Rwanda – Engaging Peace

Acceptable hate. Allowable hate. Sanctioned hate. Legal hate. Mandated hate. What’s the flavor of the day?

Posted on July 2, 2018July 3, 2018 by kathiemm

Members of Nevada Desert Experience hold a prayer vigil during the Easter period of 1982 at the entrance to the Nevada Test Site. In the public domain. Author: National Nuclear Security Administration / Nevada Site Office.

By Rev. Doe West

I have been giving honest contemplation to sponsored hate throughout my life.

A kickover moment came when I posted something on Facebook about the POTUS using the word “animals” to describe immigrants and received a reply pointing out that he was applying that term very specifically to gang members, not all immigrants.

I get it, but that leads me to more questions:

should we ever allow this level of dehumanizing towards any human being?
Is it okay to dehumanize those who dehumanize others?
What does it do for ourselves, our society, humanity, to make hatred and dehumanization acceptable, even mandated?

Culturally acceptable ways to denigrate any group become signposts for directing our hate–sometimes literally, as in “no Irish,” “no Italians,” “no Chinese,” “no Colored.” People have found countless ways to communicate how and when and whom to hate.

Tragically, religious beliefs cannot be trusted to assure mercy, grace, and love, or lead society to higher ground.

On one hand, Father James Martin, SJ, a Jesuit priest, pulls no punches: “Calling people animals is sinful. Every human being has infinite dignity. Moreover, this is the same kind of language that led to the extermination of Jews (”vermin”) in Germany and of Tutsi (“cockroaches”) in Rwanda. This kind of language cannot be normalized. It is a grave sin.”

On the other hand, the most radicalized right religious of any faith consider anyone they hate to personify sin and to be exterminated in the name of their God.

If God is not a safe covering for peace – if language can be easily swung from tool to weapon – if it all comes down to individual belief and personally comfortable boundaries, who is safe? And who or what becomes a place of hope? Is there no clear rallying cry or unifying moral understanding that we can count on to help us all rise to higher ground together?

Personally, I am holding space for hope, and I am working daily to help shape our culture by my words and actions. Today, I will use the words from the Old Testament of the Judeo-Christian text as I did in the ‘60s, when I worked for peace and justice, and as I continue to do today:

“And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore.” (Isaiah 2:4)

AFRICAN BORDERS AND THE POLITICS OF EXCLUSION: REVISITING THE COLONIAL PAST, Part 2

Posted on May 28, 2016July 7, 2016 by kathiemm

Emmanuel Mbaezue interviewing some immigration security personnel I met at the border between Nigeria and Niger Republic. Posted with permission from Emmanuel Mbaezue.

By Emmanuel Mbaezue

The artificial boundaries and the false foundation laid by Colonialism accounts for the present day features of the African continent. Colonialism was largely a system that not only bred chaos in the internal politics of most African countries, but also continues to threaten the peace of the entire region.

From inter-state border-related conflicts caused by poor and depleting economies, high levels of forced migration and weak/porous borders, to intra-state conflicts fueled by undemocratic and exclusive governments, inept/moribund political institutions and weak nationalistic projects, it is evident that Africa’s mostly political woes are symptomatic of a malignant, external involvement that never prioritized the interests of the continent.

Courtesy of western civilization, the unique African communal ownership of lands that de-emphasized territorialization gave way to private ownership with all its extortionist tendencies. There was basically an anachronism between the continent’s colonial heritage and the dynamics of its societies. The African cultural boundaries experienced difficulty assimilating the new notion of an “independent State.”

As more African States gained their independence, there also came a general awakening to the realities left behind by colonialism. It was a distasteful heritage that could not be erased or made to operate properly. While some African countries called for the maintenance of the incompatible borders that the continent inherited, others agitated for a re-delimitation and re- demarcation of African territories. It was in the midst of this dilemma that the now defunct Organisation for African Unity (OAU) in July 1964, at its first Summit of the African Heads of State, resolved that Nation States on attainment of independence should preserve the existing borders.

The hallmark of the OAU’s effort to resolve the continent’s increasing number of border-related conflicts was attained with the establishment of the African Union Border Programme (AUBP). Nevertheless, problems stemming from colonization continue to plague the continent today and more horrific is the role they have further played in compounding the challenges posed by the spread of present-day religious extremism in the continent.

While we are certainly not calling for a revocation of the resolution of the July 1964 meeting of the African Heads of State on the inherited borders, we however cannot downplay the inefficacy of that resolution. Worse still, there is apparently a clear lack of commitment on the part of the African leadership to proffer workable solutions to this quagmire. To date, some African countries are annexing lands that do not belong to them, and in the process displacing a lot of border communities. The influence of ethnic Diasporas can still be felt aggravating the civil unrest in most countries as in the case of Rwanda, the DRC, and Burundi. Religious extremists still take advantage of the similar socio-cultural backgrounds existing between their countries and those they share borders with to clandestinely spread radical ideologies.

These continental problems that never seem to abate are particularly reflective of a societal gap yearning to be filled. In my view, unless pan-Africanism is given the same place as nationalism, politico-economic trivialities and partisanship will continue to remain the bane of the African society, regardless of any efforts made to remedy the ills of her colonial past.

AFRICAN BORDERS AND THE POLITICS OF EXCLUSION: REVISITING THE COLONIAL PAST, Part 1

Posted on April 25, 2016April 26, 2016 by kathiemm

emmanuel image 1 african borders — Figure 1: Nigerian border. Photo by Emmanuel Mbaezue.

By Emmanuel Mbaezue

Once known as the cradle of civilization, endowed with a rich cultural heritage, and a communal style of living that was almost equal to none, Africa’s position in the World was once enviable. The Continent’s conservative but still “uncorrupted” nature allowed her to remain secluded and hidden to the rest of the world for centuries. For some, she was “the unknown world,” and for some others, the Dark Continent, but still in her solitary state, Africa amazingly thrived.

That tranquil and serene environment, and the gradual and peaceful evolution of the Continent, came to an end by decree of the West. In the years 1884-1885, the Continent’s fate was decided by the European powers in Berlin, Germany. Without her consent, an unwilling and un-participating Africa was arbitrarily divided into 53 mostly incompatible units, with little or no cognizance taken of her geo-demographic peculiarities.

Led by Otto Von Bismarck but mostly guided by their economic interests, the Europeans scrambled for the resources in Africa, resources they so desperately needed to feed the industrial revolution in Europe. In the course of all this, Africa not only suffered environmental and physical abuse as vast numbers of slaves and mineral resources forcefully left her shores, she also experienced deep sociological harm.

The arbitrary demarcation of African lands without any respect for its different constituents and cultural landscapes not only led to the forceful fusion of incompatible national groups into single entities and the imposition of artificial boundaries upon them, it also resulted in the distortion of entities that naturally belonged together. By their “divide and rule” system, Europe not only magnified the differentials existent in Africa’s diverse ethnic groups, but also, in some cases, arrogated more powers and privileges to one ethnic group to the detriment of others (as in Rwanda when the Belgians favored the minority Tutsis over the Hutus); thus, Europe set the stage for most of Africa’s bloodiest conflicts.

Mr. Chukwuemeka Emmanuel Mbaezue is a doctoral student of Peace & Conflict Studies, specializing in Boundary & Border Studies, at the University of Ibadan, Oyo State, Nigeria. He is a co-founder and member of the Border Areas Development Initiative (BADI), a non-governmental organization focusing on the development and security of Nigeria’s northern borders and border communities through education, research, advocacy programs and addressing issues related to forced and undocumented migration. His research area is on the trends and challenges of trans-border radicalization of young people.

Rwanda Revisited

Posted on June 13, 2014June 13, 2014 by kathiemm

It has been twenty years since the Rwandan genocide in which 800,000 people were killed in 90 days and thousands more wounded or displaced. This genocide should be remembered not just for the carnage that took place, not just for the failure of the world to provide General Romeo Dallaire, Force Commander of the United Nations Assistance Mission for Rwanda (UNAMIR) in 1993-1994, with the support he pleaded for (portrayed in “Shake hands with the devil”) and not just for the heroism of groups such as the Benebikira Sisters who refused to capitulate to the genocidal violence; it should also be remembered for the subsequent push for reconciliation led by the nation’s leader Paul Kagame.

To commemorate this genocide, the Co-Exist Learning Project Team created a documentary film that was shown on PBS the evening of April 16, 2014. This film addresses “Rwanda’s unprecedented social experiment in government-mandated reconciliation, through the stories of survivors. Can reconciliation and forgiveness be legislated? The Coexist webpage has links for the New York Times review of the documentary and some useful teaching materials.

Another site, Insight on Conflict, has a brief but inspiring discussion of peace activities being conducted for the 20^th anniversary of the genocide.

Teaching Tolerance, a project of the Southern Poverty Law Center, suggests that Americans have a lot to learn from the Rwandan social experiment.

What do you think?

Kathie Malley-Morrison, Professor of Psychology