a shared culture of peace

In April 2008, the Fundación Cultura de Paz, Foundation for a Culture of Peace organised an international meeting at the Monastery of Motserrat, just outside Barcelonia, to discuss the role of religion in the building of peace.
Reuters photo: (L-R) Mohammad Khatami, former Iranian President and President of the Foundation for Dialogue Among Civilisations, Spaniard Federico Mayor Zaragoza, president of the Foundation for a Culture of Peace and former director-general of UNESCO, and the Abbot of Montserrat Josep Maria Soler ... at the signing ... of the Declaration of Montserrat.

Not long ago, a friend and I were discussing - ok, arguing about - God; and whether the divine might exist in any of the perceived - or official - forms; given that every society and culture since the beginning of human records has identified and worshipped 'the divine'; and, nowadays you can find both illiterates and college professors who believe that there is a God, or there isn't a God, or they don't know, and (or) they don't much care.

Whatever the case may be, I was struck by this statement, which I came across on the Abadia (abbey?)de Montserrat website, in this Final draft for a Declaration of Montserrat on religions and the building of peace.

As stated in the Alliance of Civilizations Report and others (2) we must enhance efforts to bridge the divides between religions and cultures through dialogue and concrete action, because religions and cultures are intertwined. We must overcome the misperceptions, stereotypes, biased language and concepts reproduced by the media and frequently echoed by irresponsible leadership. Religions must stay together to build a future where religions co-exist harmonically and work together for a common future. We must challenge attitudes that spread the appearance of links between religion and violence, extremism and even terrorism. (my italics)

Towards the end of the document, there is this paragraph:

We are convinced that a culture of dialogue, alliance, non-violence and peace must be

built with full respect to the human rights, the UN Charter and the rule of law. Such a

shared culture of peace needs to give creative expressions to the teaching of the world’s religious traditions: we are all responsible for one another with a sense of otherness and brotherhood. In political terms, the only security that is practically possible and morally sound is “shared security”.

That works for me.

"Love your neighbour. Do good to those who hate you." takes some doing, sometimes,

but we could start with "Do no harm." or "Live and let live."

Maybe not buy any newspaper that routinely prints emotive, self-righteous headlines in five centimetre capitals, and devotes more space to photos than to words (overcome the misperceptions, stereotypes, biased language and concepts reproduced by the media and frequently echoed by irresponsible leadership).

..........................Then again, not all the broadsheets are on the side of the winged spiritual beings of your choice.......... Phooey - better step out of my nice cosy Guardian comfort zone....... I have got to stop thinking about the big stuff on Sunday afternoons........

..ahem.. Where was I? Oh yeah..

Maybe try the food, or the music, or the movies, or the books.

Buy the jewellery.

Adapt the fashions.

Copy the decor.

Maybe let the kids play together.

Wave and smile.

Talk to each other in the queue at the check-out

(enhance efforts to bridge the divides between religions and cultures through dialogue and concrete action).

All the big stuff!

The FCP put it this way.

Eso es.

¡Ojalá! - as they say here in Spain - a word derived, like many Spanish words, from Arabic, and meaning - I wish!

Where are the doves?

Paul Kaye 'A dark fog has enveloped us'

When a rocket killed his mother-in-law in Israel, actor Paul Kaye was appalled by the celebrations in Gaza. Six months on, he feels a different kind of despair

At Shuli's funeral last May, her son Jonathon, my brother-in-law, gave a speech. "Where are the doves?" he asked. "What is this land worth without someone with a vision? Nothing. Without doves it wasn't worth the struggle." Jonny is 34. He's an army reservist who is studying to be a neurologist and has a two-year-old son called Boaz. He didn't scream for blood at his mother's graveside, he screamed for peace.

For what it's worth

1

Long, long ago, the Semites lived in the not-yet-Middle-East.

2

And then Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren....... Oh, and, by the way, Isaac also begat Esau.

In fact Esau and Jacob were twins, and Esau, as the elder, should have inherited all Dad's (and Grandad's) worldly goods, prestige, divine approval, and some really good footnotes in Genesis, Mathew, etc. - but apparently sold his birthright to his brother for .......... wait for it............ 'a mess of pottage'. (Hence the oft-misquoted adage: The way to a man's hearth is through his stomach.)

The upshot was that the descendants of one bro - Jacob -became the Jewish people (aka God's Chosen People); while the descendants of Esau (All together now, "loooozuurrrrrrrr") became .... the Arabs! Interesting huh? Family Drama B.C.

Anyway, the Arabs were of no further interest to the writers of the Old Testament, while the Jews basked in God's love, which must indeed have been lovely. Unfortunately, it would appear that no-one had explained this to the Romans, who presumably thought that the Promised Land had in fact been promised to them - subjectivity can be such a problem between neighbours.....

3

So the Romans moved in, and waited for the locals to recognise that they were now a conquered people, keep their heads down and their noses clean, pay their taxes, and be good little subjects of Rome. Got that one wrong, didn't you, boys?

(Pop quiz: name one Arab people in the last couple of millennia which has knuckled under to an invader.................. take your time......... there......you see?)

So after a while, the Romans got a little fed up with being constantly dragged away from their banquets and orgies, and never seeing the end of the circuses, all because the bloody locals kept mounting rebellions and holing up in mountain fortresses (where they'd stashed all the best weed too, damn their eyes) and even going so far as to set up some smooth-tongued, appallingly dressed Holly Roller hick from the sticks as their leader - a hippy Peace&LoveMan weirdo who wouldn't know a barber if he bumped into him in downtown Jerusalem on a Thursday night ...... Of course, they sorted him out in the end; with a bit of help from the local Chamber of Commerce (Those guys knew which side their bagel was loxed on.) But the locals were still revolting, so the Romans came up with a Final Solution.

Destroy their Temple and encourage them to LEAVE.

All of them.

Declare their country a non-country.

End of story.

I blame the Romans.

4

And the 'Wandering Jew' became part of European (eh? Where? Sorry, wrong century.) Christendom's world view. Ah, Christendom (i.e. Amost Everywhere.) named after that Peace&LoveMan man that................ the Jews killed. Hmm. Some people have baggage.

Landless people scatter, assimilate, intermarry........blend. Or just die out. Generations later, their artefacts are dug out of burial chambers and displayed in museums for others to marvel at. Scientists do DNA searches. Curious individuals trace their genealogy, and perhaps discover that Abraham XX begat Isaac LV, begat Jacob CIX, begat Mike, begat Brian, begat Jack - and look! Here's the scan of little Jack! Ah!

On the other hand, expats will often cling to the comfort of traditional ways, celebrate the richness of their own songs, recipes, stories, and festivals. They will send their children to expat or international schools - maybe even boarding schools 'back home'. They will make friends among their own community, creating a base of familiarity and mutual recognition - a microcosm of their old world - from which to step out into the wonderful strangeness of their new home from home - and where they can recharge their sense of a shared identity from time to time. Ex-pats often go 'home' once a year if they can afford it - and while they might complain about the travelling, the endless unpacking and repacking, and the long round of visiting and catching up; in the end, this constant maintenance of the lines between old and new lives and relationships also frees many to get more involved in the culture and experiences that their 'foreign' base has to offer. Many will in fact choose to retire and stay 'abroad'. Most, I think, go 'home' in the end, carrying the memories and influences of their experiences with them.

Expats may feel like exiles at times but, unlike exiles, most know that they can go home eventually.

Exiles. Refugees. Diaspora.

Armenians. Jews. Palestinians.

These can never go home. Sometimes, home no longer exists.

The Armenian diaspora - descendants of the refugees of 1915 - outnumber their cousins 'back home', where the Soviet Union expanded into the space left by the Ottomans.

There are Armenian communities, with their own schools and churches, in the Middle East, Europe and the US. These communities nurture a sense of identity and heritage, and continue to act as pressure groups for a review of the events of 1915 - which Hitler would later acknowledge as, if not his inspiration for the Holocaust, at least an example of what a sufficiently powerful invader - conqueror, to use an old term - could get away with under the disapproving noses of other nations - with ruthless will and watertight organisation.

Yet Armenians also marry outside their own communities, even if this may at times resemble the plot - if not the script - of My Big Fat Greek Wedding.... Life goes on. Cultures mix. Sometimes people are happy, and sometimes not. The usual sort of thing. Perhaps two hundred years from now, people will be tracing their family trees back to a plot of land in Yerevan, as Americans now make pilgrimages to small villages in Ireland.

Yet if Armenians have achieved this balance within a century, it begs the question of why - or how - Jewish culture has managed to not merely survive, but flourish, for two thousand years, in a world where Jews have routinely been reviled and persecuted at every change in the political wind. As with Armenians, and more fortunate Palestinians, Jews have contributed to the communities in which they have settled: some of the most celebrated artists, composers, songwriters, actors, directors, writers......... businessmen.......... surgeons............... intellectuals........... stand-up comedians..................(I'm sorry, but I draw the line at Seinfeld) are Jewish. As in identity, not as in amateur genealogist who discovered an ancestor who might have been a night cleaner in the Temple back in 12 A.D.

I come back to the expats. Not military or relief workers, but teachers, oil engineers, insurance and banking personnel. Life is made easier because most foreign postings are on well-trodden routes which have the infrastructure and cosmopolitan character to accommodate expats. And you've got an Embassy, a passport and a contract. You may be concerned, if you're on a longterm, or open-ended contract, that your circumstances may deprive your children of a central plank of their sense of themselves and their place in the world - not to mention alienating them from cousins and grandparents back home. To avoid this, you are perhaps more careful than you would be back home to preserve habits and traditions that will nurture roots, and enable your 'third culture kids' to grow straight and strong in this exotic environment - and cope with seasonal repotting. Still, you're probably in a safe environment, so you settle, and so do the kids.

There are places where you would not be welcome on political, social or religious grounds, but as a rule of thumb, most international companies are cautious about setting up shop in countries where foreign leaders are burnt in effigy twice a week, and there is a grey area regarding the legality of lynching Customer Service personnel in the absence of a money-back guarantee on electrical goods.

5

American Bible Belters and Iranian clerics do an equally good job of stirring up resentment, fear and anger among their own, and proselytising their unfortunate point of view, but if your beliefs make you a target for their rhetoric or invective, there are still plenty of places where you and your way of life will be accepted and respected, if not necessarily understood or shared.

Unfortunately for medieval Jews, the sermons and writings of some very influential Christian clerics in the first five centuries A.D. accused Jews of all manner of appalling vices, and made it clear that the Jewish nation were forever culpable, and to be punished for their torture and murder of Jesus Christ.

I blame the Christians.

There are numerous examples, spread across territory and time, of Jews, Christians and Muslims - the People of the Book (i.e. the Bible) - basically agreeing to differ, and co-existing as peacefully as human beings ever can. Yet, writing or preaching to their own Christian congregations, the Church Fathers warned in the most hideous rhetoric against anything that smacked of participating in, watching or enjoying Jewish traditions.The fact that such extreme rhetoric was deemed necessary in order to discourage fraternisation or judaising suggests that the early Christians were entirely too comfortable with their Jewish neighbours for the Christian priests' peace of mind. This was the language of war - for the hearts and minds of their own congregations.

However, as these sermons were published, circulated and debated over the centuries, they came to be treated as justification for making life as difficult as possible for these Christkillers. As inflammatory labels go, that has to be right up there with The Great Satan.

Hitler's Holocaust was merely the most blatant and concentrated assault on Jews - amongst others. For centuries, in many places, Jews were restricted in what cloth their clothes could be made from (though other members of the population also lived with such restrictions in feudal times) in where they could live, how they could earn their living, what thy could own. They were the bogeymen of bedtime stories. If disease broke out or the land flooded or parched or split apart, then God was displeased that Christians were tolerating Jews in their midst. And that would have to be rectified. However easygoing a community might be, and however much business and trade might be done between the peoples of these different faiths, there was ultimately no security, because if a scapegoat or a distraction was needed, then the Jews were it. Round 'em up. Lock 'em up. Burn 'em.

Jewish culture - I would suggest - evolved from being permanent expats on a hardship posting. What doesn't kill you - or every member of your family - makes you strong, encourages self-reliance, co-operation and mutual support. You know who you are. You know what you care about. You know that while you're being harassed from one quarter, you will always be supported from another - by the people who have to deal with all this nonsense too. If you can find a way to make it feels better - music's good, and a sense of humour comes in handy - then so much the better. And if you can learn that it's what you do, not what you have, that matters - and combine that with some self-respect and a serious work ethic - then the world is your oyster, my dear. (And I may well be talking absolute rubbish, but at least I'm trying to work something out!)

Hitler may have pushed the envelope beyond anything previously imagined, but anti-semitism is ingrained in Christian attitudes and practice, and the Christian viewpoint (aggressively defensive) has underpinned the evolution of western philosophy and human society from Russia to the Americas for two thousand years.

However, I'm not bashing Christianity, though it probably appears that way. Human beings are a strange mix of cerebral and physical. At the base of the large upper, more recently evolved part of the human brain lies the hypothalamus, the most ancient and primitive part: anger and fear make this baby light up, and particularly at stages in our life when hormones are washing about, provide the drive that effectively overwhelms the rational higher brain.

Xenophobia - wariness of the unknown - an instinct to protect and justify what is ours - a need to feel justified, secure, part of something; and it's corollary, a need to identify the other (whatever that might be - haircut? religion? cooking smells? colour? generation?) as something to be ignored, converted, rejected, or removed. This is primitive, essential, survival stuff, however we dress it with words. And the words we use to rationalise such feelings and needs can be used to to appeal to those same feelings and needs in others.

Marketing sermons from fifteen hundred years ago are just this little lot in their Christian guise. If it hadn't been Christianity it would have been something else...... oh yes.... let's call it Islam. God may exist, and we may be looking at the same deity from different angles and calling it God, Jehovah, Yahweh or Allah. Or Buddha. Or Ra. But to insist that there is no God/Jehovah/Yahweh/ Allah/Buddha/Ra but God/Jehovah/Yahweh/ Allah/Buddha/Ra, and that if someone disagrees with you, then they are ignorant, wilful, backward, deluded and in need of being saved from themselves - for my money, that's the hypothalamus talking. And when they've got minerals, fossil fuels, aquifers or a virgin market for manufactured goods, then that 'ol hypothalamus is in evil alliance with the upper brain.

I do believe that the League of Nations was pursuing its avowed aim of working to prevent another world war when it decided in 1917 to establish a national home for the Jewish people, all but acknowledging that the Jews had had a very raw deal for a very long time - and it was time everyone made it up to them. I believe - though I'm not sure - that other options had been considered, including a large, unpopulated space in North America. However, we know which patch they chose - a patch of desert with no-one very important on it, who would of course understand that the Jews needed their country back. Colonialist attitudes prevailed.

The UN, which replaced the League of Nations in 1945 after World War II proved how ineffectual it was, seems to have been entirely blind to the needs and rights of the existing Palestinian population - as I say, colonialism, or paternalism perhaps. I don't think that people from highly developed European countries can appreciate what land means to settled people in the Middle East, a place which is still full of community traditions that go back a very long way. Your land is your part of your identity, your link to your grandparents, your gift to your children, the place where you live and are recognised. You don't just relocate. It was only after World War II, when Britain started clearing slums to build streets in the sky that they began to realise that the built environment has other dimensions beside its obvious physical solidity: realised that the physical and emotional connections that run through and between communities are partly shaped by the physical layout of buildings. Architects and townplanners are still working through the implications of this.

In 1947, disregarding the absolute opposition of the Arab League, and in line with best practice at the time (as demonstrated by the British)the UN redrew the map, intending to partition the land into three territories: a Jewish nation, an Arab nation, and a UN buffer zone. The thousands of Arabs who were displaced from land their families had held for generations were not happy. And the rest, of course, is bloodshed.

Israel is a fact. Creating it was an attempt to turn the clock back. Bad move. Trying to do it again? Yeah, that's really going to work.

However, the current map of Israel and Palestine is virtually a negative of the 1946 pre-Partition map (Where have we heard the word partition before? Always good for the locals.)

Israel had to defend itself against its neighbours, but the expansionists, or Zionists of the early years set about driving Palestinians off land that was designated as theirs. Sometimes they worked by stealth, through a blizzard of paperwork and the full weight of bureaucracy, where generations of people had lived in their houses and worked their land, back to a time when - - when - well no, actually there wasn't a formal written contract or bill of sale stating dimensions et. etc. etc., but my great-great-great grandfather bought this land from that family over there - just ask them, they'll tell you - and built this house and.....(Living in Spain, I can say that there are rural properties here that don't have proper boundary maps, but everyone knows that from that ridge there, to this boulder here is ours, and next door's place goes up the hill to that fence......). No papers, or the wrong stamp, or no stamp, or if the paper had your great-uncle's name on it, but he had died childless and given the deed and the place to your father on his deathbed, and your father hadn't got it changed because everyone knew how it was.

Or they built Israeli houses around Palestinian houses, cutting neighbours off.

Or they sent the bulldozers in - to clear out troublemakers. To teach people a lesson. To protect their people from Palestinian harassment and aggression.

Israel has appropriated more and more Palestinian land under the pretext of creating buffer zones to protect its citizens. It's been doing it for half a century. It has allowed the building and occupation of illegal settlements.

Then the Israeli government considers Palestinians unreasonable when they start throwing things? Start arming themselves? Start fighting back? Start thinking it's better to die a martyr and perhaps achieve something than live to be old and broken at 40 like your father?

Better build a fence. Better blockade routes in and out and make it impossible to move raw material or finished goods - impossible for someone to feed his family - impossible for someone to get to hospital when her pregnancy goes badly wrong - impossible to do anything.

Better push them into a life or death struggle, with no right to fight back. Better crowd them into the smallest possible space, so that there's nowhere safe for them to store or fire weapons, and then you can bomb them, and kill hundreds of them, and hold press conferences about these craven cynics who use their own children as shields. Better hit hospitals, UN food stores, schools. Better do it quickly - before January 20th.

And more and more people keep moving to Israel, a place that has been a warzone for decades. You have to wonder why. I expect they'll need houses.

Generations of Palestinians have lived and died in the camps. Other Arab countries won't give them passports, because this would undermine their claim to their land.

Non-Arab countries and international organisations stand in judgement, and when Palestinians elect Hamas to government in free and fair elections, partly in disgust at the bloated self-satisfaction of Yasser Arafat's old guard, and partly because, for years, Hamas has consistently done what no-one else seemed able to do: got food and medicine in to people who would otherwise have starved and died - when that happens, the Free World raises its pale, manicured hands in horror. Those foolish Palestinians, what are they playing at, electing a terrorist organisation? Better cut off their aid. Better let them starve, and succumb to every virus and infection. Better leave another generation of children to grow up physically stunted, uneducated and feral, wide open to the older guys, the heroes, who are doing something to make a difference, who could show them how to make a difference too, if they're brave enough.........

That will teach them.

It doesn't matter how many music programmes and theatre programmes etc. etc. these people manage to come up with to put some hope and colour in their children's lives. It doesn't matter how much parents love their children, or how much teachers can do with almost nothing, and with little or no income. It doesn't even matter how optimistic and enthusiastic the children may be, in the face of all odds. If Israel's intention is to push the Palestinians into a small space and annihilate them once and for all; and the rest of the world is prepared to let Israel do that because those bad Palestinians keep firing rockets into southern Israel, and only elected governments are allowed to fire rockets, because otherwise it's terrorism, and we don't approve of terrorism....................... well, I suppose they'll all be dead in the next 96 hours.

That'll teach 'em.

Everyone has to stop fighting, decide what moral and physical territory they're prepared to give up, and go talk to each other, listen to each other, and make it happen.

Northern Ireland seemed a lost cause to me as I grew up, but they've just about got themselves sorted. It can be done.

What is the point of any more people - Israelis or Palestinians - living in fear and suspicion - and then dying in a moment, and the whole nightmare constantly repeating and growing? I can't see it myself.

Peace, Poverty and the Nobel Peace Prize

Interesting 7DAYS article by Benedict Paramand on microcredit:

Mahatma Gandhi said: “Poverty is the worst form of violence.” This implies that any effort that reduces poverty could bring down violence thereby increasing the chances of peace. If this is the case then why is The Economist peeved at the idea of a banker and an economist being given this year’s Nobel Peace Prize?

In a recent article..., the magazine said: “The purpose of the prize has become muddled. There is a risk that its worth is being eroded as the Nobel Institute scrambles to find an eye-catching recipient every year.”

.....Muhammad Yunus, 66, of Bangladesh and the Grameen Bank he founded, were given the Nobel Peace Prize for 2006. Yunus pioneered the concept of lending to the poorest, who live on under a dollar a day, to make a marked difference to their livelihood. Yunus has shown that this unconventional strategy is sustainable and can be implemented on a massive scale.

... Peace is not necessarily absence of war or conflict. The tribal wars in much of Africa are more to do with the absence of economic opportunities than mutual hatred. Therefore, there is a need to widen the definition of peace. While it’s true that absence of war encourages commerce, it’s also true that vibrant communities find little reason to squabble.

... Microfinance consists of providing small loans, usually less than $200, to individuals, usually women, to establish or expand a small, self-sustaining business. For example, a woman may borrow $50 to start a small poultry business. As the chickens multiply, she will have more eggs to sell. Soon she can sell the chicks. Each expansion pulls her further from the devastation of poverty.

... Microfinance is not just lending. The providers offer business advice and counseling, while clients provide peer support for each other through solidarity circles. For example, if a client falls ill, her circle helps with her business until she is well. If a client gets discouraged, the support group pulls her through. This contributes substantially to the extremely high repayment rate of loans made to microfinance entrepreneurs.

Here's the article in full.

Trying to work through the bad stuff

When a fine former colleague and mentor was killed by a suicide bomber in Qatar last year, the muslims on our faculty didn't know where to put themselves - they grieved, felt responsible, defensive, confused - didn't want to admit even to themselves that a muslim had done this because it is so contrary to what they believe in. And non-muslim staff didn't know what to say or how to say it. No-one in that staffroom had anything to do with that attack, no-one agreed with it, or blamed or suspected anyone else but such is the insidious power of terrorism to sow these terrible subversive small gaps and silences that threaten communities.

And yet this bomber failed. Terrorism failed – as it always does in the end, though at what cost. We didn’t turn on each other. We shared our grief with students who mourned their former teacher. We celebrated his life as we mourned its ending. We comforted one another. We’re still all together, still international and multi-cultural. In Doha, so many Qataris turned out in the streets to reject the actions and justification of that bomber. A year later, Doha has just hosted a conference for international schools like ours, which bring people of all races together for a good academic education, and a broader experience of life and friendship. A good man is senselessly dead, his wife a widow dealing daily with unbearable loss, but terrorism failed.

I feared for my son and my sister-in-law who routinely used the London Tube and bus routes that were attacked last July. I was so sad for the dead, the injured and the bereaved, and for the family, friends and neighbours of the bombers, who were also victims – like us. We saw the power of terrorism to undermine communities by destroying trust – except that here too that power was illusory- at worst, short-lived, except that people are dead – gone too soon. Others remember and mourn. Neighbours tried to be compassionate. Community groups held together. Londoners were brave and stoic, got back on the buses and Tubes. Terrorism blights and haunts, but it always fails in the end.

Foreign teachers from the local international school were killed in the first Bali bombings - ordinary people doing socially responsible work and sharing cultures. Another bombing. More grief and fear. We saw the cynical application of death and fear to make people stay home and give up their efforts to understand and accept other people’s ways – except that the school remains open for education, the Balinese continue to welcome foreigners, and foreigners continue to visit and work in Bali. Terrorism fails.

The Amman bombings happened just before our trip to Jordan. Bombing your own people? Slaughtering generations at a wedding? Jordanians turned out in their thousands to condemn and mourn. The families publicly repudiated those involved. The pain was immense - just as in Madrid and New York.
And Baghdad, and Basra, and Afghanistan, and Pakistan.
Britain in the 70s.
Germany in the 80s.
Terrorism fails.

So no, while I wish people could see the ordinary humanity of people here, and appreciate that their culture has so much in it that is good, I'm not dewy-eyed about the way things are, or the people responsible for these and other rightly named atrocities - whatever their culture, beliefs or grand purpose

But terrorism, it seems to me, is a double-edged weapon. The terrorist eats his own children, poisons the well, destroys his and his fellow man’s path to the future, because what future can there be without peace, what peace without trust, what trust without dialogue and compromise – between everyone concerned? To promote and use terror to achieve one's ends is unnatural and ungodly, regardless of creed or flag. All those foolish, misguided young people so dedicated to their cause, so physically and mentally strong, so selfless that they would give up everything for their faith, country and culture – what is gained by sending such people to their death? Should they not be encouraged to serve, build, teach, nurture, invent, forgive, restore, marry, make babies, look to the future?

But of course, that only works if they believe that they have a future as things stand; that there will be a home to raise a family in, work to pay for it, education and healthcare, a life worth living. For all the rhetoric of the militants, this is as much about economics and quality of life as about religion. Fulfilled people with contented families and a satisfactory way of life among good neighbours rarely feel compelled to make the ultimate sacrifice.

On the other hand, people who have been denied – or are persuaded that they have been denied - education, dignity or hope in this life, along with the rest of their generation, and their parents’ generation, why would these people believe in a future? Add surging testosterone, a charismatic and ruthless manipulator, and at last, a sense of purpose, the imagined admiration of their friends and little brothers, the promise of eternal rewards, and the ultimate adrenaline rush. Away we go.

In March 2004, The Religious Policeman linked to this speech by George Carey, former Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury, who was part of an ecumenical group attempting to find common ground between the world’s major religions, and identify the root causes of our current difficulties, in the earnest and urgent desire to do something about them. He said at the outset,

"I am not... an expert on Islam............. [but] I have spent a great deal of time with some of the most important names in Islam – Dr Tantawi, Hassan al-Turabi, King Hussein, Prince Hassan, King Abdullah, Professor Akbar Ahmed and many other Muslim leaders and scholars – seeking to build bridges of understanding between two great faiths. In retirement I continue to engage in dialogue through the Alexander Declaration Process which attempts to bring Muslim, Jewish and Christian leaders together in Israel and Palestine..........
(There are huge gaps between all of these quotes, so please go to the original speech and form your own opinion.)
............wherever we look, Islam seems to be embroiled in conflict with other faiths and other cultures.

..............Whether religious or nominal, it is important to recognise that the vast majority of Muslims, like Christians, are honourable and good people who hate violence and are distressed to note that they are lumped together with evil and misguided people. We should never seek to demonise them or their faith. But a fight for the soul of Islam is going on.

...................... The politicisation of young Saudi Muslims was completed in our own day when the impotence of Muslim countries was compared with what they regard the decadence of the West with its materialistic power."

As a westerner living in the middle east at that time, and utterly bewildered by the swirl of global events and rhetoric, I found Lord Carey's speech honest, thought-provoking and concise (a quality I admire….) I would recommend it to everyone, at least as a basis for discussion.

I’m a gardener, in my small way, though currently defeated by mealy bugs (sob!) and the garden can be a powerful metaphor. If I’ve got strangling weeds, mould, parasites or whatever, uprooting or spraying is a brutal and effective short-term solution, but in another month, the problem’s likely to resurface, and with greater resistance. To get my garden to flourish over decades (a proper garden!) I must look to the health of the soil and a proper balance of sun, shade and moisture; take care not to overcrowd, but companion-plant complementary plants to attract pollinating insects, deter parasites, etc. etc. (OK, you see where I’m going with this! Just read the speech, willya?)

I’ve no agenda here. I’m just trying to work things through and either find a way to live with all this, or be part of something positive. History teaches that there are no permanent solutions to human conflict. Time passes, power shifts, and as one civilisation gets lazy and decadent, there’s another on the ascendant. We’re not much good at peace, at sharing, and given how difficult we sometimes find it just to live with ourselves, international relations certainly ain’t gonna be no walk in the park, baby.

(Don't believe me? OK: serious pit-stop. Have you ever done something you’re really ashamed of? How irresistible is the path of least resistance? Have you ever – in the words of my childhood catechism - sinned by thought, word, deed or omission? No-one does guilt like a Roman Catholic, except perhaps an ex-Roman Catholic…….. Check out that pit! OK back to international relations and the rise and fall of civilisations.)

History teaches, but are we willing to learn? Also –and this is always interesting - who writes the history, and what are they trying to prove? All I know is that the human race is going through one of its periodic convulsions of rage and violence, and each one brings us a little closer to bringing on the four horsemen.

(Quick exit for Terry Pratchett, the king of the outrageous sideways reference….. tumtitum… just talk amongst yourselves….. ah yes! TP, in association with Neil Gaiman, brings you ‘Good Omens’ being the nice and accurate prophecies of Agnes Nutter, Witch’ with an interesting cast of characters (p.13) including the Apocalyptic Horsepersons DEATH, War, Famine and Pollution. Thank you gentlemen.)

So, Death, War, Famine and – in the original – Pestilence, a wonderfully sonorous word for Plague. But we can do Pollution too, can’t we darlings? Ah the wonders of human ingenuity! Four biblical forces of annihilation are not enough: we have to come up with another one. Hurray for us! Well, come on then P2, after all, if we are indeed heading for the big A just as fast as our nuclear horsepower can get us there, the more the merrier!

We don't seem to learn, do we?

What to do? Where to start? What do you think?

I think I should probably lie down. This is what happens when I have a week off and two- oh dear no, it was three, no wonder! - three cups of filter coffee.

But I shall tack on something I was thinking about earlier, upload this, and then I’d better start thinking about tomorrow, and the return to the day job.

So, in my personal tribute to Blue Peter (obscure BBC TV reference from childhood), here is one I prepared earlier!

(Actually Habibi thinks that might have been Grahame Thingy, the Galloping Gourmet. Blue Peter was interesting craft projects involving cornflake packets, wire coathangers and sticky-back plastic, and my laptop is not quite at that stage, not yet, anyway.)

Right – Let’s change continent for the amateur historio-socio-econo-anthroposologist’s analysis of the Third World and the legacy of colonialism. I thank you!

(Good grief! You’re still here?! Excellent! I look forward to your feedback. )

There are economic reasons for the current mess, policies of ruthless self-interest. First World countries have long-established power bases, practices and relationships. However 'cut-throat' the competition, no throats are actually cut anymore because there is a shared understanding, however imperfect, of national psyches, values and priorities, the acceptance that we can do business - after all, we tried war twice in the 20th Century, and dammit - nobody won!

Third World countries aren't in the club. It could be argued that it is the legacy of colonialism as practised by the club members that there is a gap so huge that the terms First World and Third World exist. Africa. The Middle East. Areas of vast mineral and fuel resources. And political unrest. Corruption. Social unrest. War. Disease. Drought and desertification. Poverty. Starvation.

Am I being alarmist here, or is it all getting worse? (Does anyone hear hoofbeats?) If it’s all getting worse, despite the efforts of people much more educated, knowledgeable and responsible than me, what can I do? Or you? I only wonder because we seem to be in a life or death situation, largely of our own making, and I was brought up to clear up my own mess (not that I want anyone to look at the kitchen or bedroom right now.)

Here's a question: if Big Guy kidnaps Little Guy (a prosperous farmer and family man with lots of people working for him) takes him down a dark alley and removes his kidney (because Big Guy's cousin wants it) what is your response to Big Guy telling Little Guy to stop lying around and get on with his life - while introducing rules that reserve key resources for Big guys - oh - and sneering at the physical limitations and innate inferiority of Little guys stupid enough to allow the removal of their essential organs. ?

Hey! That was fun!

OK. Here's another one.

If Big Guy and his Big Buddies carry on like this for, say fifty years, while Little Guy gets weaker, and thinner, and picks up infections, and suffers organ failure and has a quality of existence so poor that one has to wonder why the poor so-and-so doesn't just lie down and die, and meanwhile Little Guy's wife, children and grandchildren starve and lose their home because of Little Guy's incapacity, and the non-availability of resources to people of their stature; and his employees also starve and lose their homes, and start fighting amongst themselves, or taking whatever gets them through the day (Jim Beam, say, or Prozac) is there a possibility - here's the question - that their kids and grandkids might start to feel a little resentful of Big Guy and the Big Buddies, and, lacking the resources to help themselves, decide to go after Big Guy, and his Big Buddies, and make them sorry?

Last questions: And if they do,

1) Whose fault is that?
and
2) Short of annihilating all the Little Guys (hmm.... now there's an option) what does Big Guy need to do to make things right? Gosh, it's a good job he's got all his Big Buddies to help him think that one through. Perhaps the Big Grandkids should help clear up after Big Grandad…. before everyone is sorry.

You have thirty seconds to complete this paper, as time is running............ Oops