| Home
About UDC Wheel and Guidelines Leadership Convergence Festival of Faith Resolutions to the U.N. Peace Sunday Los Angeles Assembly Global Assembly World Interfaith Network Fellowship World Scriptures Testament for an Evolving Universe Science and Spirituality Health and Wellness Education The Arts Magazine Newsletters Participation/ Membership |
Table of Contents
Non-Violent Peace Brigades: How Fast Can We Move?
I envision an international ideal of service awakening in an emerging class of people who are best called evolutionaries. I see them as soldiers, as youth, and as those who have soldier spirit within them. I see them come together in the name of people and planet to create a new environment of support for the positive growth of humankind and the living earth mother. Their mission is to protect the possible and to nurture the potential. They are the evolutionary guardians who focus their loving protection and affirm their allegiance to people and planet for their own good and for the good of those they serve. They are pioneers, not palace guards. - Jim Chanon, First Earth Battalion The United Nations General Assembly has designated October 2 as the International Day of Nonviolence. October 2 is the birth anniversary of Mahatma Gandhi. For Gandhi, non-violence was at the center of his philosophy and actions. Thus it is appropriate to mark the day with an analysis of one aspect of non-violent action: the role of peace teams as observers in conflict situations. The armed conflict between Georgia and Russia over South Ossetia and Abkhazia starting on August 8 as most people were watching the start of the Olympic games is a test case in real time of how fast governments can negotiate a ceasefire, a freeze on military activity and the deployment of external observers on the frontiers of Georgia, South Ossetia and Abkhazia. The full team of European Union (EU) observers, some 300 persons, is to be in place by October 1. As France has the presidency of the EU until the end of 2008, the French government had its team of 30 observers on the ground by 25 September, waiting for the full contingent of EU observers. The observers, while unarmed, are from military and internal security units. During the first weeks of the conflict, there were only Russian peacekeepers. The Russian peacekeepers have been there since 1994 when an agreement was signed in Geneva among Georgia, Abkhazia, Russia, and the UN. The UN was to mediate in the Georgia-Abkhazia conflict and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) the Georgia-South Ossetia conflict. The Commonwealth of Independent States was to provide peacekeepers – basically observers. The CIS states were quickly reduced to only Russia. There are no reports that the Russian peacekeepers tried to prevent the fighting between Georgian and Russian troops or between the Georgian and South Ossetia militias. The degree of government control over these militias cannot be known. The violence has led to a refugee flow from South Ossetia and Abkhazia, mostly of ethnic Georgians. The current refugees join some 200,000 Georgian refugees, mostly from Abkhazia, due to the 18 months of fighting during 1992-1994. Most of the ethnic Georgian refugees have not been permanently resettled in Georgia and continue to live in unstable conditions. It is unlikely that, after the current flair up of violence, there will be any massive return of refugees. The EU observers are from the military. I do not have access to the resumes of the observers to know how many have served in other countries, in UN missions or received special training in unarmed observation. As we mark the International Day of Nonviolence, it is appropriate to ask could non-violent peace teams have reached the Georgia-Abkhazia and Georgia – South Ossetia frontiers faster had they been called upon by the EU or the UN to do so? We can also try to look at why governments still turn to their armed forces to provide observers in conflict areas. There have been a good number of efforts to create non-violent teams which could work internationally somewhat on the model that Mahatma Gandhi and his followers developed in India, the Shanti Sena, to work primarily in local communal tensions.(1) One of the first and most ambitious was the proposed "Peace Army" to be a ‘living wall’ between the advancing Japanese Army and the Chinese defenders of Shanghai in 1932. The effort, based in the UK, was offered to the League of Nations, but since the League was not planning to get involved, nothing came of the effort. Japan continued its conquest. A second opportunity to show the effectiveness of non-violent inter-positioning came in August 1981 with the newly created US-Canada-based Peace Brigades International (PBI). In August 1981, there was a fear that US troop maneuvers in Honduras on the frontier with Nicaragua would be a prelude for a US or a US-aided attack on the Sandinista government of Nicaragua. PBI was able to draw upon an already existing team of people in southern California, some of whom were trained in radio transmission. The team had already trained together and built up a ‘team spirit’. The team was able top move out quickly. Negotiations with diplomats from Nicaragua and Honduras were carried out at the UN in New York as part of the PBI secretariat was in Philadelphia, in easy reach of New York. After the US-Hondourous maneuvers finished, the fear of a real invasion ended, and the PBI team was withdrawn. (2) One never knows if there were serious US plans for an attack or if support for the Contras was all that was envisaged. This experience showed the need for having an existing trained team and for good contacts with ambassadors at the UN. Given the crucial importance of close contacts with the UN, I was asked to represent PBI at the UN in Geneva, which I did from 1982 until about 1996 when there were changes in the functioning of the PBI secretariat. For reasons I do not know, after the one experience on the Nicaragua-Honduras frontier, there was no further use made of the team from southern California. PBI recruitment was done on an individual basis. Teams were constituted when individuals arrived in the country of action. The PBI activity became centered on individual protective accompaniment of local human rights activists living under threat of abduction or assassination in Guatemala. (3) During the 1980s, the Ambassador of Nicaragua to the UN in Geneva was one of my former students who kept me well informed about Central American politics. We had discussions on the possibility of non-violent defense against the Contras. While there was interest on the part of the Nicaraguan government, nothing was really put into place. There were two situations with which I was deeply involved in discussions with UN officials: the large-scale refugee flow of Muslim Burmese to Bangladesh with the danger of a Burmese Army attack on the refugees, and the transport of relief supplies during the wars in ex-Yugoslavia. In both cases, several hundred people would have been necessary with only two weeks notice. PBI was not equipped to raise that number of people in that length of time. Since the 1981 creation of PBI, a number of other organizations have joined the ranks of non-violent peace teams, some with hopes of building a large reserve of well-trained team members able to go into conflict areas as peacemakers and actively use and share their conflict resolution and peacemaking skills. There has also been a growth in mediation and conflict resolution efforts, both in academic programs and in non-governmental organizations (NGOs). However, as we see in the Georgia conflict, ‘when the chips are down’, governments turn to other governments, not to NGOs. The confidence of governments only in other governments should come as no surprise. The world is still organized around the role of states, and both the diplomatic services and the military are trained to be state-centric. There is no non-governmental peacemaking organization that springs to the mind of a government official in a crisis situation, with the possible exception of the International Committee of the Red Cross which is bound to governments by treaties which set out its rights and responsibilities. As Brian Urquhart, for many years the chief political officer in the United Nations, has written "Peacekeeping depends on the non-use of force and on political symbolism". The Red Cross is one of the most universally recognized political symbols. Even those who do not respect the Geneva Conventions know they are not supposed to shoot people with a Red Cross flag. Only the UN flag has such wide recognition as a non-state symbol. The second weakness of non-governmental peacekeeping is the lack of availability of people on short notice. While there are an increasing number of people who have studied in conflict resolution courses or have participated in efforts in the field, most have jobs, families etc. and cannot drop everything to live on the Georgia-South Ossetia frontier for three months. The military are sitting around waiting for something to do. The only civilian equivalents are monks. I had once thought that it might be possible to re-create the 'fighting monks' of Japanese history. I saw teams of Christian, Buddhist, and Hindu monks all trained and ready to be deployed. For a while in the 1980s when there were a good number of communes, I thought about 'New Age monks' that could play the same role. But I must not have been convincing enough. The third weakness is related to the other two. The people on the ground who are to be protected or at leased 'observed' know what the military are. They may not like soldiers, but they have seen them before. Non-violent peacekeepers without a recognizable symbol or uniform are unknowns and there is little time to explain. Non-violence is still more potential than reality. On the International Day of Nonviolence, we have to consider the road not yet travelled. *** Rene Wadlow, Representative to the United Nations, Geneva, Association of World Citizens and editor of the on-line journal of world politics and culture: www.transnational-perspectives.org Notes: 1. Thomas Weber.Gandhi's Peace Army: The Shanti Sena and Unarmed Peacekeeping, (Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 1996, 293pp.) 2. For an account see: Daniel Clark Transnational Action for Peace Transnational Perspectives Vol 9, No4, 1983 3. For a full analysis see: Liam Mahony and Luis Enrique Eguren Unarmed
Bodyguards: International Accompaniment for the Protection of Human Right,
(West Hartford, CT: Kumarian Press, 1997, 288pp.)
A Gaza Development Corporation by Rene Wadlow On Monday 17 December, a funding conference to aid the Palestinian Authority will open in Paris with France, Norway and Tony Blair as the Middle East Quartet Special Representative as co-hosts. Norway is the chair of the ad hoc liaison committee which prepared the meeting. The conference, planned well in advance, comes shortly after the Annapolis meeting whose aim was to restart serious Israeli-Palestinian negotiations that would lead to the creation of a sustainable Palestinian state by the end of President Bush’s term in 2008. Financing an economic recovery and development program for Palestine is an obvious need for the creation of a state. President Mahmoud Abbas of the Palestinian Authority has asked for $5.8 billion for the 2008-2010 period, and it is likely that pledges will be of that order. However, it is often easier to raise funds than to spend them in ways that promote the desired ends. Although the Palestinian Planning Minister Samir Abdullah is in Paris for preliminary talks, it is not sure that the advance planning for the conference has taken into consideration the need to integrate an economically-vigorous Palestine into the wider geographic context. Such a wider economic zone would include Israel, Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan. Prosperity depends on liberating the economic potential of the Palestinian refugees and especially their descendants. The return of a large number of the Palestinian refugees to Israel from Lebanon, Syria and Jordan is impossible for political reasons, and the return or settlement in Gaza is impractical for ecological reasons, population density being already very high. Palestinians have been prevented from playing an active and positive political and economic role in Lebanon. Given the fractured nature of Lebanese politics, it is unlikely that Lebanese leadership will help integrate Palestinians into Lebanese society now, if they have not done it during the last 60 years. Thus, it is basically the Palestinians living in Lebanon who are likely to integrate the West Bank. Palestinians living in Jordan are likely to continue living there, and Palestine-Jordan economic ties are likely to grow. The current plan of the Palestinian Authority is to use 70% of the hoped-for new revenue for budget support and debt repayment and 30% on development. One can question this ratio in principle, but we do not have unpaid Palestinian civil servants knocking at the door. 30% of new funds for expansion and creation of new industries seems low to spark continuing economic growth. There are two political issues that take the creation of an economically-strong Palestinian state out of the framework of economic planning and require social and peacebuilding measures. The first is the continuing poor relations between Palestinians and Israelis (at least with the majority Jewish segment of the Israeli population) and the second is the separation between Gaza and the West Bank -- a political, economic as well as a physical separation. Thus, there is a need to earmark funding for Palestinian-Israeli peacebuilding activities. Economic support for peacebuilding activities, especially those carried out by non-governmental organizations played an important role in the Northern Ireland peace process. The European Union created a Peace and Reconciliation Fund followed by the International Fund for Ireland which emphasized the linkages between economic aid, conflict resolution, and peacebuilding. Some $393 million were spent for the period 1995-1998 and this was increased in the year 2000. Much of the money was administered by non-governmental organizations and local authorities in some 5000 projects. The peacebuilding efforts in Northern Ireland were coordinated with efforts in the Republic of Ireland whose economic growth was also helped by grants from the European Union. While no two situations are alike, political violence had broken out in Northern Ireland in 1968 and was based on a long history of Protestant/Catholic tensions. It was largely the humanistic vision of Jacques Delors, then President of the European Commission, who saw the need for such peacebuilding financing. We have to hope that the Paris Conference will find its Delors. The divisions between Gaza and the West Bank are real and need to be overcome. Hamas, in control of the Gaza strip, was not part of the Palestinian delegation to Annapolis and is unlikely to be among the Palestinian negotiators in Paris. The recreation of a Palestinian unity government, while necessary, is not likely in the short run. However, a rise in the welfare of the population in Gaza is necessary immediately. Economic hardship and massive unemployment are unlikely to lead to more liberal attitudes and a will to compromise. As a unity Palestinian Authority is not possible for the moment, alternative structures based on continued Hamas control of Gaza need to be put into place. One possibility would be a Gaza Development Corporation, an independent socio-economic body devoted to planning and administration and funded by part of the new revenue arising from the Paris conference. Such a Gaza Development Corporation would obviously have Hamas members, but also persons chosen for their expertise as well as persons from community organizations. Such a mixed body would be an innovative structure and could be in a cooperative but independent relation with the Palestinian Authority. 17 December must be more than a fund-raising day but also one of political creativity. Rene Wadlow is the Representative to the United Nations, Geneva of the Association of World Citizens and the editor of the journal of world politics www.transnational-perspectives.org
We the Silent Majority and the Muslim Fanatics A reply to an email received a few months ago - the email is included below I live in Australia. I had written this immediately after I received the email quoted below from someone. Somehow I decided to observe 'peace' and did not send it out straight away. With the Australian election looming, I now speak for the silent majority both in the West as well in the East. Some of you may feel like forwarding it to others. To add some fuel to the fire…in the Judo-Christian propaganda war against Islam and Muslims, using 'fanatic phenomenon' as a cause rather than as an effect… I know first-hand what it is like to be subjected to fanaticism. I was born in a peace-loving community that has been persecuted relentlessly for more than 100 years by the fanatics. When very young, returning from our local primary school, often my elder brother and I were stoned and verbally abused by a gang of local kids. I was only 8 years old but remember it vividly when we had to flee our home with just the clothes we were wearing at the time. The house was saved but how can I forget the loss of our beloved library containing many rare hand-written manuscripts that were taken out by the illiterate mob and burnt in the street? Many belonging to my community and personally known and loved by me have been killed, jailed or driven out of Pakistan by the fanatics. Over time, I have come to reconcile myself with the fact that those kids and fanatics were illiterate, ignorant, hooligans and vandals not driven by any ideology but by a base desire to enjoy themselves while inflicting pain on others. If Islam means peace then such people were obviously not acting accordingly. If you want to know how Muslims feel about terrorism and about being
branded as terrorists, go to: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1645580,00.html
The email below is oversimplifying and very much one-sided propaganda. It does not explain what has caused this recent resorting to so called Islamic fanaticism. Why is all of a sudden the Western media placing so much emphasis on using the term 'Islam, 'Islamist', 'Muslim' very often in the same sentence with words such as terror, terrorist, and fanatics? If the Muslim women dress differently the media portrays them as backward. We only need to visit Christian Italy, Spain or Greece or remember early immigrant women to Australia from these places wearing their head covering that if worn today by Muslim women is now being touted as the hateful word 'hijab'. We enjoy our freedom to wear a bikini in public but why do we deny the same freedom of a Muslim woman to wear what she feels comfortable with? The Christian/Hindu/Marxist Tamil Tigers have carried out more than 200 suicide bombs but we never hear about their religion! Is it because their campaign is not directed against the 'Christian' West? When 8,000 Muslim Bosnian men and boys were butchered we never heard about the 'Christian' background of the UN Troops who allowed it to happen or that of the 'Christian' mass murderers but only that they were Serbs. And this was allowed to happen in Europe, not in Africa! When Israelis kill Muslims or pursue truly racist policies hardly anyone mentions that they are Jews. When an American or Australian commits mass murder no one mentions his religion but while living in the West if a Muslim is alleged to break the law his religion and cultural background are always mentioned. Why the selective reporting? Criminals are criminals. If we must mention their religion or ethnicity then we must do so for each one of them. When Muslims are killed, the Western media takes its time in reporting it until after the event, as happened in Bosnia. When Christians and Jews get killed by any Muslims, the same media goes into a frenzy. Is a Christian or Jewish life worth more than that of a Muslim? When local Christians were killing immigrant Muslims on an island in Indonesia no one told us. When the Muslims took up the sword to retaliate suddenly we had multimedia stories on the event. When the Christian militia in East Timor drove out the Muslim Timorese who became refugees in West Timor we never heard about them. In Australia there are support groups about East Timor refugees but none above West Timor refugees. Why the one-sided compassion? 9/11 killed 3000 Americans. We are being told daily never to forget. The Gulf War based on blatant lies has killed more than 500,000 Iraqi 'Muslims' and created 2.5 million 'Muslim' Iraqi refugees. Who is counting the 'Muslim' civilians being killed by the Americans in Afghanistan? See http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1666 and http://www.cursor.org/stories/civilian_deaths.htm if you want to find out more. And yet we expect cooperation and affirmative action from the silent Muslim majority? The Iran-Iraq war lasted 8 years and killed over a million 'Muslims' on both sides of the border. Did you ever hear about it or remember anything about it? You know why? Because Americans and the West hated the Islamic revolution in Iran so much that they actively encouraged and provided military hardware and advice to their beloved despot ruler of Iraq, Saddam Hussain to invade and attack Iran. He was fully supported by the Americans throughout that war even though he was gassing the Muslim Kurds as well. And he was considered a friend of the Christian West at that time! When a fanatic Muslim blows himself up and many other people, we shake our head and can't fathom such stupidity. When our democratically elected Western governments use their veto to support 'Jewish' Israel to continue occupying Palestine and for killing thousands of Muslim Palestinians over more than 40 years, we (the silent majority in the west) keep on voting them back in because a stronger economy means more to us than morality or ethics. And a war brings prosperity to some! So we the silent majority in the West, let us keep on voting democratically so that our governments keep on telling us lies about their reasons for going to war against the Muslims or for their support of Israel's racist policies, or of undemocratic and corrupt Arab rulers that have greatly contributed towards creating the current fanatic backlash phenomena. Here are some of the lines (in italics) from the email that I would like to comment on. The full text of the email is at the end of this article. The fact is, - that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history. Completely false! There are more than one Billion Muslims spread across
the world. Don't judge them by what happens in a handful of undemocratic
kingdoms and Emirates planted in the Middle East by the Christian US/British
imperialists. 17 out of 19 hijackers of 9/11 were said to be from Saudi
Arabia, a monarchy installed and supported by the Christian West for its
oil and well known for funding of and spreading its militant brand of Islam
in Pakistan and in Indonesia. Saudi authorities have openly admitted and
threatened with funding the Sunni insurgency in Iraq to stop the spread
of Shia Iranian influence. What action has been taken against Saudi Arabia?
The fact is that the old British practice of Divide and Rule is very much
in fashion again. Invade Iraq to remove Saddam and let the Shia and Sunni
Muslims kill each other. Divide Palestinians into Fatah and Hamas but support
one faction. The Muslims will be too busy killing each other. They won't
have time to complain about or attack Israel. Children living and growing
up in refugee camps and under constant attack only learn to be angry and
desperate and prone to militancy. Why do we expect them to learn how to
love those who make their daily life hell?
It is the fanatics who march. It is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting wars worldwide. It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire continent in an Islamic wave. Wow! Did I say something about Christian propaganda above? 50 shooting wars? Do a bit of search on the web and look up: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/index.html for a list of the 42 current conflicts. I quote from the above site:
That still makes a total of only 32 significant conflicts and out of those you can judge none as driven by truly ideological fanatical reasons. Consider Sudan, the most popular topic with the Western media these days. If any of you know what happened with Biafra in Nigeria you would know what I am talking about (and I was in Nigeria at the time). Did the Sudanese government started this conflict? It was the (Western supported) rebels in the oil rich Darfur region of Sudan that started attacking the established government so that their Western masters, the oil merchants, could move into the vacuum with lucrative contracts. When you look up the civilian casualty and refugees figure in the above
conflicts, who comes on top? Israel, Iraq and Afghanistan. Who has been
invading, occupying and waging the war there? Who helped establish Israel
and drove millions of Muslim refugees from their homes with no right to
return? Compare that with the officially recognized fundamental right of
any Jew anywhere in the world to return to Israel no matter where he/she
was born! Do you consider it fair and civilised? What else is racism?
It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or honour kill. Now I have heard everything. Easy jargon this one! It is of course humane, Christian and civilized (in fact quite OK) to use a 'precision' missile or 2000 lbs bunker buster that leaves no trace of the children and women, or cluster bombs and mines that keep on killing year after year and will not be considered murder, but it is inhuman to behead someone just because the 'civilized' people find it upsetting and unfamiliar. Honour-Kill? The bloody idiots were doing that long before Islam appeared on the scene. That is not fanaticism, that is old tribal custom and nothing to do with Islam. Hindus have been burning widows with their husbands for thousands of years. That too was considered honour-kill and only recently the custom seems to have gone out of fashion. Let us admit our own laziness. We, the Silent Majority in the West, are comfortable living with secure mortgages, double garage homes, nuclear families and petrol guzzling 4-wheel drives (just to take our children to schools everyday - if you don't believe me, just visit a local school at the kids drop or pick up time). We are pre-occupied with career, power, money, sex, fashion, sports and politics. Why should we give a damn about what is happening in some backward heathen Muslim countries and what has been causing the current restlessness? How many of us are being attacked, murdered, invaded, occupied, driven out of our homes for ever, or see our children being shot? How many of us live with passes and permits and daily public humiliation of body searches just to go to work? And what if we were, what would we do to end the oppression? Would we lie down and get trampled on by the invaders or would some of us with balls join the resistance? Would that action be morally correct irrespective of what bloody religion we believed in? Personally, as I live in Australia, if Australia was invaded and we had to live under oppression like that, I would be the first one to want to join the resistance! I would gladly be labelled a fanatic by the invaders. But that would have nothing to do with my religion! It would have everything to do with what I consider Right or Wrong! It is not right to invade and occupy another country or people for so long that several generations are born in oppression, suppression and daily cruelty. Nothing good comes out of that. We can see it happening but we really know nothing!
Below is the original email I received:
Subject: FW: History lesson something worth considering... Subject: History lesson
Subject: Learn from History A man whose family was German aristocracy prior to World War Two owned a number of large industries and estates. When asked how many German people were true Nazis, the answer he gave can guide our attitude toward fanaticism. "Very few people were true Nazis "he said," but many enjoyed the return
of German pride, and many more were too busy to care. I was one of those
who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools. So, the majority just
sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew it, they owned us,
and we had lost control, and the end of the world had come. My
We are told again and again by "experts" and "talking heads" that Islam is the religion of peace, and that the vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace. Although this unqualified assertion may be true, it is entirely irrelevant. It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better, and meant to somehow diminish the spectre of fanatics rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam. The fact is, - that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history. It is the fanatics who march. It is the fanatics who wage any one of
50 shooting wars worldwide. It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter
Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over
the entire continent in an Islamic wave. It is the fanatics who bomb, behead,
murder, or honour kill. It is the fanatics
Communist Russia comprised of Russians who just wanted to live in peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant. China's huge population, it was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people. The average Japanese individual prior to World War 2 was not a War mongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across South East Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians; most killed by sword, shovel and bayonet. And, who can forget Rwanda, which collapsed into butchery. Could it not be said that the majority of Rwandans were "peace loving"? History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for all our powers of reason we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of points: Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence. Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don't speak up, because like my friend from Germany, they will awake one day and find that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have begun. Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Serbs, Afghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, and many others have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up until it was too late. As for us who watch it all unfold; we must pay attention to the only group that counts; the fanatics who threaten our way of life. Lastly, at the risk of offending, anyone who doubts that the issue is serious and just deletes this email without sending it on, can contribute to the passiveness that allows the problems to expand . So, extend yourself a bit and send this on and on and on!! Let us hope for a better world !
Pakistan's Emergency and the International Media Pakistan's political fortunes, or misfortunes rather, have been a mixed
bag of virtues and an incessantly vague and utterly useless blame games
since the proclamation of emergency by the nation's military strongman,
General Pervez Musharraf. Out of the many different scenarios and analyses
that
Speaking very generally, the international media have held the movement being launched by the civil society that is being spearheaded by Justice (retd) Wajihuddin Ahmed, Imran Khan, Nawaz Sharif, the honourable deposed judges of the Supreme Court and the High Courts and arrested lawyers like barrister Aitzaz Ahsan, Ali Ahmed Kurd and Advocate Munir Malik, in high respect. It is being broadly seen as a national movement being commandeered by Western educated, secular and moderate lawyers, politicians, journalists and deposed judges that widely seeks to reinstate the supremacy of the constitution, restore the supremacy of the law and judiciary, ensure an independent and free media and to promote values of pluralism and democracy in all sections of the society. The western media has played its role in exposing General Musharraf's hypocrisy with regards to the clampdown of emergency in the country. Though he blamed the judiciary's interference into affairs of the executive and the media for sensationalising acts of terror, majority of the people of Pakistan do indeed believe that the major reason for the proclamation of emergency was not the rising acts of terrorism and suicide bombings in the country, but an expected verdict of an eleven member Supreme Court bench headed by the honourable Justice Javed Iqbal that would have declared Musharraf's candidature for a third term presidency unconstitutional. General Musharraf had the words of his legal advisors and counsels, Syed Sharifuddin Pirzada and Attorney General Malik Qayyum that the verdict was to go against him, 8-3. Therefore in order to save his 'own skin', as an article in The Economist would go on to say, General Musharraf decided to proclaim emergency and deal with an activist judiciary and an influential media, with an iron fist. In an article posted on Newsweek's website on November 26, journalist Ron Moreau correctly mentions that "nearly every Pakistani believes that Musharraf declared the draconian emergency measures expressly to oust the justices—who were poised to declare his re-election to a second five-year term unconstitutional." This fact is further validated by the fact that terrorist activities and suicide bombings have further spiked up since the proclamation of emergency, as a major military operation in the erstwhile peaceful Swat valley, purportedly against the militant leader Maulana Fazlullah and his loyalists seems inevitable. What can be seen in Pakistan is that against all odds and rational norms, General Musharraf has been pretty easy and calm with the terrorists and has vented his anger firmly on the media, the lawyers and civil society activists through massive arrests, news blackouts and ferocious usage of tear gas against civilians. This has cast the general's image as that of a firm believer in democracy; way too much irrespective of whatever George W. Bush has to say. The Time magazine in its cover story on Pakistan has correctly depicted this fact in its November 19 issue by accepting that "it wasn't the extremists who bore the brunt of Musharraf's wrath. Indeed, as even as his regime cracked down on lawyers, journalists and human rights activists, it agreed to a cease fire with a powerful militant leader( Maulana Fazlullah) who had taken 213 soldiers hostage in the lawless north-western region." The story further went on to quote human rights activist and the head of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan Aasma Jehangir, saying that the "arrested are progressive, secular minded people, while the terrorists are offered negotiations." One lesson that General Musharraf has never shown to have learnt or implemented is the willingness of the army's top hierarchy to take casualties. This has been one fundamental issue that has plagued the army ever since the defeat in East Pakistan in 1971. General Zia was quick enough to withdraw his troops from the Siachen glacier and (Pakistan conceded that land to India) when casualties and military expenditures started to spiral upwards during the brief but deadly military skirmish with the much larger and better equipped Indian Army back in 1984. Musharraf found himself at the centre of the storm that sprouted out from the Kargil misadventure. Amidst international pressure spearheaded by the Clinton administration and rising casualties, General Musharraf quickly ordered withdrawal of troops from the Kargil that had been so painstakingly taken up by the Kashmiri freedom fighters and the regular soldiers of the Pakistan army. One lesson that he should have learnt from America's recent misadventures is that in cases of combating terrorism, conflicts can only be fought and won when the regular army and its top leadership shows the willingness to take up casualties, come what may in order to achieve nationalistic goals and supreme causes like ridding the nation from terrorism. Musharraf has clearly failed in this assessment. However, this time round, it is so that for the first time since 1971, that the Army has been involved in operations that should have been dealt and resolved politically, with military operations being the last resort. The Army's inability to take up casualties, coupled with the degradation of the morale and confidence of the troops as a result of being tipped off against its own people, has been the largest and single most important factor that has emboldened the terrorists. During the Red Mosque stand off in Islamabad earlier this year, an operation was repeatedly shrugged off as leading authorities also shied away from tough diplomacy. The relatively casual attitude shown by the administration at that time did not only fester a wound that should have been easily closed down at the right time of the first diagnoses, goes on to speak volumes about the kind of thinking that prevails within the administration regarding the fight against terrorism. Just like Generals Ayub and Zia demonstrated the threat to American interests in South and Central Asia from the growing sways of Soviet style Communism, to derive maximum aid and benefits from the US, General Musharraf has used his trump card of terrorism to the same advantage and coincidentally, at the cost of the larger and more vital national interests. A vast majority of Pakistanis today are unwilling to believe and accept that the way General Musharraf and the army is dealing with the threat of terrorism is best in the nation's larger interest. General Musharraf's moves, unlike those of his predecessors, have not gone unchallenged. Surprisingly enough, many journalists, editors and columnists who have written about Pakistan's 'emergency plus' in international newspapers and magazines, have demonstrated the many similarities of this situation, with the emergency of the lat 1970s, as was proclaimed by the country's third military president, General Zia. Many Indian columnists, in their opinion-editorials have argued that as compared to General Zia, Musharraf has been considerably more powerful and more resourceful. Former Indian diplomat MK Bhadrakumar, in his opinion piece entitled 'will the US pressure tactics work?', in the Asia Times (reproduced by the Pakistani newspaper Daily Times on November 18), argued that as General Zia was a pariah back in 1979, General Musharraf at the time of the proclamation of emergency 2007, Musharraf was a front-line partner in the global fight against terror. Another major difference between the two emergencies was that Zia at that time, clamped down his authority in order to weed out the political opposition that he could possibly get from Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, an elected prime minister who was later hanged on the orders of Zia, through a very pliant judiciary. That is why Bhutto's hanging is referred to pretty often as a 'judicial murder.' Against this, Musharraf's emergency had actually allowed individual politicians to return from exile in the back drop of 'deals' and the politically blasphemous National Reconciliation Ordinance. Bhadrakumar also went on to compare John Negroponte's recent visit to Pakistan, to the visit that was embarked upon by President Carter's Secretary of State Warren Christopher and his National Security Advisor, Zbigniew Brzeziniski, in 1979. In both cases, it has been pointed out that American pressure and diplomatic efforts had been bound to fail due to a strikingly similar range of factors. Firstly, just as the Carter Administration had turned into a failed lame duck since the onset of the Iranian Revolution, Bush has suffered the same credibility crisis as a result of the Iraq misadventures and therefore, like General Zia, General Musharraf, keeping in focus the larger and long term interests of the institution to which he belongs, the Army, is forced to go slowly, and think beyond the outgoing administration that finally leaves office in January 2009. However, one other fact that needs to be highlighted is that unlike
General Zia, Musharraf is no more the only strong man at home. Unlike Zia,
he faces a huge and strong movement at home from the secular and moderate
civil society. The movement is seemingly growing in strength as its demands
for press freedom, reinstatement of the pre-November 3 judiciary, among
others are becoming more clear and louder each passing day. Considering
this fact, it would not be entirely incorrect to assume that the civil
society's uprise since March 9, the day President Musharraf fired the Supreme
Court's Chief Justice and filed a reference against his alleged acts of
corruption, has shaken the very foundations of the current unconstitutional
and rubber stamp set-up that has been desperately cobbled together by General
Musharraf himself. Against all this, in 1979, the nation had yet to fully
recover from the confidence shattering defeat of the Armed forces in East
Pakistan in 1971 and also from the politically tense situation during the
1977 elections and therefore the masses did not dare come out to the streets
to protest. Therefore controlling law and order situation was pretty much
easier at that time, than in 2007. Also, as there was just one state owned
television channel at that time and only a handful of newspapers that were
heavily censored, ideological domination and proliferation of solely state
friendly messages through the media was not only easy, but indeed was the
order of the day! The state owned media in Pakistan at that time, was nothing
more than a practical example of Katz and Lazersfeld's hypodermic syringe
model. The media landscape now is pretty much different in an era of Information
Technology, nanotechnology and globalisation.
Considering these and many other facts and issue that cannot be discussed here due to limitations of space, it would be logical to accept MJ. Akber's conclusion, that "Ronald Reagan needed Zia more than Zia needed Reagan. Musharraf needs Bush more than Bush needs Musharraf." This is all the more so also because of the situation in Afghanistan then and now. Then, Reagan needed Zia as a proxy who was indirectly commandeering America's war against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, using their equipment, ammunition and money. Against that, Musharraf jurisdiction of action is by far more restricted and limited, most reasons of which are beyond the scope of this write up. The new curbs on the media have barred the media from giving live coverage of rallies and suicide bomb blasts. The media is also not supposed to air messages of 'terrorists.' Like the judiciary, the media should not bring actions of the executive into questioning. Many of the live television talk shows and hosts whom the government thought to be hostile to the official line of propaganda, have either been silenced through the use of force, or the media owners have been asked to do away with their shows and fire the hosts or else they would face heavy fines and other penalties including television blackouts and imprisonments. ARY television, AAJ television and Dawn News TV are among some of the big media channels that have obliged to follow the government's newly issued draconian 'code of conduct' and have subsequently banned the shows of various popular anchors like Kashif Abbasi of ARY and Syed Talat Hussein of AAJ TV. It has so far been only Geo TV that has taken a principled stand against the government's onslaught against the media, even at the cost of around $13.33 million, the alleged financial loss that the network has so far incurred due to its inability to broadcast the ongoing India-Pakistan cricket series, for which it had the sole broadcasting rights in Pakistan. Even the network's entertainment, youth and sports channels still remain suspended. The story with newspapers has however been totally different. Although the media curbs have been there for newspapers and other print media as well, but the press, to which many Pakistanis have reverted back to in order to get the news and views, has so far defied these bans and newspapers like The Nation, The News and Dawn, Pakistan's largest selling English language daily, have been very critical of the government from the outset of the proclamation of emergency. However, considering the low levels of literacy in Pakistan, their impact still remains limited and therefore the administration is not as much concerned about the way print journalism has been functioning over the last few weeks. In an interview during CNN's programme International Correspondents on Nov 25, Dawn's London correspondent, M. Ziauddin said that "most of the dictators in the country in Pakistan have tolerated English print journalism, because they knew that most of the people don't read English newspapers. And that gives them a kind of window to show to the world, look, we're so liberal on the media." He indeed raised an interesting issue. It is true that the Musharraf government has indeed used the existence of the nation's vibrant English language media in order to validate his claims of giving the media liberty during his tenure over the last eight years. Realities are however different. Many senior Pakistani journalists and heads of various media bodies in the country are of the opinion that the government has not given the media anything that they had not struggled hard for day in and day out. General Musharraf has however failed to learn his lessons of media management over the years. He still does not understand that by laying curbs on the traditional media, news and essential realities regarding the government's malfunctioning and corruption cannot be hidden. This is the age of citizen journalism, it is the age of the Internet and mobile technologies. The international media's principled stand against the imposition of emergency must be taken with a pinch of salt. What I mean to say here is that the Western news media must be credited for ensuring that protests and demonstrations against the military rule are kept in the real limelight, but however once again, like the case of Iraq, some analyses and interpretations continue to remain flawed as the scope of debate and discussion continues to remain restricted. This has led to the concealment of many essential and hidden realities. What the masses out there have not been able to understand is the dangerous silence of the western media when it comes to uncovering the hands of the hidden institutions and the vast anti-Musharraf lobby in the west. What the western media has failed to analyse is that America, is only using Pakistan to fulfill its global aims of controlling oil and gas in the Central Asian Republics. America, like always is currently using the Musharraf regime to its ultimate benefits in South and Central Asia. The British were the ones who taught the Americans a very important lesson, that in order to pacify the Middle East in its favour, the Americans must solidly seal the gates, or the two openings of the Middle East. One being Saudi Arabia and Turkey and the other being Pakistan. Over the years, the Americans have had a considerable impact on the policy-making procedures in Pakistan. The current situation is not different. It must not come as a surprise that both, Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto are only back home because of the nods from Washington. It must also not be forgotten that in the expulsion of Nawaz Sharif to Saudi Arabia, back in the year 2000, former US President Bill Clinton had a lead role to play. What Musharraf has failed to understand that at this moment in time, when the scare of depleting energy resources has made the Americans invade two Muslim countries which are rich in oil, gas and other energy generating energy resources like coal—all in the name of fighting global terrorism and extremism. General Musharraf might have conveniently played into American hands, all throughout these last eight years. Americans are still very much for the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan pipeline. If media reports are anything to go by, then it must be added here that there have been reports saying that as a reward for snubbing the gas pipeline project with Iran, America has offered this TAP project and another oil/gas pipeline project to Pakistan that involves Kuwait and Qatar. America has long sought a complete control over the natural resources in the Middle East. Musharraf's compromise on national security and real national interests has not been an issue that the Western media has taken up because the corporate media, barring a few exceptions has been eager to toe the official lines of the White House and Pentagon and has not been critical enough of General Musharraf, at any other time in the last eight years, than in the last one month or so. That purely is so because if political instability in Pakistan last for too long American interests in the region, including the military campaign in Afghanistan could start facing serious setbacks. Another factor that the Western media has generally failed to highlight is the role being played by various lobbies and institutions in fuelling the current anti-Musharraf movement in Pakistan. The pro-India and pro-Israel lobbies in the US have it in their interests to fuel violence in Pakistan, as it is only then that their claims of the 'Islamic bomb' or 'nuclear weapons falling into the wrong hand' would be lent an ear to. Those who think that political tensions in Pakistan would have an adverse impact on India today, are wrong. What these commentators do not understand is that on the account of being a much larger country in size and economy, India can grasp the shocks without any jitters in the economy, obviously until and unless the Pakistan Army does not try to take advantage of the political situation and embark upon a wild and mindless adventure like Kargil or Operation Gibraltar. So, as India is out of the equation and still relatively secure, it can be said that those pro-Zionist western lobbies which have opposed Pakistan's nuclear programme from day one, stand most to gain by these political unrests, provided that they are short-lived. By portraying Pakistan as an unstable and untrustworthy partner in the War on Terror, these lobbies can effectively get sanctions levelled against Pakistan, just like the Pressler Amendment of the 1990s. The Western media never covers the activities of these powerful groups. Against to what may be seen in front, there are hidden hands involved, which have been using the lawyers's movement in our country for their own professional and political gains. Those bar associations that have given in strong condemnation to the post-emergency situation that has evolved in the country. Where these bar association have taken a strong notice of the lawyers' manhandling in the country and the house arrests of the honourable Supreme Court Justices, there it may be recalled that the US Supreme Court is indeed the administration's lapdog. The US judiciary validated Bush's presidency and electoral win in November 2000, when by all accounts and recounts, AL-Gore was the clear winner in Florida. The American judiciary's freedom was recently clipped and purged when the US Congress passed the Military-Commissions Act of 2006, that was also signed by President Bush. The Act conveniently now disables the Supreme Court and other civilian courts across the USA to take suo moto notices of cases of Human Rights abuse that come up as a result of illegal detentions and torture that have been going on around the world endlessly, all at the convenience of the Bush Administration and the powerful Jewish lobbies in the US. Handpicked magistrates and judges would now oversee such cases in newly constituted military tribunals that have so far been shielded from public view and notice, by none other than America's corporate owned media. These Courts in the US cannot operate freely within their own jurisdiction. Their own freedoms have been eloquently and conveniently abused by President Bush and his many predecessors whose unconstitutional acts have not been investigated and scrutinised by the judiciary in the USA, despite of receiving widespread coverage and condemnation from around the world. How can lawyers and judges who present themselves in these brainwashed and inflexible courts speak for an indigenous lawyers' movement in another part of the world? Pakistan's judiciary has in fact done what judges and lawyers in many other parts of the world have not been able to do in recent history. Our judges and lawyers, those of whom are leading the protests against General(R) Pervez Musharraf, have had the courage to say 'no' to absolute authority, which in the words of the illegally fired Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammed Chaudry, 'corrupts absolutely'. These stark realities, where on the one hand have yet to be dawned upon Musharraf, have also been missing from stories and media coverage regarding Pakistan in the West. Over the last two years or so, more importantly over the past few months, what the Western media has failed to truly report is the fact that General Musharraf has often resorted to use brute force in the country for two major reasons. Firstly, he has used it to keep the terror issue burning so that he can show to the world that in case they decide to do away with him, the extremists would take over and that Pakistan's nuclear weapons would fall into the wrong laps, like a bunch of juicy and ripe mangoes and oranges. This is the message that he tried to radiate out of the Red Mosque issue, a wound that he festered for around 6 months, before finally acting. Secondly, General Musharraf has resorted to the use of brute force to deal with political issues. This has been seen quite frequently over the last twelve months. The machinery of the law-enforcement agencies have been used against an increasingly secular media, lawyers, politicians and even the Chief Justice, Iftikhar Mohammed Chaudry who was manhandled by the police on March 13. Brute force was used in Karachi on the 12th of May when then government in Sindh, was desperate to prevent the then suspended Chief Justice from addressing a session of the Sindh High Court Bar Association, SHCBA. The CJ and his team of legal advisors were sent packing back to Islamabad from the Karachi airport only. Brute force was again used on September 29 when lawyers were peacefully protesting along the Constitution Avenue in Islamabad. That day, papers for the Presidential election of General(R) Musharraf were to be scrutinised and passed by the handpicked and state sponsored puppets in the Election Commission of Pakistan, which is headed by Justice (retd) Qazi Mohammed Farooq. In a vain attempt to silence and brutally disperse the assembled lawyers and journalists the police, allegedly on the orders from the top, reigned in it with its full stock of tear gas, pistols, guns and batons to beat up the unarmed civilians in what the retired head of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), Munir A Malik called a 'fascist assault' while talking to Dawn News, Pakistan's first private English language television station. Like President Bush, General(R) Musharraf has failed to understand that problems, which are of legal and political nature, cannot be solved through brute force. Just like Iraq, Waziristan, Balochistan, the judicial crisis, including the General's questionable eligibility for a third term as head of state, all were problems of political and legal nature and should have been solved politically, and in the courts and on the media. Resort to brute force has only made problems, which were already pretty delicate and controversial, more troublesome. The Army has been put in greater trouble along Swat and Waziristan. The vibes of dissent and rebellion against waging a war on civilians, can now be heard clearly. It is in this context that the proclamation of emergency shall be seen. Though Musharraf's short term goals have been achieved, but he would learn sooner, rather than later that this was not the legitimate, legal and political way of dealing with an influential media and an activist Supreme Court. All the aforementioned issues have been widely discussed in the Western
media, but it is so that in case of the American media, the facts have
been twisted and so incorrectly presented that the consumers of the mainstream
corporate media in the US would still be pretty much ill informed and ignorant
about the realities on the ground. This is coupled by the fact that as
most American journalists and media personalities do not have a firm knowledge
of Pakistan's culture, traditions, politics, etc. their analyses do end
up being flawed in the end. This allegation was widely levelled against
the Newsweek magazine when it mentioned Pakistan as the most dangerous
country in the world. A read through of Newsweek's coverage of Pakistan
in recent times, largely implies that 'senior' journalists including the
magazine's editor of the international section, Fareed Zakaria, have only
a partial knowledge about Pakistan. The magazine has generally ignored
the underlying realities of the Red Mosque standoff and does not present
a neutral picture of Pakistan's struggle for democracy. Consider the following
questions. How many of the Western journalists really covering Pakistan
really know about what constitutionalism, pluralism, secularism and democracy
the Quaid-E-Azam really stood up for? How much do they know about the people's
movement that was spearheaded by Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto and the Pakistan People's
Party in the 1970s? The answer, not many.
Thus conclusively, it can be said that the Western media's partial knowledge about Pakistan, coupled with the interests and objectives of the establishment and strong Jewish and Christian evangelical lobbies and the US media's corporate owners, has often led to shabby and highly blasphemous, inflammable and ignorant journalism when it comes to reporting about Pakistan and the Islamic World and their issues. This leads to bad reporting which in turn ensures that the consumers of mainstream media coverage in the US, largely remain ignorant and shielded off from the essential realities, knowledge of which is their fundamental right, even under the United States' Constitution's Freedom of Information Act. No wonder, CNN journalist Christiane Amanpour called reporters of the FOX NEWS channel, the 'foot soldiers' of the Bush administration.
HARMONIOUS COEXISTENCE -- The Next Step in Global Cooperation? by Richard Kimball We know our current situation -- over population, limited resources, numerous conflicts, massive environmental pollution and destruction, and materialization of minds -- but where is this destructive process leading? Will it get more destructive or can we create a more harmonious coexistence leading to cooperative synergy (1 + 1 > 2) and a sustainable and healthy existence? It is our genetic nature to be both cooperative and destructive. In Buddhism, these elements are also in our past life karma. Can we overcome these proclivities and stop the destructive process before we go over the precipice? All Spiritual Traditions have teachings and moral principals that address these issues, such as no killing, stealing, abusing and living in illusions. If these teachings have been around for such a long time, why haven't they been widely put into practice? What kind of new "wake-up" call will it take for us to change our thoughts, feelings and behaviors? For most "addicts" it takes such a "wake-up call" for them to open up to possible change. But, less than five percent really take such an opportunity to put into reality the knowledge available to them! Does this mean that we are currently in such a world situation? It is obvious that a recognition of our current destructive and addictive state is becoming more obvious, especially to those who have access to such information. But, most people are still in denial of their own role in this process. There is more access than ever before to modalities for dealing with our attachments, hindrances and addictions, but who is really utilizing them? The allure of greed, desire and excess is very strong in today's world, and the ways of seeking after such illusions and delusions have become available, even to children. So, can anything be done to change this process? The seeds of the future are always planted in the present. It all begins with ourselves. Buddhism says: "When the mind is pure, the land will be pure." If we have become "awakened" to these issues, we can make use of the resources we have (such as counseling, therapy, meditation, yoga, breathing) to self-develop, transform and then influence others who are ready. When the next great "wake-up" call comes, such as an economic and/or environmental "crash", we can be available to benefit those who are ready to grow. This process cannot be forced on anyone. As some Christians say, "God helps those who help themselves." Is this viewpoint pessimistic or realistic? Based on past experience, and current conditions, it is realistic - but nothing is certain. We may even destroy this earthly existence while transforming ourselves! It takes many to create such a change in relationships with other and nature. Who's Coming Along The journey that never ends waits for no one.
Should we avoid and escape the unfinished business inside?
Leave behind the rot and degradation;
The old is well known. Habit is a comfort.
Say goodbye to the past or there is nothing new in the future!
APPRECIATING CULTURAL DIVERSITY -- The Shamanic Spiritual Tradition by Richard Kimball, April 18, 2004 I am a Psychologist, Anthropologist and a Shaman (Ng'ganga) in the Shona Tradition in Zimbabwe. I have studied cultures all over the world and researched the psychological and spiritual aspects of human development for more than forty years. There are many kinds of Shamanic (Siberian for Healer) Traditions in Human History. Each culture has created people with special skills that may include physical healing, emotional healing and spiritual healing. These individuals can be either male or female. Some are expert in herbal medicine, others can either tell the future or connect one with deceased ancestors. Still others give advice on life issues and resolved conflicts. Since the beginning of humankind, our ancestors took part in ceremonies and celebrations, whether dancing around a fire for three days non-stop, connecting with the ancestors in a cave, or contacting the animal spirits before a hunt. In other words, spirituality has been a recognized part of all of life and existence from our very beginnings. Through dealing with an integrated beingness – body, mind and spirit – one could lead a successful and fulfilling life. Shaman knew that the body is the material form we inhabit, therefore it needs to be taken care of through our diet, exercise and medicines. Our mind is both our decision maker and connector to others so it needs to be kept healthy and open through positive socializing - dancing/drumming, morality and useful advice. Our spiritual energy that connects us to all of existence needs to respect the "gods" and "ancestors" who have given us this life. Traditional Healers were what we call today - psychologists, doctors, leaders and priests. Without the Spiritual Healers, we would not have survived as human beings! They made it possible for us to stay healthy and be in harmony with nature. These aware people were sensitive to all of life, understood that all of existence has energy and that we are all connected. They assisted the community in restoring health by removing some evil condition or affliction; purified and cleansed the mind and body through rituals and ceremonies and performed fundamental Rites of Passage (birth, adulthood, marriage and death) ceremonies. They provided meaning and understanding to life. Through their presence they gave hope, reduced fear, cleansed the community of evil doing and maladjustments, dealt with jealousy and revenge and prepared the group for climatic anomalies and possible wars. For traditional people, forgiveness (not necessarily forgetting) was a key element to keeping the band or tribe together. There were exceptions, but most negative acts were accepted and let go of through laughter, crying, or other kinds of catharsis, as well as counseling. The Shaman were always there to be of service in times of conflict, intolerance and need. Our ancestors were very flexible and adaptive. The 10 year anniversary of the Rwanda genocide, and other wars, are examples of not forgetting but realizing that life must go on and the survivors need to be taken care of in order for the children to carry on the cultural and spiritual tradition. Reconciliation in Rwanda has not been finalized, but it is still an on-going process. Another example of forgiveness is the Truth and Reconciliation that has taken place in Post-apartheid South Africa. Most Africans, as well as other traditional peoples, have been able to "go with the flow" even in light oppression (cf. colonialism and slavery), especially from Europeans, Arabs and Americans. It is this resilience that has allowed us to survive in the past, and should be used by us in the current world of conflicts. Often, escaping society's pain and suffering, has become more complex since society creates a lot more unresolved issues than ever before. Especially in today's children, there is a lot more separation of mind (both intellect and emotions), body and our spiritual essence (often people are in denial that this exists), especially because of the time discipline in schools and intellectualization in education, television and other media, computers and computer games and the attachment to machines in general. This kind of digitalization of the mind is a real trap, for many of today's youth have lost any sense of reality. In most of today's urbanized cultures, kids grow up inside "concrete walls" and do not have a chance to live a full life with nature and community. How many schools deal with the whole person? How many psychotherapists deal with the whole person? We have "jailed" our culture, and filled its inhabitants full of medications in order to keep them "incarcerated." Knowing about this conditioning and habituating of behaviors, does it solve life's issues or allow a person to grow and develop? Also, for most people, accepting this reality is both difficult and scary. Today, we have become attached to roles and identity and seem to want to hold on to and defend ourselves through fear of some loss. Such desires and illusions usually end up as attachments and addictions. We might say, "I want to go beyond my ordinary reality and beyond the pain and suffering." Is this just for a short time, or will it allow us to attain a deeper sense of consciousness? Will this belief liberate the mind, or is it in fact an illusion? When we are in a state of bliss from taking drugs, going into trance, or meditating, we may feel that it is wonderful. But who are we when we come back to the ordinary world? Bliss can be a state of attachment, and there is still a sensuality in it, a level of connection which is inside the ordinary brain. It is an illusion and is actually suppressing certain physical and neural areas. Does it lead to a kind of addiction because it is an illusion, and if we see "visions" or connect with a dead ancestor, what are we actually experiencing? Are we seeing reality or something that our mind is creating? What are altered states of consciousness? Are they "healthy?" This a very important concern, especially in terms of ethics. There was, and still is, abuse in the work of some Shaman. A small percentage do exploit people for their own material or other benefit, such as ego power. In all spiritual practices we need to be careful and test out the authenticity of the leader, the teachings and the results. Community is the basic structure in traditional societies. When they do rituals, it brings the community together. People are always going to have conflicts. The Shaman is often there to resolve some conflicts, and if they get together as a group and let out all the pent up anger, it will at least give them a sense of a functioning community. Of course they do lose a certain percentage of people who do not "fit in." But at least humans have existed for a hundred thousand years or more because of their ability to deal with conflicts most of the time. Also, it is possible that some people who went through certain ritual processes, did reach deeper consciousness and connect with their true essence, maybe even becoming enlightened. Ritual use of this Shamanic process, intermittently, is not an addiction. It certainly is a kind of attachment because it is part of habituation in life which is learned and accepted. The recreational use of chemicals is a dependency that is based on fear and need, and often does lead to attachment and addiction. So there is a difference between recreational use of substances and there use in ceremonies and other activities. Trying to escape from pain and suffering is because of the confusion, uncertainty and the meaninglessness that a lot of people feel in life. So, they hope for something more. It does not necessarily mean that they really want to transcend this life. Here is a contradiction: on the one hand they hate suffering, but on the other hand they are scared to death of any real transition. This is because they love the attachment to the excitement and sensuality of living this human life. Are drugs and rituals real openings or impediments? People have to search for themselves, in their lives, these key issues. They need to work with specialists, including perhaps a Shaman, and come to terms with who they are and what are the blockages and hindrances they have in their life at all levels. These might be some traumas that they experienced when they were a little kid which is still in there, and every time they try to open up, they get stuck in that experience - emotionally, cognitively, or behaviorally. Given the light of our history as human beings, we should learn from our ancestors, the Shamanic Traditions and other cultures. No matter what Spiritual Tradition we now embrace, we should accept, respect and appreciate our spiritual heritage and not demean it as "primitive." Nothing is perfect, but in appreciating cultural diversity, we can not only continue to survive, but also learn how to flourish in spiritual equality and fulfillment.
Excerpts from UN People's Assembly Panel below. Click here for full text. Speakers included Ramu Damodaran, Chief, Outreach Division, United Nations Department of Public Information. This was the first time the idea of a People's Assembly has been formally discussed within the structure of the U.N. Congratulations to all involved! HOW A UNITED NATIONS PEOPLE'S ASSEMBLY WOULD CONTRIBUTE TO UNITED NATIONS PARTNERSHIPS WITH CIVIL SOCIETY Friday, September 8, 2006 Sponsored by Communications
Coordination Committee for the UN, Citizens for a UN People's Assembly,
Association of World Citizens, Pathways to Peace, Young General Assembly,
and Unity Foundation.
One of our most critical global issues is the stockpiling of over 27,000 nuclear weapons, with over 4,000 nuclear warheads on hair trigger alert. A study by the Rand Corporation concluded these weapons would destroy both Russia and USA in an hour. Why do we allow this to happen? The people need to put pressure
on the countries to eliminate nuclear weapons. A People's Parliament
or Assembly could help educate and bring pressure on the governments.
Our work as activists involves
an obligation to recognize our power and responsibility. The strategy
of fear has allowed poor global decisions to be made by not holding our
government leaders accountable. To strengthen the UN and realize
the MDGs we need to sharply monitor those in power and hold our decision-makers
responsible.
Dr Calleman, Mayan Calendar expert, was in Los Angeles in the latter part of September, 2006. The Mayan Calendar -
by Dr Calleman
For a long time the Mayan calendar has appeared enigmatic to scholars and
lay people alike. A calendar with a core of 260 days ruled by special deities
and numbers has seemed like an oddity compared to the many astronomically
based calendars prevalent in the other cultures of the planet.
In the recent two decades interest in the calendar system of the ancient Maya has however increased dramatically all over the world. Many have come to conclude that this calendar system, which originally was discovered by the Native American peoples of present day Mexico and Guatemala, may be the most significant information that humanity possesses regarding its fate and purpose. Ultimately, this recognition seems to be a reflection of a changing world view. People at large are now moving away from the mechanical world view and towards one where the universe is ruled by "energies" in a broad sense. Consciousness is beginning to be seen as primary to matter and ultimately it is from this shift in world view that the increased interest in the Mayan calendar, punctuated by the upcoming Mel Gibson movie Apocalypto, derives. Carl Johan Calleman is a world leading expert on the Mayan calendar with a background as a biologist and cancer researcher (Ph.D in Physical Biology from the University of Stockholm). In 1993 he left his academic carreer as a Senior Researcher at the Dept of Environmental Health at the University of Washigton, serving among other things as an expert on cancer for the World Health Oganization, to devote himself full time to elucidating the broader meaning of the Mayan calendar. From his scientific perspective he has used the Mayan calendar as a template that allows us to understand evolution in the widest possible sense. Based on empirical studies he has demonstrated that biological or historical evolution is not a sequence of random events, but the result of a divine plan for the evolution of consciousness, a time plan that is described by the Mayan calendar. This amounts to a fundamental shift in world view where there is no longer a conflict between evolution and creation and where they are instead both true and life in general is part of a context given its meaning by the divine. Yet, Calleman consistently bases his theories on facts; for this there is a consensus of agreement within the academic community. Within the framework of evolution provided by the Mayan calendar no aspect of our existence seems to be excluded and so meaningful insights may be gained about everything from the evolution of galaxies to art history. All may be seen as aspects of the evolution of consciousness and human history in particular may be seen as projections of a mind that evolves according to a certain pattern that becomes understandable to the student of the Mayan calendar. What is generally called paradigm shifts in human science, knowledge and understanding of the world are simply to be understood as reflections of energy shifts in the Mayan calendar. The same may be said about the shifting religions and spiritual traditions of mankind that may all be understood as parts of processes generated by the universal principle of creation, termed by the Maya the World Tree. At the current level of evolution the transformation of consciousness is according to the Mayan calendar system speeding up and so also everything around us seem to be happening at a higher pace than ever before. This speed-up occurs outside of the control of human individuals and so it becomes increasingly important for us humans to understand it and find the tools to align our individual paths with the design of the cosmic plan. The student of the Mayan calendar has the benefit of understanding the speed-up of time and where it is taking the world. Most importantly, however, Calleman´s work with the Mayan calendar provides an extensive body of scientific evidence from all disciplines showing that life is inherently meaningful and has a higher purpose, a Theory of Everything, where science and spirituality are no longer separate. Dr Calleman is the author of The Mayan Calendar (Garev 2001) and The Mayan Calendar and the Transformation of Consciousness (Bear and Co, 2004) and has the web page www.calleman.com. He was the initiator of the Oneness Celebration June 6-8, 2004 and the Midlight Meditation, June 1-2, 2005. He collaborates among other with Don Alejandro Oxlaj (head of the council of elders of the Maya) and Sri Bhagavan in the Breakthrough Celebration www.breakthroughcelebration.com with the purpose of providing meaningful ways for people today who wants to participate in the divine process of creation described by the Mayan calendar.
Spectrum Magazine is in the process of being developed on our website. It existed for a number of years as a quarterly publication to present articles, stories, poetry, art work, and other materials related to the individuals and organizations involved in the Council. Please watch for these materials to appear shortly one at a time, until we will discover that the Magazine has been put together in a complete form. We will update the materials as they become available, rather than having to wait for a quarterly change of contents. We will use the Unity-and-Diversity Wheel as the basis for selecting materials, so that we will be able to cover all areas in the course of time. We invite you to submit materials that you feel would be appropriate based on the stated purpose of the Council and the concerns that you feel need to be voiced. Thank you kindly for your interest and cooperation.
Unity-and-Diversity Contact Information Leland P. Stewart, B.S.E., B.T.,
|