~
To
MITIGATE DOMESTIC DISCONTENTS AND HARMONIZE GLOBAL DIVERSITY ~
THE
FUTURE
OF
PEACE
IN THE
TWENTY-FIRST
CENTURY
Edited by
DR. NICHOLAS N. KrTTRJE,
H.E.
KSTJ
RODRIGO CARAZO
H.E. JAMES R. MANCHAM,KBE'
";
Carolina Academic Press
Durham, North Carolina
;
!
U i
Cross-Cultural
Conflict Resolution
Abdul Aziz Said
American University and
Nathan
C.Funk
American UnIVersity and
Lynn M. Kunkle
American University
I
slam, like all religions, is not only a theological
affIrmation but also a living historical process
with multiple syntheses and expressions
that
must be taken into account.
transform relations between Islam and the vVest,
Wt' need a new framework
for cross-cultural
connict resolution that underscores the role of faith in
peacem'1king. By aftlrming the role of faith, we can
create space for authentic
communication
in the
midst of connict-communication
from which a
new narrative of cooperation
may yet emerge.
']'0
Many Paths to Peace
l\t the turn of the twenty-first
century, the rising
prominence
of protracted
ethnic and religious
cont1icts, combined
with emergent
fears of socalled "civilizational" clashes, have convinced many
scholars and commentators
that dominant
models
of human and social development
may be incornplek, insofar as they understate
the power of the
religious impulse and cultural particularity
while
searching for malL'rial but not spiritual common
denominators.
Clearlv, the cultural and religious
aspects of conflict and its resolution must be taken
]02i\
seriously. While the conditions
for broad-based
dialogue~-and
hence for full actualization
of the
role of faith in connict resolution-have
yet to be
met, an emerging literature
on religion, connict
resolution, and peace has contributed
significantly
to prospects for new forms of ecumenical dialogue
and collaborative
effort in the domain of f~lithbased peacemaking.
Ideals of peace span across all religions and cultures, incorporating
such values as security and
harmony
as well as justice and human dignity.
Every major system of faith and belief, whether
religious or secular in character, has in sonle way
or another promised peace as an outcome of the
implementation
of its precepts. While the character and content of ideals has differed, conceptions
of peace nonetheless
recur in the most diverse
philosophical
and religious systems-in
the RcpulJlic by Plato, the scholasticism
of Abrahamic
traditions,
the humanism
of the Enlightenment,
the ArtJlIIsJlIIslztm
by Kautilya, and the realpolitik
of modern
international
relations theory. While
peace is sometimes construed narrowly, to denote
a simple absence of war, the word carries deeper
resonances and broader signifIcations,
suggesting
a presence of human dignity or social, ecological,
and spiritual harmony. vVhile scholars and activists
have only just begun to identify cultural pluralism
:\bdul Alii Said, :oJalh"n C. I-'unk, and Lynn M. Kunkle, "Cru"
with pcrn1issin!1
uf the authors.
Cnlltlr,,1 (:ontlict
Restllution."
Ctll'yrighl
211111 J(cpnntcd
Cross-Cultural
Conflict Resolution
as a potential resource for a dynamic and sustainable world order, some have attempted to promote
a truJy cross-cuhural research agenda.2
Each living religious and philosophical tradition
possesses a repertoire of peace-related precepts and
practices that is in some sense both universal in
significance and uniquely particular in form. Even
where ideals converge within a single tradition,
praxeologica] styles often diverge, leading to manifold ways of relating essential precepts and values to
daily practices. l~or example, Christians who share
belief in the redemptive love of God through Christ
have differed over the proper means of aspiring to
create the peaceful "City of God." Historically, some
have viewed imperial power and centralized authority as an appropriate means to the sought-after
ends; others have favored an approach centered on
the witness of small communities of faith, and still
others have underscored individual conscience and
social renewal through the reform of institutions.
When we speak of the role of faith in crosscultural conflict resolution, our challenge is to
honor the diversity of the world's humanistic and
spiritual traditions while seeking common ground
among them. \'\'I1at is needed, in other words, is an
agenda for research, dialogue, and activism that
is global in conception, and responsive to common chaHeng€soLpeacemaking
and coexistence
within and among the world's many traditions. It
is no longer sufficient for transnational agendas for
the advancement of peace to be defined primarily
by the cultural experiences and perceived security
threats of a particular nation or culture. We need
new frameworks for thinking about religion, culture, and spirituality~frameworks
that recognize
the powerful role that faith and belief pJay in conflict and conflict resolution, and that do not privilege one cuhure as "normal" and label another as
"exceptional."
***
from an experiential perspective, religion may
be detJned as a path of ultimate transformation,
1029
compnsmg a "system of symbols [upholding]
deep-seated attitudes and motivations, providing
a complete system of values for human life."3 As
an interconnected system of symbols, religion provides a basis for what Galtung calls "deep culture,"
a comprehensive and coherent ethical system, with
patterned, idealized courses of action for handling
conflict to achieve harmony. Distinctive patterns of
conflict resolution testify to successfuIlyestablished
cosmologies from which adherents may take for
granted shared normative frames of reference for
interpreting the rightness or wrongness of events.
The ways that religion informs a collective
cosmology' are profound but often subtle. Cosmology includes the unstated expectations, the
subconscious or "common-knowledge" framework
and measure by which behaviors, gestures, and
responses are all given meaning. These patterned
expectations arrive from religious and other social
experiences, and are so deeply ingrained that they
do not always surface consciously. They are surfaced and most pronounced in conflict situations,
however, where expectations of what should be are
violated and new circumstances must be evaluated
and responded to. In these instances, collective cosmologies become manifest in the conflict dynamic
though the choice of language, invoked imagery,
and appeal to certain values and goals regarding
the "intended order." Appeals to shared values regarding justice and the intended social order are
especially important for addressing and resolving
conflicts where pronounced power asymmetries
exist between parties. Likewise, recurring violations of what should be can lead to a larger crisis of
meaning. In this way, resolving "horizontal" conflicts between participants play an important role
in upholding a larger, "vertical" sacred order.
By encompassing a broad repertoire of models
or precedents of desirable behavior in conflicted
circumstances while admonishing others, religion
implicitly influences the desirability and likelihood
of certain courses of action over others. In turn,
strategic responses to conflict tend to be rationalized in a manner that is not injurious to religious
Cross-Cultural
Religious beliefs, then, can influence preferred conflict resolution
approaches
directly, by presenting
idealized act ions and guidelines for mora] cond uct,
as well as implicitly, through emotional
memory
and religiously based principles and values. Most
importantly,
religious cosmologies provide coping
mechanisms
for handling conflict, stress and trauma. In this way, parties to conflict can achieve healing and the transformations
necessary for renewal
and a return to wholeness.
Through a process of conflict resolution that is
sensitive to religious and spiritual concerns, participants are afforded the possibility of restoring and
renewing their social relations. Faith-based conf1ict
resolution,
then, offers prospects
for individuals
to be redeemed in terms of their own conscience,
their spiritual relation with the divine, and their
highest ideals. It affirms deeper needs and ideals
.that are conducive to persona] empO\verment
and
[humanization
of the "other," and helps to separate
;that which is essential in a persona] or communal
identity structure from that which is more superficial. It encourages participants
to look to the guidelines and moral exemplars of their own cultural or
religious tradition,
while also drawing forth their
own personal spirituality as they seek to recognize
legitimate clZlims, to take responsibility
for a shZlre
of the conflict situatiol1, .'1[1(1,. if and whcn they feci
it necessary, to reconsider fUI1lhi11cntaJ assumptions about sclf and other. By attcnding to communal beliefs and values while creating a space.~
that affirms the personal potentiZilly transcultural
..
d1aracter of spirituality, a faith-based approach to
~nflict
resolution accounts for important cultural
~ifferences
and resonates with the experience of
~nflict
and reconciliZition
at a deep, ex.istential
)eve!. In situations where belief systems differ, partticularistic doctrines are recognized and incorpotilted but not absolutized, and parties to conflict arc
~rovided with opportunities
to "stretch" the limita~ons of their prior understandings
and to identify
pxemplars of ecumenical concern within their own
~adition.
i Attempts
f
I
1031
Conflict Resolution
to divorce
the spiritual
from conf1ict
resolution practices deny an essential component
of healing and social restoration
that permits
conflicts to be experienced as resolved. This is in
part because conflict resolution processes that do
not address spiritual transformation
processes are
prone to a sense of incompleteness
or mere suspension of conflict, lacking in restoration,
wholeness
or healing. The existential ruptures that occur in
conflict situations often require symbolic redress,
or meaningful
exchange of human acknowledgement within the frameworks
offered by collective
cosmologies.
By advancing a vision of social harmony and the role of the individual within it, faithbased practices elucidate what resolution and peace
will require, so that a deeply embedded system of
meaning and appropriate
coping mechanisms
are
engaged for healing and transformation.
***
vVhile there are many debates regarding the most
fitting and proper manner to interpret and apply
shari'a in the modern world, the principal concern
of shari'a is the maintenance
of proper, harmonious relationships
on and across all levels-between
the individual
and God, within the individual,
within the family and community,
among Muslims, between religions, and ultimately with all of
humanity and creation. Law is expected to support
and promote the fulfillment of lasting, deeply rooted human needs and discourage the pursuit of false
satisfiers. Religious tolerance is built into Islamic
precepts, which confer to the "People of the Book"
a protected status. From the standpoint
of Islamic
universalislT!., particularly as it has been articulated
by those who have contemplated
the Qur'anic passage, "To every people (was sent) a Messenger" 00:
47), humankind
is ultimately
one community;
compi rative evaluation of prophets is discouraged,
for all are deemed messengers of one God.5
A striking feature of Qur'anic discourse is the
emphasis on people's use of their Emate intelligence
in comprehending
the revealed gmdance, which is
accessible both in the Holy Book and in the Book
1(J32
oj :\ature. Time and again the Qur'(//1 exhorts its
hl'<lrers to ponder, reflect, think, and understand.
Religion is armed
with arguments
designed
to
persuade
through
force of logic, emotional
appeal, appeals to universal cosmic order and Divine
f'rovidential
purpose,
and, Lliling these, promises
of eschatological
rewards or punishments.
Above
all, it is recognized that people cannot be dissuaded
from pursuing the wrung course in this life thruugh
!orce or violcnce: "There is /10 cOlllpulsiO/1 III jilith'"
asserts the Qur'£lll (2:256).
Islam and the West: A Search for Commod
Ground
lJisLussions
of Islamic conceptions
of peace and
conflict resolution
lead quite naturally to the question of Islamic political
activism.
Contemporary
Islamic activism is not a backward-looking
rejection of the modern world, but rather a deeply felt
expression
of cultural
identity
and a critique
of
domestic as well as international
political orders.!;
Islam provides its adherents
with a language
that
addresses all aspects of life, and Islamic activism
equips Muslims with a vocabulary
through
which
they may affirm their identity and project themselves politically.
All too often, differences
between
Islamic
and
\'\'estern concepts and values are either over- represented or under-represented.
When they arc overrepresented,
the result is the "incompatibility"
story
Illentioned
at the beginning
of this essay, in which
di,llogue between the West and Islam is portrayed
as an exercise in futility. In large part to counteract
this story, a second story~the
story of compatibility~has
also been told, identifying
gen uine sim ilarities but sometimes
seeking to subsume
Islamic
precepts within a 'vVestern framework.
A third story~a
story of intercultural
complementarity
and
Building
reconciliation,
we hope~has
a Culture of Peace
yet to be written ....
Because Islamic traditions
pruvide a set of powerful political precepts and practices with universal
implications,
Islam can make important
contributions to an integrated
world order~one
that affirms the unique value of all cultural traditions.
In
partidilar,
Islam prescribes
a strung sense of COI11Illunity and solidarity of people; it postulates a collaborative
concept of freedom;
and it demystifies
the Western myth of triumphant
material progress
and development.
!'vloreover, Islamic precepts offer
strongly affirmative
statements
on the subject of
cultural pluralism.
Societies have so often been repressive
that a
strong \'\'estern tradition
has emerged that sees the
elimination
of repression
and want as the chief goal
of society. Though Muslim societies might benefit
from careful study of Western individualism,
they
need not embrace
the 'vVest's dichotomy
between
the individual
and the communitv,
in which the
individual
is seen as serving the individual.
It is
true that cultural systems, like political, economic
and social ones, have usually contained
much to
impede human development:
forces such as prejudice, chauvinism,
competitiveness,
racism, sexism,
and so on. This docs not change the fact that the
cultural community
is where most human realiza
tion must take place. Thus, the cultural comnHlI1ity
needs to be served by political, economic and social
systems, rather than the reverse.
There arc many roads to humanistic
cultural
pluralism,
many potential
systems of uHl1I11unitarian, free, creative life, and many potential
languages, arts, music, dramas,
and literatures
that
are compatible
with humanistic
ethics. No doubt,
every community
needs some "cultural revolution"
to remove those things that dehumanize
society or
inhibit human development.
But only as the primacy of the cultural community
is made clear wil!
creativity have a dlance to replace conformitv,
with
cooperation
replacing competition.
Cross-Cultural
Conflict Resolution
.:.+
**
... \Ve live in an era of transition, one
and depth goes beyond anything yet
human history. We live in the midst
and hope, between tragedy and efforts
beginnings. We either face the choice
the direction of creativity or becoming
than we are today.
whose scope
witnessed in
of suffering
to make new
of moving in
even less so
\Vhere do we go from here ... ? In a world of collapsing boundaries,
cultures need to experience
their commonality.
This is necessary if the suffering that Americans and Westerners are undergoing
in the face of scourges like terrorism is to find its
counterpoint
in the suffering of those who turn
to militant belief systems or are unable to prevent
their companions
from doing so.
In other words, divergent
worlds of perception-Islam
and the West, the South and the
North-must
move from isolation toward unity.
To do so, we need to stimulate
reflection, find
meaning in common tragedies, and share our most
sacred values, including our conceptions
of peace.
Such activities permita
..S,carch for meaning and
commonality.
The discovery of commonality,
in
turn, makes reconciliation
possible, through the reidentification
and reaffirmation
of the core spiritual precepts upon which our religious narratives,
images, and values have been built. In the process,
we may also derive common
responses to shared
human suffering.
***
Throughout
history, though admittedly for limited
periods, various civilizations
have demonstrated
how spiritual values can engender social progress.
At the same time, we would hasten to acknowledge that these same values have just as often been
corrupted and manipulated
to justify actions that
1033
represent their antithesis. This in itself, however,
should not prevent an appreciation
of the historic
association between the emergence of a truly moral
social order and widespread commitment
to spiritual values.
\Vhile we in no way wish to denigrate traditional
religious commitments,
we believe that, at the present juncture of human development,
it is useful to
make a distinction
between spirituality
and religion, even though the terms are often used interchangeably because both refer to matters of faith.
The term religion refers to an institutional
framework within which a specific theology is pursued,
usually among a community of like-minded believers. Spirituality, on the other hand, transcends the
boundaries
of religion, suggesting broader human
involvement that comes from the inner essence of a
person. At the level of the individual, it refers to action borne of a commitment
that is not necessarily
informed by allegiance to a particular religion.
Just as we find the naive materialism of the postRenaissance centuries is no longer working, changes have begun in the direction of a more inclusive
epistemology. As we enter the h\'enty-first century,
we are recognizing
that the deeper we delve into
the fundamentals
of science, the closer we are to
the fundamentals
of many of the traditional mysticisms. We are now coming to recognize the reality
of "the sacred," which we define as any process that
explicitly links us to the largest possible context to
which we belong ....
***
A new ethic must allow humanity
to experience
itself as complete, as we already are. It must value
acceptance of the self as a whole, embracing the
unconscious
as well as conscious. The integration
of the personality
at the individual level becomes
a metaphor for the integration of humanity at the
species level.
***
--.---lCJ34
Building
EeJigious traditions and spirituality, however, must
be reborn if they arc to respond to contemporary
spiritual needs and permit intercultural
reconciliation. Though most religious and ethical systems
promote reciprocity and goodwill, their institutions
and outlooks are too freLjuently identified with ,iust
those aspects of the past that contribute to current
division and conflict. Put very simply, spiritual va/ues for the present and future cannot be partisan;
they must speak to the universal human need for
transcendence,
unity, and justice.
In conclusion, we affirm that achieving a unifying global consensus as the basis for a humane, ecologically viable, new global system is possible. The
essence of such a vision must be felt as well as rationally argued, because it involves both the head and
the heart. From this perspective, a new global system reLjuires new political and social arrangements,
a new (or renewed) vision of humankind's
existential reality and purpose, and an unrelenting
effort
to make the former truly reflect the latter. This is an
agenda for conflict resolution that is worthy of the
best in human nature and experience.
tllre I/nd Conflict
Resoilitioll
(Washington,
States Institute of Peace Press, /998).
I. Some of the material
in this chapter
'1. Cosmologies
universes"
both
the Spring, 2002 issue of PCI/ce I/nd Conflict
2. See, for example,
Leslie E. Sponsel
(;regcJr, cds., Tlzc AntlzlOpolog)'
iH'1lddtT, CO: Lynne Rienner,
are the basis of the "shared
which
"conflict"
arc essential
and
resolve major disputes.
flict is a matter
a conflict)
interprets
COIl/lict
the same phenomenon
and Orien!."
5. Qllr'all
(2:136).
6. Richard
Fall-:.,''raIse
tics of Exclusion:
in
and Thomas
of Peace I/lld NOllviolencc
1994); Kevin Avruch,
CIII-
Pl'. 7-23).
the right of Muslims
liS Aluslillls
gests that
contemporary
and the Ceupuli
World
Qllt/r-
Falk unequivocally
participation
world order, and sug-
Islamic
movements
manifest
as well as poJiticalmarginalizatiun.
to cultural
Islam and the West: A New Cold
War or Convergence?,"
(Third
ment. Salla suggests
stereotypical
models
sentations
H~!I-Id
QUllrterly,
has advanced
vol. ] 8,
a similar
argu-
that there is a need to move beyond
"essentialilations"
based on historical
and
contingency,
of Islam as a discourse
inant liberal democratic
paradigm
to many other religious discourses.
P
ErlbaU111 Associ-
to equitable
in the contemporary
Doug/as
Michael SaJ1a, "Political
both
Stlldies.
Universalism
its
Life
vl/l'il/tlOlIllI
The Case of Islam" (7hil'd
tcr/v, vol. I R, no. I, /997,
within
to Violellce,
cds, Lawrence
to
Con-
(19971 "Connict
In Cllltllmi
J(CSOllitIUII: Altcml/tircs
Fry and Kaj Bjorkqvist,
ates, lVlahwah, NJ.: 49.
defcnds
Johann
of
by which
"each party r to
consciousness:
Caltung,
Cycles in UClIdent
means
As Gal tung has emphasiled,
of group
own li-amework,"
udtural
to the identification
the legitimate
no. 4, 1997, pp. 729-742)
is appearing
DC: United
3. Ludwig, Theodore.
( 1994) tlze Sacred PI/tlzs of tlze
\.Vest. Ivladv1illan College Publishing Co. NY: 5.
resistance
Notes
a Culture of Peace
fragmentary
toward
that critiques
in a manner
repre-
the dom
similar