|
|
 |
By Anis Hamadeh*
17 September 2002 Most commentaries on the Middle East can be criticized for being ritual and for not offering solutions. This also holds true for Samuel Huntington's theses about the clash of civilizations. While they may accurately represent the zeitgeist, they do not point to ways out of the conflict. Rather, they remain at the level of describing the situation. This leaves the reader with an uneasy feeling, a feeling of helplessness and fear, which in turn supports the political fear-and-control-thinking that generates the clash of civilizations.
The most important point of departure for peace in the Middle East is the readiness on the part of all the sides involved to be self-critical. Given the long years of conflict, a large pool of guilt has accumulated, making self-criticism difficult. However, those who are most ready to be self-critical are likely to be the people on the periphery of violence, that is, the peace activists among the opposing sides. To concentrate on them to start a dialogue would make more sense than to focus on the fighters and the extremists.
The only evil is ignorance, said Buddha, and thus bringing things to consciousness means moving towards happiness and peace. This means bringing the pictures to the consciousness on which our decisions and judgements depend. It means bringing to consciousness the fact that Yad Vashem is situated not far from the living, suffering Palestinians. It means bringing to consciousness the fact that Iraq is being called to account with the help of the UN, while Israel is not. And it means bringing to consciousness the fact that the relationship between Jews and Germans can by no means be called normal, and that you can hardly talk about this subject in public, because it is too sensitive, too close, too private.
Another method to de-escalate conflicts is to be instrumental in avoiding debate with arguments that are incompatible with one another. In cognitive linguistics there is the concept of "frame restructuring", meaning the harmonization of two pictures (frames, scenarios). Let's take, for example, the concepts of Zionism and of Jihad. Both are as abstract concepts as they are frequently used in the Middle East conflict, and they are among the main causes for misunderstanding. These concepts are like a box of which nobody really knows the content. In the respective in-group, these terms are identity-building and positive, in the respective out-group all negative pictures are projected into them. It is important to deconstruct key abstract concepts like Zionism and Jihad, terrorism and democracy, in order to come to comparable units, so that one can understand what people really mean by their concepts. Subsequently, a new picture can be structured which does justice to each group and their pictures, without doing injustice to another group. To want peace means to localize the core of the conflict and to overcome it. This overcoming has - as far as I can see and I hope to be wrong here - not yet been seriously started.
Moreover, the Israel-Palestine war is viewed too much in terms of material categories. This does not do justice to the situation, but is typical for the public side of our societies. As if it were only about soil and water! Of course the soil issue is one of the most important issues in the practical creation of the state of Palestine (which is also wanted by the UN). But it is also and foremost about freedom and independence. And freedom and independence are in the first place things which one can feel, and not things which one can possess.
It is, for example, possible to create and to manifest Palestine without making that dependent on material property and soil. Of course, not as a substitute, but as an identity-building measure. For this purpose I propose the project "Virtual Palestine". A detailed map of Palestine can be shown on the Internet (without denying Israel). If you click on the cities you get detailed information. Cities and towns can be mapped like in a computer game and all businesspeople and artists and private people can settle in their towns, and even their streets. Every Palestinian can make immediate use of their right of return and can give a home to their stories, their photos and their memories.
This virtual Palestine already exists, but there is hardly a consciousness about it. And it is spread over thousands of web pages made by people who hardly know each other. Yet it only needs some coordination and the support of an acknowledged personality from the Palestinian establishment to virtually make Palestine a unit.
This is a practical way of building the Palestinian identity and of strengthening it without always focusing on the enemy. When, for instance, the Palestinian refugees or their descendants can return to their villages in this, virtual way, then this does no harm or violence to the Israelis. At the same time memorial places can come into being through the virtual rebuilding of destroyed villages and this will relieve the Palestinians and thus will have a positive effect on the conflict. It can also be helpful to learn mastering the conflicts within Palestinian society in a virtual surroundings. It must again be stressed that this project is not meant as a substitute.
Such a web site should not be political in the first place, yet it should give space to all the political views. It is the people who stand in the centre. When the people come to learn about each other they understand what Palestine is. It is not the land, it is the people.
*Anis Hamadeh is a German-Palestinian musician and writer.
Copyright © Redress Information & Analysis.
All rights reserved.
|
|