Home » blogs » Dot Maver's blog

interview on Lebanon bombings

Submitted by Dot Maver on July 16, 2006 - 10:55pm.

Hi everyone,

Yesterday on an interview I was asked our position on the recent airport bombings in Lebanon, especially in relation to the killing of innocents. As the cycle of violence continues and our media and news outlets report on these instances, I remind myself often to ask the question: "What would the Secretary of Peace do about this one?" I have a vision of inspiring cooperation on behalf of the common good, all the while knowing that in doing so all needs are met, including our own.

Prior to answering any question, or getting on any interview call, I review my thoughts about the following: I imagine that I am the playground supervisor for 5 year olds who are running, playing, screaming, laughing. Suddenly one of them lashes out and hits another who begins to cry. What do I do? What is the best adult response?

Do I say, " Stop Hitting! That's bad! That's wrong! Don't do that anymore! You're hurting people! Enough!" I realize these words don't stop anything, further they do not provide a way through. These are not words about communication skills, about feeling angry or hurt, about having a problem and finding options to resolve it in ways that do not result in more hurt.

Instead I might say, "Come over here and let's talk about this for a minute."

So now we have a situation in the the world where someone is hitting another. What do we do? What would a minister or secretary of peace do? I submit s/he would not focus on demanding that something change or condemning those involved. Rather s/he will help provide the options and processes that point the way through to potentially peaceful resolution of tension and conflict, thereby building more constructive relationships leading to a culture of peace, sustainability and justice...cooperation on behalf of the common good.

It is in this spirit of peace and cooperation that I share these notes from a recent interview, knowing that others have also already been asked similar questions, and the more we use the language of possibility and the freedom of creative visioning, the more likely we will help the shift from the present chaos and crisis to what it is we continue to call for and strive to demonstrate. I am ever grateful to journey with you, Dot

notes from interview...
Our position is that we are calling for a fresh approach to international crisis. It is time for dialogue - for truth and reconciliation - for meeting needs in real ways. If we continue to address symptoms, to merely react to breakouts of violence that are symptoms of deeper causes, we will continue this cycle of violence and that is simply not acceptable.

We need to address the root causes of violence and there is a need to bring all constituents to the table to dialogue about the issues, the causes, the needs that are not presently met. For example, it is my understanding that Hezbolleh, the party of God, is a Lebanese umbrella organisation of radical Islamic Shiite groups who want a Muslim fundamentalist state modeled on Iran. Let's ask the question: Why? What needs will that meet? And how is it that we are so far beyond listening to one another, understanding one another, supporting one another, that we bomb one another to get our needs met?

It is time for dialogue leading to living together in sustainable ways on this planet we all call home. This is not a quick fix, nor is this going to be easy. Yet it seems the only way to move through the present crisis facing all of us - in virtually every country - it shows up in different ways but we all deal with violence - is to agree to stop the killing - and dialogue with one another to find ways of meeting all needs in order to live in peace. Peace is not the opposite of war, nor is it the absence of violence. Peace is the presence of truth and justice.

We are killing people because we still teach our children to fear, hate and kill. I hearken back to the speech by the Israeli Prime Minister to our US Congress just a few weeks ago when he said it is time to stop teaching our children to hate. Our position is that we must all teach our children to love.

The more power the greater the responsibility. The more power a country has, the greater the responsibility to help all of us recognize our interconnectedness, meet the needs of all people, and learn to live together in sustainable ways on this beautiful planet. It is time for structures in government that reflect the will of the people for peace...such as a ministry or department of peace.

There are peacebuilding techologies, processes and programs that exist today and are very effective. We call for governments throughout the world to focus on peacebuilding and to use their power and influence to find creative ways to utilize the peace professionals who are doing good work. Let us foster in future generations the seeds of peace and the longing to enter a peace profession that serves the common good. The time is now.

Dorothy J. Maver, Ph.D.
Executive Director
The Peace Alliance
Campaigning for a US Department of Peace
www.thepeacealliance.org
The Peace Alliance Foundation
Empowering Civic Activism for a Culture of Peace
www.peacealliancefound.org

Global Alliance for Ministries and Departments of Peace
http://www.peoplesinitiativefordepartmentsofpeace.org/

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

The New Jerusalem

Submitted by Donald on August 26, 2006 - 7:40pm.

I see a shining city of smooth red stones gleaming in the noonday sun.
I see the beggar and the priest, the rabbi and the mother all with eyes gleaming in gratitude that another day is here to share with each other as all the children of all the religions and colors and creeds play joyfully at their feet.
These children have been shown by example the great benefits of peaceful play and joyful togetherness with great respect and love for themselves and each other and the product is no less than peace.

I see them all together, start each day with song and dance and meditation creating sacred space to work and play and do their day in harmony with nature and each other.
I see the politicians and the armies, the gangs and thugs and thieves set down their tools of destruction and begin to play as a great symphony the notes of creation, the sound of silent joy and gratitude while
hatred, killing, dying, war simply sink into the dust and are never remembered spoken of or acted upon ever again.

Now is the peaceful moment-yes, it has finally arrived. We are here on this planet at this time to bear witness to our own ancient creation of peace on earth that we all agreed upon some many eons ago.

This is now the city of hope where all religions are honored and all are safe and welcome, free to share their hopes and dreams with each other as never before.

The hidden agendas had to leave the planet never to return and took with them those that loved the evil, spread the disease, killed the innocent with no conscience and left the masses to beg for scrapes from the coded table of the few.
The rivers run clean and clear now and the flowers speak out loud as does the rest of nature in soft tones of graceful dignity and we finally learn,
WE ARE ONE WELCOME TO JERUSALEM- CITY OF HOPE AND LIGHT

Israel and Lebanon

Submitted by Susan Livingston on July 23, 2006 - 10:16pm.

We've already intervened by arming Israel. I wonder why we give more aid to Israel, a developed nation, than to any other nation on the planet? If I were Lebanese, there is no way I'd be trusting the US to mediate a dispute with anyone - least of all Israel.

It may be hard to swallow an analogy between a children's playground fight and a war between nations, but when I think about it, the difference is one of degree, not kind. In both cases, the first step is what we call "protective use of force" in NVC. But that force MUST NOT come from someone who is party to the dispute.

Editor, propeace.net

Re: A Quandary for Peacemakers

Submitted by Rainbow Brain on July 18, 2006 - 8:05pm.

stereoman wrote:
So how does the peacemaker get the weapons-wielders to silence their armaments?

Mutual*Trust

Truth - All*Ways, leads to Peace

Peace - All*Ways, leads to Truth

BL*M
The Last*War

A Quandary for Peacemakers

Submitted by stereoman on July 17, 2006 - 9:53am.

I certainly unite with Susan's observations, and I agree that, had we had a Department of Peace in place for some years, an active mediation between the warring factions in the Middle East might have forestalled this most recent disaster.

But now the tragedy is unfolding, with each side targeting and killing civilians on the other. I disagree with Ms. Maver's analogy to this degree: she claims that

Quote:
. . . these words don't stop anything, further they do not provide a way through. These are not words about communication skills, about feeling angry or hurt, about having a problem and finding options to resolve it in ways that do not result in more hurt.

Instead I might say, "Come over here and let's talk about this for a minute."

IMHO this is not an adequate response. First, the authority figure must step between the antagonists and stop the fight. "Come over here" is not heard by the screaming children, and it isn't being heard by Israel or by Hezbollah. I believe the overriding principle is "First, stop the bleeding."

This is a quandary for peacemakers, because when there is bleeding, peacemaking has already failed. There is no "talk about it" without cease fire or surrender. Clearly surrender is not a viable option in peacemaking. So how does the peacemaker get the weapons-wielders to silence their armaments?

Ms. Maver correctly notes that peacemaking is "not a quick fix". Does that mean that the escalating violence in Israel and Lebanon should simply be allowed to play out, as the US Secretary of State has suggested? Most of our fellow citizens think the US should stay out of the conflict entirely, according to an Angus Reid survey over the weekend. What is your opinion? Should we just stand at the sidelines and let the fight continue until they are ready to talk? Should the US intervene? Militarily? What about the UN?

Steve

=========

Our lives begin to end the moment that we become silent about things that matter. (Martin Luther King Jr.)

Interview on Lebanon bombings

Submitted by Andrea on July 17, 2006 - 9:50am.

My heart is so intensely weighted at the horrors I witness daily on TV/News --

A "friend" responded to me after sending Dot's message, with great horror at the word "dialogue!"

Dot's message may seemed quite trivial to him in my passing along her message, but if we don't start to implement "dialogue" instead of threats ......

tell me .....

what results and doesn't work....... and what will the ultimate result be, and for us all?

We witness countless times how reactionary, 'good 'ol boys & cowboys' means of "handling" things -- doesn't work ....

Apparently, we collectively as a society have to witness and experience immense suffering on all sides before we dare decide that there actually might be a better way of handling things .......... oh, but that's right .... people hear the potential for dialogue or worse, ......... the potential for "peace" and actually recoil!

For those who recoil at the notion of thinking differently, (and by the way lots of evidence that true, authentic mediation works!) let's make sure that the horror of peace-making is expressed to the fathers and mothers on all sides -- who's hearts have been torn to shreds with the thousands who've been slaughtered .

Let's make sure we tell everyone that we don't dare think differently about "dialogue" --

After all, we're willing to have people die ......

Any attempts for greater peace just might make us all seem, weak.

Yes, we DO have to get angry at the fact that we collectively decide to have more faith in the cancer cell than in any means to better understand one another.

I continue to choose to believe there IS another way!
And in the meantime, I pray and send light, that it intervene, in all of our lives!

Andrea

Follow the Simple Directions

Submitted by Susan Livingston on July 17, 2006 - 1:45am.

This title is a philosophy of life professed by a new friend who I hope will sign on here as a blogger. We've lost sight of the simple directions. What's so difficult about the approach Dot is suggesting here that the "powers that be" don't get it? What will it take to unlearn what Dennis Kucinich calls the "knee-jerk reflex" that results in the tendency - compulsion! - to reach for the weapons?

I would offer one "friendly amendment" to Dot's remarks: We need not teach our children to love; we must only allow it. Love is of the heart, not of the mind. We can teach the mind, but we can only open the heart. Or, as Paul McCartney says, "Let it be." Peace, though, can be taught in the presence of love; Dot says peace is the presence of truth and justice, and these are of the mind.

What WILL it take to unlearn that reflex? I ask that in earnest, not in exasperation or impatience. To achieve peace, we must allow love, and that's a frightening prospect to those who have not been allowed to love. We claim we are ready to control our cultural evolution, and we know we want that evolution to take a new/old direction, but evolution happens over generations, not over the lifespan of an individual. For those who have not been allowed to love, is it even possible to allow future generations to love? Perhaps the directions aren't so simple after all!

Editor, propeace.net