World renowned peace facilitator Mohammed Abu -Nimer shares experiences

Prof. Mohammed Abu-Nimer at the recently concluded conference on Forgiveness and Reconciliation in Jordan that brought together representatives from the Arab region 

By Surya Vishwa

Why is world peace seemingly so difficult? How can core humane concepts such as forgiveness and reconciliation find their due place in rectifying race and religion based conflicts around the world?

Is peace a property of the inner realm of a human as all religions indicate and how can this inner realm manifest in the outer world of policy and local as well as world politics?

How can we understand peace within the spheres of diplomacy, global economic and climate wellbeing and geopolitics?

Should not peace, diplomacy and geopolitics find a balance for the world to achieve authentic sustainable development? 

Can macro peacebuilding techniques and methodologies in one part of the world be relevant to another? 

Are the concepts of peacebuilding and human rights two sides of the same coin?

Can religion be used for the original goal that it was meant for – as a tool of holistically educating the inner consciousness of the human and how can we do it effectively in a time where religion is often used to fuel conflicts?

Economics and spirituality are seen as divorced from each other conceptually, but could the world be a better place if these two qualities were merged to strike a much needed balance as a tool of global poverty eradication?

Some of the above questions surface in our minds when we read or hear world news. Peace is a word that is today part and parcel of absence in much of what we see around us and often affects our minds negatively. 

Yet, there is an academic discipline in the world of modern university level education themed ‘peacebuilding’ as there is on ‘human rights.’ However, mainstream media pays little attention to the unravelling of the significance of these study streams which could greatly serve a world wilting amidst religious, ethnic, land and economic based conflicts.

This week we feature an interview with Mohammed Abu-Nimer, a Palestinian origin expert on global conflict resolution, peace and dialogue. Prof. Abu-Nimer is a full professor at the American University School of International Service in International Peace and Conflict Resolution in Washington, DC, the largest school of International Relations in the United States. With academic as well as peacebuilding facilitation experience of over 30 years he is the founder-director of Salam Institute for Peace and Justice in Washington, DC which carries out peacebuilding research, training and projects in many parts of the world, including the Arab world on facilitating interreligious and intercultural dialogue.

The work of Prof. Abu-Nimer is significant as a global peace researcher as well as a practitioner, mediating in actual conflict situations where his most recent areas of focus have included faith-based peacebuilding, interfaith dialogue, as well as peace and forgiveness education. Prof. Abu-Nimer has intervened and led conflict resolution programs in African countries (Chad, Niger, and Nigeria), Middle East, Palestine, Israel, Northern Ireland, the Philippines (Mindanao), Sri Lanka, and the United States.

In this interview we attempt to reach some insight into peacebuilding work done in different parts of the world and also find out the scope for peace and inter-religious understanding to be educative subjects for children, youth and adults: 

 

Q: You have worked widely in the world in peacebuilding. You got into this field after you left your homeland Palestine while a youth. Could you speak of this decision?

A: I was born in Palestine and received my secondary education at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

It is never easy to leave the country of one’s birth. For 10 years I worked in many peacebuildng programs held between Palestinians and Jews in Israel and since 1989 I have lived in the United States as an American. I have appreciated the positive nation building mechanisms this country has taken and feel free to criticise it constructively as needed. Freedom of expression is protected but also is constantly being challenged in the USA. 

Q: You teach subjects connected to international relations in conflict resolution and peacebuilding. How do you assess the relevance of the theory of these subjects when they are tested in the real world? 

A: Theory lays a contextual foundation for understanding practical dimensions. First of all the subject of peacebuilding intersects between disciplines such as sociology, history, economics and international relations, amongst others. One of the founders of the academic sphere of peace and conflict studies is Johann Galtung, a Norwegian professor of sociology who also had a degree in mathematics. Peacebuilding is not a subject that can be understood in an isolated manner and it was created from a deep understanding of society as gleaned from the discipline of sociology and psychology. Yes, there are difficulties when you test some of the theoretical concepts against what is aflame in the real world. 

Also a theory developed in one part of the world may not be seen as appropriate to another or will be seen sceptically to say the least. For example, when we come to teach peacebuilding we focus on non-violence, inclusivity and equality. Theoretically this is what we focus on when we promote peacebuidling in conflict ridden societies. These values are consistently questioned in every society, especially in those with deep rooted conflicts. 

Once a teacher of Quranic Studies in Chad asked us, “You want to teach us all these things. Please give examples from current reality where these things are present as they are not what we face.” I was part of a team representing the Salam Institute for Peace and Justice where we were looking at how Quranic schools could use religion for peace education. I told him ‘how about how you give examples from your faith (Islam).’

He said, “We do that but the gap between reality and the ideal is too vague and it is very hard for us to continue and deal with that. So we would rather talk about theology only.” 

So, yes, I understand very well the difficulty in transforming the ideals of peacebuilding in complex contexts. One of the reasons is because governments and at times international agencies support more the funding of security related counter-terrorism interventions and less of the people-centred peacebuilding mechanisms. 

 

Q: On the question of religion and peace, you have researched and carried out facilitations on the potential of religion for peace education. Could you elaborate more on this? 

A: Religion is seen as a driver in most conflicts. Islam has been used as one, especially in the last five decades. 

Nevertheless, I think all religions have in them major opportunities to be centred upon to create peace at policy level by schools, universities, governments and places of worship – as intended by the founders of these religions. Buddhism practiced by the majority of the people in Sri Lanka and many countries is a wonderful religion of peace – and can be used in the world for peacebuilding and eradicating conflicts. I have worked with Buddhists and Buddhist clergy directly on creating such initiatives and I have worked with Islamic schools in several parts of the world facilitating the use of Islam in peace education. 

I will share a case study. From 2008 we began engaging with the religious leaders, and the Muslim community of Chad, Niger, Burkina Faso and Cameron, working with the religious schools and posing the question; ‘Can the Quranic exclusive religious schools be teaching conflict resolution, non-violence, religious diversity and other positive values.’ 

As a senior researcher and trainer with a team from the Salam Institute of Peace and Justice, an organisation created in the Washington DC area in 2003, I believe that we can continue and provide capacity building, scholarship, research and practice based training which has been applied across the world for the past twenty years. 

The context of the work in peace education in religious schools was initiated after the US withdrew from Afghanistan two decades ago and there was an increase in violent extremism recorded in many other Muslim majority countries as well. For example, Mali, Lake Chad, Senegal, Burkina Faso, Niger, Cameron, and Northern Nigeria. 

The US government put a call for work in these countries and Salam was an organisation asked to help and support in the education segment. There was also security related training that included military and police. As we started to work consistently with these Quranic schools the teachers felt that we came with an assumption that they were teaching violence. This was not so. But they saw us as coming from Western countries and this assumption on their part was there. As we spent a greater amount of time in these communities in their religious schools that lacked even basic facilities, what was clear was that the core reason for the unrest of youth and for them to join extremist groups such as Boko Haram was not religion. There were other issues – gross poverty, hopelessness, lack of education facilities, mistreatment by security establishments and being suspected to be violent when innocent. Religious identity was used as a route of justification of resistance and against existing grievances. This could be the same in many parts of the world. Finally what we found out in our practice and theory based work in these communities was that religion was just an outer cover used for extremism and that the root lay in lack of opportunities and extreme poverty, exploitation and exclusion. We specifically asked youth of the militant group Boko Haram and other such groups) if they joined because of religion and they said no, citing hopelessness as a key cause. 

 

Q: So your view is that violent extremism is not solely a security problem?

A: Violent extremism cannot be viewed as solely a security problem. One has to go to the root causes and respond accordingly. Islamisation, securitisation, and religionisation has become linked with violent extremism and has created backlash in many communities. It has prevented the establishing of genuine and sustainable relationships with the local affected communities. 

 

Q: Have you faced reactions where local communities in the countries you carry out peace projects view the interventions as ‘foreign’?

A: Yes. This is a key problem. But we follow the peacebuilding framework and assumption that every intervention has to be owned by the local communities. Failure to achieve that will affect the sustainability and effectiveness of such interventions 

When we worked in Arab societies using their language and local cultural framing we faced less resistance than those who were viewed as being foreigners with no understanding of the local circumstances.

This has been one of the major challenges from communities such as Muslims or those of other religions that we have worked with globally. Such communities complain that there are many outsiders who come and tell them what to do, without seriously taking into consideration their contextual constraints. Much effort should go to use the local knowledge, tradition and culture to create opportunities for conflict resolution. This should be done with minimum assumptions and as a learning process. 

Q:  What are your current projects?

A: We are now focusing on promoting forgiveness and reconciliation in Arab countries which was the theme of a conference from 28-29 May 2023 in Amman, Jordan. At the conclusion of the conference on 29 May the first Regional Network to Promote Reconciliation and Forgiveness in the Arab region was launched in the Jordanian capital. The initiative was spearheaded by the Salam Institute for Peace and Justice in Washington and the Jordanian Hayat Center – RASED, with the participation of 11 Arab countries represented by 35 representatives. The attendance and enthusiasm at the conference is a clear indication that the participants have a strong belief in the importance of stabilising the situation in the region. 

The severe consequences resulting from these wars, whether economic, social or political, are debilitating and affect all the countries concerned. The regional network we hope will contribute to providing knowledge and capacity building to the Arab region organisations and individuals affected by conflicts and wars. The intention of this network is to help form proactive societal, cultural, economic, and political initiatives in support of forgiveness and reconciliation infrastructures.

 

Q:  Although the experiences vary, could the learning from these initiatives be used for other parts of the world?

A: There are always examples that will resonate with other countries and contexts and as the regional platform develops we hope to share actual accounts of forgiveness and reconciliation. These two areas, reconciliation and forgiveness, hold the power to reverse conflict situations and we are hoping to compile a global account of case studies based on our work in different parts of the world.

Q:  Are there other global projects you are involved in which you think could inspire different nations?

A: Well, there are several which include diverse research and practice based work. But there is the interreligious dialogue series that we are planning to shortly focus on in the US, UK and South Asia. Here we will be focusing on inter-religious dialogues with the inclusion of diverse stakeholders such as the media which plays a key role in conflict resolution or exacerbation. 

We are focusing on religious identity as a key factor in advancing peacebuilding in these communities because of the fact that most of the people resort to their faith and spirituality when they try to cope with victimhood and trauma as well. In addition, in many of these communities the religious identity has been manipulated to justify exclusion and violence against the “other”. 

We look to contribute to enhancing the constructive role that faith and spirituality can play in individual and community lives.