith (University of California, Davis)

Much has been written about the ‘risk society’, which can embrace anything from existential angst to the dangers of new technology. Less attention has been paid to the concrete meaning of risk in specific circumstances. This special issue places the experience of work at centre stage. Its focus is the nature of risk as it is faced by workers in the workplace, embracing the sources of risk, how it is experienced, and how it can be moderated or even deployed constructively. In relation to the moderation of risk, what are the roles of workers, trade unions, labour market intermediaries and regulatory bodies in negotiating risk? Is risk now simply taken for granted, and if so is this a universal tendency or one limited to certain occupations and contexts? We particularly wish to encourage studies of workers at the bottom end of the labour market, for risk affects them in very stark ways; we include here the insecure work force such as migrant and illegal workers and temporary and agency staff.

Potential topics include the following:

Low-wage workers and economic insecurity.
Migrant workers, insecurity and the management and negotiation of risk (for example through family or communal resources).
Gendered and racialized experiences of risk.
Dangerous technologies and the negotiation of risk.
Risk and opportunity: under what circumstances can taking a risk bring benefits, and what kinds of workers are most likely to reap the rewards?
Changes over time: is ‘risk’ as new as is sometimes supposed, and what can a historical perspective say; is it the fact of risk that is new, or does risk take on new forms?
The role of institutions in regulating risk. This embraces international comparative studies of national regulatory regimes, as well as the role of trade unions and other representative bodies.
All methodological approaches, including ethnographies, case studies and quantitative analyses, are equally welcome. Papers must, however, identify and explain a phenomenon. That is, it will not be sufficient to show that risk exists. Papers will ideally address the antecedents, nature, and consequences of an aspect of risk. They should also address in what respects, if all, risk is new in its extent or its nature.

This call is open and competitive, and the submitted papers will be blind reviewed in the normal way.
Submitted papers must be based on original material not under consideration by any other journal or outlet.
The Editors will select five papers to be included in the special issue, but other papers submitted in this process may be published in other issues of the journal.
The deadline for submissions is 13 July 2007. Authors will be notified by the end of August if their papers have not been accepted for review. The special issue is intended for publication in mid- 2008.

Papers to be considered for this special issue should be submitted online via www.humanrelationsjournal.org. Please direct questions about the submission process, or any administrative matter, to Alice Gilbertson.

The editors of the special issue are very happy to discuss initial ideas for papers, and can be contacted directly:

Paul Edwards
P.K.Edwards @ Warwick.ac.uk

Monder Ram
MRam @ dmu.ac.uk

Vicky Smith
vasmith @ ucdavis.edu

WBUR/NPR Boston: "Here & Now"
Broadcast 8/7/06
Jean Baker Miller

An interview of Judith Jordan about the life and work of Jean Baker Miller, broadcast on NPR's program, "Here & Now." If you would like to listen to the interview, please use the following link:
http://www.here-now.org/shows/2006/08/20060807_13.asp

AfricAvenir News are kindly sent out by Eric Van Grasdorff:

Liebe Freunde,

Vom 20.-22. Oktober 2006 lädt AfricAvenir in Kooperation mit der Akademie Frankenwarte und der Initiative südliches Afrika zu einem Filmseminar in die Akademie Frankenwarte in Würzburg.

Jenseits der engen Perspektive europäischer und US-amerikanischer Medien, die Afrika auf seine Misere oder Exotik reduzieren, bieten afrikanische Filme einen differenzierten Einblick in die Vielfalt des Kontinents und dessen aktuelle gesellschaftliche Entwicklungen. Trotz oft auswegloser finanzieller und struktureller Probleme hat sich in den vergangenen Jahren ein gesellschaftskritisches Kino mit hohem realistischen Anspruch entwickelt, hervorgebracht durch eine neue Generation von Filmemachern und Filmemacherinnen. Dieses Seminar bietet einen Einblick in die Vielfältigkeit des Filmschaffens in Afrika und die Möglichkeit, eurozentrische Blickweisen auf afrikanische Realitäten zu hinterfragen.

Eine Kooperation zwischen AfricAvenir International e.V., der Initiative Südliches Afrika e.V. (INISA) und der Akademie Frankenwarte.

Anmeldung bei Margarete Grzegorczy: E-Mail: Margarete.Grzegorczyk[at]frankenwarte.de; Fon: 0931 / 80 464-214; Fax: 0931 / 80 46477; Stichwort: Seminar-Nr.: 107456 / 4205

Teilnahmebeitrag: € 85,00;

Voraussetzung für die Teilnahme sind (passive) Kenntnisse der englischen Sprache

Programm & Anmeldeformular (pdf):http://www.africavenir.com/africavenir/berlin/film/Filmseminar.pdf
Filmseminar Homepage: http://www.africavenir.com/africavenir/berlin/film/seminar.php

Adresse:
Gesellschaft für Politische Bildung e.V.
Leutfresserweg 81 - 83
97082 Würzburg
Postfach 55 80
97005 Würzburg
Fon: 0931 / 80464-214
Fax: 0931 / 80464-77
info@frankenwarte.de
www.frankenwarte.de

Lernziele:
Den TeilnehmerInnen soll anhand ausgesuchter Beispiele ein Einblick in das Filmschaffen Afrikas vermittelt werden. Ziel ist es, den Kontinent Afrika mit dem Medium Film als heterogenen Kulturraum vorzustellen sowie die Kenntnisse über Afrika und den kulturellen Reichtum der Länder zu vertiefen. Die Teilnehmenden sollen befähigt werden,

* die Traditionslinien, die Konflikte und die Innovationen im afrikanischen Film besser erkennen zu können
* zu erkennen, dass der eurozentristische Blick die Wahrnehmung der reichen Kultur Afrikas trübt
* ein differenziertes Bild Afrikas in gesellschaftspolitischen Diskussionen besser vertreten zu können

Zugänglichkeit:
Das Seminar ist von der Akademie Frankenwarte allgemein für alle interessierten Bürgerinnen und Bürger offen, zusätzlich angeschrieben wurden alle Personen in der Interessentendatei der Akademie Frankenwarte. Darüber hinaus wurde das Seminar öffentlich im Internet (www.frankenwarte.de/programm/) ausgeschrieben.

Seminarleitung:
Georg Rosenthal; Dipl.-Kfm, Akademieleiter, Würzburg
René Gradwohl; Dipl.-Politologe, Filmteam AfricAvenir – INISA, Berlin
Daniel Bendix; Student der Politikwissenschaften, Filmteam AfricAvenir – INISA, Berlin

Seminarteam:
Julien Enoka Ayemba, Diplom-Medienberater, Berlin
Dr. Marie-Hélène Gutberlet, Wiss. Mitarbeiterin am Institut für Theater-, Film- und Medienwissenschaft der Universität Frankfurt am Main
Marc Heinz, Journalist, Bonn
Oliver Schmitz, Regisseur und Drehbuchautor aus Südafrika, Berlin
Jean-Marie Teno, Regisseur aus Kamerun, Issy-Les-Moulineaux (angefragt)

Programm

Freitag, 20.10.2006

* Anreise bis 18 Uhr
* 18.00 Uhr Abendessen
* 19.00 - 19.15 Uhr Begrüßung, Vorstellungsrunde
* Einführung in das Seminar: “Das Filmschaffen in Afrika und die jungen afrikanischen (Film)kulturen“
* 19.15 - 20.30 Uhr Film Le Clandestin von José Laplaine, Zaire, 1995, OmU, 15 min, Impulsreferat mit anschließender Diskussion zum Thema: Die derzeitige Lage des Afrikanischen Films mit Dr. Marie-Hélène Gutberlet
* 20.30 - 22.15 Uhr Film Mossane von Safi Faye, Senegal, 1996, OmU, 105 min – Leitthema: Erwachsen werden in Westafrika

Samstag, 21.10.2006

* 7.45 - 9.00 Uhr Frühstück
* 9.00 - 11.00 Uhr Film Mapantsula von Oliver Schmitz, Südafrika/ Australien/Großbritannien, 1988, 109 min, mit anschließender Diskussion zum Film unter dem Leitthema: Erfahrungen aus zwei Jahrzehnten Filmschaffen in Südafrika, Diskussion mit Oliver Schmitz
* 11.00 - 13.00 Uhr Film Hijack Stories von Oliver Schmitz, Südafrika/Deutschland/Frankreich, 2001, OF (engl.) 94 min mit anschließender Diskussion zum Film unter dem Leitthema: Sprachen und das Filmschaffen im „Neuen Südafrika“, Diskussion mit Oliver Schmitz
* 13.00 - 14.00 Uhr Mittagessen und Pause
* 14.00 - 16.00 Uhr Film Le Malentendu Colonial von Jean-Marie Teno, Kamerun/Frankreich/ Deutschland, 2004, OmEnglU, 78 min, mit anschließender Diskussion zum Film unter dem Leitthema: Koloniale Vergangenheitsbewältigung, Diskussion mit Jean-Marie Teno
* 16.00 - 16.15 Uhr Pause
* 16.15 - 18.00 Uhr Dokumentarfilm Le Mariage d´Alex von Jean-Marie Teno, Frankreich/ Kamerun, 2002, OmEnglU, 45min (angefragt), mit anschließender Diskussion zum Film unter dem Leitthema: Polygamie - Liebe, Familie und Partnerschaft in Afrika, Diskussion mit Jean-Marie Teno
* 18.00 Uhr Abendessen
* 19.30 - 21.00 Uhr Festival der Filmkulturen in Namibia und Swasiland – Afrikanisches Kino zwischen Anspruch und Wirklichkeit, Vortrag und anschließende Diskussion mit Marc Heinz

Sonntag, 22.10.2006

* 07.45 - 9.00 Uhr Frühstück
* 9.00 - 10.15 Uhr Die Videofilmindustrie aus Nigeria und afrikanischer Film - Eine Alternative oder ein Widerspruch? Vortrag und anschließende Diskussion mit Julien Enoka Ayemba
* 10.15 - 10.30 Uhr Pause
* 10.30 - 12.00 Uhr Film Max and Mona von Teddy Mattera, Südafrika, 2004, OmEnglU, 98 min, mit anschließender Diskussion zum Film unter dem Leitthema Stadt und Land in Afrika, Diskussion mit Rene Gradwohl und Daniel Bendix
* 12.00 - 12.30 Uhr Zusammenfassung der Seminarergebnisse Abschlussgespräch und Auswertung, Georg Rosenthal/Rene Gradwohl/Daniel Bendix
* 12.30 Uhr Mittagessen
* Ende des Seminars nach dem Mittagessen

Sie sind herzlich zu diesem Seminar eingeladen. Der Teilnahmebeitrag in Höhe von 85,00 € schließt Programm, Unterkunft im Zweibettzimmer und Verpflegung (ohne Getränke) ein.

Alle Zimmer verfügen über Dusche, WC sowie Telefon mit Internetanschlußmöglichkeit. Empfang, Restaurant und ein Tagungsraum sind rollstuhlfreundlich erreichbar. Die Toiletten in Haus 1 sowie ein Gästezimmer sind behinderten-gerecht ausgestattet. Alle Gästezimmer sind Nichtraucher-Zimmer. Haustiere dürfen leider nicht mitgebracht werden.

AfricAvenir News, 23rd January 2006

AfricAvenir News are kindly sent out by Eric Van Grasdorff:

Liebe Freunde,

www.AfricAvenir.org
Wollen Sie Fördermitglied von AfricAvenir International e.V. werden?
Kontaktieren Sie Ann Kathrin Helfrich, Fon: 030-80906789, a.helfrich@africavenir.org

Redaktion des Newsletters: Eric Van Grasdorff, e.vangrasdorff@africavenir.org
AfricAvenir International e.V. ist nicht für die Inhalte externer Webseiten verantwortlich.

SURVIVAL INTERNATIONAL PRESS RELEASE

INDIGENOUS PEOPLES WIN HISTORIC VOTE ON RIGHTS - CANADA VOTES AGAINST

On UN Indigenous People's Day (9 August), Survival welcomes the UN Human Rights Council's historic vote in favour of the declaration on indigenous people's rights. Canada and Russia were the only two countries on the council to vote against the declaration.

Several African countries including South Africa voted in favour of the declaration, breaking with African governments' traditional reluctance to recognise indigenous peoples.

Canada, which refused to back the declaration, has faced a long campaign by Survival over its treatment of the Innu people of Labrador and Quebec. Over the last 40 years, the Innu have been moved from their land and made to live in settled communities. The new communities are marked by extremely high levels of alcoholism, petrol-sniffing amongst children, violence, and record levels of suicides.

Survival's director Stephen Corry said today, 'A UN declaration of indigenous peoples' rights is long overdue and it's encouraging that many of the former colonial powers, together with South Africa, finally supported this very progressive move. What is really dismaying is that Canada decided to join with Russia in opposing the draft declaration. Canada's treatment of many of its indigenous peoples is very shabby indeed and they will feel further discriminated against by their government's actions at the UN.'

The declaration was first discussed over 20 years ago. It will now move to the UN General Assembly, where member countries are expected to vote on it later this year. The Council recommended that the General Assembly approve the declaration.

If approved, the declaration would set a benchmark against which countries' treatment of tribal peoples can be judged; it is not legally binding. The declaration recognizes the rights of indigenous peoples to their land and to live as they wish. It also affirms that, for example, they should not be moved from their lands without their free and informed consent.

-ENDS-

For further information contact Miriam Ross on (+44) (0)20 7687 8734 or email mr @ survival-international.org

To read this press release online and to see the text of the declaration visit http://survival-international.org/news.php?id=1787

--

We help tribal peoples defend their lives, protect their lands and determine their own futures.

Survival International
6 Charterhouse Buildings
London EC1M 7ET
UK
Tel: (+44) (0)20 7687 8700
Fax: (+44) (0)20 7687 8701
www.survival-international.org

Jean Baker Miller, noted feminist, psychoanalyst, social activist;
1927-2006

Jean Baker Miller, noted feminist, psychoanalyst, social activist;
1927-2006

BROOKLINE, MA - Jean Baker Miller, MD, noted feminist, psychoanalyst, and
social activist died at her Brookline, Massachusetts home July 29, 2006
after a 13-year struggle with emphysema and post-polio effects. Her 1976
groundbreaking book, Toward a New Psychology of Women, traced the
connection between women's mental health and sociopolitical forces. Dr.
Miller maintained that women's desire to connect with others and their
emotional accessibility were essential strengths, not weaknesses as they
were traditionally regarded.

She was born September 29, 1927 in The Bronx, New York to Irene and Henry
Baker. She contracted polio at l0 months of age and until the age of 10
underwent several operations that left her with an atrophied leg and limp.
Her family was of very modest means and she attended New York City
schools. She won a scholarship to Sarah Lawrence College where near
graduation she switched from a history to a pre-med major. She then had a
scholarship at the College of Physicians and Surgeons at Columbia
University, one of ten women in a class of l00, graduating in 1952. She
was an intern and a first-year resident in internal medicine at Montefiore
Hospital in the Bronx. Switching to psychiatry, she was a resident at
Bellevue Hospital, Jacobi Hospital, and the Upstate Medical Center in
Syracuse. She held faculty positions at Boston University School of
Medicine, Harvard Medical School, and Albert Einstein College of Medicine.
She was a fellow of the American Psychiatric Association; the American
College of Psychiatrists; the American Orthopsychiatric Association; and
the American Academy of Psychoanalysis.

Toward a New Psychology of Women, a bestseller and classic in the fields
of psychology and women's studies, was translated in over 20 languages and
distributed around the world. Dr. Miller also co-authored The Healing
Connection: How Women Form Relationships in Therapy and in Life and
Women's Growth in Connection; she edited Psychoanalysis and Women, and
authored and contributed to numerous articles on depression, dreams, and
the psychology of women.

"Toward a New Psychology of Women maps the interplay between empathy and
politics masterfully and for the first time," says Christina Robb,
Pulitzer Prize-winning author of the new book, This Changes Everything:
The Relational Revolution in Psychology. "In it, Dr. Miller created the
first democratic psychology - that is, the first psychology of people who
at last can realistically hope and learn to work with and love their
political equals all their lives."

Dr. Miller's writings and work led to her appointment as the first
director of the Stone Center for Developmental Studies at Wellesley
College in 1981 where she spearheaded collaborative work among scholars,
researchers, and clinicians on the treatment and prevention of mental
health problems in women.

Work at the Stone Center led to the subsequent establishment of the Jean
Baker Miller Training Institute at the Wellesley Centers for Women at
Wellesley College in 1995. Dr. Miller served as director of the Institute
until late 2005, where Relational-Cultural Theory - a new model of
psychological development - was further elaborated and taught to
practitioners, lay persons, and most recently, business professionals.

While most of the Institute's seminars have been geared to training mental
health professionals, the underlying message of Dr. Miller's work calls
for a basic shift in the way human relationships are organized. From
emphasizing separateness, accruing power over others, and social
stratification, nations and individuals need to emphasize mutual respect
and the building of community. Her greatest hope was to effect change that
would bring about real social justice.

Judith Jordan, director of the Jean Baker Miller Training Institute,
reflects, "Alongside Jean, we worked to educate people that human
development is about movement toward increasing mutuality and better
connection, rather than growth toward separateness and independence. Her
vision has altered our core understanding of both men and women; we all
need connection. Building growth-fostering relationships leads not only to
personal wellbeing but to social justice."

Dr. Miller traveled the world educating people about this new paradigm.
"Everywhere we went," Dr. Jordan notes, "women would come to Jean after
her conference and say these identical words, 'Your book changed my life!
Thank you!' Jean, with characteristic humility, was always surprised."

In addition to conducting seminars and workshops, the scholars at the
Institute have continued to expand applications of Dr. Miller's work and
Relational-Cultural Theory to address a broad-range of psychological,
social, and organizational issues through working papers. Recent
publications co-authored by Dr. Miller include: Telling the Truth about
Power (2003); How Change Happens: Controlling Images, Mutuality and Power
(2002); and Racial Images and Relational Possibilities (2001).

"Jean Baker Miller was a cherished friend and colleague whose brilliance,
gentle determination, and wide influence brought great honor to Wellesley
College," says Diana Chapman Walsh, president of Wellesley College. "It
was fitting that the Jean Baker Miller Training Institute took root on the
campus of a college dedicated to educating women to make a difference in
the world. Jean's groundbreaking work has made an enduring difference to
generations of women and men, enabling us to understand power in
connection with compassion and love."

Susan McGee Bailey, executive director of the Wellesley Centers for Women,
notes, "Jean's feminism was strong, compassionate, and unwavering, never
militant but radical in its implications. Her work and her theory are not
just for psychologists nor just for women, but for all people everywhere.
The strength and clarity of her vision will continue to inspire our work
here at the Centers as well as that of so many around the world who were
touched by her life, her perspectives, and her practice."

In her last public presentation at the Institute in a 2004 program called
"Encouraging an Era of Connection," Dr. Miller's work focused on creating
communities of courage and hope. "I think that the source of hope lies in
believing that one has or can move toward a sense of connection," she
shared.

Throughout her life, Dr. Miller was known for her humility. Resisting the
notion of individual recognition, she recognized that her work grew in
collaboration with others. Dr. Miller was the reluctant recipient of
numerous awards and honors including, Woman of the Year in Health and
Medicine from the National Organization of Women Massachusetts Chapter,
1982, and Massachusetts Psychological Association Allied Professional
Award for Outstanding Contributions of the Advances of Psychology, 1982.
She received honorary degrees from Brandeis University and Regis College.
She was featured in Changing the Face of Medicine: Celebrating American's
Women Physicians, a traveling exhibit organized by the National Library of
Medicine at the National Institutes of Health, 2003-2007.

Dr. Miller is survived by her husband of more than 50 years, S.M. (Mike)
Miller of Brookline, two sons, Jonathan F. Miller of Sleepy Hollow, New
York and Edward D. Miller of New York City and a grandson, Jacob (Jake)
Miller.

A memorial service will be held in the fall at Wellesley College. In lieu
of flowers, the family has requested that contributions be made to the
Jean Baker Miller Training Institute in Dr. Miller's memory, and sent to:
Jean Baker Miller Training Institute, Wellesley Centers for Women,
Wellesley College, 106 Central Street, Wellesley, MA 02481. Gifts may also
be made online via:
https://www.wellesley.edu/JBMTI_contribnew/contributions.html.

Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Nachfolgend sowie im Anhang ein
aufrüttelnder Text von Jessica Benjamin, der als offener Brief möglichst in
der ZEIT erscheinen soll. Bitte verbreiten Sie den vorangegangenen, gestern
von mir versandten englischen Text nicht weiter, sondern wenn, dann diesen,
aber bitte vorerst noch nicht an andere Zeitungen, da er hoffentlich in der
ZEIT erscheinen wird! Danke! Mit freundlichen und besorgten Grüssen Ihre
Mechthild Klingenburg-Vogel

Sehr geehrte Frau Bundeskanzlerin!

Als ich im Juni 1967 als Studentin nach Frankfurt/M. kam, war ich
überrascht, dass die ganze Universität voll von Plakaten war, auf denen
stand: „Spende für Israel!“ – Ich selbst hatte zwiespältig auf den
6-Tage-Krieg reagiert: In Amerika als Kind jüdischer Einwanderer
aufgewachsen und Israel durch einen Besuch einige Jahre zuvor tief
verbunden, war ich jedoch als aktive Gegnerin des Vietnam-Krieges und
frühere Bürgerrechts-Aktivistin sehr besorgt über die Besatzung durch Israel
und deren Folgen.
Während meiner Studentenzeit in Frankfurt, aber auch durch einen seit 35
Jahren bestehenden Kontakt mit dem intellektuellen Leben in Deutschland,
habe ich ein tiefes Verständnis vom Ringen der Deutschen meiner Generation
in der Auseinandersetzung mit der Nazi-Vergangenheit und mit ihren
Schuldgefühlen wegen des Holocaust. Ich habe erfahren, was sie als kleine
Kinder an Leid erlebten, sowohl durch die direkten Zerstörungen des Krieges
als auch durch die seelischen Wunden, die ihre Eltern in sich trugen. Ich
weiß, was viele meiner jüdischen Mitbürger nicht wissen, wie tief dies die
Deutschen meiner Generation beeinflusst hat. Und als Psychoanalytikerin
hatte ich erst vor kurzem die Gelegenheit, auf der Tagung der Deutschen
Gesellschaft für Psychoanalyse in Hamburg über die Verwirrungen zu sprechen,
die diese Vergangenheit noch immer bewirkt. Und von meinen deutschen
Kollegen wurde die Tatsache, dass ich diese andauernden Verwicklungen
ansprach, mit großer Resonanz und Dankbarkeit aufgenommen.
Im Gefühl der Verbundenheit zu Ihrem Land und im Wissen um die jahrelangen
Anstrengungen, sich um die Aufarbeitung der Nazi-Vergangenheit zu bemühen,
appelliere ich an Sie, Frau Bundeskanzlerin Merkel, als die Vertreterin der
heutigen Deutschen, diese augenblicklich so entsetzliche Situation zwischen
Juden und Arabern im Mittleren Osten als Chance zu begreifen, etwas Neues
aus der Vergangenheit zu machen. – Während ich schreibe werden unschuldige
Israelis in Haifa, Naharia und Tiberius von Langstreckenraketen getroffen,
die israelischen Streitkräfte bombardieren unschuldige Zivilisten im Libanon
und im Gazastreifen, Hunderttausende unschuldiger Palästinenser sind ohne
Wasser und Elektrizität der Wüstenhitze dieses Sommers ausgeliefert.
Ich glaube, dass man ernsthafter in Betracht ziehen muss, wie die
Vergangenheit in der Gegenwart fortlebt, wenn jetzt Israelis und Araber sich
auf furchtbare Art bombardieren und sich gegenseitig umbringen. Es ist
entscheidend, endlich über die leere Rhetorik von Schuld, Anklage und dem
Recht, zurück zu schlagen, hinweg zu kommen und sich mit den Ursachen für
diesen Zustand auseinander zu setzen, - nicht zuletzt damit, was einige
amerikanische Juden dazu bringt, unsere Regierung noch in ihrem Versagen,
sich einzumischen und Frieden durchzusetzen, zu unterstützen.
Worum ich Sie, Frau Bundeskanzlerin, bitten möchte: Werden Sie Vorreiterin
in Europa für die Übernahme einer neuen Art von Verantwortung für das, was
gerade passiert, - und zwar nicht aufgrund von unschuldiger Neutralität,
sondern vielmehr gerade im vollen Wissen um die Rolle, die Deutschland und
die anderen europäischen Nationen dabei spielten, die ursprünglichen
Bedingungen für Antisemitismus, Kolonialismus, die Umsiedlung der
Palästinenser und den Holocaust. Diese Erfahrungen haben Gefühle von
Ohnmacht, Verletzlichkeit und drohender Katastrophe bei beiden Völkern
erzeugt, sodass Überreaktionen und weitere Eskalationen unausweichlich
wurden. Auf jeder Seite werden deshalb diejenigen, die glauben, dass es
gefährlich sei, dem Anderen zu trauen und die Waffen niederzulegen, immer
wieder die Oberhand gewinnen und bestimmenden Einfluss ausüben.
Dieses Misstrauen hat seine Wurzeln in der Vergangenheit. Wie oft müssen wir
noch miterleben, wie schnell die Begründung für die Besatzungspolitik und
Unnachgiebigkeit in einen Rückgriff auf die Erinnerung des Holocaust
übergeht? Das ist keine reine Manipulation oder Legitimierung. Israels
Unsicherheit und Tendenz zu Unnachgiebigkeit und Eskalation statt zu
territorialem Rückzug und Beruhigung des Konflikts wird im Namen der
Sicherheit immer wieder und beharrlich verteidigt mit Verweis auf die
Vergangenheit des Holocaust.
Viele psychologische Studien beweisen die Tatsache, dass derartige nationale
Traumatisierungen von einer Generation an die nächste weitergegeben werden.
Es steht außer Zweifel, dass das Trauma der Vernichtung und die frühere
Geschichte des Antisemitismus, die auf beschämende und bedrückende Weise
auch im heutigen Europa und in der islamischen Welt fortdauert, mit
verantwortlich ist, dass Israel den von einer Mehrheit seiner Bürger
ersehnten Frieden, nicht erreichen kann. Der letzte Grund für die
Unsicherheit der Israelis liegt in der Wahrnehmung, dass, wenn ihnen die
Rechtmäßigkeit ihrer Aktionen bezweifelt wird, ihnen damit auch ihr
Existenzrecht verweigert wird. Und im Zusammenhang eines solch tiefen
Traumas von Genozid wissen wir alle, was solch eine Verweigerung bedeutet.
Sie haben das Gefühl, wenn sie sich schützen, werden sie verurteilt, und
wenn sie sich nicht schützen, werden sie umgebracht. Gleichzeitig empfinden
besonders die Palästinenser fatalerweise die israelische Besatzung als
letzte Manifestation des europäischen Imperialismus und als Missachtung
ihrer Unabhängigkeit. Aus diesem Grund ist es für beide Völker notwendig von
Europa die Anerkennung der prinzipiell legitimen Bedürfnisse, die ihnen
vorenthalten wurden, zu bekommen, ( jedoch nicht notwendigerweise der Art
der Verteidigung dieser existentiellen Bedürfnisse).
Sie als Deutsche wissen, dass der gegenwärtige Zustand nicht nur eine
Reaktion auf geopolitische Realitäten darstellt, sondern auch die Folge des
ungelösten Vermächtnisses von Leiden, Erniedrigung und extremer Verfolgung
ist. Und deshalb scheuen viele Deutsche meiner Generation vor einer
Stellungnahme in diesem Konflikt zurück. Ihr öffentliches Schweigen, Frau
Bundeskanzlerin, angesichts der fadenscheinigen Plattitüden von George Bush
über Terrorismus und Selbstverteidigung, Plattitüden, die vielleicht durch
weitere gefährliche Pläne motiviert sind, denen wir Amerikaner hilflos
gegenüberstehen, hilflos, uns aufzulehnen. Plattitüden, die verleugnen, wie
katastrophal die Eskalation des Krieges auf den Libanon in unserer heutigen,
von 1982 so weit unterschiedenen Welt war. Weil das Empfinden von Schuld und
die daraus herrührende De-Legitimation noch immer so stark ist, erscheint es
oft so, als ob Deutschland kein Recht hätte, sich zu äußern, obwohl die
Deutschen nur zu gut wissen, welcher Preis von denen bezahlt werden muss,
die Gewalt und Ressentiments außer Kontrolle geraten lassen.
Aber ich möchte Ihnen zu überlegen geben, ob nicht vielmehr das Gegenteil
zutrifft! Sie können und Sie müssen sich äußern! Ihre Anerkennung der
Fortwirkung der Geschichte des Leidens, wenn das Trauma von einer Generation
zur nächsten weitergegeben wird, kann ein Zeichen für andere sein, wie
notwendig die Anerkennung von Verantwortung und deren öffentliches Benennen
ist, um ein Ende der Gewalt zu ermöglichen, Schuld hat eine Funktion: Sie
ist nicht sinnlos, sie drängt uns zu Wiedergutmachung, zu heilen, eine
wirkliche Veränderung zu schaffen. Als Wesen mit Gewissen, als
moralisch-ethische Wesen können wir die Last von Schuld mit Würde annehmen,
statt voller Scham zu versuchen, uns ihr zu entziehen
Frau Bundeskanzlerin Merkel, als Angehörige der Generation, die alt genug
ist, um die Folgen zu kennen, einer Generation, die die Schuld auf sich
genommen hat, ohne selbst Täter zu sein, warum können Sie nicht im Namen
dieser Deutschen sprechen, und, indem Sie das tun, die anderen Regierenden
in Europa anregen, auch ihre Verantwortung anzuerkennen und den Schutz und
die Sicherheit anzubieten, die sie in jener Vergangenheit nicht gewährt
hatten.
Einst war Europa die Heimstatt der Juden, aber es wurde ihnen zur Hölle.
Jetzt können Sie die Folgen der Taten Ihrer Nationen anerkennen und auf
dieser Grundlage auf der Notwendigkeit einer Intervention bestehen, um die
Sicherheit und das Leben von 2 sehr traumatisierten Völkern zu
gewährleisten. Sie können deren Schutzbedürftigkeit anerkennen, die ihnen in
der Vergangenheit verweigert wurde, und, indem Sie Ihnen diese Anerkennung
gewähren, können Sie sie dringend bitten, damit aufzuhören, sich gegenseitig
die Schuld zuzuweisen.
Heute können Sie Ihre „Spende für Israel“ geben, indem Sie Ihre Anerkennung,
Ihre aufrichtige Reue und Ihren nüchternen moralischen Mut zeigen, indem Sie
anerkennen, wie die Verbrechen der Täter zu Verbrechen der Opfer werden, die
von den Deutschen an die Juden und Araber weitergegeben wurden. – Wie
Eltern, die mit tiefem Bedauern sehen, wie das Kind, das sie missbraucht
haben, nun sein eigenes Kind missbraucht, die die Verantwortung für das
Leid, das sie verursacht haben, übernehmen und ihrer Reue angemessenen
Ausdruck verleihen, um ihr Enkelkind zu retten, so können Sie Ihr Wissen und
Ihre Schuldanerkenntnis als Basis dafür nutzen, für ein Ende der Gewalt
einzutreten und auf einer Intervention zu bestehen.
Dies ist ein ernstgemeinter Vorschlag! Überlegen Sie, Frau Bundeskanzlerin,
was Sie gewinnen können, indem Sie die moralische Verantwortung übernehmen
und die Führer dieser sich bekriegenden Völker bitten, im Namen Ihrer
eigenen deutschen Schuld nicht auf weiterer Gewalt zu bestehen! Rufen Sie
die anderen Regierenden in Europa im Namen Ihrer eigenen Verantwortung dazu
auf, sich Ihrem Angebot einer Intervention anzuschließen, um diese
Feuersbrunst einzudämmen, solange noch Zeit ist! Sie können mit Ihren
europäischen Verbündeten, besonders Großbritannien, das diesen Zustand
mitverursacht hat, gemeinsam Ihre Verantwortung anerkennen und dadurch Ihrer
Besorgnis für die Sicherheit jener Völker eine vertrauenswürdige,
verbindliche Basis verleihen. Indem Sie die Fortdauer des Mordens
verhindern, indem Sie sich gegen die tragisch-ignorante US-Regierung
abgrenzen, die sowohl mit verheerender Gleichgültigkeit gegenüber
menschlichem Leiden als auch mit Blindheit gegenüber realpolitischen Folgen
eine vorsätzliche Politik der Nicht-Einmischung im mittleren Osten
unterstützt hat. Unsere gegenwärtige amerikanische Regierung hat wenig
Respekt vor internationalem Recht und ist sich nicht gewahr, wie Gewalt
weitere Gewalt hervorbringt. Die dringende Notwendigkeit einer Intervention
wurde von der US-Regierung nicht erkannt , sodass es dringend geboten
erscheint, dass Europa einschreitet, um dies zu fordern oder sogar selbst
eine dritte Kraft bildet, die befrieden, schützen und dauerhaften Frieden
ermöglichen kann.
Frau Bundeskanzlerin Merkel, Sie und das deutsche Volk haben die Chance,
etwas unerhört Gutes zu tun, den Schlagabtausch gegenseitiger
Schuldzuweisungen zu ändern, ihn von den beiden kleinen kriegführenden
Parteien in den Zusammenhang zu heben, in den er wirklich gehört, in dem
nämlich alle verantwortlich sind! Nur in diesem größeren Zusammenhang kann
die Sicherheit der beiden verwundbaren und leidenden Beteiligten garantiert
werden. Dann könnten beide Seiten eine internationale Intervention als Hilfe
akzeptieren, ohne das Gefühl zu haben, ihr Recht auf Existenz und
Selbstverteidigung würde ihnen verweigert, wenn sie aufgefordert werden,
Frieden zu schließen.

Jessica Benjamin, Ph.D., New York

Dear Colleague: We have recently updated several of our library sites, adding 800 links to full-text articles and reports. The relevant sites are: Terrorism, Counter-terrorism, and Homeland Security; Chinese Military Power; and The Revolution in Military Affairs Debate page. All can be accessed via a single gateway: http://www.comw.org/infogate/

Carl Conetta, Project on Defense Alternatives, Cambridge & Washington DC, USA pda @ comw.org

How The Fighting Stops: Achieving a Sustainable Ceasefire in Lebanon by Shibley Telhami

Thanks Evelin. You may note that in my most recent comment on Lebanon at the Brookings Institution, which was televised in the US, I highlighted the issue of humiliation and suggested that the solution to the problem must be based on a balance between deterrence on the one hand and dignity on the other. The discussion could be watched on video or be read at www.brookings.edu. The transcript can be accessed directly at: http://brookings.edu/comm/events/20060731.pdf.
Best,
Shibley

28th Annual Ethnography in Education Research Forum: “Ethnography and Education in Trying Times”

***CALL for PAPERS***

ONLINE SUBMISSIONS OPEN: August 1, 2006
SUBMISSION DEADLINE: October 15, 2006
NOTIFICATION: Early November 2006
PRESENTATION SCHEDULE: Early January 2007

In most parts of the world attempts to homogenize education must compete with ever-expanding cultural and linguistic diversity. Standardized educational goals and assessments are becoming dominant as school systems seek to prepare students to participate in broad national and international markets. Yet students and teachers also live their lives in rich and vibrant local communities, which do not conform to standardized knowledges and practices.
The 28th Ethnography in Education Research Forum seeks to explore directions for education in these trying times. What are the implications of educational standardization for the value of local knowledges in education? How can ethnographers put local knowledges and practices back on national and international agendas?

The Ethnography in Education Research Forum invites papers that explore these issues by ethnographically documenting grassroots responses to varying levels of educational policy, describing teacher-researcher collaboration in the
development of equitable educational practices, making theoretical and methodological connections between the study of societal level phenomena and local processes, bringing to light covert responses to overt policy decisions, and critically examining relationships between academic and public interests.

Plenary Speakers:
Marilyn Cochran-Smith, Boston College
Frederick Erickson, University of California at Los Angeles
Gloria Ladson-Billings, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Susan Lytle, University of Pennsylvania

All proposals may be submitted online beginning August 1:
http://www.gse.upenn.edu/cue/forum.php

TYPES OF PRESENTATIONS:

Proposals are requested for presentations in the following categories:

1. Individual Paper (Traditional or Work-in-Progress)
2. Group Sessions (Traditional or Work-in-Progress)
3. Data Analysis Consultation

Practitioner Research: For Individual Papers and Group Sessions, you may choose to designate your presentation as PRACTITIONER RESEARCH. Practitioner research presentations focus on research by teachers and other practitioners in educational settings (e.g., school principals, counselors, non-teaching aides, parents, students, and other members of school communities).
Practitioner research presentations are particularly featured on Saturday, known as Practitioner Research Day.

1. Individual Papers (15 minutes)
Individual papers by one or more authors. Either final analyses, results, and conclusions (Traditional) or preliminary findings and tentative conclusions Work-in-Progress) may be submitted. Indicate practitioner research, if you so choose.

2. Group Sessions (75 minutes)
A full session of no fewer than three and no more than six presenters, including a discussant. These sessions may vary in organization: a set of individual papers, a panel discussion, a plan for interaction among members of the audience in discussion or workshop groups are possible formats. Either final analyses, results, and conclusions (Traditional) or preliminary findings and tentative conclusions (Work-in-Progress) may be submitted. Indicate practitioner research, if you so choose.

3. Data Analysis Consultation (30 minutes)
Individual submissions only. Presenters offer data along with questions about analysis for consultation with expert researchers and conference participants. Data analysis consultation is by definition Work-in-Progess. Presenters must follow specific guidelines available online: http://www.gse.upenn.edu/cue/dacinstructions.php

PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA:

1. Significance for education
2. Conceptual orientation
3. Methodology
4. Interpretation
5. Quality of analysis
6. Depth and clarity

FORMAT OF PROPOSALS:

Everyone must submit:

A. Summary (limit 100 words)
This should be a brief overview of the work to be presented.

B. Description (limit 1500 words)
Selection is based on the description. A detailed description of the work to be presented should be submitted including conceptual orientation, data collection and analysis methods, data interpretation, and significance to education.

Special Instruction for Group Sessions
Submit Summary and Description of the session overall, as specified above. If the session consists of a set of individual papers, the group session proposal must also include a description for each individual presentation.

All proposals must be submitted online:
http://www.gse.upenn.edu/cue/forum.php

Dear Sir/Madam,

Please see www.unesco.org/education/researchforum concerning the UNESCO Forum on Higher Education, Research and Knowledge Colloquium on Research and Higher Education Policy, to be held at UNESCO Headquarters (Paris, France) from 29 November to 1st December 2006.

We would be delighted if you were able to attend this important event.

Please confirm your participation as soon as possible through sending us the attached registration form, E-mailing it to Ms. Mary Rosset (m.rosset@unesco.org), or faxing it to +33 1 45 68 56 32 by 15 September 2006.

Please do not hesitate to contact if you have any enquiries about the UNESCO Forum or the Colloquium.

Best Regards,

Isabelle Devylder

*****************************************************************

Madame, Monsieur,

Vous trouverez sur www.unesco.org/education/researchforum des informations relatifs au Colloque sur les politiques dans les domaines de la recherche et de l'enseignement supérieur, organisé par le Forum de l'UNESCO sur l'enseignement supérieur, la recherche et la connaissance au siège de l'UNESCO (Paris, France) du 29 novembre au 1er décembre 2006.

Nous espérons avoir le plaisir de vous voir participer à cette importante réunion.

Si vous souhaitez vous inscrire, merci de bien vouloir retourner le formulaire d'inscription ci-joint par email (m.rosset@unesco.org) et/ou fax (Attention: Mme. Rosset: +331 45 68 56 32) le plus rapidement possible et au plus tard le 15 septembre 2006.

N'hésitez pas à contacter le Secrétariat du Forum si vous des questions à propos du Forum ou du Colloque.

Nous vous prions d'agréer, Madame, Monsieur, nos respectueuses salutations.

Isabelle Devylder

******************************************
Isabelle Devylder
Assistant Programme Specialist
Forum on Higher Education, Research and Knowledge
Division of Higher Education
UNESCO
7, place de Fontenoy
753 52 Paris 07 SP
France
Tel : + 33 (0)1 45 68 05 39
Fax :+33 (0)1 45 68 56 32
Email : i.devylder@unesco.org
www.unesco.org/education/researchforum

The 2005 Thomson Scientific (formerly ISI) Journal Citation Reports® were released recently and SAGE is pleased to announce the following for Political Science, IR and Public Administration:

Political Science highlights from the Journal Citation Reports®:

European Union Politics is now included in the Political Science Journals Citation Report with a first Impact Factor (IF) of 1.273 and is ranked 8/84

The Journal of Theoretical Politics saw its Impact Factor (IF) more than double over the last two years from 0.763 to 1.686. It is now ranked 4/84

SAGE now publishes 40% of the top 15 journals in the Political Science discipline of the JCR®:

Journal of Theoretical Politics, IF: 1.686 (4/84)
Journal of Peace Research, IF:1.279 (7/84)
European Union Politics, IF: 1.273 (8/84)
Comparative Political Studies, IF: 1.220 (12/84)
Politics & Society, IF: 1.100 (13/84)
Journal of Conflict Resolution, IF: 1.079 (14/84)
International Relations highlights from the Journal Citation Reports®:

The European Journal of International Relations saw its IF more than double over the last two years from 0.781 to 1.500. It is now ranked 6/50

Security Dialogue saw its IF almost double over the last two years from 0.763 to 1.686. It is now ranked 19/50

Our International Relations journals have shown an average increase in Impact Factor of 60% over the last 3 years

Public Administration highlights from the Journal Citation Reports®:

Administration and Society saw its IF more than triple over the last year from 0.232 to 0.700. It is now ranked 11/25

Our Public Administration journals have shown an average increase in Impact Factor of 70% over the last year

If your library subscribes, you can access the full-text to the journal. If you are unable to access, recommend the journal to your library liaison today.

We would like to thank our authors for publishing high quality articles in our leading journals. For submission information, please visit the individual journal's website by clicking on the title above.

Kind regards,
Lorna McConville
SAGE Publications
Tel: +44 (0)20 7324 8506
www.sagepub.co.uk
lorna.mcconville@sagepub.co.uk

Child Maltreatment, November 1 2005, Volume 10, No. 4

Contents:

• Candice Feiring
Emotional Development, Shame, and Adaptation to Child Maltreatment
• David S. Bennett, Margaret Wolan Sullivan, and Michael Lewis
Young Children's Adjustment as a Function of Maltreatment, Shame, and Anger
• Jeffrey Stuewig and Laura A. McCloskey
The Relation of Child Maltreatment to Shame and Guilt Among Adolescents: Psychological Routes to Depression and Delinquency
• Candice Feiring and Lynn S. Taska
The Persistence of Shame Following Sexual Abuse: A Longitudinal Look at Risk and Recovery
• Claudio Negrao, II, George A. Bonanno, Jennie G. Noll, Frank W. Putnam, and Penelope K. Trickett
Shame, Humiliation, and Childhood Sexual Abuse: Distinct Contributions and Emotional Coherence
• Esther Deblinger and Melissa K. Runyon
Understanding and Treating Feelings of Shame in Children Who Have Experienced Maltreatment
• Tamara J. Ferguson
Mapping Shame and Its Functions in Relationships
• Lucy Berliner
Shame in Child Maltreatment: Contributions and Caveats
• Index to Child Maltreatment Volume 10

Language of the Third Reich
LTI: Lingua Tertii Imperii
Continuum Impacts
2006, Continuum International Publishing Group Ltd
http://www.continuumbooks.com

Abstract:

Victor Klemperer (1881-1960) was Professor of French Literature at Dresden
University. As a Jew, he was removed from his university post in 1935,
only surviving thanks to his marriage to an Aryan. From 1933 to 1935
Klemperer kept detailed diaries, which contain in note form some of the
raw material for the German edition of LTI: Lingua Tertii Imperii.

First published in 1957, The Language of the Third Reich arose from
Klemperer's conviction that the language of the Third Reich helped to
create its culture. As Klemperer writes: 'It isn't only Nazi actions that
have to vanish, but also the Nazi cast of mind, the typical Nazi way of
thinking, and its breeding ground: the language of Nazism.'

This brilliant book is by turns entertaining and profound, saddening and
horrifying. It is deservedly one of the great twentieth-century studies of
language and its engagement with history.

http://linguistlist.org/issues/17/17-2171.html

Nairobi, August 3, 2006

Announcement by the AMARC Africa Board

Every organization, at some point in its existence it may face challenges that it can either overcome, or realize that it cannot succeed. At AMARC Africa we are faced with great challenges that have necessitated that the Board takes very important decisions on July 7th in a meeting held in Abuja, Nigeria, for the greater good of the global community radio movement.

As part of the community radio stakeholders, we as the AMARC Africa Board of Directors inform you that due to financial difficulties, the AMARC Africa office in Johannesburg and its satellite office in Dakar have been forced to cease operations. We have also accepted the departure of the Regional Director, which will take effect at the end of August 2006. This has arisen as a result of substantial reductions in the support of certain key donors, an insufficient institutional response to changes in the donor environment and internal institutional problems. We have resolved to conduct an investigation to gain a better understanding of what actually went wrong.

The Board of Directors of AMARC Africa is exploring a range of options to ensure that AMARC Africa is able to continue to serve its members and to continue to advocate for an environment favourable to community radio in Africa. We have called upon the support of AMARC International to assist in this process. In these trying times we request the support of all stakeholders who recognise the vital role of community radio in Africa.

Putting the situation in context, AMARC Africa, since its establishment in 1998 as an autonomous regional entity of AMARC, has achieved considerable success in lobbying for a friendly policy, legal and regulatory environment for community radio in Africa, as well as in serving its members and building the capacity of community radio and its impact in service of democratisation and development. The valuable lessons, networks and partnerships that enabled us to achieve these milestones will be called upon from time to time to assist us as we rebuild AMARC Africa.

We believe the challenges we are currently facing need to be addressed in the wider perspective of the evaluation and impact assessment process leading to the AMARC 9, the Ninth World Conference of Community Radio Broadcasters to review our strategic objectives and modes of support of our members in Africa. As part of the global evaluation process launched by AMARC, we recently held a Roundtable in Abuja, Nigeria, to review community radio in Africa, and the role of AMARC in removing barriers to the establishment of community radio and increasing its impact in achieving development goals.

We invite you to participate in this process as a forum for members and stakeholders to engage in critical reflection on the goals and priorities of AMARC Africa in support of community radio in Africa.

In solidarity
Grace Githaiga
President AMARC Africa

ETHNICITY, CAREER AND WORK IN THE HEALTH SERVICES (EMCA)

CONFERENCE
Thursday, 17th August, 2006
Francis Bancroft Building
Queen Mary, University of London,
Mile End, London E1 4NS

1.15 p.m. - Lunch
2.00 p.m. to 5.30 p.m. - Presentations and discussion
Buffet Reception - 5.30 p.m. with an African flavour

The EMCA project is an ESF co-financed project which has explored the careers of both skilled and low paid Black and minority ethnic workers (BME) in the health sector. It explores the working experience and career opportunities of different groups against a backcloth of both discrimination and of high levels efforts to combat racism in the health services. The conference will report on findings from both quantitative and qualitative research in the NHS, with respect to career structures, migration and local level relationships in the workplace and seeks to identify areas of good practice to challenge discrimination.

The half day conference will launch a consultative report on the EMCA findings and provide an opportunity to consult with interested and knowledgeable parties before the final report is produced. The conference will engage with the following questions:

… What is the current position on equality and diversity in the NHS today?
… What is the employment experience of overseas qualified highly skilled workers compared to those qualified in the UK?
… What is the experience of lower paid Black and Minority Ethnic workers in the health service today?
… What is improving opportunities for BME workers at the local level?
… What makes a difference?

Research findings presented by Professor Geraldine Healy and Dr. Franklin Oikelome

Conference programme and details of other contributors to follow.

Who should attend?
The conference will be of interest to those concerned about the position of race and ethnicity in today's health service, including policy makers, managers, diversity officers, trade unionists, academics and researchers.

Please let us know as soon as possible if you would like to attend (deadline: 8th August 2006) so that appropriate catering arrangements can be made. Email: Franklin Oikelome, f.o.oikelome@qmul.ac.uk, or Tel: 020 7882 7448. There is no charge for the conference.

School of Business and Management Website: www.busman.qmul.ac.uk
CRED website: www.busman.qmul.ac.uk/research/research-equality-diversity.htm

--------

Geraldine Healy
Professor of Employment Relations
Centre for Research in Equality and Diversity
School of Business and Management
Queen Mary, University of London
Mile End, London E1 4NS
+44(0)20 7882 7467 (direct)
+44(0)20 7882 5545 (message

Cinemas, Identities and Beyond: St. Andrews-Glasgow Postgraduate Conference

Call for Papers

The exploration of identity is one of the most contested and thought-provoking contemporary subjects. As a dominant and penetrating cultural form, cinema conditions and shapes the manner in which we interpret issues of identity and space. Our understanding of representation, narrative conventions, film form, industry issues and a host of other socio-political factors related to cultural production and consumption powerfully define our ever changing ideas of identity.

This AHRC funded one-day event is run entirely by postgraduate students from the Universities of St. Andrews and Glasgow. We are primarily seeking to bring together PG students from Scotland and the North of England but we will also consider abstracts from those studying further afield. Successful applicants will use film in their work as a means of understanding and interpreting issues of society, culture, and identity. We invite participants from a range of disciplines: Film, television and cultural studies, languages, comparative literature, anthropology, and area studies.

We will interpret the conference theme broadly. Papers exploring the following areas are particularly welcome:

· National, regional, and transnational cinemas and identity
· Aesthetics and cinematic identification

· Time, space and signification
· Early cinema and modernity

· Non-mainstream cinema practices and identity
· New media and digital cinemas

· Cinema and gender
· Western film theories and cross-cultural paradigms

· Globalisation, transnationalism and cinemas
· Cinemas and stardom

· Media imperialism
· Linguistics and cinematic formalities

· Cinemas and cultural politics
· Sound and music

· Soap operas and reception
· Genres and interpretations

· Migrant and diasporic cinemas
· Media synergies

Panels will be moderated by leading academics who will respond to the papers. Confirmed convenors include:

Professor Pam Cook (University of Southampton)
Dr. Dimitris Eleftheriotis (University of Glasgow)
Professor Christine Geraghty (University of Glasgow)
Professor Andrew Higson (University of East Anglia)
Professor Dina Iordanova (University of St. Andrews)
Professor John Caughie (University of Glasgow), who will open the conference, will be our Guest of Honour.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please send an abstract of 200 words for a paper of approximately 20 minutes, together with your contact details and a brief biographical note to Ruby Cheung at wyrc@st-andrews.ac.uk. Please indicate “Abstract Submission” in the subject line of your email.

Ten bursaries of £50 will be given away to selected participants (please indicate you would like to be considered for a bursary at the time you send in your abstract).

The papers will be selected by an inter-University PhD student committee: Ruby Cheung and David Fleming (St. Andrews) and Philippa Smith and Katharina Lindner (Glasgow). Selected participants and bursary recipients will be notified in early September.

Closing date of abstract submission: 18 August 2006

Further information will be available at ;
http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/modlangs/filmstudies/events/index.html

Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH)
August 1, 2006

**********

The Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH) aims to promote constructive perspectives and dialogue about Muslim-Western relations.
*This service is available in Arabic, Bahasa Indonesia, English and French.
*Unless otherwise noted, copyright permission has been obtained and articles may be reprinted by any news outlet or publication. Please acknowledge both the original source and the Common Ground News Service (CGNews).
*For an archive of CGNews articles and other information, please visit our website at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org/).

**********

ARTICLES IN THIS EDITION:

5. My America: the new world by Eboo Patel
Eboo Patel, of the Interfaith Youth Core in Chicago, praises the religious diversity in the US from the fascinating angle of an American Muslim of Indian parentage. Patel, while recognizing the importance of Islam in his own life, challenges us all to stand by Winthrop's hope of creating a "city on a hill" in which religious communities can stand together and enjoy a sense of fraternity.
(Source: US Dept. of State, June 15, 2006)

**********

ARTICLE 1
Waging war or winning peace
HRH El Hassan bin Talal

Amman - Once again, the region rings with the all-too-familiar cries of hatred, anger, violence and bloodshed. It seems we have become unable to disable violence – whether the perpetrators be state or non-state actors. Where is the voice of reason or the eye that sees beyond the immediate? Where is the ear that is prepared to listen?

Only last September at the UN World Summit, world leaders agreed in a historic statement that states have a primary responsibility to act to protect their own populations, and that the international community has a responsibility to act when these governments fail to protect the most vulnerable among us. Yet what we are witnessing today in Lebanon, in Palestine, in Iraq and in Afghanistan is no less than the punishment of the powerless, escalating humanitarian crises of mammoth proportions coupled, in Lebanon, with the destruction of the very infrastructure of civilised existence.

We are a dishonest lot in the Middle East. Maddened by grievances real and perceived, each of us clamours to call for peace when we have all, through trauma and intransigence, become mesmerised by war. We may fool our media allies from far away, or fulfil the requirements of sloganeers who do not share our air and soil, but we know, you and I, that lasting peace will only come when we look each other in the eye and translate hatred into words that begin a difficult conversation. The people of Israel have made an easy decision to not talk to extremists. Perhaps the bravest step is to engage with moderates and acknowledge that our troubled neighbourhood needs the courage of compassion and the wisdom of longer-term self-interest to undo the damage of macho militarism. The gunfire around us makes it even harder to hear the voices of our marginalised communities.

Honesty is the only way to save our grandchildren from the fear and asphyxiation of hope, which we have all known for so long. Our clustered cities of Amman and Tel Aviv, Beirut and Damascus are too close to each other to avoid a tangled future. We, the Children of Abraham, may claim to look in different directions for culture and custom, spirituality and succour, but this small patch of scorched, embattled earth cannot be divided by fences and false borders of the mind. If the political play does not allow us to admit this to those whose map of our region is distorted by self-interest and misguided strategic obstinacy, then at least let us have the sense to admit it to each other. Enlightened self-interest must compel us to foster human dignity and integrity by addressing the full spectrum of basic human rights, spanning from the rights of children to full respect for the rule of law on a national, regional and international level.

The events of the past three weeks have brought us to the edge of the abyss. They are the result not of timeless and inevitable conflict, but of intransigence, fear and a shocking lack of creativity by leaders in our region and beyond. The indiscriminate loss of life on all sides has polarised our populations and shown diplomacy for the devalued and scorned art it has become. The focus on polemics and the ensuing escalation of violence has sidelined the very real and dangerous concerns that underlie our region’s spiralling decline.

Aggressive ideology is nurtured by an increasing lack of economic equality, poor social mobility, a denial to many of human security and the exclusion of the silenced majority. It is evident to us all that military might cannot cure the evils of our region. Violence begets violence and the mass bombings of civilians can only result in increased use of terror tactics further down the line.

It has become exceedingly clear that the current crisis requires the application of a two-fold solution if we are ever to hope for a secure and stable peace for all our citizens. The conflicts that rule our daily lives must be addressed at the political level but we cannot afford to ignore the effects of military overkill on basic humanitarian issues. Human rights are the first casualties of war and the degradation of human dignity in our region has undone generations of agreement and convention on the rights of civilians to protection and well-being. The anger and trauma created by hundreds of dead and injured and the displacement of hundreds of thousands of civilians so far can only have violent repercussions for a hitherto democratic, pluralistic and multicultural Lebanon reality. The shockwaves are felt by our entire region.

The continued reliance on violence to tackle problems created by a ruthless ignorance of the right to economic and existential security of civilian populations can only succeed in handing over to extremists on all sides the power to represent our grievances. A Conference for Security and Cooperation in the region must be a priority for our leaders if human security is ever to become a reality. Diplomatic avenues must be opened and explored and this arduous process should include Syria and Iran. War and its tragic repercussions are inclusive of all -- surely a model for peace should strive for such inclusiveness.

In memory of my late brother, HM King Hussein, and of PM Yitzhak Rabin, we must strive not to wage wars, but to win peace. Real peace must be built, it is not just the absence of war. We need to immediately call a Conference for Security and Cooperation to talk about the endgame, to develop regional understanding, to address the energy issue that is at the heart of so much instability and to devise a multilateral approach to such thorny issues as the proliferation of WMD, together with a regional concept for human rights, prosperity and security. Ideally, it could lead to a regional Code of Conduct and a Cohesion Fund that establishes principles of common interest, responsibility, transparency and a collective defence identity, reflecting the fact that interdependency is the reality today. Anthro-centric policies, policies where people matter, is the way to close the human dignity divide. Through good governance, we must empower the poor and dispossessed who find expression for their frustrations in extremist ideology.

The international community must firmly commit to supplanting unilateralist policies with regional strategies with the final aim of drawing up a comprehensive Regional Stabilisation Pact. The sooner a cessation of hostilities is achieved and international peacekeeping forces are deployed on both sides of the border, the sooner a collective strive towards institutionalised regional stability can begin. I cannot emphasise enough the need for diplomacy to transpose violence and this call echoes President Eisenhower’s appeal that the “table, though scarred by many past frustrations, cannot be abandoned for the certain agony of the battlefield.”

###
* Prince El Hassan bin Talal, brother of the late King Hussein of Jordan, is chairman of several organizations in fields which include diplomacy, interfaith studies, human resources, and science and technology. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org/).
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), August 1, 2006
Visit the website at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org/)
Distributed by the Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH).
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

**********

ARTICLE 2
~YOUTH VIEWS~ Forgetting the past
Steven Coulthart

Syracuse, NY- As I watch the screams of a grieving mother or the remains of demolished buildings on the nightly news, I am reminded of a fitting quote: "Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it".

Because history is indeed repeating itself, yet again.

In 1914, driven by an eerily familiar nationalist fervour, a young Slavic man assassinated Archduke Ferdinand and his wife. This act proved to be a spark that set Europe ablaze with war.

In an example of history repeating itself, a similar spark has occurred that parallels the 1914 assassination. Since Hezbollah took two Israeli soldiers hostage, this seemingly small scale event has grown into a flashpoint for a renewal of violence between the Israeli military and militant Islamists. Other countries have also been drawn into the conflict, at least peripherally. America's support of Israel's “symmetrical reaction” and Iran's implicit and explicit support of Hezbollah has not only captured world attention but generated fear of a wider crisis and possible military involvement by the US itself if Syria or Iran became directly involved.

If the assassination of the Archduke provided the first spark of war, then entangled alliances provided the acceleration to engulf Europe in the flames of war. In Lebanon and around the world, many see the current conflict as a polarising force. Just as the world was divided between Allied and Axis powers during World War I (WWI), there is a line being drawn between those who condone and those who condemn Israel's actions.

Perhaps the most frightening of history's lessons is the frivolousness of war. During WWI, the world learnt that new battlefield technology paired with old tactics resulted in slaughter of previously unimaginable proportions where neither side was able to achieve victory. Long-range artillery and poison gas had devastating effects on soldiers as well as civilians. WWI caused the death of millions, destroyed much of Europe’s infrastructure, and the aftermath resulted in unhealed political scars that indirectly led to World War II.

Over the past fifty years of Israel’s existence, the Israeli military and varying Arab groupings have been fighting their own version of trench warfare. Using conventional military tactics coupled with cutting-edge weapons, Israel is attempting to indirectly destroy a non-national actor (Hezbollah) by destroying the infrastructure of the Lebanese state. Military and political tactics have yet to find an effective method to counter such unconventional forces that blend themselves into the civilian population, use terror as a weapon and shy away from open warfare. But it is also obvious that Hezbollah's goal to destroy the Jewish state is little more than wishful thinking. The inability of each side to win decisively makes the war a battle of attrition. The real victims are neither Israel or Hezbollah, but the hundreds of innocent civilians that have already been killed. Furthermore, the war is increasing the gap between the generally pro-Israel West and the Muslim world.

But the mistakes of the past do not have to be repeated.

Today, there are plenty of opportunities and resources available that were not available in Europe at the onset of WWI. The barriers to state-to-state communication that drew the world to war in 1918 have been removed. Organisations such as the UN provide a neutral forum that can prevent a regional conflict from exploding as Europe did in WWI. International law provides a basic framework for the interactions between states but all actors need to acknowledge the legitimacy of non-governmental organisations and respect international law if peaceful alternatives are to be found. Currently, the Bush administration is realising that aggressive actions such as the 2003 invasion of Iraq can and do set dangerous global precedents that other militarily powerful countries like Israel will follow. Leading countries such as the US must use institutions such as the UN and the framework of international law to broker peace and re-establish stability before more blood is shed.

At the same time, the once impassable borders between warring countries that prevented the movement of ideas between individuals of different homelands no longer matter because of Internet and satellite communications. In the Middle East and around the world, people from different countries and regions can communicate, one-on-one, if they so choose. Today, people from all religious, political, social and ethnic groups have the ability to meet and talk, creating the potential to eliminate conflict from the ground up. Modern connectivity that breaks down barriers makes peace even more feasible and attainable than ever before. If Israelis and Palestinians were educated and integrated together from a young age, for instance, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict might just cease to exist.

Global commerce can also contribute to peace in the Middle East, and has led to the thawing of frigid relations between nations who were once the worst of enemies. Many Arab nations that were once enemies of Israel now trade with the Jewish state. In a world of increasing economic interdependence, war makes even less sense than it did one hundred years ago. Economic independence is impossible for nearly all nations to achieve, and economic ties mean conflict is not an option.

Many parallels exist between the renewed hostilities in the Middle East and the conditions that led to the 'Great War', but the tools exist today to avert all-out war. Instead of condoning the war, powerful countries such as the US need to encourage dialogue and take a more active role in strengthening the Middle East peace process, which the current US administration seems to have all but abandoned. The era of aggressive pre-emptive strikes and wars must end, as we have seen in Iraq that it only leads to further suffering on all sides in an increasingly interdependent world. Collaborative action between countries, as shown at the G-8 summit, can contain conflict if there is enough collective will. Progress can still be made but first, we must learn from our past.

###
* Stephen Coulthart is a recent graduate of the State University of New York, where he studied Political Science and Public Justice. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org/).
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), August 1, 2006
Visit the website at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org/)
Distributed by the Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH).
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

**********

ARTICLE 3
Beirut, modern jazz and the new Middle East
Nizar Ghanem

There is a kind of beauty in jazz, a broken beauty, so-to-speak, contradictory in nature yet very complex. New things are discovered while listening to it. Hidden, secret and relative, it resembles a certain uncertainty.

Beirut is like jazz. I smiled, holding on to that thought as I drank the last sip of my Almaza beer in Café de Prague in the once again war-torn Beirut. Obscure, lively, unwilling to die and constantly reinventing itself, the city is a puzzle of endless contradictions. I considered this as I watched the smiling faces of Beiruti intellectuals sitting around drinking their beer after a rough day in Beirut. Beirut is still dancing, still listening to jazz and still able to reinvent itself under siege. So here’s to Beirut, the heart, the passion and the love. Cheers!

People who visit this city say that Beirut has a certain charm to it; it’s full of art, pubs, theatres, crazy ideas and that sweet, sweet liberty where bikinis go side by side with veils. It’s where hippies and rockers walk side by side with mujahideen, sheikhs and priests. I have always wondered why Beirut possesses this lively nature that is so entrancing. I have finally determined that it’s because, unconsciously, we are very aware of our own mortality, and so life becomes dear, and every moment is lived.

Beirut is at war, and there is a huge cloud of black smoke that encompasses the capital and its surroundings. “Beirutis are breathing their own destruction,” as Robert Fisk wrote recently. Ironically, just a few days ago, Beirut was roaring with life as hundreds of thousands of tourists from all over the world had come to get a taste of the exquisite Beiruti experience. Hotels were fully booked, downtown restaurants packed with customers and streets bursting with people of different races, religions and nationalities. Beirut was displaying the glamour that had been tragically absent during the civil war of 1975-1990, though never forgotten.

Waking up to the sound of bombs and F16s roaming the city skies, the Lebanese cannot believe what is happening. A taxi driver once said to me, “to understand Beirut, you have to understand the world.” Another contradiction: Lebanese taxi drivers are as much political analysts as they are providers of transportation. Understanding what happens in Lebanon is inherently linked to understanding regional and international forces and their interests; it is the curse of geography and the burden of history.

“Why are we at war?” -- a question the Lebanese are asking themselves as they hurry to mend their wounds and count their dead in the remains of a city they trust only to be unpredictable. Other questions remain unanswered: where did all this international silence come from, does the Geneva Convention mean anything in today’s world, what about human rights, children rights? But in Beirut, nothing seems to make sense, one political party waging war against Israel, another against Syria, while Westerners are enjoying their own party in the endless Beirut nightlife. I have the feeling that I am watching an existentialist movie with no heroes and a grey background; from my corner, I see an attractive Lebanese woman walking by, followed by a man wearing a necktie, then by one of the self-styled mujahideen, a missile, and an Israeli tank with Bush on top of it singing about democracy. The tank is followed by a woman on a bike, a European, and yes, she’s demanding peace!

Earlier, in a grubby apartment in Beirut, I sat in my room listening to the news. Hundreds have been killed and injured in brutal wars involving Iraq, Palestine and now, Lebanon. My room mate, a supporter of Hizbullah, is smoking hash and listening to Mushrooms, an Israeli band. Outside, the sound of bombs mixes with the Muslim call for prayer, while the deadly black smoke creeps along the city streets and alleys. On television, Condoleezza Rice talks about the “New Middle East”. And then it hits me: if rock speaks about pain and rap about anger, jazz expresses a form of imperfection and uncertainty. Jazz is dialectical, it turns and moves, and like mathematics it constructs a world of complex relationships. But somewhere in its development, when all the variables have been exhausted and all the contradictions expressed and elaborated upon, it is no longer possible to dissect or analyse it. You fall into numbness. Jazz is about numbness…

What I want to say is that while Middle Easterners are subjected to all forms of violence, oppression and injustice, they are called upon to express love and forgiveness. No offence to Ms. Rice, but the call for a new Middle East seems to bring out a hysterical, manic laugh. We are completely numb, to the extent that any form of rhetoric, logic or speech is bound to fail. It seems not to matter, as President Bush will build this “New Middle East” and is doing so with blood and fire.

How many times can we rise from the ashes and build our lives again, I asked myself as I sat there in the darkness of that Beiruti night. How many times can we forgive, rebuild our homes and give life another shot? How many times can we listen to the same song playing again and again, even if it is jazz? I had no answer. It seems that if the Middle East had to compose a music that would express its past, its troubled present and its un-certain future, the pain of rock won’t suffice, neither will the aggressiveness of rap, and it would definitely be something much more complicated than modern jazz. It would be something yet to be discovered.

###
* Nizar Ghanem is a project coordinator at the Forum for Development, Culture and Dialogue in Beirut. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org/).
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), August 1, 2006
Visit the website at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org/)
Distributed by the Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH).
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

**********

ARTICLE 4
Lebanon: Bush's moment of truth
John Esposito

Washington, D.C. - President Bush finds himself today looking at a potential legacy that includes a world in which anti-Americanism will have increased exponentially among America’s friends and foes alike, terrorism will have grown rather than receded, and America will be enmeshed in Iraq and Afghanistan. Gaza, and now Lebanon, provide the Bush administration with a major opportunity to demonstrate its global leadership and its stated commitment to the spread of democracy by promoting the Middle East Peace process, policies used by the Bush administration so far to legitimate the U.S.-led invasion and occupation of Iraq. Tragically, the administration has thus far chosen to be part of the problem, not of the solution.

From North Africa to Southeast Asia, as a recent Gallup World Poll indicates, overwhelming majorities (91-95%) said that they did not believe the US is trustworthy, friendly, or treats other countries respectfully, nor that it cares about human rights in other countries (80%). Outside of Iraq, there is over 90% agreement among Muslims that the invasion of Iraq has done more harm than good. How has the administration responded? In a world in which the war on global terrorism has come to be equated in the minds of many Muslims (and others) with a war against Islam and the Muslim world, the administration re-emphasised the importance of public diplomacy, appointing a talented senior Bush confidante, Karen Hughes, and spoke of a war of ideas.

However, the administration’s responses in Gaza and in Lebanon undercut both the President’s credibility and the war on terrorism. The US has turned a blind eye to Israel’s launching of two wars whose primary victims are civilians. It failed to support UN mediation in the face of clear violations of international law and Israel’s use of collective punishment, policies in Gaza that Amnesty International has labelled war crimes. It refused to heed calls for a ceasefire and UN intervention and continued to provide military assistance to Israel.

America, with its unconditional support of Israel, has become a partner not simply in military action against Hamas or Hezbollah militants, but in a war against democratically elected governments in Gaza and Lebanon, a long-time US ally. The "disproportionate response" to Hezbollah's July 12 seizure of two soldiers and killing of three others has resulted in the death of more than 350 thus far, the displacement of more than 700,000 and the destruction of Lebanon’s infrastructure; its primary victims are hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, not terrorists.

UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan’s criticism of the Israeli bombardment of Lebanon as "excessive use of force" was countered the next day by the New York Times headline “US speeds up bomb delivery for the Israelis.” Is it any wonder that news reporters in the Arab world speak of the Israeli-US war, that a Western Christian religious leader and long-time resident of Lebanon speaks of “the rape of Lebanon,” or that in Southeast Asia, as one observer put it, “Malaysians are telling Bush, forget the war on terrorism. He is inflaming terrorism!”

There are no easy answers but as John Voll has argued, the Israeli invasion of Lebanon some twenty years ago demonstrated that a massive military response is not the solution. The administration needs to respond in concert with the international community and international organisations like the UN. America must lead in the call for an immediate and unconditional ceasefire and a negotiated settlement as well as be a major donor in the restoration of the infrastructures of Gaza and Lebanon. While nothing should compromise America’s commitment to the existence and security of the state of Israel, America’s national interests and credibility not only in the Arab/Muslim world but internationally will depend on our ability to “walk the way we talk.” U.S. policy should make no exceptions, for the Arabs or Israelis, when it comes to the disproportionate use of force, indiscriminate warfare whose primary victims (those killed, injured or displaced) are majorities of innocent civilians not terrorists, collective punishment and the massive violation of human rights.

###
* John L. Esposito, University Professor of Religion and International Affairs at Georgetown University, is a Gallup Senior Scientist and the founding Director of the Prince Al Waleed Bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org/).
Source: Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, July 24, 2006
Visit the website at www3.georgetown.edu/sfs/acmcu (http://www3.georgetown.edu/sfs/acmcu)
Distributed by the Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH).
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

**********

ARTICLE 5
My America: the new world
Eboo Patel

Chicago – I love America not because I am under the illusion that it is perfect, but because it allows me—the child of Muslim immigrants from India—to participate in its progress, to carve a place in its promise, to play a role in its possibility.

John Winthrop, one of the earliest European settlers in America, gave voice to this sense of possibility. He told his compatriots that their society would be like a city upon a hill, a beacon for the world. It was a hope rooted in Winthrop's Christian faith, and no doubt he imagined his city on a hill with a steeple in the centre. Throughout the centuries, America has remained a deeply religious country while at the same time becoming a remarkably pluralistic one. Indeed, we are the most religiously devout nation in the West and the most religiously diverse country in the world. The steeple at the centre of the city on a hill is now surrounded by the minaret of Muslim mosques, the Hebrew script of Jewish synagogues, the chanting of Buddhist sangas and the statues of Hindu temples. In fact, there are now more Muslims in America than Episcopalians, the faith professed by many of America's Founding Fathers.

One hundred years ago, the great African-American scholar W.E.B. DuBois warned that the problem of the century would be the colour line. The 21st century might well be dominated by a different line—the faith line. From Northern Ireland to South Asia, the Middle East to Middle America, people are condemning, coercing and killing in the name of God. The most pressing questions for my country (America), my religion (Islam), and all God's people may well be these: how will people who may have different ideas of heaven interact together on Earth? Will the steeple, the minaret, the synagogue, the temple and the sanga learn to share space in a new city on a hill?

I think the American ethos—mixing tolerance and reverence—may have something special to contribute to this issue.

America is a grand gathering of souls, the vast majority from elsewhere. The American genius lies in allowing these souls to contribute their texture to the American tradition, to add new notes to the American song.

I am an American with a Muslim soul. My soul carries a long history of heroes, movements, and civilisations that sought to submit to the will of God. My soul listened as the Prophet Muhammad preached the central messages of Islam, tazaaqa and tawhid, compassionate justice and the oneness of God. In the Middle Ages, my soul spread to the East and West, praying in the mosques and studying in the libraries of the great medieval Muslim cities of Cairo, Baghdad and Cordoba. My soul whirled with Rumi, read Aristotle with Averroes, travelled through Central Asia with Nasir Khusrow. In the colonial era, my Muslim soul was stirred to justice. It marched with Abdul Ghaffar Khan and the Khudai Khidmatgars in their satyagraha to free India. It stood with Farid Esack, Ebrahim Moosa, Rahid Omar and the Muslim Youth Movement in their struggle for a multicultural South Africa.

In one eye I carry this ancient Muslim vision of pluralism, in the other eye I carry the American promise. And in my heart, I pray that we make real this possibility: a city on a hill where different religious communities respectfully share space and collectively serve the common good; a world where diverse nations and peoples come to know one another in a spirit of brotherhood and righteousness; a century in which we achieve a common life together.

###
* Eboo Patel is executive director of the Interfaith Youth Core in Chicago, Illinois. He is a leader in the interfaith movement. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org/).
Source: US Department of State, June 15, 2006
Visit the website at http://usinfo.state.gov/
Distributed by the Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH).
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

**********

The Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH) provides news, op-eds, features and analysis by local and international experts on a broad range of issues affecting Muslim-Western relations. CGNews-PiH syndicates articles that are balanced and solution-oriented to news outlets worldwide. With support from the Norwegian government and the United States Institute of Peace, this news service is a non-profit initiative of Search for Common Ground, an international NGO working in the field of conflict transformation.

This news service is one outcome of a set of working meetings held in partnership with His Royal Highness Prince El Hassan bin Talal of Jordan in June 2003.

~YOUTH VIEWS~

CGNews-PiH also regularly publishes the work of student leaders and journalists whose articles strengthen intercultural understanding and promote constructive perspectives and dialogue in their own communities. Student journalists and writers under the age of 27 are encouraged to write to cbinkley@sfcg.org for more information on contributing.
*The views expressed in these articles are those of the authors, not of CGNews-PiH or its affiliates.

Common Ground News Service
1601 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Suite #200
Washington, DC 20009 USA
Ph: +1(202) 265-4300
Fax: +1(202) 232-6718

Rue Belliard 205 bte 13
B-1040 Brussels, Belgium
Ph: +32 (02) 736-7262
Fax: +32(02) 732-3033
E-mail: cgnewspih@sfcg.org
Website: http://www.commongroundnews.org

Editors

Emad Khalil (Amman)
Juliette Schmidt (Beirut)
Chris Binkley (Dakar)
Medhy Hidayat (Jakarta)
Elyte Baykun (Washington)
Leena El-Ali (Washington)
Emmanuelle Hazan (Washington)

**********

To subscribe or unsubscribe, send an email to cgnewspih@sfcg.org with “subscribe” or “unsubscribe” in the subject line, indicating your language of choice among English, French, Arabic and Bahasa Indonesia.

Vous trouverez une version française en bas de ce message
Usted encontrará una versión en español debajo de este mensaje

***************

***************

Dear Reader,

We hope you are interested in being kept up to date on the activities of UNESCO’s Sector for Social and Human Sciences (SHS) which is why we are sending you this monthly e-news bulletin. If you no longer wish to receive this information, just click on the following link: mailto:sympa@lists.unesco.org?subject=unsub%20news-shs

On 3 and 4 August, UNESCO and the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration will jointly organize a Regional Conference of Cities for an Inclusive Urban Society in Bangkok, Thailand. On this occasion, the Coalition of Cities against Racism and Discrimination in Asia and the Pacific will be officially launched and will remain open for signature by municipalities in the region.

Signatory cities are expected to integrate the Ten-Point Plan of Action, which takes account of the specificities of the region, into their strategies and policies, and to provide the necessary human, financial and material resources required for its effective implementation. The Ten-Point Plan of Action was elaborated during an October 2005 expert meeting in Bangkok by representatives of Bangkok (Thailand), Chiangmai (Thailand), Matale (Sri Lanka), Sakai (Japan), Suva (Fiji), Vientiane (Lao PDR), Wellington (New Zealand), as well as NGOs, national human rights commissions, national ministries, and researchers in the social sciences.

More information about the Coalition can be obtained from a brochure Call for a Coalition of Cities against Racism and Discrimination in Asia and the Pacific: Towards an Inclusive Society, available online at www.unesco.org/shs/citiesagainstracism, or by request from Sarinya Sophia (s.sophia@unescobkk.org)

The deadline for submission of candidatures for the 2006 Edition of the UNESCO Prize for Human Rights Education has been extended till 8 September 2006. For more information, just click on the following link: www.unesco.org/shs/human_rights_prize

Other events planned for the month of August 2006:

14 to 15 August: UNESCO’s Bujumbura Office in Burundi is organizing a workshop on “Peace Education, Non-Violence and Peaceful Resolution of Conflicts”. This will be a peer educators’ training session for the representatives of The National Youth Council.

14 to 17 August: This year, the American Sociological Association Annual Meeting in Montreal, Canada, will feature the UNESCO Panel on the Global Gender Divides. The panel will address the following questions: “How have globalization processes affected gender ideologies and inequalities? Are gender constructs and relations converging globally? What kinds of North-South differences exist?”

17 to 18 August: Brazil is preparing to launch the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights at a National Conference planned in Curitiba. This conference is organized in the framework of the National Brazilian Congress of Medical Councils, meaning that the conference will benefit from the presence of a high number of health professionals for the announcement of the Declaration.

30 to 31 August: UNESCO is holding an Experts’ meeting on Ethics Teaching at UNESCO Headquarters in Paris. The expert group on the teaching of ethics will examine the existing teaching programmes in the area of ethics, in order to propose a core curriculum that will be made available to Member States through the Global Ethics Observatory. This meeting will allow for discussion of teaching plans, teaching manuals, and developing learning tools, particularly multimedia resources.

Agenda of UNESCO’s Social and Human Sciences Sector: www.unesco.org/shs/agenda
UNESCO Social and Human Sciences Sector website: www.unesco.org/shs
SHS Views website: www.unesco.org/shs/views

----- To subsribe to “SHS e-news” -----
mailto:sympa@lists.unesco.org?subject=sub%20news-shs

----- Contacts -----
John Crowley, Chief of Section, SHS/EO/CIP: j.crowley@unesco.org
Cathy Bruno-Capvert, Editor, SHS Views: c.bruno-capvert@unesco.org
Irakli Khodeli, Press Assistant: i.khodeli@unesco.org
Petra van Vucht Tijssen, Webmaster: p.van-vucht-tijssen@unesco.org

*************

*************

Madame, Monsieur,

Nous avons pensé qu'il vous intéresserait d'être régulièrement tenus informés des activités du Secteur des sciences sociales et humaines de l’UNESCO (SHS), c'est pourquoi nous nous permettons de continuer de vous adresser ce bulletin d'information électronique mensuel. Si vous ne souhaitez plus recevoir ces informations, il vous suffit de cliquer sur le lien suivant : mailto:sympa@lists.unesco.org?subject=unsub%20news-shs.

Du 3 au 4 août prochains, la Conférence régionale des villes pour une société urbaine d'inclusion qui se tiendra à Bangkok (Thaïlande), sous l’égide de l'Administration métropolitaine de Bangkok et de l’UNESCO, sera l’occasion de lancer la Coalition des villes contre le racisme et la discrimination en Asie Pacifique.

Après ce lancement, l’ensemble municipalités de la région seront invitées à se joindre à cette nouvelle Coalition. Les villes signataires seront encouragées à intégrer dans leurs stratégies et politiques municipales un Plan d’action en 10 points tenant compte des spécificités de cette région du monde, et s’engageront à consacrer les ressources humaines, financières et matérielles nécessaires à son exécution réelle.

Constituant une plateforme d’action commune, ce document a été élaborée en octobre 2005, lors d’une réunion qui s’est tenue à Bangkok et à laquelle ont participé les représentants des villes de Bangkok et Chang Mai (Thaïlande), de Matale (Sri Lanka), de Sakai (Japon), de Suva (Fidji), de Vientiane (RDP Lao), de Wellington (Nouvelle Zélande), ainsi que des représentants de plusieurs ministères nationaux, d'ONG, de Commissions nationales des droits de l'homme, et de nombreux chercheurs en sciences sociales et humaines.

Pour plus d'information, voir la brochure « Appel à une Coalition des villes contre le racisme et la discrimination en Asie et le Pacifique : vers une société inclusive » (en anglais), disponible en ligne à l’adresse suivante www.unesco.org/shs/citiesagainstracism, ou auprès de Sarinya Sophia (s.sophia@unescobkk.org).

La date limite pour la présentation des candidatures pour l'édition 2006 du Prix UNESCO de l'éducation aux droits de l'homme est prolongée jusqu'au 8 septembre 2006. Pour plus d’informations, merci de cliquer sur le lien suivant : www.unesco.org/shs/human_rights_prize

Les autres événements pour ce mois d’août 2006 :

14-15 août : le bureau d'UNESCO à Bujumbura, au Burundi, organise un atelier sur « l’Éducation à la Paix, la non-violence active et la résolution pacifique des conflits» qui permettra de former des « pairs éducateurs » parmi les représentants du Conseil National de la Jeunesse.

14-17 août : un panel sur « la division homme-femme au niveau mondial » est organisé par l’UNESCO à l’occasion de la réunion annuelle de l’Association sociologique américaine qui se tiendra à Montréal, Canada. Parmi les questions qui seront abordées : “Comment les processus de globalisation ont-il affecté les idéologies et les inégalités de genre ? Les constructions et relations de genre convergent-elles globalement? Quelles sortes de différences Nord/sud existent-ils ? »

17-18 août : une conférence nationale pour le lancement de la Déclaration universelle sur la bioéthique et les droits de l’homme au Brésil se tiendra à Curitiba, Brésil, dans le cadre du Congrès brésilien des conseils médicaux. .

30-31 août le Groupe d’experts sur l’enseignement de l’éthique se réunira au Siège de l’UNESCO, à Paris, France, afin d’avancer dans l’élaboration d’un tronc commun d’enseignement de l’éthique qui sera mis à la disposition des Etats membres par l’Observatoire mondial de l’éthique. Cette réunion permettra d’avoir une discussion sur les plans de cours, les manuels des professeurs, et le développement des outils d’apprentissage, en particulier les ressources multimédia.

Agenda du Secteur des sciences sociales et humaines de l’UNESCO : www.unesco.org/shs/agenda
Site web du Secteur des sciences sociales et humaines de l’UNESCO : www.unesco.org/shs
Site web de SHS Regards : www.unesco.org/shs/regards

----- Pour s’abonner à "SHS e-infos" -----
mailto:sympa@lists.unesco.org?subject=sub%20news-shs

----- Contacts -----
John Crowley, chef, SHS/EO/CIP : j.crowley@unesco.org
Cathy Bruno-Capvert, rédactrice en chef, SHS Regards : c.bruno-capvert@unesco.org
Irakli Khodeli, assistant presse : i.khodeli@unesco.org
Petra van Vucht Tijssen, webmaster : p.van-vucht-tijssen@unesco.org

*************

*************

Señora, señor:

Hemos pensado que le interesaría mantenerse informado periódicamente sobre las actividades del Sector de Ciencias Sociales y Humanas de la UNESCO (SHS), por lo que nos permitimos seguir enviándole este boletín informativo electrónico de carácter mensual. Si no desea recibir estas informaciones, sólo tiene que pulsar en el enlace siguiente: mailto:sympa@lists.unesco.org?subject=unsub%20news-shs.

Del 3 al 4 de agosto próximos, tendrá lugar en Bangkok (Tailandia), la Conferencia Regional de Ciudades para una Sociedad urbana inclusiva, bajo patrocinio de la Administración Municipal de Bangkok, y de la UNESCO, con el objeto de lanzar la Coalición de Ciudades contra el racismo y la discriminación en Asia-Pacifico.

Tras este lanzamiento, las ciudades de la región serán invitadas a sumarse a esta nueva Coalición. Las ciudades firmantes integrarán en sus políticas municipales un Plan de Acción de 10 puntos que tiene en cuenta los aspectos específicos de cada región del mundo, y se comprometerán a destinarle los recursos humanos, financieros y materiales necesarios para su puesta en marcha.

El Plan de Acción de 10 puntos fue elaborado a partir de una plataforma de acción común en octubre de 2005, durante una reunión en la que participaron representantes de las ciudades de Bangkok y Chang Mai (Tailandia), Matale (Sri Lanka), Sakai (Japón), Suva (Fiji), Vientiane (RDP Laos), y Wellington (Nueva Zelanda), así como varios ministerios nacionales, ONG’s, Comisiones Nacionales de derechos humanos e investigadores en ciencias sociales y humanas.

Para mas información, recomendamos consultar el folleto «Convocatoria para una Coalición de ciudades contra el racismo y la discriminación en Asia-Pacifico: hacia una sociedad inclusiva » (en inglés), disponible en línea en la dirección www.unesco.org/shs/citiesagainstracism, o bien contactar a Sarinya Sophia (s.sophia@unescobkk.org).

· La fecha limite para presentar candidaturas a la edición 2006 del Premio UNESCO de Educación para los Derechos Humanos ha sido prolongada hasta el 8 de septiembre de 2006. Para obtener más información (en inglés y en francés), sólo tiene que pulsar en el enlace siguiente: www.unesco.org/shs/human_rights_prize.

Otros acontecimientos previstos para este mes de agosto:

14-15 de agosto: la Oficina de la UNESCO en Bujumbura, Burundi, organiza un Taller sobre “Educación para la Paz, la no violencia activa y la resolución pacifica de conflictos” que permitirá formar “pares educadores” entre los representantes del Consejo Nacional de la Juventud.

14-17 de agosto: la UNESCO organiza un panel sobre « La división de género a nivel global”, en ocasión de la Reunión anual de la Asociación sociológica americana que tendrá lugar en Montreal, Canadá. Entre las cuestiones que serán abordadas, destacamos: “¿Como ha afectado la globalización a las ideologías y desigualdades de género? / ¿Las construcciones y relaciones de género convergen globalmente? / ¿Qué tipo de diferencias Norte/Sur existen?”

17-18 de agosto: la Conferencia Nacional para el lanzamiento de la Declaración Universal sobre Bioética y Derechos Humanos en Brasil se llevará a cabo en Curitiba, Brasil, en el marco del Congreso brasileño de los Consejos Médicos.

30-31 de agosto: el grupo de expertos sobre enseñanza de ética se reunirá en la Sede de la UNESCO, en Paris, Francia, con el objetivo de avanzar en la elaboración de un currículo común de enseñanza en el ámbito de la ética que se pondrá a disposición de los Estados miembros a través del Observatorio Mundial de la Ética. Esta reunión permitirá tener una discusión sobre los planes de estudios, los manuales de los profesores, el desarrollo de los útiles de aprendizaje, en particular los recursos multimedia.

Agenda del Sector de Ciencias Sociales y Humanas de la UNESCO: www.unesco.org/shs/agenda (en inglés)
Sitio web del Sector de Ciencias Sociales y Humanas de la UNESCO: www.unesco.org/shs (en inglés)
Sitio web de la revista del Sector de Ciencias Sociales y Humanas de la UNESCO: www.unesco.org/shs/opiniones

----- Para subscribirse a “SHS e-noticias” -----
news-shs@lists.unesco.org

----- Contactos-----
John Crowley, Jefe, SHS/EO/CIP: j.crowley@unesco.org
Cathy Bruno-Capvert, Redactora jefe, Revista de SHS: c.bruno-capvert@unesco.org
Irakli Khodeli, Asistente de prensa: i.khodeli@unesco.org
Petra van Vucht Tijssen, Responsable del sitio web: p.van-vucht-tijssen@unesco.org

ANUNCIO/ ANNOUNCEMENT

Linking & Learning Programme on ESCR for Latin America - Call for Applications

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

( In English below )

Agradecemos que circulen ampliamente esta información

CDES, COHRE, Dignity International, Equipo pueblo y Social Watch se complacen en informarles que están abiertas las candidaturas para el segundo Curso de Capacitación sobre DESC para América Latina a realizarse en Quito, Ecuador, del 2 al 10 de noviembre de 2006. Se contará con un número limitado de becas parciales y totales para participantes.

Envíe su candidatura a través de los formularios de inscripción antes del 1 de septiembre de 2006 a: curdesc@socialwatch.org

A continuación les enviamos la información de presentación y se encuentran adjuntos el documento informativo del curso y el formulario de inscripción para el mismo.

Gracias por su interés. Muy cordialmente,

CDES, COHRE - Americas Programme, Dignity International, DECA Equipo pueblo y Social watch

** ** ** **

Curso de Capacitación sobre DESC para América Latina

2 - 10 NOVIEMBRE 2006, Quito, Ecuador

Organizado por: CDES, COHRE – Americas Programme , Dignity International, DECA Equipo Pueblo y Social Watch

Con el apoyo de: People’s World Relief and Development Fund of the Anglican Church de Canadá (PWRDF)

Por la segunda vez, se organiza este curso en América Latina con el objetivo dotar a un selecto grupo de participantes de conocimientos y herramientas necesarias para integrar los derechos humanos al trabajo diario.

El programa apunta a activistas de movimientos/organizaciones que estén trabajando en temas sociales y justicia económica y a aquellos que trabajan directamente con personas viviendo en pobreza.

El curso reunirá a participantes de diferentes partes de América Latina que actúen como "catalizadores y multiplicadores". Se buscan personas que estén capacitadas para difundir los conocimientos y las habilidades adquiridas durante el curso y para presentar/implementar estos conocimientos en sus propias organizaciones y espacios de trabajo.

Resumen del Curso:

Los derechos humanos proveen de un marco conceptual amplio e integrado para abordar las causas de la pobreza; capacitar en derechos humanos puede fortalecer y tonificar los esfuerzos en la lucha por el cambio social, al concienciar sobre las obligaciones y compromisos que los gobiernos han asumido con el fin de garantizar una vida digna para todas y todos.

En 2005, se realizó la primera experiencia de un Curso de Capacitación para América Latina organizado por Dignity Internacional y Social Watch, en colaboración con COHRE Americas y Equipo Pueblo (México). Este curso se realizó en Uruguay y nació como respuesta a repetidas demandas de grupos latinoamericanos en los últimos cuatro años.

Teniendo en consideración el éxito de la experiencia de 2005 en Uruguay, que obtuvo una evaluación verdaderamente positiva de los participantes, así como la abrumadora cantidad de candidaturas recibidas (250 candidaturas para 25 cupos), se ha decidido repetir la experiencia.

Documento Informativo | Formulario de candidatura

Ambos documentos también disponibles en Social Watch

Si tiene dificultades descargando los documentos, envíenos un mensaje a curdesc@socialwatch.org

PLAZO LÍMITE DE CANDIDATURA: 1 Septiembre del 2006

===================================================

Please Help Circulate

CDES, COHRE, Dignity International, Equipo pueblo y Social Watch are pleased to announce that the application procedure to the second Linking & Learning Programme on ESC Rights for the Latin America Region that will take place in Quito, Ecuador, from 2 to 10 November 2006 is now open. A limited number of full and partial scholarships can be made available.

You can apply by filling the application form attached and sending it, before 1 September, to: curdesc@socialwatch.org

Below you will find all information related to the programme and the Information Document and the Application form are attached.

Thank you for your interest. All the best,

CDES, COHRE - Americas Programme, Dignity International, DECA Equipo Pueblo y Social watch

** ** ** **

Linking & Learning Programme on ESC Rights for the Latin America Region

2 to 10 November 2006 – Quito, Ecuador

Organisers: CDES, COHRE – Americas Programme , Dignity International, DECA Equipo Pueblo y Social Watch

With the support of: People’s world relief and Development Fund of the Anglican Church de Canada (PWRDF)

For the second time, it is being organised this programme in Latin America, with the objective of equipping selected participants with the knowledge and skills necessary to integrate human rights in their daily work

The programme is aimed at activists from social and economic justice movements and at those working directly with persons living in poverty. The programme will bring together ‘catalysts’ from different countries of Latin America. These persons will be in a position to spread knowledge and skills they have acquired from the programme and to introduce/implement what they have acquired within their own organisations or environment.

Summary of the programme:

This Regional Linking & Learning Programme is organised with the conviction that a human rights framework by empowering the poor and their movements will contribute to establishing the primacy of dignity of individuals over trade and markets and ensure adoption of effective policies and programmes by governments for eradication of poverty.

In 2005, for the first time, a Linking & Learning Programme on ESC Rights for the Latin American region was organised by Social Watch and Dignity International, in partnership with COHRE–Americas Programme and Equipo Pueblo (Mexico). This programme took place in Uruguay, and was born in response to repeated demands from Latin-American groups and organisations over the past 3 years.

Bearing in mind the success of the 2005 programme in Uruguay, which received a tremendously positive evaluation from the participants, as well as the impressive amount of applications received (around 250 to 25 places), the decision was taken of having another programme this year of 2006.

Information Document (english / spanish) & Application Form

Documents also available for download at Social Watch

If you have difficulties accessing the documents from the website and would like the documents to be sent via e-mail, please send a mail to: curdesc@socialwatch.org

DEADLINE FOR APPLICATIONS: 1 SEPTEMBER 2006

Peace and Justice Studies Association - Annual Conference: Who Speaks for the Common Good?

October 5-8, 2006

Shortly after September 11th, peace groups throughout the US distributed world flags with a photo of the earth and a slogan, "We're all in this together." That sense of the common good - that we are all bound together, living on one earth, and that our wellbeing is interconnected - is crucial to the development of a more peaceful and just world. Has this notion fallen out of favor? How do we resolve the tension between the dual strivings we each feel, to be autonomous, and yet to be connected?

In an era in which pursuing one's self-interest is commended, who speaks for the common good? Those who honestly attempt to do so are disempowered to act on it, and those who speak for the nations rarely even pretend to do so. How do we decide what really serves the common good, and how do we work for the common good? The rhetoric of a common good is sometimes misused to sacrifice the interests of some people, allegedly for the good of a greater number. How can we, as people committed to creating a peaceful, just world, promote a focus on the common good, properly understood?

Highlights:
Plenaries: The role of religion in seeking the common good: an interfaith panel * Who speaks for the common good in the global context * Opportunities and obstacles to ordinary people’s struggle for the good of all * Education for the Common Good

Presentations and discussions on K-12 education, college education for peace and justice, human rights, peacemaking in situations of conflict, non-violence, movements for peace and social change. Opportunities to visit organizations in NYC who are working for peace, justice and the common good.

PJSA is dedicated to bringing together academics, K-12 teachers and grassroots activists to explore alternatives to violence and share visions and strategies for peacebuilding, social justice, and social change.

For more information, contact Conference Organizer, Dr. Margaret Groarke at 718-862-7943 or pjsa2006@manhattan.edu. Or go to our website, www.peacejusticestudies.org.

Making Enemies: Humiliation and International Conflict

See for more details http://www.humiliationstudies.org/whoweare/evelin04.php