Walking in MLK’s shoes

by Anya Cordell
17 January 2012

Chicago – Martin Luther King, Jr., the renowned American civil rights activist, said, “Men hate each other because they fear each other, they fear each other because they don’t know each other, and they don’t know each other because they are often separated from each other.” Americans commemorated his legacy on 16 January, a fitting moment to ask, how can we interrupt this cycle?

Reflecting on this question, I recalled my community confronting this issue when my black neighbour was murdered by a white supremacist. For months we convened each night of the week where the murder occurred to walk and talk together. This simple practice became a transformational, ongoing event. It was our response to communal trauma in order to support the family of the victim, reclaim our neighbourhood and reframe our lives in the wake of the shock that hate had interjected.

Two years later the 9/11 attacks exposed trauma and fear laid bare on a global scale. We felt the horrifying reverberations worldwide. Soon we saw fear congeal into stereotyping and generalised suspicion. Initial incidents of hateful backlash were directed at innocent individuals throughout the United States. Bias, bullying, smears and physical harm have continued to target Muslims in particular and to impact others – Sikhs, Hindus, South Asians and Arab Christians – in the United States and beyond. In my work, I became closely connected to the families of innocent men who had been murdered in this backlash. I feel tremendous concern over the virulent voices now reaping profit, votes and notoriety from fomenting bias.

What practical initiatives can heal the all-too-common dynamic King described, which plays out in racism, xenophobia, Islamophobia and other prejudices? Is there something more effective than dialogue, which can easily get bogged down in discord?

I believe the ongoing walks my community enacted, and another initiative called “sharing events”, are more engaging than programs analysing faiths or contrasting cultures, and are more easily orchestrated in communities, schools, universities, organisations and corporations. The simplicity of these initiatives undermines even entrenched separation and misinformation between those of different religions, ethnicities or backgrounds.

Sharing events — which are free and family-friendly—can take place in living rooms, community halls, faith communities, school auditoriums or corporate lunchrooms. In communities, such events can rotate venues monthly. Participants are invited to share music, art, poetry, stories of hopes and dreams, their “work-in-progress”, or even a “play-in-progress”, in order to give expression to something moving, personally meaningful or evocative.

At one such event a Bangladeshi American regaled participants with tales of confronting identity while confronting groups-within-groups. Growing up, he was the only brown-skinned Muslim child in his school. He was amazed to learn there were Christians and Jews, not just “whites”; then discovered a local mosque filled with light complexioned Bosnian Muslims. He became adept at humour to break through these divisions. Such “sharings” create surprising portals through which we glimpse the “other” as equally human and discover possibilities for caring and friendship.

Similarly, ongoing walks differ greatly from single marches or annual interfaith walks, which have become commonplace. In my community we learned the advantages of these serial events. They attracted even reticent neighbours, who had hesitated to cross anyone else’s threshold or enter unfamiliar houses of worship. Those not drawn to dialogues or meetings but simply wanting exercise took comfort in walks they could drop in and out of. Yet because the walks were regular and ongoing, unlikely relationships developed.

Most of us hold unacknowledged suspicions or stereotypes of other groups. However, when parents push strollers together and find themselves comparing notes on child-rearing, the fact that one wears a headscarf and another a yarmulke becomes less overwhelmingly divisive. We might even envision becoming allies who are willing to “go out on a limb” for others and imagine them taking similar risks for us.

While it is challenging to create movements or political action campaigns, these initiatives are easily replicated. They can move us toward opportunities in which something interesting and extraordinarily precious takes root between humans, the antidote to disdain and destruction.

In their simplicity these practices elicit the promise of the ideals that King exemplified: that we encounter one another with openness to our essential and common humanity, and acknowledge our shared longing for a world in which we all feel valued and safe.

###

* Anya Cordell is a Jewish speaker and writer, recipient of the Spirit of Anne Frank Award and the author of Race: An Open & Shut Case. This article was written for the Common Ground News Service (CGNews).

 

Three questions for Islamists

by Mustafa Husayn Abu Rumman
20 September 2011

Amman – As an imam at a mosque in the Jordanian capital Amman, I have been following the dramatic developments across North Africa and the Middle East with a combination of high hopes and grave concern. The phenomenon of young people organising peacefully to demand political reform, economic opportunity and human rights is a source of pride for me; numerous worshippers in my mosque are among them. On the other hand, the mounting lethality of conflict between state and society in so many Arab countries is terrible to behold. So is the tragedy of burgeoning crime, economic struggles and insecurity in countries such as Egypt that are undergoing dramatic transformations.

In these riveting times, the role of Islam is essential and Arab societies seem to know it. I can tell just from the growing number of worshippers in my mosque, which overflows every Friday during weekly prayers. Young people draw comfort and inspiration from Islam as they face an uncertain future.

At the same time, political analysts – both within Arab societies and in the world at large – are raising concerns about the role of so-called “Islamist” groups in the on-going political transitions. Members of my own congregation often ask me for counsel on this issue. In response, through sermons every Friday as well as more intimate conversations, I have been trying to articulate the distinctions that will be necessary to ensure that the tenets of Islam are properly applied – and that the language of Islam is not co-opted by opportunistic political movements.

In the present state of flux in North Africa and the Middle East, there is robust competition for political popularity in a new marketplace of ideas. When assessing any political figure or movement claiming to draw legitimacy from Islam, one should pose several questions and demand unambiguous answers.

The first question is: do you support equal political, social and economic rights for all citizens of your country, regardless of ethnicity, gender or sect?

The answer should be yes. The Qur’an and prophetic traditions present a vision of social justice in all its forms – not only for men but also for women; not only for Arabs but also for other ethnic groups; and not only for Muslims but for all humankind. This is my conviction as a lifelong student of Islam. The texts that prove this are many, but suffice it to say that the Qur’an’s vision of equity and justice is addressed not to any subset of humankind but to all “Children of Adam” (7:26).

Over the centuries, interpretations of Qur’an and prophetic tradition have varied, and some of these interpretations have been incompatible with essential Qur’anic values. The most accurate interpretation would never differ with the principle of universal equity and justice – nor deny political or economic opportunity to anyone. Such an interpretation can and should be achieved by the principal of ijtihad, the practical application of the human mind to the world’s ever-changing circumstances.

The second question is: do you believe that Islam is compatible with a definition of the rule of law that transcends a particular religion’s jurisprudential precepts?

The answer should be yes. From a contemporary Islamic perspective, sharia is not a document that supplants the legal system of a given country. To the contrary, it is a set of principles that demand of believing Muslims that they respect the laws of the country in which they live, provided that the laws are compatible with the universal values of social equity and human rights. Moreover, in the event that a given law is inequitable or unjust, sharia demands that believing Muslims work within a legal and democratic framework to amend the law. Islam stresses the principle of shura, or consultation, as a means of reaching decisions that affect the body politic. Those “whose affairs are a matter of counsel” (42:38) are considered to be worthy of a divine reward.

Finally, the third question is: do you maintain that your political platform is a flawless rendering of the precepts of Islam?

The answer should be no. The Qur’an attests to the fact that humankind, granted worldly power, is prone to error and corruption: “[Humankind is liable to] break the covenant of God after ratifying it, and sever that which God ordered to be joined, and make mischief in the earth” (2:27). Islam, for its part, is innocent of the errors of those who presume to interpret or apply it. Because it is hubristic and suspect to suggest that someone is without flaw, it is equally hubristic and suspect to claim to speak in the name of Islam.

Moreover, to claim to speak in the name of Islam is to assert superiority over other political platforms – a position that leads to totalitarianism.

Islam, as I understand it, demands that humankind negotiate over difference and govern consensually. There are no modern-day prophets or rightly-guided caliphs. We must endeavour to collaborate in healing our region and the world as best we can.

###

* Mustafa Husayn Abu Rumman is the imam of the Ibn Sinan mosque in Amman, Jordan. This article was written for the Common Ground News Service (CGNews).

 

Israel’s brick wall – and beyond

By Larry Derfner
27 September 2011

Modi’in, Israel – Whenever things take a turn for the worse in Israel, whenever I think this country has become too filled with fear and aggression to ever be ready to make peace, I remind myself: the way we’re going leads to a brick wall, and one day we’re going to run into it. After the pain subsides and we dust ourselves off, we will see that the brick wall is still standing. And at that point, we will have no choice but to change direction.

The brick wall up the road is international isolation to the point of pariah status, together with a continual escalation in severe security threats and no reasonable hope of overcoming them by military force.

Last week at the United Nations, Israel took another giant step toward that wall. By enforcing Israel’s opposition to the Palestinian statehood bid, the United States, appears to have dealt itself out of influence in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and maybe even in the Middle East as a whole.

Backed by the Republican Party, the American Christian right and the American Jewish right, the Israeli government bent US President Barack Obama too far this time. By blocking the Palestinian drive for statehood, he’s no good to Israel anymore. He’s lost the trust of even a moderate Palestinian leader like Mahmoud Abbas. So he can’t pressure the Palestinians to be more conciliatory, like he could before.

It’s questionable whether he has much sway left with Egypt, Turkey and Jordan, either, whom Israel used to count on as bulwarks against its radical enemies.

This is not good for Israel. And if Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu thinks a Republican in the White House will come riding to his rescue, I doubt that any of the Republican candidates will be able to win any more friends or influence people for this Israeli government than Obama currently can – and I am, of course, understating matters.

There’s a Hebrew saying, “Tafasta meruba, lo tafasta” which can be translated to mean: “If you get too greedy, you end up with nothing.” This, I think, is what happened to the Netanyahu government and its American allies – they not only wanted to temper Obama’s pressure on Israel, they insisted that he follow Netanyahu’s lead.

And by doing so, the Israeli government, backed by its blind supporters in the United States, may end up with nothing – in the form of an America that can no longer defend it diplomatically. And for Israel, especially now, America is most emphatically the indispensable nation.

Still, something tremendous is coming out of this experience: the Palestinians see for themselves that non-violence and diplomacy work. They have been cheering Abbas in New York and in Ramallah as he rides the wave of his triumphant speech – and reiterates that the Palestinian struggle will continue non-violently.

This movement, led by Palestinians and joined by Israeli and foreign activists, began locally in protests against land expropriations in West Bank villages and settler “block-busting” in Jerusalem’s Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood. Abbas, however, has been calling for a national strategy of non-violence for the last decade, and it appears his way has captured his people’s imagination. This is what all seekers of peace in the Middle East have waited for, Palestinians and Israelis alike, and now it has come.

What’s coming will not be easy for Israel, for America or for the Western powers seeking to bring Abbas and Netanyahu to the negotiating table. Without a commitment from Netanyahu to recognise the Palestinians’ right to the Occupied Territories alongside Israel’s right to its pre-1967 territory, together with a freeze on settlement building in the West Bank, Abbas will not negotiate. Meanwhile, Abbas will keep coming back to the Security Council with his demand for statehood, forcing Obama to defend Netanyahu’s position, which will only deepen the isolation and hostility for America and Israel in the Middle East.

There is only one way to reverse direction – by ending the Israeli occupation and making way for an independent, sovereign Palestine. Sooner or later, I’m absolutely convinced it will happen. The status quo is not static. At some point, the cost of the Occupation to Israel and the United States will become too high to bear any longer. And then Palestinians – along with Israelis – will be free.

###

* Larry Derfner is an American Israeli journalist and columnist who has written for many newspapers including US News & World Report, The Jerusalem Post, and The Sunday Times of London. He currently writes for +972 Magazine. This article was written for the Common Ground News Service (CGNews).

 

Happy Peace Day!

September 21 is the International Day of Peace. It was established by a United Nations resolution in 1981 to coincide with the opening of the General Assembly. The first Peace Day was celebrated in September 1982.

 

 

International Day of Peace is also a Day of Ceasefire – personal or political. Take this opportunity to make peace in your own relationships as well as impact the larger conflicts of our time. Imagine what a whole Day of Ceasefire would mean to humankind.

 

HAPPY PEACE DAY!

Israel and the Palestinians Must Face the Inescapable

By Alon Ben-Meir - July 25, 2011

Coexistence between Israel and the Palestinians is inevitable and, short of catastrophic developments, the two peoples are doomed or destined to live between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River. They must now decide on the quality of that coexistence. Do they want to live with mutual hatred and fear while demonizing one another or do they want to live in peace and amity and realize the biblical prophecy of making their shared land the true Land of Milk and Honey? No peace will ever be forged, let alone endure, unless both sides understand and appreciate each others’ fears, concerns, hopes and dreams. Only through direct social contacts and people-to-people dialogue will they overcome their mutually destructive perception of each other.

Read the whole article: Israel and the Palestinians Must Face the Inescapable

Semites unite! You have nothing to lose but your conflict

By Roi Ben-Yehuda and Aziz Abu Sarah

09 August 2011
 
Jerusalem – On 15 July a small bit of history was made in Jerusalem. Around 3,000 Jews and Arabs marched together from the Jaffa Gate in the Old City to the Sheikh Jarrah neighbourhood in East Jerusalem calling for Palestinian independence, freedom and dignity. The demonstration was organised by the Sheikh Jarrah Solidarity Movement and leaders of the Palestinian East Jerusalem neighbourhood committees.

We, an Israeli from Tel Aviv and a Palestinian resident of Jerusalem, were among those who joined and made our presence felt and voices heard.

Our reasons for joining were many. First, we believe that an alliance between Israeli and Palestinian activists is an essential condition for transforming this conflict. We should move away from Israeli versus Palestinian to those who are pro-solution versus those who are pro-conflict. It doesn’t matter if you are Jewish, Muslim or Christian; what matters is what you stand for.

Second, we wanted to see what Israeli-Palestinian hope looks like in 2011. So many people in Israel-Palestine seem to feel hopeless about the possibility of a meaningful exchange with one another. Such helplessness is easy to get sucked into. Instead, we wanted to be in the contagious company of people who believe they can make a difference.

Third, we both felt that a joint Jewish-Arab demonstration for peace and justice in Jerusalem would give us the opportunity, if we may paraphrase Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel, to pray with our feet.

Finally, even though the march was ostensibly about Palestinian independence, recent anti-democratic legislation in Israel (such as the anti-boycott legislation which outlaws calls for boycotts against the State of Israel, including settlements in the West Bank), gave us additional motivation to join and shout: “Not in our name!”

As for the actual demonstration, there were many things to take heart in. Palestinians who came played a leadership role in organising the demonstration and were not just followers as in past events, which had been led predominantly by Israeli activists.

People held signs which read, “Bibi, recognize Palestine”, and “[19]67 lines – a Palestinian State Alongside a Jewish State”. They chanted slogans in Hebrew, Arabic and English, such as, “From Sheikh Jarrah to Bil’in, Palestine will be liberated” and “Jews and Arabs refuse to be enemies”.

Around 3,000 protestors may not seem much, especially in comparison to the great Peace Now demonstrations of the past, but taking into account that Jerusalem is a very right-wing city and that the weather was extremely hot, a few thousand Jews and Palestinians standing shoulder to shoulder, united in a call for freedom and dignity for the Palestinian people, was an impressive sight.

Of course not everything was ideal. There were many more Jews than Palestinians. This may have to do with the fact that there are many Palestinians who are not thrilled about dividing Jerusalem (and falling under Palestinian Authority rule), or have given up on the two-state formula. But there are other reasons as well: fluctuating levels of trust between Jewish and Palestinian activists, the Palestinian taboo against working with Israeli activists and fear of reprisals from the Israeli authorities.

Another difficulty for us as peacemakers were the “talking points” during the demonstration, exemplified by one of the most visible signs that read, “Only Free People Can Negotiate”. This is a quote from former South Africa President Nelson Mandela that, in the context of Israel-Palestine, suggests that as long as Israel is an occupying force there can be no negotiation between the two entities.

While we are both sympathetic to this position, we find the idea problematic that one side is free and the other is imprisoned. Years of terrorism and occupation have made Israelis emotional slaves to an intractable conflict. Moreover, Palestinians are not just passive prisoners in an Israeli jail; they are also active agents with a say in their own fate. We need to remember that it’s leverage, and not freedom, that matters in negotiations. Though the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is asymmetrical in a way that favours Israel, the Palestinians – who ultimately hold the key to Israel’s legitimacy – are far from being without leverage, as the leadership’s decision to go to the UN in September to seek recognition of a Palestinian state so perfectly demonstrates.

At the end of the march, as people began to scatter, we were both left wondering whether this was the beginning of a new chapter of Jewish-Arab cooperation. The answer of course depends on the direction both societies are heading. But this we know: if a genuine movement for peace is to take root in this land, it must be done through Semitic unity. Friday, 15 July was a good start.

###

* Roi Ben-Yehuda is a graduate student at both Columbia University and George Mason University. Aziz Abu Sarah is Co-Executive Director of the Center for World Religions, Diplomacy and Conflict Resolution at George Mason University, and a winner of the Eliav-Sartawi Award for Common Ground Journalism. He blogs at azizabusarah.wordpress.com. This article was written for the Common Ground News Service (CGNews).

Riding the school bus together in Jerusalem

By Khaled Diab

26 July 2011
 
Jerusalem – The mutual distrust between Israelis and Palestinians is such that almost every action by the other side is viewed through a prism of suspicion. Take the Jerusalem light railway. When it finally starts operating, it will connect the Jewish west of the city with the Palestinian east.

Many Palestinians, concerned over Israel’s ongoing settlement expansion, see the new tram not as a useful transportation service but as part of an Israeli plan to cement its grip on the whole of Jerusalem. For many Israelis, the idea of becoming fellow passengers with Palestinians is a prospect that elicits both fear and loathing.

This is partly because, with little personal contact between the two sides, the voices of extremists are the loudest. Avoiding an arrival at this terminal state of distrust is a long journey that should start as early as possible in life. Perhaps persuading Israelis and Palestinians to become fellow passengers on the school bus, so to speak, is one of the biggest challenges facing those who seek a future of coexistence.

The Hand in Hand bilingual education network aims to provide just such an opportunity. Founded in 1997 by an Israeli-American social worker, Lee Gordon, and a Palestinian-Israeli teacher, Amin Khalaf, the network is currently comprised of four schools where Israeli-Jews and Palestinians can study together in both Arabic and Hebrew. The largest school, with some 500 pupils, is in Jerusalem.

In line with the school’s aim of promoting complete equality between Arabs and Jews, the children often don’t know or care about the ethnicity of their schoolmates. “The children at the school don’t look at each other as ‘Jews’ and ‘Arabs’, they use their own criteria,” explains Ira Kerem, an American-Israeli social worker and my guide for the day. “What they’re interested in are things like: is this person good friend material, is this kid cool, how good is he at football?”

“We learn to love people for who they are more than where they come from or what religion they believe in,” says Ruth, a Jewish pupil.

Nevertheless, despite the school’s best efforts, inequalities do creep in. In theory, the school’s bilingual approach should ensure that all the pupils become equally proficient in Hebrew and Arabic, explains Inas Deeb, who is in charge of educational programmes at the school.

“However, Arab pupils generally speak better Hebrew than Jewish pupils speak Arabic,” says Deeb. “Hebrew is the dominant language… Arab kids speak Hebrew outside the school, unlike most of the Jewish kids [who do not speak Arabic].”

Despite these linguistic disparities, which the school and parents are working to tackle, pupils confirm the general sense of equality and trust. “There’s no difference here between the Jewish kids and the Palestinian kids. Unlike outside the school, here we feel equal,” agreed Mu’eed and Jouhan, two Palestinian teenagers studying at the school.

But the reality of the divided city is never far from the school gates. When I probed the youngsters about whether they socialised with their Jewish friends, both answered in the affirmative, but noted that Jewish and Palestinian neighbours were not always as tolerant and understanding.

As its name suggests, Hand in Hand does its best to promote honest and mutually respectful dialogue among pupils and parents alike, says Kerem. “We teach that bloodletting will not resolve the conflict or bring about peace,” adds Deeb.

Although this is commendable, the question of how much difference the few thousand children who have studied at Hand in Hand and other schools like it can make is a poignant one. “We have no illusions that this school will bring peace between Israelis and Palestinians,” one Israeli-Jewish father admitted to me. “But you have to do something and every little bit counts. And you have to start with yourself.”

“This school offers a glimmer of hope for the future, and for the sake of our children, we need to provide them with every bit of hope we can,” his good friend, a Palestinian mother, chimed in.

But to keep this glimmer alight and perhaps help it burn more intensely requires support. Hand in Hand depends for at least a third of its funding on international private donations, which have been hit hard by the global recession. If it fails to raise more funds, it may be forced to cut back its activities.

It is the opinion of this author that not only does Hand in Hand deserve a helping hand, but that this kind of bilingual education should become more universally available in order to help the next generations to learn to live together.

###

* Khaled Diab is an Egyptian-Belgian journalist and writer living in Jerusalem. He writes about a wide range of subjects, including the EU, the Middle East, Islam and secularism, multiculturalism and human rights. His website is www.chronikler.com. This article was written for the Common Ground News Service (CGNews).

Arab Revolution moves to Israel and London

“The people demand social justice.”

By Kamal Nawash

By now everyone has heard of the Arab Spring. This is a phenomenon where Arabs have felt empowered to question the authority of their governments which has resulted in the removal of four long time presidents from power and one more on the way.

Soon after the demonstrations began in the Arab countries, analysts began asking whether the demonstrations will spread to Israel. However, the analysts were not talking about Jewish Israel they were instead talking about the Palestinian occupied territories of Israel. As it turned out, the Arab Spring has spread but not to Palestine. To everyone’s surprise, the demonstrations have spread to Jewish Israel in what is increasingly being called the “Jewish Summer.” Amazingly, Jewish Israelis were inspired by their Arab Neighbors in Egypt, Syria, Tunis, Libya and Yemen.

Read the whole article at the Free Muslims Coalition.

 

Voices of Hope from Oklahoma to Norway

 

One week after the twin attacks in Norway, Oslo is covered with flowers.

 

Floating flowers

The first of many funerals took place on Friday. Young multicultural Bano, who only became 18 years old. Together with her family, she fled Iraq and sought sanctuary in Norway when she was just seven. The funeral services were held in accordance with both Christian and Islamic traditions, and the image of a female priest and an imam side by side contradicted everything the Islamophobic killer stands for.

Two days later, Bano’s 14 year old brother, determined to resume normal activities as soon as possible despite his grief, played his first game in Norway Cup, an international football (soccer) tournament for youth. He was credited an assist – he could have scored himself, but chose to pass the ball to the scorer.

Flowers, teddy bears and candles

The teddy bears and cards in the sea of flowers in front of Oslo Cathedral will be stored. The candles will be remoulded into new candles. The flowers will become new soil for a memorial site.

The sympathy that has poured in from all over the world has been heart-warming. From Oklahoma, the city that was hit by the dreadful bomb attack in 1995, come recorded Voices of Hope and the message that Norway should establish a memorial site in order not to forget.

Voices of Hope from Oklahoma to Norway

Oklahoma has its memorial park, the Oklahoma City National Memorial, including the Field of Empty Chairs with its 168 empty chairs representing those who lost their lives in the attack. Each night, the chairs are lit. There is also the Memorial Fence, where visitors still leave flowers and mementos.

Time for reflection: What if the killer had not been blond with blue eyes, but a Muslim, as so many thought as the news of the bombing of the governmental building reached us? Would we still have stood shoulder by shoulder? Would the anti-Islam rhetoric have become even harsher? As we realized that we were witnessing a home-grown terrorist in action, a mind-changing wind swept over us. This should be a time for all of us – no matter which ethnicity and religion we belong to – to reflect on our own thoughts and prejudices towards others, and we are allowed to say: I was wrong. Forgive me.

Flowers all over:

Flowers on Parliament gate

Flowers on Parliament lion

  

Flowers on City Hall statue

A joyous, but risky first swim

Palestinian and Israeli women together at the beach in Tel Aviv, after a group of Israeli women had brought them illegally into Israel

Women’s solidarity across borders when a group of Israeli women snuck some of their Palestinian counterparts from West Bank into Israel for a day of fun. Many of the Palestinian women had never seen the sea before.

Read the whole article in the New York Times: Where Politics Are Complex, Simple Joys at the Beach

Keep swimming, ladies! :-)