2nd edition of the Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory and Practice

Please join us in celebrating the publication of the 2nd edition of the Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory and Practice. This booksigning event will take place on October 9th at 4pm in the Trustee Room at Teachers College.
To learn more, click here.

See the contents list here.

Kathryn Crawford
International Center for Cooperation and Conflict Resolution
525 West 120th Street, Box 53
New York, NY 10027
www.tc.edu/icccr
crawford@tc.edu
Ph: 212.678.3402
Fax: 212.678.3784

New Book: La Dignité par Bernard Doray

Ce livre est celui d’un mot, « dignité », qui court aujourd’hui le monde, et qui est pris ici dans sa signification majeure : les lieux du psychisme et de la culture par où les femmes et les hommes affirment leur appartenance au monde humain.

L’auteur est psychiatre, psychanalyste, et anthropologue de formation. Son travail résume de nombreuses années de réflexions théoriques nourries d’engagements de terrain exigeants.

On questionne l’histoire du concept de dignité en Occident. Des figures se détachent : Pic de la Mirandole, Rousseau, Kant, Marx. Ces grandes pensées sont mises en regard de questions contemporaines : la psychiatrie, la bioéthique, l’aspiration à une économie postcapitaliste de la valeur-dignité.

On interroge également la discrétion du concept de dignité chez Freud à partir d’une hypothèse biographique originale.

Les sciences sociales sont convoquées autour des dossiers de la pauvreté et de la dissidence. Du juge chilien Juan Guzmán à Henri Alleg, du sous-commandant Marcos au professeur biélorusse Bandazhevsky, une quinzaine de porteurs de dignité viennent enrichir cet ouvrage, le plus souvent à partir d’entretiens originaux.

Ce travail n’a pas de précédent. Il ouvre un ensemble de perspectives nouvelles: dans les champs des projets politiques, de la thérapeutique, de l’analyse du travail et de l’économie. Il propose un chemin vers un humanisme
de notre époque.

La Dignité
Bernard Doray
LA DISPUTE
éditeurs
109, rue Orfi la
75020 Paris
01 43 61 99 84
la.dispute@wanadoo.fr
Diff usion et distribution
en France : CDE-Sodis
Diff usion en Belgique, au Canada et
en Suisse : Gallimard export
416 pages, 26 €
Code Sodis : 973451.3
ISBN : 2-84303-130-3
en libraire, le 21 septembre 2006

Sommaire
Présentation
Première partie. Le terrain et le concept dans ses oeuvres
Chapitre premier. Chiapas : Le miroir de la dignité
Chapitre II. L’Occident et le concept de dignité
Chapitre III. Le monde humain : fondements matériels du pacte éthique
Chapitre IV. Jean-Jacques Rousseau et le métier d’homme
Chapitre V. Citoyenneté et folie
Chapitre VI. Kant : le sublime devoir
Chapitre VII. Droit et bioéthique
Chapitre VIII. Marx et la névrose de marchandisation
Chapitre IX. Un événement éthique dans la vie des Freud
Deuxième partie. Pratiques de la société,
sciences de la société
Chapitre X. Les trois Ivryens
Chapitre XI. Les sciences sociales en question
Chapitre XII. Des dissidences
Chapitre XIII. Le juge Juan Guzmán
Troisième partie. Porteurs de dignité
Chapitre XIV. Créateurs
Chapitre XV. Henri Alleg, ou la dignité
Chapitre XVI. Amérique Latine : la bravoure des femmes
Perspectives
ÉPILOGUE

Global Covenant: The Social Democratic Alternative to the Washington Consensus
By
David Held, London School of Economics and Political Science
Polity Press, 2004

Description:

In this pathbreaking book, one of the world’s leading analysts of globalization and global governance confronts the failures of international politics in the aftermath of 9/11 and the war against Iraq. He argues that there were and are alternatives to the way the western coalitions responded to the profound challenges of mass terrorism and political violence - alternatives which can better address the roots of these challenges and deliver political and social justice.

In order to grasp this alternative, the changing structure of the global order has to be understood. To this end, the book is divided into three sections: economics, politics and law. In each section contemporary trends are analyzed, problems confronted, and a series of detailed policies set out. The aim of the book is to focus on feasible and effective policy choices which could lead to a progressive transformation of global affairs. Against the ideologues who are wholly in favour or hostile to globalization, this book shows how globalization can be better regulated to deliver human development, equitable economic change, democracy and justice.

This is an original book that will appeal to all those - students, policy makers, and the general reader - who confront questions about globalization and global governance. It is an optimistic text that holds that progressive political change is still within our grasp.

Author Information:

David Held is Graham Wallas Professor of Political Science at the London School of Economics and Political Science.

Dear HumanDHS friend!

David Held sets out a number of principles which he believes can be universally shared, and can form the basis for the protection and nurturing of each person’s equal significance in the moral realm of humanity. Eight principles are paramount for him. They are the principles of:

1. equal worth and dignity;
2. active agency;
3. personal responsibility and accountability;
4. consent;
5. collective decision making about public matters through voting procedures;
6. inclusiveness and subsidiarity;
7. avoidance of serious harm; and
8. sustainability.

Please see apart from his book Global Covenant also the following publications:

Held, D. (2004b) ‘Future Globalizations’, a plenary talk given at the Inaugural Conference of Globalization Studies Network, The University of Warwick, Coventry, UK, 20 August 2004.

Held, D. (2005) ‘Principles of Cosmopolitan Order’, in G. Brock and H. Brighouse (eds): The Political Philosophy of Cosmopolitanism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Common Ground News Service - Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH)
for constructive & vibrant Muslim-Western relations
24 September - 01 October 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

1) by Abbas Barzegar

In the third article in a series on religious revivalism and Muslim-Western relations, Abbas Barzegar, a graduate student at Emory University, considers the impact of militant Islam on Muslim societies and looks at existing resources that these communities and countries have developed to tackle it. “By recognising that Muslims the world over have strong and sincere ethical commitments toward the eradication of all forms of corruption, vice and extremism, Western leaders and thinkers might find successful partners in places they never imagined.”
(Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 26 September 2006)

2) by Steven Coulthart

Rather than focusing on the differences between Iran and the United States, Steven Coulthart, recent graduate of the State University of New York, looks at the similarities of both countries’ leaders. “The citizens of Iran and the US should recognise that they are not all that different, that they in many ways share the same aspirations and goals, and that while their cultures are quite different, they have leaders who share remarkably similar traits. It is this common ground that will open up dialogue and prevent the unthinkable.”
(Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 26 September 2006)

3) by John L. Esposito

University professor of religion & international affairs and director of the Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown University, John L. Esposito, puts the recent comments made by the Pope as well as Muslim reaction to them in context. He goes on to suggest how Christians and Muslims can get harmoniously past this single issue, concluding: “It is now time to move on. The Pope has apologised and Muslims and Catholics (as indeed all Christians) must now get back on track, building on the significant accomplishments in inter-religious dialogue in recent decades. In the twenty-first century, critical to Catholic-Muslims relations will be how Benedict XVI’s papacy and Catholics work with their Muslim counterparts to overcome ignorance and hostility as well as the threat from violence and intolerance globally.”
(Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 26 September 2006)

4) by David Ignatius

Following on from his recent interview with U.S. President George W. Bush, Washington-based syndicated columnist, David Ignatius, recounts a subsequent meeting with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Looking at the two meetings side-by-side, the common interests are clear: “Iran can't achieve its ambitions as a rising power without an accommodation with America. America can't achieve its interest in stabilising the Middle East without help from Iran. The potential for war is there, but so is the bedrock of mutual self-interest. The simple fact is that these two countries need each other.”
(Source: Daily Star, 26 September 2006)

5) by Abdel-Moneim Said

Director of Al Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies, Abdel-Moneim Said, warns Middle Eastern leaders of the damaging implications of a lack of resources and volition to forecast crises and make forward-looking decisions in the region. “Reacting to developments without having a policy of our own is what we've been doing all along and you might say we're getting better at it. But to lack policy is costly, and the cost increases when more countries are involved and when those involved are bigger. So the next crisis is likely to involve stakes that are higher than anything we've seen so far.”
(Source: Al Ahram, 14 - 20 September 2006)

1) Muslims are paramount allies in fighting “jihadism”
Abbas Barzegar

Atlanta, Georgia - Last summer, following the London underground and bus attacks, New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman wrote in an op-ed piece: "If it's a Muslim problem, it needs a Muslim solution." Almost immediately, his call spread across the global media network. Muslim leaders were summoned to offer answers. Many leaders simply offered that "true Islam" does not stand for such acts of violence and cowardice. Many recognise that Friedman's call was not truly directed at a Muslim audience, but rather at a Western audience frustrated with what it saw as Muslim complacency with so-called jihadism. Such thinking neglected the fact that it was Muslim, not Western, societies that have been most adversely affected by Islamic radicalism, and failed to recognise the great efforts Muslims have taken to challenge these dangers.

While Western societies have only recently fallen victim to Islamic militancy, it has been Muslim families, schools, cities and cultures that have been dealing with the much more insidious day-to-day challenges of curbing the enticing persuasions of Islamic militant ideology. In the wake of Cold War policies where Muslim societies like those in Somalia, Afghanistan and Palestine were treated like pawns in a game of chess, trying to argue against an ideology that deceitfully promises empowerment, dignity and eternal reward has for decades been the courageous and consistent work of Muslim religious leaders and the overwhelming majority of their constituents. By recognising these efforts, the Western world might find allies in the fight against this perverted jihadism.

The first step in this direction is to recognise that Muslim societies have fought extremism in general within their tradition for centuries and have made such efforts central to the overall vision of creating a just and "God-conscious" social order. Enshrined in the ethical obligation to "enforce the good and eradicate the evil," Muslims in the founding days of Islam succeeded early on in overcoming extremist sects, such as the Kharijites, whose unbridled zealotry threatened the Prophet Muhammad's overall mission. In such cases, sincere Muslims combated these evils with both their hands and their pens. Many sections of the Muslim world today now stand poised to do the same: it is through this aspect of Muslim faith, accompanied by proper Western engagement, that Islamic radicalism will find its greatest threat.

In places as insular as Saudi Arabia, whose religious authorities produce some of the most myopic interpretations of Islam, the duty to stop extremist violence has been taken up with a noticeable degree of success. In 2004, the Saudi royal family, backed by the leading Islamic scholars in the kingdom, offered a month-long amnesty to terrorists to turn themselves in or thereafter suffer extermination. The effort led to the surrender of some of Osama bin Laden's top officials within days. What made the amnesty possible was the mediating role of Sheikh al-Hawali, a former senior-ranking theologian at one of the country's leading seminaries, Umm al-Qurra University, who was, ironically, also imprisoned for five years on account of his views against the U.S. military presence in the region. Militant extremists respected al-Hawali as a credible scholar whose words carried the weight of the hereafter.

Those regarded as the most authoritative curators of Islamic law - imams, mullahs, sheikhs and scholars - should be employed in the ideological struggle against terrorism, precisely because it is their voices that may be the only ones heard by renegades.

Al-Hawali's role might be compared to that of Ayatollah Ali Sistani’s in Iraq and his successful effort at defusing the Muqtada al-Sadr standoff in Najaf in 2004. The creation of a national Muslim council in France designed to codify Islamic law and hold French Muslim citizens accountable to it might serve as yet another example. These cases highlight the fact that the Muslim world has at its disposal institutional resources, the foremost being clerical and legal authority, to curb extremism. These should be considered by all parties concerned about preventing further violence. By recognising that Muslims the world over have strong and sincere ethical commitments toward the eradication of all forms of corruption, vice and extremism, Western leaders and thinkers might find successful partners in places they never imagined.

###

* Abbas Barzegar is a graduate student at Emory University. His research focuses on the complexity and cultural, religious, and political diversity of the American Muslim community. This is the third of six articles in a series on religious revivalism and Muslim-Western relations commissioned by the Common Ground News Service (www.commongroundnews.org).

Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 26 September 2006, www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org)
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.


2) ~YOUTH VIEWS~ Ahmadinejad and Bush: more similar than different?
Steven Coulthart

Syracuse, New York - The speeches and interviews occurring this week at the United Nations general assembly have drawn global attention to the halls of the UN. But truly at the centre of the controversy are two men, Iranian President Ahmadinejad and U.S. President Bush. Both are highly controversial in their home countries and abroad, and would at first glance seem to be polar opposites. Yet, some common threads seem to link the two men – both in terms of their rise to power and their views on religion and the state.

Both men are leaders with shadowy pasts and a strong spiritual bent. To understand both Ahmadinejad’s and Bush's similarities, it is vital to analyse their rise to power. Both were outsiders on their respective national stages, and used this status to gain entrance into politics. As the former governor of Texas, Bush was a presidential underdog at first in the 2000 US election. Critics argued that his lack of foreign policy experience and relative obscurity to the American public were major handicaps to his campaign. However, the election’s result showed that Bush's reputation as an outsider enabled him to persuade socially conservative voters that he would restore morality to the scandal-ridden Presidency and would be able, because he was an outsider, to end Washington’s political gridlock.

Similarly, Ahmadinejad emerged in Iranian politics as an outsider coming from a lesser post as mayor of Tehran. In a strikingly similar tactic as Bush, Ahmadinejad used his outsider’s position to provide an alternative to frustrated voters. Election results from the US in 2004 revealed a country divided to the core and put the political divisions between rural and urban areas into focus. The Bush campaign was effective in appealing to red (rural) state voters who emphasised “moral values” deemed higher than their blue state counterparts’ when picking a candidate. Interestingly, Ahmadinejad appealed to a similar rural population of Iran just as Bush had to rural America through a mix of social conservatism and promises to improve the lot of Iran’s underclass.

In both the US’s 2004 and Iran’s 2005 elections, religion’s role in politics was greatly increased. Both Bush and Ahmadinejad were able to tap into feelings of marginalisation among conservative religious groups that were frustrated by liberal political forces in their countries. Even more interestingly, the percentages of both countries’ populations who would classify themselves as religiously conservative are roughly the same. According to estimates by Hadi Semati of the Woodrow Wilson International Center, approximately 35% of Iranians support religious conservative candidates. According to a 1993 Gallop poll of Americans, 33% of Americans agreed with the statement, "The Bible is the actual word of God and it is to be taken literally, word for word."

Once in office, these two leaders have also taken similar roads, particularly with regard to foreign policy. Ahmadinejad, only a year into his Presidency, has aggressively pursued a policy of developing nuclear technology, and has not shied away from confrontations with the United Nations and the world’s great powers. Ahmadinejad's strong anti-American and anti-Israel rhetoric has persuaded many that moderation in Iran is truly dead and that Iran is a threat to the West. Similarly, Bush, who had campaigned as something of an isolationist, was able to use the terrorist attacks of 9/11 to launch an aggressive foreign policy in the Middle East, a policy whose self-stated aims are the democratisation of the Middle East and thus the elimination of threats to Israel and American interests.

Bush has also abandoned the US’s usual position of maintaining the moral high ground, and has used similar threatening, confrontational and aggressive rhetoric, stating that "You are either with us or against us" on fighting terrorism, and labelling North Korea, Iran and Iraq as an “axis of evil.” In both countries, this rhetoric serves to shore up their respective power bases, which are inclined to nationalism and viewing foreign policy issues in black and white.

Perhaps the greatest similarity between these two leaders is that their success or failure lies in the deserts of Arabia and the steppes of Asia. Both men know we are entering a new historical epoch, and both seem determined, however misguided their methodology, to put their country’s national interests above all else, whatever the risk to the rest of the world. Bush has continually rejected the notion of speaking with Iran's president and generally rejected the idea of negotiating with Iran over its nuclear aspirations. It is time for citizens of both countries to recognise how extremist their leaders have become, and what a danger to the world and to their own security such nationalism and extremism can be. The citizens of Iran and the US should recognise that they are not all that different, that they in many ways share the same aspirations and goals, and that while their cultures are quite different, they have leaders who share remarkably similar traits. It is this common ground that will open up dialogue and prevent the unthinkable.

###

* 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), 26 September 2006, www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org)
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.


3) Benedict XVI and Islam
John L. Esposito

Washington, D.C. - The primary purpose and message of Benedict XVI's address in Regensburg, Germany was not about Islam, referred to in only four paragraphs of his eight-page lecture. And yet, this papal address to a university audience turned into an occasion for an international protest across the Muslim world. Morocco withdrew its ambassador to the Vatican, heads of state from Turkey to Indonesia voiced criticism, the Sheikh of Al-Azhar commented on the Pope’s ignorance of Islam, and leaders of Muslim organisations called for a public apology. The incident has also triggered public demonstrations, the burning of the Pope in effigy in Pakistan and acts of violence against both Christians and churches.

The Pope clearly stated that his primary purpose was to discuss the issue of “faith and reason”. He did so reacting and responding to a major concern of his, the excesses of secularisation: the triumph of secularism and increased weakness of Christianity and the Roman Catholic Church in his homeland, Germany, and in Europe in general, and attempts to exclude religion from the realm of reason.

Although the Vatican stated that the Pope did not intend to offend, his remarks did in fact upset many Muslims. Particularly offensive to Muslims was his citation of a fourteenth century Byzantine emperor’s remarks about the Prophet Muhammad: “Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”

Now, Muhammad is revered in Islam as the final Prophet of God and the model of Muslim life. Moreover, the remark that he commanded the spread of Islam by the sword is simply inaccurate, for what the Qur’an and Muhammad did was recognise the right to defend Islam and the Muslim community by fighting those Meccans who threatened and attacked Muslims.

Equally problematic is the Pope’s statement that the Qur’anic passage, “There is no compulsion in religion” (Qur’an 2:256) was revealed in the early years of Muhammad’s prophethood in Mecca, a period “when Mohammed was still powerless and under [threat]” but was overtaken later when he ruled Medina by “instructions, developed later and recorded in the Koran [Qur’an], concerning holy war.”Both these statements are incorrect. Qur’an 2:256 is not an early Meccan verse but is itself from the later Medinan period and the Qur’an does not equate jihad with holy war. This interpretation of jihad developed years later after Muhammad’s death when it came to be used by rulers (caliphs) to justify their wars of imperial expansion and rule in the name of Islam.

Benedict XVI is a distinguished Catholic theologian but he is not an expert on Islam. The Vatican in the recent past has had some first class scholars of Islam serving the papacy as advisers. The inappropriate references to Islam in the Regensburg address could easily have been averted. If the Pope’s primary purpose was to address the issue of the relationship between faith and compulsion on the one hand and faith and reason on the other, Christian history offers ample examples (the Inquisition, Galileo and other issues he mentions, violence and extremism, holy wars) without having recourse to passages drawn from mutual polemics.

Have Muslims over-reacted to the Pope’s statement? Their responses need to be understood in the context of our post 9/11 world with its greater polarisation and alarming increases in Islamophobia. Many Muslims feel under siege. A Gallup World Poll of some 800 million Muslims from Morocco to Indonesia indicates widespread resentment over what respondents see as the denigration of Islam, Arabs and Muslims in the West. The cartoon controversy in Europe demonstrated both the dangers of xenophobia and Islamophobia, and the depths of anger and outrage. Therefore, it is easy to understand why Muslims would express their disappointment and anger and call for an apology and dialogue much the same as Jewish leaders strongly urged meetings with the Pope or other Church leaders for offensive comments or actions. This was the case for American Jewish leaders before the papal visit of 1987, after Pope John Paul II had met with Kurt Waldheim. As prominent Muslim leaders noted during the European cartoon controversy and in the current situation, expressions of concern or outrage do not preclude discussion and dialogue and certainly never justify acts of violence.

Pope Benedict has now apologised, but more can be done. The Pope could invite Muslim religious leaders and scholars to meet and discuss the issues that his statement raised and hear their concerns and responses to his specific comments about Islam, the Prophet and jihad. He could invite them to join with him in mutually acceptable language to express concern about violence in the name of religion and the abuse of human rights. The Pope’s upcoming visit to Turkey could be an occasion to demonstrate in his public pronouncements his respect for Islam and Muslims and his desire to continue the major accomplishments that the Catholic Church has made since Vatican II in Catholic-Muslim dialogue.

It is now time to move on. The Pope has apologised and Muslims and Catholics (as indeed all Christians) must now get back on track, building on the significant accomplishments in inter-religious dialogue in recent decades. In the twenty-first century, critical to Catholic-Muslims relations will be how Benedict XVI’s papacy and Catholics work with their Muslim counterparts to overcome ignorance and hostility as well as the threat from violence and intolerance globally.

###

* John L. Esposito is University professor of religion & international affairs, director of the Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, Georgetown University and author of What Everyone Needs to Know about Islam and Unholy War: Terror in the Name of Islam. 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), 26 September 2006, www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org)
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.


4) An hour with a confident Ahmadinejad
David Ignatius

Washington, D.C. - The most telling moment in a conversation I had in New York last week with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad came when he was asked if America would attack Iran. He quickly answered "no", with a slight cock of his head as if he regarded the very idea of war between the two countries as preposterous.

Ahmadinejad's confidence was the overriding theme of his visit. He was like a picador, deftly sticking darts into a wounded bull. As he moved from event to event - TV and print interviews, a chat with the august Council on Foreign Relations, his lecture to the United Nations General Assembly - he displayed the same flinty composure. It sometimes seemed as if he owned New York, dispensing his radical bromides like a tidy, compact version of Fidel Castro. Underlying his performance, I sensed the same certainty that was expressed by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini back when this confrontation began in the late 1970s: "America cannot do a damn thing."

Over the course of a week's time, I had an unusual chance to sit with both President George W. Bush and Ahmadinejad and hear their thoughts about Iran. The contrasts were striking: Bush is groping for answers to the Iran problem; you sense him struggling for a viable strategy. When I asked what message he wanted to send the Iranian people, Bush seemed eager for more contact: he spoke of Iran's importance, of its great history and culture, of its legitimate rights. He made similar comments in his speech Tuesday to the UN General Assembly.

Ahmadinejad, meanwhile, is sitting back and enjoying the attention. He's not groping for anything; he's waiting for the world to come to him. When you boil down his comments, the message is similar to Bush's: Iran wants a diplomatic solution to the nuclear impasse; Iran wants dialogue; Iran wants more cultural exchanges. At one point, Ahmadinejad even said that "under fair conditions," he would favour a resumption of diplomatic relations with the United States.

But if the words of accommodation are there, the music is not. Instead of sending a message to the administration that he is serious about negotiations, Ahmadinejad spent the week playing to the gallery of Third World activists and Muslim revolutionaries with his comments about Israel and the Holocaust. This audience hears the defiant message between the lines: America cannot do a damn thing.

Ahmadinejad is the calmest revolutionary I've ever seen. Sitting in a plush easy chair in his suite at the InterContinental Hotel, he barely moved a muscle as he made the most radical statements. His feet didn't jiggle, his hands didn't make gestures, his facial expression barely changed. His eyes were the most expressive part of his body - sparkling one moment, glowering the next, focusing down to dark points when he was angry.

An interview with Ahmadinejad is an intellectual ping-pong match. He bounces back each question with one of his own: Ask about Hizbullah's attacks and he asks about Israel's attacks. Question his defiance of the UN and he shifts to America's defiance of the world body. In more than an hour of conversation with me and Lally Weymouth of Newsweek, he didn't deviate from his script. Indeed, some of his comments in the interview were repeated almost word for word when he addressed the General Assembly a few hours later. This is a man who is adept at message control.

The common strand I take away from this week of Iranian-American conversation is that the two countries agree on one central fact: Iran is a powerful nation that should play an important role in the international system. Bush put it to me this way: "I would say to the Iranian people: we respect your history. We respect your culture ... I recognise the importance of your sovereignty." Here was Ahmadinejad's formulation when I asked how Iran could help stabilise Iraq: "A powerful Iran will benefit the region because Iran is a country with a deep culture and has always been a peaceful country."

That's the challenge: can America and Iran find a formula that will meet each side's security interests, and thereby allow Iran to return fully to the community of nations after 27 years? Iran can't achieve its ambitions as a rising power without an accommodation with America. America can't achieve its interest in stabilising the Middle East without help from Iran. The potential for war is there, but so is the bedrock of mutual self-interest. The simple fact is that these two countries need each other.

###

* David Ignatius is a syndicated columnist based in Washington, D.C. 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, 26 September 2006, www.dailystar.com.lb (http://www.dailystar.com.lb)
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.


5) Crisis averse
Abdel-Moneim Said

Cairo - This region is stumbling from one crisis to another. Over the past few years, we've seen major wars, a spate of terrorist attacks, as well as an Intifada that has cost thousands of lives. We've seen countries fall apart, and we know that within a few years they will break up yet again into new countries we know nothing about. The ever-present Palestinian problem, that one problem that we've elevated into a cornerstone of our communal grievances, remains unresolved. Fifty-eight years after losing their homeland, the Palestinian people have yet to secure an independent state. Some territories were freed by the Oslo Accords, but these are now lost. As if this wasn't enough, the victory of Hamas in Palestinian general elections has bankrupted the Palestinian Authority and put the nation on the verge of civil war.

It is a sad scene indeed, even when you consider "lesser" problems. Look at Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia and Sudan, and think of the horrors unfolding there. In the middle of all that turmoil, some Arab countries have managed to keep their stability and a modicum of respectability intact. But even they cannot afford to sit on the fence. Whether you're talking of a central issue or a peripheral one, Arabs who may not want to get involved end up doing just that. With every crisis spiralling into greater horrors, aloofness comes at a price. When Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and other Arab countries recently criticised Hizbullah's behaviour, saying that the Shia group put an entire country at risk, acting irresponsibly, their remarks backfired. Domestic pressures were such that those who asked Hizbullah to put the genie back in the bottle opened their own Pandora's box, replete with regional and international demons. Arab honour, once again, was at stake.

What I am saying is that major Arab countries, such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia, cannot afford to ignore the perils stalking them every step of the way. Every crisis ignored tends to snowball. Every disaster ignored comes back to haunt them. The balance of power in the region keeps shifting with every crisis, and no country can afford to block off the world and enjoy a moment of peace. Sooner or later, one regional crisis or another will seep into the domestic situation of any given country.

What is remarkable, however, is that we have no mechanism of forecasting crises or nipping them in the bud. You can only manage a crisis if you predict with some accuracy the behaviour of its various players. In this region, this is not always possible. In the recent war in Lebanon, no one knew exactly what Hizbullah wanted, or even what Israel wished to achieve. As a result, the Arab world was engaged in a damage-limitation exercise. It got the Arab League involved somewhat, and promised material and moral assistance. While doing so, it didn't forget to denounce Israel and the United States for triggering the tragic situation.

Damage limitation can be expensive. In this case, things weren't so bad. Oil prices were at record highs, and Saudi Arabia was in a position to offer Lebanon $1 billion or so. And thanks to Egyptian and Saudi pressure, UN Resolution 1701 turned out slightly better than the original French-U.S. draft. Furthermore, Lebanon is a small country. Imagine what would happen should a full-fledged confrontation break out between Iran and the United States, or if Israel were to bomb Iranian nuclear installations. These scenarios cannot be ruled out completely. It is clear that Iran is playing its cards close to its chest, hoping to gain time and confront the world with a fait accompli in which it already has developed nuclear weapons. Iran is offering to negotiate with all major powers at one go, a matter that would elevate it to the position of being a regional superpower. Perhaps that's all Iran really wants. But the West doesn't seem to understand that, or is unwilling to give Iran what it wants. Reading reports from the United States and Israel, one detects the same mood that prevailed six months before the invasion of Iraq. No one in the West wants to let a fundamentalist state acquire nuclear weapons.

Sadly, our decision-making institutions have no independent information on the situation. There is no sign that our intelligence services are active in Iran in any significant manner. Relations between Washington on the one hand and Cairo and Riyadh on the other are rather strained. Washington is not discussing regional policy with Arab countries, not even those countries upholding peace treaties with Israel. As a result, in the next major crisis in this region we will still be looking for a black cat in a dark room. Reacting to developments without having a policy of our own is what we've been doing all along and you might say we're getting better at it. But to lack policy is costly, and the cost increases when more countries are involved and when those involved are bigger. So the next crisis is likely to involve stakes that are higher than anything we've seen so far.

We can always get lucky. Perhaps it's all one big Iranian bluff. Early in the summer, there was an indication that some people in Tehran were hoping for a deal with Washington. And already the United States, the EU, and other major countries have made Iran an offer, but Iran wants a better deal and is continuing to enrich uranium. Still, when the stakes are so high, luck is not enough. Leaders cannot make sound policy without having sufficient information and options. To this moment, we haven't decided whether Iranian nukes would be just as perilous to the region as Israel's nukes, or would ultimately reduce the Israeli threat. To my knowledge, Arab countries have not discussed this matter yet. They are worried, that much is clear. But more so, they are resigned to their fate.

###

* Abdel-Moneim Said is director of Al Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org)

Source: Al Ahram, 14 - 20 September 2006, www.ahram.org.eg/weekly (http://www.ahram.org.eg/weekly)
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 constructive, offer hope and promote dialogue and mutual understanding, 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 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?list=cgnews)
The views expressed in these articles are those of the authors, not of CGNews 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

Email : 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)

Translators
Olivia Qusaibaty (Washington)
Rio Rinaldo (Jakarta)
Zeina Safa (Beirut)

CGNews is a not-for-profit news service.

AfricAvenir News are kindly sent out by Eric Van Grasdorff:

Liebe Freunde,

English version below !

Für Sonntag, den 1. Oktober, zwischen 10.00 und 17.00 Uhr laden sabisa – performing change und AfricAvenir International zur Fachtagung „Performance Practices for Social Change - Perspectives from Africa“ in die Werkstatt der Kulturen. Im Zentrum der Tagung steht ein Fachgespräch mit Hope Azeda (Ruanda), Nora Amin (Ägypten/Sudan) und Julia Eksner (BRD) über die Potentiale und Grenzen von Theater als Gestaltungsform gesellschaftlicher Prozesse in Konflikt- und Post-Konfliktregionen. Die Veranstaltung findet in englischer Sprache statt. Übersetzung ins Deutsche wird bei Bedarf zur Verfügung gestellt.

Am Samstag, den 30. September, um 19.30 Uhr werden Ausschnitte aus dem vorangegangenen Workshopprozess gezeigt, sowie die Arbeit von Hope Azeda in Ruanda und von Nora Amin in Ägypten und im Sudan vorgestellt.

Am: Samstag, den 30. September 2006
Beginn: 19:30 Uhr
Ort: Studio von AKT-ZENT e.V. (Skalitzer Str. 97, HH, 4. OG); U-Bhf. Görlitzer Bhf
Eintritt: frei

Am: Sonntag, den 1. Oktober 2006
Zeit: 10:00 – 17:00 Uhr
Ort: Werkstatt der Kulturen (Wissmanstraße 32), U-Bhf Hermannplatz
Teilnahmebeitrag: 15,- €/10,- € erm.
Anmeldung bitte unter: paula.kramer@sabisa.de, Anmeldung auch vor Ort möglich

Die Tagung beinhaltet ein Fachgespräch mit

NORA AMIN (Ägypten/Sudan): Is change possible or not?

HOPE AZEDA (Ruanda): Creative and Performing Arts for Social Transformation in Rwanda

JULIA EKSNER (BRD): Trauma and Recovery

Fachgespräch zur Arbeit mit Theater in Konflikt- und Post-Konfliktregionen und als Gestaltungsform gesellschaftlicher Prozesse. Julia Eksner wird eine Einführung zu den Begriffen „Trauma“ und „Heilung“ geben und Konzepte, Bedeutungen, Klassifizierungen sowie Arbeitsansätze diskutieren. Hope Azeda und Nora Amin werden ihre konkreten Erfahrungen der Arbeit mit Theater in Konflikt und Post-Konfliktregionen vorstellen und zueinander in Bezug setzen.

Gemeinsam möchten wir erörtern: Was sind besondere Potentiale der Theaterarbeit und der Arbeit mit kreativen Methoden als Formen der gesellschaftlichen Mitgestaltung? Welche Formen sind besonders effektiv, welche Rahmenbedingungen sind notwendig? Wo liegen die spezifischen Grenzen von Theater als Teil gesellschaftlicher Transformation? Was sind besondere Aspekte der Arbeit im Globalen Süden?

Die Veranstaltung findet im Rahmen des Projekts „Kommunikation in Konflikten – KiK '06“ und wird durch Mittel der Stiftung Umverteilen! und der Landesstelle für Entwicklungszusammenarbeit - LEZ gefördert.

----
sabisa - performing change e.V. ist ein gemeinnütziger Verein mit Sitz in Berlin. Der Verein nutzt Theater und Performance in der Konfliktbearbeitung und der Auseinandersetzung mit sozialer Ungleichheit und Diskriminierung. Mit der Anwendung, Reflektion und Weiterentwicklung von kreativen Medien mit emanzipatorischer Zielsetzung bewegt sich sabisa – performing change an der Schnittstelle von pädagogischer Praxis, Kunst und Wissenschaft. sabisa initiiert internationale Dialoge durch Austauschprojekte, bietet Fortbildungen in Theater und Performance an und ist in der schulischen und politischen Bildungsarbeit aktiv. Dabei legt der Verein insbesondere Wert darauf, Kompetenzen und Methoden aus dem Globalen Süden für den lokalen Kontext nutzbar zu machen. Weitere Informationen finden Sie unter: www.sabisa.de.

Wir danken dem ITI - International Theatre Institute für seine Unterstützung.
----

Invitation: Conference „Performance Practices for Social Change - Perspectives from Africa“.

On Sunday 1st October 2006 between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m., sabisa – performing change and AfricAvenir International welcome you to participate in the conference “Performance Practices for Social Change - Perspectives from Africa”.

On Saturday 30th of September at 7.30 p.m. aspects of the workshop process in Berlin will be presented along with information about the local work of Hope Azeda in Rwanda and Nora Amin in Egypt and Sudan.

Saturday, den 30th September 2006, 7.30 p.m.
Studio of AKT-ZENT e.V. (Skalitzer Str. 97, HH, 4. OG); Metro Görlitzer Bhf
Free and open to all

Sunday, 1st October 2006, 10.00 a.m. – 5.00 p.m.
Werkstatt der Kulturen (Wissmanstraße 32), Metro Hermannplatz (U7, U8)
Registration fee: 15,- €/10,- €
Please register with: paula.kramer@sabisa.de, Walk-in registrations welcome.

The conference program includes reflections with

NORA AMIN (Egypt/Sudan): Is change possible or not?

HOPE AZEDA (Rwanda): Creative and Performing Arts for Social Transformation in Rwanda

JULIA EKSNER (Germany): Trauma and Recovery

This conference will be a space for dialogue and reflection on working with theatre in conflict and post-conflict regions and applying theatre as a creative tool to participate in processes of social change. Julia Eksner will give an introduction to the terminology of „Trauma“ and „Recovery“ and discuss the concepts and different ways to frame and approach them. Hope Azeda and Nora Amin will introduce their work experiences with creative and performing arts in regions of conflict and post-conflict and relate them to each other as well as to the larger concepts previously introduced.

Together we want to discuss: What are the specific potentials of working with theatre and creative processes as forms to participate in social change? What type of work is particularly effective and what kind of circumstances do we need to create satisfying work? Which are the specific limitations of theatre as a part of social transformation? What are specific aspects of working in the context of the Global South?

The conference is part of the project KiK '06 "Communication in Conflicts" and is financed by Stiftung Umverteilen! and the Landesstelle für Entwicklungszusammenarbeit LEZ.

----
sabisa – performing change is a non-profit organisation based in Berlin, Germany. They employ creative media and the performing arts in projects for social transformation and community cultural development. sabisa organises international training programmes like “Communication in Conflicts”, offers workshops in theatre and the performing arts and is actively involved in local educational, community and anti-bias projects. Through the application and development of artistic media as means to constructively deal with conflicts and to combat all forms of oppression and social exclusion, sabisa locates their work on the intersection of education, art and social science. The organisations main emphasis is the facilitation of critical and productive dialogue and exchange between the North and the South. sabisa consciously focuses on making use of methodology and expertise developed in the South in our local context. Please find more information on www.sabisa.de.

We thank the ITI - International Theatre Institute for their support.
----

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.

DIGNITY INTERNATIONAL
MONTHLY NEWSBULLETIN - September 2006

Dignity News

* Development Hinges on Human Rights
* Global Programme on Human Rights in Development – Call for Applications
* Latin America Programme on ESC Rights – well on the way!

Other News

* The Uganda Social Forum: Building Uganda, Our Responsibility!
* Third Social Watch General Assembly
* IMF/World Bank Annual Meetings
* Human Rights Council – 2nd Session
* General Assembly review: Extreme Poverty has Deepened
* Global Fund for Lifesaving Drugs

Publications

* 3D New Report - Niger: Agricultural Trade Liberalisation and Women's Rights (August 2006)

Announcements

* From COHRE: new website, new report & recent updates from Kenya

Forthcoming Events – Highlights

* International Civil Society Forum: an Optional Protocol to the ICESCR
* 17 October 2006 - World Day to Overcome Extreme Poverty – the 4th Global White Band Day

DIGNITY NEWS

*** Development Hinges on Human Rights

Although the human rights reform movement has recorded remarkable successes it has failed to embrace, social and economic rights. Speaking during a human rights forum at Landmark Hotel in Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania, the Executive Director of the Foundation for Civil Society John Ulanga, said the human rights movement previously focused on civil and political rights and neglected economic, social and cultural rights, adding that human rights are more than just civil liberties.
While the human rights movement was calling for international protection and promotion of human rights, the development movement was in support of global development and the elimination of poverty in the word. Although the two shared a lot in common, they never reconciled conceptually.
He said that it had become increasingly necessary to bring the two movements closer together to ensure that policy frameworks are consistent and complementary rather than contradictory and competitive.
John Ulanga said that the programme theme “Human Rights in Development” was the defining theme for a future of human dignity for all. He quoted the Father of the Nation of the United Republic of Tanzania, Julius Nyerere who in 1986 said “Whenever there is no equality there is no peace, and whenever there is no peace there is no development”. Equality is the basis of human rights, and that human rights and development are inseparable.
The Human Rights in Development Learning Programme for East Africa (5-13 September 2006), opened by John Ulanga was organised by Dignity International in partnership with Hakijamii Trust of Kenya and Tanzania Council on Social Development with the financial support of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Finland.

*** Global Programme on Human Rights in Development – Call for Applications

Are you:
- a development activist from a grassroots, national and international development NGO?
- holding a key position within your organisation with experience and responsibility in a range of areas, including programming, advocacy and campaigning?
- interested to explore together with other participants the meaning of human rights in development work and how integration of human rights into development work translates into concrete strategies and development programming at the grassroots and international levels?
THEN apply for the Annual Learning Programme on human Rights in Development. The programme will take place in Malaysia from 1-11 December 2006 and further details can be found at http://www.dignityinternational.org/dg/page.php?28

*** Latin America Programme on ESC Rights – well under way!

The Learning Programme on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights for the Latin America Region is presently dealing with the ‘painful’ selection process. From the more than 150 all good-quality applications received only 20 to 25 persons will be selected. All applicants will be notified in the coming week. Sorry for taking some time. Thank you for understanding!
This programme is organized by CDES, COHRE–Americas Programme, Dignity International, DECA Equipo Pueblo and Social Watch and counts withthe support of Primate’s World Relief and Development Fund of the Anglican Church of Canada (PWRDF). The programme willtake place in Quito, Ecuador, from 2 to 10 November 2006.

OTHER NEWS

*** The Uganda Social Forum: Building Uganda, Our Responsibility!

World leaders meet annually at the World Economic Forum to conspire on how to exploit the poor, rape the earth in order to enrich a few. To extend the grip of multilateral corporations, the agents of this process of impoverishment, globalisation was invented in the last decade. Since 2001, Civil Society has been engaged in the creation of an alternative World through the World Social Forum whose theme is: Another World is possible - a world of justice, equity and peace.
Since its inauguration in Brazil, World Social Forums have fast become a popular way to organise worldwide as evidenced by the increasing number of people who participate in them. From a paltry 15,000 in Porto Alegre in 2001 to about 120,000 in the Indian city of Mumbai in 2004, the Social Forum has become a popular mechanism which is that is being replicated in different countries of the developing world, because it gives real hope that an alternative and better world, situation, etc is possible. As a matter of fact, the 2007 World Social Forum will be hosted by East Africa.
In that same spirit, we civil society representatives hereby today announce our resolve to launch the Uganda Social Forum on November 10th 2005 at Nambole National Stadium, under the theme, "building Uganda - our responsibility". For we too strongly believe that another Uganda is possible.

*** Third Social Watch General Assembly

Eleven years after its creation, the Social Watch initiative needs to assess its achievements and decide on its strategy for the coming years. For that purpose, the third Social Watch General Assembly is now taking place in Sofia, Bulgaria (September 23 to 26 2006).
The meeting is expected to be an expression of the diverse Social Watch “membership” by bringing together representatives from 60 countries of as many national coalitions as possible, as well as keynote speakers, special invitees from key NGO networks with closely related areas of concern and observers from national Social Watch groups in formation.

*** IMF/World Bank Annual Meetings

The IMF/World Bank Annual meetings took place in Singapore from September 14-20, 2006. Parallel to this, and in the spirit of resistance to neo-liberal policies and in keeping with the history of people’s struggles worldwide against economic domination, Asian movements together with an international group of networks, movements, campaigns and NGOs convened an International Peoples Forum versus the IMF & World Bank, on September 15 to 17 in Batam, Indonesia.
See IMF/World Bank Annual Meetings WEBLOG, on IFIwatchnet website
http://www.ifiwatchnet.org/wb_annual06/
Source - Choike

Transparency Begins at Home, WB-IMF Told : Civil society organisations gathered on this island, ahead of the annual meeting of the World Bank (WB) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in neighbouring Singapore, have launched a ‘global charter' demanding transparency from the finance institutions.
The charter has set out nine principles to compel the financial powerhouses to fall in line with the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which guarantees the right to ‘'seek, receive and impart information and ideas'. Among them are the public's right to access information held by the IFIs, ‘'regardless of who produced the document and whether the information relates to a public or private actor'.
Source – Inter Press Service (IPS) (http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=34752)

*** Human Rights Council – 2nd session

The 2nd Session of the new Human Rights Council (HRC) is being held from 18 September to 6 October 2006 at the Palais des Nations in Geneva, Switzerland. During this session, the HRC will discuss a joint report on detainees in Guantanamo Bay as well as the issue of Freedom of Religion or Belief and Freedom of Opinion and Expression.
For further details, see http://www.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/

*** General Assembly review: Extreme Poverty has Deepened

According with the United Nations General Assembly midterm review, while slight increases in development aid since 2002 had raised health and education standards among the world’s poorest countries, extreme poverty had actually deepened, senior United Nations officials warned today as they called for a reinvigorated global partnership of donor nations, civil society, and the private sector, working alongside the least developed countries, to improve the prospects of some 370 million people now forced to live on less than $1 a day.
“Together, we have an urgent moral imperative to eradicate abject poverty”, declared General Assembly President Sheikha Haya Rashed Al Khalifa of Bahrain, as she opened that organ’s High-Level Meeting on the midterm review of the Brussels Programme of Action for Least Developed Countries (LDCs) for the Decade 2001-2010. The bulk of the 50 United Nations-identified LDCs, which include small island developing States and landlocked developing countries, are located in Africa, with the rest scattered throughout Southern Asia, and one - Haiti - in the Northern hemisphere.
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/ga10497.doc.htm

*** Global Fund for Lifesaving Drugs

A global fund to purchase massive amounts of medicines for developing countries with money coming from "solidarity" flight taxes and other innovative financing systems was recently launched. The initiative was presented by the Presidents of Brazil, France, together with the UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan.
"There will be no peace and prosperity in a world where millions of people are still extremely poor. The war we must wage is a war on hunger, poverty and other forms of exclusion, including lack of access to essential drugs," Brazil's Lula said Tuesday.
In its first stage, the fund, called Unitaid, will focus on combating HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis - three diseases that occur most frequently in the world's less developed countries.
"Unitaid's regular and predictable sources of financing will ensure its value added and effectiveness. As of now, 18 countries have announced plans to introduce a solidarity levy on airline tickets. Other similar instruments, including additional long-term budgetary resources will also be welcome," the agency said in a statement.
Source: International Press Service (IPS) (http://www.ipsterraviva.net/TV/ldcs/en/viewstory.asp?idnews=755)

PUBLICATIONS

*** 3D new report - Niger: Agricultural Trade Liberalisation and Women's Rights (August 2006)

3D (3D: Trade, Human Rights & Equitable Economy) has just published a report about the impact of trade liberalisation on women’s rights in Niger, describing how women suffer disproportionately from liberalisation of agricultural trade. The report has been submitted to the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, which will assess the enjoyment of women’s rights in Niger, in 2007.
You can read the report’s briefing at
http://www.3dthree.org/pdf_3D/3DCEDAWNigerAg.pdf

ANNOUNCEMENTS

*** From COHRE: new website, new report & recent updates from Kenya

New website – COHRE’s website has been fully redesigned and updated. The new site retains all of the reference material on housing rights and related issues found on the old one, while adding many features in a new design intended to be easy to use. The site will be further developed in the next months. COHRE appreciates any comments or suggestions for new content – you can write to webmaster@cohre.org.
Defending the Housing Rights of Children - new report on children's housing rights, developed by COHRE in collaboration with Cordaid and 16 children's and human rights agencies around the world. The report examines the many ways in which children suffer violations of their housing rights and highlights the international human rights standards intended to protect the housing rights of children worldwide.
Update on housing rights in Kenya – COHRE and Hakijamii Trust have recently released the last update on housing rights issues in Kenya. This issue is focused on forced evictions in Kenyan forests.
Both the Report and the Kenya Update are available at www.cohre.org (http://www.cohre.org/)

FORTHCOMING EVENTS – HIGHLIGHTS

*** International Civil Society Forum: an Optional Protocol to the ICESCR

The Forum is promoted and organised by CIDESC and the NGO Coalition to the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), and will take place in Lisbon, Portugal on 12&13 October 2006. This forum aims to guarantee the involvement of civil society in the drafting process of the Optional Protocol to the ICESCR. The intention is to have a draft Optional Protocol agreed upon during the Forum. The document is being prepared by the NGO Coalition for an Optional Protocol to the ICESCR. It will be issued before the Forum takes place so that all interested parts can give their contribution.
During the Forum, Ms. Catarina Albuquerque, Chairperson of the United Nations Working Group to consider options regarding the elaboration of an Optional Protocol to the ICESCR will present the Human Rights Standards: Learning from Experience Report - a co-publication of International Council on Human Rights Policy (ICHRP), the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) and the International Service for Human Rights. This reports examines the unpredictable history of past standard-setting and the options available to those who advocate new standards in the future. The ICHRP Research Director, Magdalena Sepulveda, will be present at the meeting.
For more information on the program see http://www.esc-rights.org/

*** 17 October 2006 - World Day to Overcome Extreme Poverty – the 4th Global White Band Day

Next 17th of October - World Day to Overcome Extreme Poverty – all across the world millions of people will show their support for the fight against poverty by wearing a white band, and will call on world leaders to do more to eradicate poverty.
The theme of the month is Stand Up Against Poverty and there will be actions on trade justice, debt and aid as well as a global world record attempt on 15-16 October. All these actions will be calling on world leaders to keep the promises they made in 2005 to make poverty history and to do much more.
Do get involved wherever you are – wear a white band, contact a politician, go along to an event or take part in the world record attempt.
Over the next few weeks there will be more information on this in various websites. You can download a preview toolkit below to get your plans started right now.
You can take action to make poverty history at any time but do please join the world in doing so this autumn as together
http://www.makepovertyhistory.org/docs/toolkit.pdf

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 [info@dignityinternational.org?subject=information]

Don Klein kindly wrote to us (September 24, 2007):

A recent issue of the Journal of Social Issues is devoted to Post-Cold War Peace Psychology (Volume 62, No. 1, 2006). The concluding article by Milton Schwebel deals with the interrelationship between "realistic empathy," active nonviolence, and the task of confronting disparities of wealth and other salient political realities.
With love, Don

CALL FOR ASSISTANCE: HUMAN DEVELOPMENT IN FAILED STATES

Dear colleagues,

Please allow me to introduce myself: my name is Fabienne Simenel and I am working for equalinrights, an independent international resource centre and support network on human rights and human rights-based strategies based in The Netherlands. I would like to present you the following question:

Human development in failed States ... How can communities and others take action to realise their human rights when there is no operating State?

Equalinrights is seeking persons working with human rights-based strategies (or the "rights-based approach") (HRBA) in the context of a failed or failing State. We are also seeking relevant resources, case studies, resource persons and background documents. We are currently planning for an initial event at the World Social Forum in Nairobi, January 2007, to explore this issue and engage further on-going support to those working in this environment to try to
overcome some of the hurdles that exist.

Failing and failed states have become increasingly common phenomena over the past decades, each one causing enormous human suffering, poverty, trauma and destruction on all levels of society. They leave millions of people with little protection in the face of gross and persistent human rights violations across the spectrum of rights. Conditions make security and human, social and economic development all but an impossibility. Or do they?

The human rights-based approach to development is a powerful, holistic framework to eradicate poverty, injustice and exclusion. It offers creative possibilities to expose and redress underlying power relations, hold different actors accountable; promote self-empowerment processes for those living in poverty to play a key role in their development and advance multilateral strategies to realise human dignity for all. However, failed or failing States raise difficult questions on how the HRBA can be effectively used. Further, work is needed to elaborate its meaning, overcome hurdles and consolidate creative
strategies for this context.

This will provide the basis of the event proposed for the WSF. It will explore what kind of human rights-based strategies communities, civil society, development agencies, donors, and international NGOs and institutions are using and can use where there is no effective government or state systems operating in a country. How can they act most effectively to secure respect for human rights, including the human right to work, the human right to a decent standard of living, the human right to protection from violence; the human right to protection from discrimination, and the human right to life?

We are seeking people and networks engaged on this issue as well as innovative stories; strategies and mechanisms; testimonies and short films that relate to informal or formal use of elements of the "rights-based approach" in relation to increased human security, development and human rights. Some issues include:
* What does the HRBA mean for civil society actors working in a failed state?
* Who can communities hold accountable and how?
* How can people renegotiate their relationship with those exercising power over resources, opportunities and space to realise their
human rights, to effect meaningful changes in their own lives and to influence their future?
* How can civil society use often extremely confined political space and lack of human security to mobilise and act for change? Who else can provide support in this situation and what would this entail?

Please join us in this effort to share your experience, understanding and strategies, and think together to advance practical options with people struggling for change within these environments.

Please contact Emma Sydenham on sydenham@equalinrights.org

Background on equalinrights ...

Equalinrights is an independent, global resource centre and support network, established in response to an identified gap in support, resources and know-how in understanding and implementing human rights-based strategies in the struggle against poverty. Equalinrights connects people struggling against poverty to other people and resources they need to more effectively achieve their mission through human rights-based strategies. It also seeks to explore and develop new materials, tools and practices to better understand and apply human rights-based strategies to make rights real!

Fabienne Simenel
Equalinrights
The Netherlands Institute of Human Rights
Janskerkhof 3, Utrecht The Netherlands, 3512 BK
Tel: +31 30 253 8510
Email: info@equalinrights.org
Website : http://www.equalinrights.org

The Institute for Global Leadership Fall 2006 Courses

Reconciliation Leaders™ are practical idealists who facilitate reconciling environments for any challenge in any setting—family, community, organization, national or global. This leadership arises from the leader’s vocational calling, skill building, a broad world view, a simple and sustainable lifestyle, and a philosophy of life to be at peace in oneself and in service to others for a cooperative and compassionate global society.

The Practice of Reconciliation Leadership. October 13-15, Tuition is $395. Register by October 11. Friday, October 13, 5:00 p.m.-9:00 p.m.; Saturday, October 14, 9:00 .m.-5:00 p.m.; Sunday, October 15, 1:00 p.m.-5:00 p.m. Course participants will be introduced to the distinct vocation of Reconciliation Leadership. They will experience the first steps of their journey to become part of this new breed of leaders. The following competencies will be introduced: the rediscovery of awe and wonder in their daily life; self-awareness of their gifts and strengths; clarity of their own needs and agenda, as well as understanding the role and untapped potential of the unconscious; creating balance and wellness in their daily life; and eliminating the dichotomy of a work self and a true self. In addition, participants will write the beginning paragraph of their personal mission statement to be continued in the next course.

Writing a Personal Mission Statement —10 hours of Individual mentoring, under the guidance of Virginia Swain. Tuition is $995. Scheduled by mutual agreement. Leaders will present their Mission Statement in the United Nations on December 8 and learn how they make a difference in the world by working and living their mission (see course below at the UN December 6-8)

New Perspectives on Anger, Conflict and Culture. Nov-ember 3-5. Tuition is $395. Register by October 3. Friday, Nov. 3, 5:00-9:00 p.m.; Saturday, Nov. 4, 9:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.; Sunday, Nov. 5, 1:00 p.m.-5:00 p.m. New perspectives on age-old challenges reveal valuing ways to address one's own and another's anger, conflict and differences instead of devaluing ways. This course introduces gender, race, and ethnicity to include our common humanity as well as celebrate our differences; resolve inner conflicts, anger, stress, and self-defeating behavior; address fears both of failure and success, reflect feelings and emotions in a way that is not alienating to others; understand the role of untapped potential of the unconscious in relationships; develop tools for resolving gender and relationship issues; cultural sensitivity and being aware of brotherhood and sisterhood beyond perceived differences.

Reconciliation Leadership and Global Frameworks. December 6-8. Held at the United Nations. Tuition is $495. Register by Nov. 6. Wednesday, December 6, 1-6 p.m.; Thursday, Dec. 7, 9 a.m-6:00 p.m.; Friday, Dec. 8, 9:00 a.m.-4:00 p.m. Participants will be introduced to global frameworks that have local application in their workplace and community through the practice of Reconciliation Leadership—The Millennium Development Goals, The International Decade for a Culture of Peace and Nonviolence and The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. UN speakers will present these frameworks.

Practicum—Individual mentoring under the guidance of Virginia Swain. Tuition is $1995. Scheduled by mutual agreement. Participant leaders choose a personal or interpersonal challenge and are mentored through the challenge as they apply their mission statement and special calling in a 20-hour practicum applying the personal and interpersonal competencies that are introduced earlier in the program.

Applicants must have a prior discussion with Virginia Swain to ensure resonance with the program’s values and ideals. Visa/Mastercard or check payable to the Institute for Global Leadership and mailed to 32 Hill Top Circle, Worcester, MA 01609. Room and board is the responsibility of the participant leaders.

© The Institute for Global Leadership.
Reconciliation Leadership is a trademarked approach and practice belonging to the Institute for Global Leadership.

Our Mission

The Institute for Global Leadership provides confidential, compassionate and skilled guidance, consultation and training to help leaders and teams through change, challenges and crises.

We recognize all human beings, institutions, nations and multilateral entities for their uniqueness, need and capacity for transformation.

We accomplish our mission by:
- Mentoring leaders who act from their unique calling and special gifts.
- Mentoring leaders and teams.
- Consultation and training for Reconciliation Leaders™ committed to providing conditions for a sustainable peace.
- Providing dispute resolution services for family, community, institutional, national and global challenges.

Virginia Swain, Director, Institute for Global Leadership at 508-753-4172,vswain@global-leader.org, www.global-leader.org.

The Institute for Global Leadership provides vocational leadership and development models, courses, and services in New York, NY and Worcester, MA USA to implement the International Decade for a Culture of Peace and Nonviolence for the Children of the World (2001-2010) and support the Millennium Development Goals of the 150 Heads of State at the Millennium Forum at the United Nations in 2000.

Patron:
Mr. Anwarul K. Chowdhury, Under-Secretary-General and High Representative, the Least Developed Countries, Landlocked Developing Countries and Small Island Developing States.

Hyperlinks:

Finding peace through inner strength: Worcester writer helps others chart course in turbulent times, Worcester Telegram and Gazette, September 1, 2006

The Need for Reconciliation Leadership™

Reconciliation Leadership™ Certificate Program 2006-07

Reconciliation Leadership™ Certificate Program Press Release 08/06

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

CALL FOR ITEMS

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 October 6, 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 29**  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.

4th International Conference on Peace, Jaipur Peace Foundation

Dear Friend,

You will be happy to note that Jaipur Peace Foundation is organizing its 4th international conference on "Peace". This year the theme is Peace and Conflict Resolution in a Globalised World: Issue of Culturalism. The conference will take place in Jaipur during January 4-6,2007.

In the last about 15 years the world is witnessing unprecedented globalization that has affected every walk of life. It has also affected
the concept of peace and conflict resolution by adding new actors and processes and creating new issues. One of the issue that worries all is the issue of culturalism .The growing awareness about one's ethnic roots and cultural mooring has believed to threaten the democratic and liberal environment in the world. The differences or otherwise amongst cultures and issues of multiculturalism vs. liberalism vs. world culture and the role of nonviolent techniques to solve these issues is agitating our minds.

The conference seeks to provide a platform for peace lovers to examine these issues from various angles and to exchange their findings with each other so that a meaningful discussion can be started cutting across ideological, ethnical and national boundaries.

The sub themes of the conference include:

1.Theoretical approaches to peace and conflict resolution
2.Trouble spots of the world and the analysis of peace efforts.
3.Issue of culturalism as a factor for conflict
4.Role of nonviolent techniques in solving conflicts
5.Impact of globalization on peace related issues.
6.Role of Peace Education

The conference is being organized in the centenary year of launching of Satyagraha by Mahatma Gandhi (Gandhi launched it on September 11,1906 in
South Africa) and so a special session will be devoted to Satyagraha.

As you are interested in such issues, it is with great pleasure that we invite you to participate in this conference. Due to scarce resources we
will not be able to finance your travel but we will provide you guesthouse double sharing accommodation.

Yours truly,

Professor (Dr.) Naresh Dadhich
Note:

1.Registration fee per participant is $ 150
2.Boarding and Lodging will be provided for some participants free of cost
3.Three Lunches, Dinners and breakfasts are included in the registration fees.
4.No travel allowance will be given
5.Last date for submission of abstract October 30.

For detail contact:
Naresh Dadhich at ndadhich@datainfosys.net or nareshdadhich @ gmail.com

Common Ground News Service
Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH)
for constructive & vibrant Muslim-Western relations
17 - 24 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.
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 Nader Hashemi

In the second article of a series on religious revivalism and Muslim-Western relations, Nader Hashemi, a post-doctoral fellow in political science at Northwestern University looks beyond religious doctrine to explain the current rise in fundamentalism. “In the context of the debate on Islamic fundamentalism, an explanation has often been sought by focusing on the doctrinal character of Islam and its alleged anti-modern ethos. While it is tempting to do so, especially in our post-September 11th world, focusing exclusively on ideology at the expense of sociology and history limits our understanding and clouds our judgment of this important and emotionally charged topic.”
(Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 19 September 2006)

2) by Lee Marsden

An Oxford Brookes University lecturer in International Relations, Lee Marsden argues that the current U.S. campaign to reshape the Middle East is lacking. Concerned that “by branding others as fanatical, irrational and threatening, violent solutions are bound to appear more appropriate than attempts at resolving differences,” Marsden advocates that national leaders start talking. “Engagement does not necessarily connote agreement; indeed healthy opposition and rivalry are essential components of democratic practice between nations, just as it is within nations. What is necessary is being able to respect an opponent's right to hold different views.”
(Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 19 September 2006)

3) by Daniel Armanios

The president and founder of Session: Middle East at the University of Pittsburgh, Daniel Armanios, counters the overwhelming hopelessness many feel towards to the situation in the Middle East through simulation. In the spring, 22 diverse U.S. college students came together in Pennsylvania to counter the current complacency with the status quo and to reinvigorate the search for peace. “[T]hese student participants met with their many diverse peers in Pittsburgh with only the mutual and sincere desire for peaceful regional progress and cooperation. Participants left with an understanding not just of the causes for regional tension and conflict in the present day but of the ‘other’, those whose shoes they rarely get to walk in, let alone take the journey with. They left knowing that they have the tools to generate much-needed creativity and hope in a region and society mired in seemingly unchanging despair.”
(Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 19 September 2006)

4) by David Ignatius

Syndicated columnist, David Ignatius, writes about his recent opportunity to ask President George W. Bush what he would say to the Iranian people if he had a chance to communicate directly with them. Expressing support and respect for the state and its people, Bush also shared some of the reasons behind American concerns on the issue of Iranian nuclear weapons. He advocated face-to-face exchanges as the best way to open dialogue with Iran, leaving the author with a sense that “Bush is serious about finding a peaceful solution to the nuclear crisis, and that he is looking hard for ways to make the connections between America and Iran.”
(Source: Daily Star, 16 September 2006)

5) by Gede MN Natih

Gede MN Natih, a member of the advisory board of the Indonesian Conference of Religions for Peace (ICRP), describes the fundamental beliefs of members of the World Conference of Religions for Peace that has met regularly since 1970, representing all major religious traditions. “Sharing a conviction of the fundamental unity of the human family, and the equality and dignity of all human beings, delegates called to mind the declaration of that first assembly. It stated, ‘... It is not religion that has failed the cause of peace, but religious people. This betrayal of religion can and must be corrected.’ Never has it been more crucial to reflect and act upon this declaration.”
(Source: The Jakarta Post, 8 September 2006)

1) Searching for the roots of Islamic fundamentalism
Nader Hashemi

Evanston, Illinois - How can one rationally explain the rise of Islamic fundamentalism today? Why in the age of reason, rationality and secularism have large numbers of people in the Muslim world gravitated and embraced a religious fundamentalist conception of the world? From radical fundamentalist groups such as Al Qaeda and the Taliban to more mainstream organisations such as the Muslim Brotherhood (in Egypt) and the Jamaat-e Islami (in Pakistan), the Muslim world seems to be dominated by fundamentalist Muslims. Where can we search for answers? History and sociology, rather than ideology, provide a lens to grapple with this growing social phenomenon.

Throughout human history during times of great social transformation and political turmoil, a natural concomitant has been the revival of religion. This is an observable sociological and historical phenomenon that transcends borders, ethnicities and civilisations. During the Mongol occupation of Russia (1237-1480), for example, the Orthodox Church experienced one of its greatest periods of growth. A similar phenomenon occurred in the United States in the mid-nineteenth century with the onset of the Industrial Revolution. Stated simply, social upheaval engenders a reaction where one seeks stability and security by a return to the basic and the familiar. This often means religion. Muslim societies are no different in this regard.

James Piscatori has perceptively noted that “religion, precisely because in the past it answered questions about life and death and provided its followers with moral links to each other, becomes the means by which individuals hope to answer the new question of what it is to be modern, and, in so doing, to gain perhaps a reassuring, common world-view. In this respect, born-again Christians and veiled-again Muslims are responding to the same broad phenomenon.” The upheavals associated with modernity, as Piscatori suggests, are central to understanding the rise of religious fundamentalism.

Modernisation, it should be emphasised, is a traumatic process. In the Western experience it took several hundred years to develop its secular and democratic institutions, much of it through a process of trial and error. The historic intra-Christian wars of religion, political persecution, genocide, the Industrial Revolution, the exploitation of workers, the rise of nationalism, and two world wars, resulted in a profound change in all spheres of life – political, economic, intellectual and religious. Today we are witnessing a similar process of transformation in developing countries with concomitant destabilising affects. One comparative difference is that these changes are taking place more rapidly in the Muslim World (in the last half of the 20th century) than they did in the Western experience which unfolded over the course of hundreds of years.

It is important to appreciate that the modernisation process in the Muslim world has been very different in many respects. Unlike in Europe where it was largely an indigenous process, in the case of Muslim societies, modernisation began as a direct result of the colonial encounter with Europe. Instead of innovation, the Muslim experience was one of imitation in an attempt to play catch up with the West. Muslim countries in the post-colonial era have been split unhealthily into two camps: the elites, who have received a Western-style education and internalised secular values and a large majority that has not. Many regimes are ruled by a gerontocracy of aging men while the majority of their populations are under the age of 30. Most political change since the era of formal independence has been forced top-down on society in an accelerated manner, not bottom-up via an indigenous process of social evolution and democratic negotiation.

In 1935, for example, Reza Pahlavi (the father of the last Shah) ordered his troops to go into the streets of Tehran to forcibly remove – at bayonet point – the veil from women’s heads. These policies were matched in neighbouring Turkey by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk’s harsh secularisation and Westernisation of Turkish society. Two generations later, in the same authoritarian way that the Pahlavi monarchy forcibly removed the veil, Ayatullah Khomeini and his Islamic revolutionaries imposed it on Iranian women with equal determination and rigor. Similarly, the rise of political Islam in Turkey can partially be explained as a counter reaction to Kemalist secularist policies that were imposed on a religious society – 99.8 % of which are Muslims – in a top-down manner to the exclusion of Turkey’s Islamic character. It is against this backdrop that we should situate and explore the emergence of Islamic fundamentalism as a historical phenomenon.

It is tempting to seek easy answers to complex social phenomenon. In the context of the debate on Islamic fundamentalism, an explanation has often been sought by focusing on the doctrinal character of Islam and its alleged anti-modern ethos. While it is tempting to do so, especially in our post-September 11th world, focusing exclusively on ideology at the expense of sociology and history limits our understanding and clouds our judgment of this important and emotionally charged topic.

###

* Nader Hashemi is a post-doctoral fellow in political science at Northwestern University. This is the second of six articles in a series on religious revivalism and Muslim-Western relations commissioned by the Common Ground News Service (www.commongroundnews.org).

Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 19 September 2006, www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org)
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

2) Time to talk
Lee Marsden

Norwich, England – Today, the United States’ campaign to reshape the Middle East is an unmitigated disaster. The ambitious project to create a democratic region has resulted in the deaths of over seventy thousand people, mainly civilians, in the Middle East and beyond. Recent democratic elections in Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, the Palestinian Territories and Israel have resulted in more rather than less violence. For Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice this may be the acceptable “birth pangs of democracy” but for millions in the Middle East the very notion of US-sponsored democracy is a misnomer.

Rather than assisting democracy and the perpetual peace that is supposed to ensue from it, the United States is perceived as a destabilising force that has wrought havoc in many societies and economies, be it intentional or not. In identifying the promotion of democracy as a U.S. national security objective, the Bush administration has sought to influence the outcomes of elections, refused to deal with democratically elected governments not of its choosing, and arguably used democracy promotion as a Trojan horse to undermine governments in Iran and Syria. In doing so, America has seriously undermined both its own democratic credentials and its ability to influence change in the region.

It is the Bush administration's dichotomous presentation of its war on terror that is the greatest obstacle to peace and democracy in the region. In attempting to portray conflicts in the region as between good and evil, freedom and terrorism, democrats and “Islamo-fascists”, debate is closed down and opportunities for engagement rejected. Just as in the Cold War when nationalist movements were equated with communism, so now Islamic movements are regarded as tyrannical and belligerent - to be defeated rather than negotiated with. By stigmatising organisations such as Hizbullah and Hamas as terrorist, which have legitimately built their reputations on extensive social welfare provision and a lack of corruption, there is no longer a necessity to respect their constituencies and democratic mandates. And yet it is only by engagement and searching for common ground that a way forward can be found in the region.

Engagement does not necessarily connote agreement; indeed healthy opposition and rivalry are essential components of democratic practice between nations, just as it is within nations. What is necessary is being able to respect an opponent's right to hold different views. Democrats should seek to convert enemies into adversaries through the contestation of ideas rather than bullets. Demonising organisations and individuals reduces the possibility of negotiating peaceful outcomes to a zero sum game. The demonised want similar things for their own families and neighbours that are taken for granted in America: the right to a peaceful life, to work, be educated, have a decent standard of living and not live under foreign occupation. By branding others as fanatical, irrational and threatening, violent solutions are bound to appear more appropriate than attempts at resolving differences. Conflict resolution requires some recognition that opponents may have legitimate grievances and concerns, and that these need to be addressed.

If the United States is genuinely interested in Middle Eastern democratisation, then it needs to start a dialogue not just with its friends in the region but also with its enemies, including Syria and Iran. It needs to respect the electoral wishes of Palestinians in the Occupied Territories and enter into direct talks with Hamas about resuming financial assistance. At the same time it needs to take note that what is good for the Middle East must necessarily be what works for both Israel and its Arab neighbours. As part of a more considered strategy of engagement, leading to the establishment of democratic norms, the United States should encourage the withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza, the immediate release of all democratically elected members of the Palestinian Assembly held in Israeli gaols, insist on respecting the sovereignty of Lebanon and engage with Hizbullah as a component of the Lebanese polity.

Over the past five years, we have heard much from the Bush administration about freedom and liberty but little about justice, fairness and respect in the Middle East. Without these there can be no freedom or liberty, and certainly no democracy. Winston Churchill famously said that “jaw jaw is better than war war”, and this could still be America's contribution to peace in the Middle East. The time has come to start talking directly to leaders of antagonistic governments and organisations, as representatives of their peoples, and seek to achieve settlement to problems on the basis of equity and sustainability.

###

* Lee Marsden is a lecturer in International Relations at Oxford Brookes University in the United Kingdom. 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), 19 September 2006, www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org)
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

3) ~YOUTH VIEWS~ College students search for innovative methods of peace
Daniel Armanios

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania –In the aftermath of the recent Hizbullah-Israeli conflict and with continued violence in the Gaza strip, the days of Yitzhak Rabin, Anwar el-Sadat, King Hussein, and even the Oslo-days of Yassir Arafat, days of hope for peace, seem a distant nostalgic memory.

From 31 March to 2 April 2006, twenty-two U.S. college students from across the country came to Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania to genuinely change the prevailing sense of despair about Middle Eastern conflicts. They came together because they felt it was time to sincerely recognise the profound 1977 words of Anwar el-Sadat at the Knesset: “No one can build his happiness at the expense of the misery of others.” Together they decided to defy the hopelessness that seems the norm in the Middle East by finding new innovative methods to rejuvenate the quest for permanent regional peace. Together, American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) interns, Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) members, Palestine refugee activists, college Democrats and Republicans, Central Asians, Christians, Jews and Muslims decided the time to change complacency with the status quo was now.

Through a forum called Session: Middle East, founded at the University of Pittsburgh, the successes of the 1978-1979 Camp David Summit and the 1991 Madrid Conference and, yes, even the failures of Camp David II in 2000, were considered in light of current events to help promote new grassroots methods for peace. Student participants role-played not just leaders intimately involved in the conflict but also journalists, scientists, and others devoted to regional awareness and peace. Unlike other conventional simulation methods, for participants to understand the “other”, role reversals were conducted so that those holding pro-Israeli views were often asked to adopt Arab positions and vice versa.

The results of this simulation were as diverse and creative as the participants involved. Israel employed a series of good-faith measures towards the Palestinian National Authority (PNA) such as increased water from Israeli reserves and joint management of permanent check points in return for a PNA-issued immediate cease fire. Lebanon recognised Israel as a state so long as Israel joined in talks regarding its status in the Non-Proliferation Treaty (PNA), respect of Lebanese sovereignty, and the Palestinian right of return. Through all these events, student journalists chronicled events, as mock reporters for the Jerusalem Post and Al-Hayat. Student scientific experts, simulating the roles of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), provided technical assistance for scientific aspects of the agreed-upon resolutions.

For the observer, this was truly an investment in hope for the future. Just as Sadat boldly appeared before the Knesset, these student participants met with their many diverse peers in Pittsburgh with only the mutual and sincere desire for peaceful regional progress and cooperation. Participants left with an understanding not just of the causes for regional tension and conflict in the present day but of the “other”, those whose shoes they rarely get to walk in, let alone take the journey with. They left knowing that they have the tools to generate much-needed creativity and hope in a region and society mired in seemingly unchanging despair.

This student-initiated and student-run movement for genuine and innovative methods for peace is spreading across the United States and Canada. The student bodies of the University of Georgia, the University of California at Irvine, and the University of Toronto in Scarborough have all expressed interest in constructing similar forums amongst students in their respective regions. Hopefully, more will find their own personalised versions of the regions leaders and hold dear to the knowledge that they can create change today that will last well into tomorrow.

###

* Daniel Armanios is the president and founder of Session: Middle East at the University of Pittsburgh. 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), 19 September 2006, www.commongroundnews.org (http://www.commongroundnews.org)
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

4) White House sends peace vibrations at Tehran
David Ignatius

Washington, D.C. - What would President George W. Bush say to the Iranian people if he had a chance to communicate directly with them? I was able to put that question to Bush in a one-on-one interview in the Oval Office on Wednesday. His answer made clear that the administration wants a diplomatic solution to the confrontation over Iran's nuclear program - one that is premised on an American recognition of Iran's role as an important nation in the Middle East.

"I would say to the Iranian people: We respect your history. We respect your culture. We admire the entrepreneurial skills of your people. I would say to the Iranian people that I recognise the importance of your sovereignty - that you're a proud nation, and you want to have a positive future for your citizens," Bush said, answering quickly and without notes.

"In terms of the nuclear issue," he continued, "I understand that you believe it is in your interest - your sovereign interest, and your sovereign right - to have nuclear power. I understand that. But I would also say to the Iranian people, there are deep concerns about the intentions of some in your government who would use knowledge gained from a civilian nuclear power industry to develop a weapon that can then fulfil the stated objectives of some of the leadership (to attack Israel and threaten the United States). And I would say to the Iranian people that I would want to work for a solution to meeting your rightful desires to have civilian nuclear power."

"I would tell the Iranian people that we have no desire for conflict," Bush added.

He expressed hope that Iran would help stabilise Iraq, but he said the best channel for this dialogue would be through Iraq's new prime minister, Nuri al-Maliki, who was in Tehran this week. And he called for a new program of cultural and educational exchanges between the United States and Iran, as a way of encouraging greater contact and trust.

Bush's comments were a clear public signal of the administration's strategy in the confrontation over Iran's nuclear program. In recent days, the Washington rumour mill has been bubbling with talk that the administration is planning military options for dealing with the crisis, perhaps in the near term. But Bush's remarks went in a different direction. His stress was on reassuring Iran that the United States recognises its ambitions to be an advanced nation, with a robust civilian nuclear power program and a role in shaping the Middle East commensurate with its size and power. The red lines for America involve nuclear weapons, military threats to Israel or the United States, and Iran's links to terrorist groups.

Bush's comments tracked the offer the United States and its allies have made to Iran if it agrees to suspend its enrichment of uranium. He proposed that the West supply enriched uranium to Iran and other countries and collect the nuclear waste. He argued that this global program "would be a solution that would answer a deep desire from the Iranian people to have a nuclear power industry."

On Iraq, Bush said Maliki's visit to Tehran was "aimed at convincing the Iranians that a stable Iraq is in their interest. They have said so many times, and I think Prime Minister Maliki is now attempting to find out what that means, and how the Iraqi government can work with the Iranians to create a sense of stability."

Bush said he had read commentary criticising Maliki's trip. "I disagree. Prime Minister Maliki should go to Iran. It is in Iraq's national interest that relations with Iran be such that there are secure borders and no cross-border issues, including the exportation of equipment that can harm Iraqi citizens as well as coalition troops, and the exportation of extremism that can prevent this young [Iraqi] democracy from flourishing."

Our discussion followed the 12-day visit to America by Iran's former president, Mohammad Khatami. I asked Bush why he had approved this visit by a high-level Iranian, and what he thought it had accomplished. "One of the dilemmas facing [American] policymakers is to understand the nature, the complex nature of the Iranian regime. And I thought it would be beneficial for our country to receive the former leader, Khatami, to hear what he had to say. And as importantly for him, to hear what Americans had to say." He wanted Khatami to understand that on the nuclear issue and Hizbullah's attacks on Israel, "it's not just George W. Bush speaking."

The Khatami visit "said that the United States is willing to listen to voices," Bush explained. "And I hope that sends a message to the Iranian people that we're an open society, and that we respect the people of Iran." Clearly, the White House wants to reach out to segments of Iranian opinion beyond the hard-line president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

I asked Bush what next steps he would favour in opening dialogue with Iran. "I would like to see more cultural exchanges," he said. "I would like to see university exchanges. I would like to see more people-to-people exchanges."

"I know that the more we can show the Iranian people the true intention of the American government," Bush concluded, "the more likely it is that we will be able to reach a diplomatic solution to a difficult problem." I came away with a sense that Bush is serious about finding a peaceful solution to the nuclear crisis, and that he is looking hard for ways to make the connections between America and Iran.

###

* 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, 16 September 2006, www.dailystar.com.lb (http://www.dailystar.com.lb)
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

5) Interfaith forum opens pathways to understanding
Gede MN Natih

Jakarta - Representing all major religious traditions, more than 800 religious leaders from more than 100 countries convened last month in Kyoto, Japan, at the Eighth World Assembly of the World Conference of Religions for Peace (WCRP), to address the theme, "Confronting Violence and Advancing Shared Security".

The first Religions for Peace World Assembly, convened in Kyoto in 1970, and every assembly since, has affirmed deeply held and widely shared religious principles that still inspire our search for peace with justice today. Sharing a conviction of the fundamental unity of the human family, and the equality and dignity of all human beings, delegates called to mind the declaration of that first assembly. It stated, "... It is not religion that has failed the cause of peace, but religious people. This betrayal of religion can and must be corrected." Never has it been more crucial to reflect and act upon this declaration.

Today we live in the grip of many forms of violence, both direct and structural, and violent conflicts take lives and destroy communities. The diverse and interconnected threats currently experienced by innumerable members of the human family call for a much broader understanding of violence in the world, and the world's religious communities must play a central role partnering with one another and all sectors of society to prevent and stop war, expose injustice, combat poverty and protect the earth. The time to do this is now and our key to confronting violence is cooperation based on mutual respect and acceptance.

Direct physical threats are the most commonly offered definition of violence, but in reality violence takes many diverse and complex forms. Economic injustices leading to extreme poverty and hunger kill 50,000 people each day, while preventable and treatable diseases kill millions. Meanwhile, 25 million people have already died from AIDS while some 40 million more are living with AIDS and HIV. The impact on our communities is devastating.

Many corporations, especially at the multinational level, pursue their business interests without concern for values that foster sustainable development, while environmental degradation and dwindling resources threaten our planet's ability to sustain life. Victims are the poor and the powerless who are vulnerable to violence in all forms.

As people of religious conviction, all delegates agreed that we hold the responsibility to effectively confront violence within our own communities whenever religion is misused as a justification or excuse for violence. Religious communities need to express their opposition whenever religion and its sacred principles are distorted in the service of violence.

Our religious teachings call us to care for one another and to treat the problems faced by others as our own. Furthermore, there are practical grounds for cooperation. No group is immune to violence or its consequences. War, poverty, disease and the destruction of the environment have a direct or indirect impact on all of us.

Individuals and communities deceive themselves if they believe they are secure while others are suffering. Walls can never be high enough to insulate us from the impact of the genuine needs and vulnerabilities of others. No nation can be secure while other nations are threatened. We are no safer than the most vulnerable among us.

Security is a shared commitment and the moral and ethical convictions of diverse religious traditions around the world provide a moral foundation for confronting violence in its many forms. All people have a collective responsibility to meet our common need for security.

Looking back to the Seventh World Assembly of Religions for Peace, in Amman, Jordan, in 1999, it is encouraging to learn about the peace initiatives that have been implemented by dedicated people around the world since that time. There is still so much to do but Religions for Peace has become a major global multireligious voice and agent for peace. Guided by respect for religious differences, in Indonesia and around the world, we will keep striving to foster multireligious collaboration harnessing the power of religious communities to transform conflict, build peace and advance sustainable development.

In Kyoto, the delegates committed themselves to prevent and confront violence in all its forms. They believe in the power of multireligious cooperation to advance a common vision of shared security. We are determined to mobilise our religious communities to work together and with all sectors of society to stop war, struggle to build more just communities, foster education for justice and peace, eliminate poverty and advance sustainable development for future generations.

###

* Gede MN Natih is a member of the advisory board of the Indonesian Conference of Religions for Peace (ICRP). 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, 8 September 2006, www.thejakartapost.com (http://www.thejakartapost.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 constructive, offer hope and promote dialogue and mutual understanding, 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 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?list=cgnews)

The views expressed in these articles are those of the authors, not of CGNews 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)

Translators
Olivia Qusaibaty (Washington)
Rio Rinaldo (Jakarta)
Zeina Safa (Beirut)

CGNews is a not-for-profit news service.

America's Promise Restored
by Harlan Ullman

From the architect of the U.S. military's "shock and awe" doctrine and mentor to former Secretary of State Colin Powell comes an explosive explanation of why our country's current political culture and capacity for crusade is far more destructive than all of Al Qaeda's deadly intentions. Buy Here

The WMD's DemocracyNews
Electronic Newsletter of the World Movement for Democracy - www.wmd.org
Special Issue - September 19

*****************************************************************
Dear Colleagues,

On October 18, the World Youth Movement for Democracy will celebrate World Youth Day for Democracy, as part of the Global Youth Campaign for Democracy.

Launched last year, the Global Youth Democracy Campaign promotes activities around the world that:
- Mobilize youth to organize and participate in debates, rallies, educational campaigns, vigils, and other non-violent actions to promote democratic values and concepts;
- Educate youth and the larger community about the importance of human rights, press freedom, active citizenship, and other democratic principles;
- Raise awareness of the positive contributions youth are making to democracy in the world; and
- Strengthen the international network of young democracy activists by getting more people involved and participating.

The World Youth Movement for Democracy emerged from the third WMD Assembly in South Africa to support young people and those working with youth to build real democracy around the world. Based on the vision and ideals of the World Movement for Democracy, the WYMD aims to strengthen pro-democracy movements by incorporating the active and equal participation of youth, as well as providing a platform for young democracy activists to address the importance of democratic values, a forum for them to share information and ideas, and an action-oriented, solidarity movement.

We invite all participants in the World Movement for Democracy who are interested in youth participation to join the WYMD, and to organize an event during October as part of the Global Youth Campaign for Democracy! The day is coming up fast, so we encourage participants to think realistically about what they could organize in a short time, something they would like to share with other WYMD participants, something they want to contribute to this collective effort of youth around the world working for true democracy, responsive governments, active citizenship, and human rights.

For more information about the World Youth Movement for Democracy, or to register with us, please visit our website, www.ymd.youthlink.org.
You can learn more about the World Youth Day for Democracy and register your event at www.ymd.youthlink.org/ymd/launchday.html.

Those interested in ongoing partnership with the WYMD are invited to please contact the secretariat directly.

Thank you for your participation!
Best wishes,
Andrea Des Marais
Secretariat Coordinator, World Youth Movement for Democracy Global Youth Action Network Regional Headquarters - Sao Paulo, Brasil www.ymd.youthlink.org
andrea@youthlink.org
Tel: (+55) 11 3815 9926 Fax: (+55) 11 3819 8593

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

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

World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters
Association Mondiale des Radios Communautaires
Asociación Mundial de Radios Comunitarias

September 18th, 2006

Invitation to AMARC 9, the Ninth World Conference of Community Radio Broadcasters

11 to 17 November 2006, Amman, Jordan

Dear Colleagues,

On behalf of the International Board of Directors of the World Association of Community