Tweet
Dar Al-Hayat, Saudi Arabia
Feb 22 2005
Religion Must be Part of the Solution
Rabbi David Rosen
Taking up the metaphor of "a window of opportunity," one might point
out that someone bent over in pain will be hard-pressed to see any
light from the window, or even believe it exists. This applies to a
large segment of the Israeli and Palestinian populations, which, even
if not suffering directly from the violence of the last four and a
half years, has been substantially traumatized by it.
Personally, however, I have no doubt that we are at a remarkable
turning point. No less significant than the impressive democratic
Palestinian support for Mahmoud Abbas (aka Abu Mazen) is the
remarkable political turnabout of Ariel Sharon. One has to grasp the
almost metaphysical meaning of "settlement" in Zionist mythology in
order to appreciate that the advocacy of dismantlement of even one of
the settlements - and led by the man who symbolized their
establishment - is a development of enormous positive significance
toward a resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It is of
course possible that the vagaries of Israeli politics may postpone
implementation. However, there is no doubt in my mind that even if
lamentably delayed, this Rubicon will be crossed and an inevitable
and inexorable dynamic will ensue. Already, security cooperation has
advanced with rapidity, and the likelihood is that Israel's
unilateral disengagement will increasingly be bilateral and
cooperative. As events on the ground begin to change, the
populations' skepticism will change as well.
The greatest danger, of course, comes from extremists on both sides.
To my great distress as a religious person, such extremist violence
usually occurs under the pretext of religious duty. Indeed, the Oslo
Peace Process was torpedoed substantially on both sides by the use of
religion as justification for violent actions. We have to do our best
to neutralize such extremists, and while this requires effective
security and legal action, this is not enough.
For better and worse, religion is inextricably bound to the
identities of the parties involved in the conflict, and it is
exploited even by those who are far from the spiritual and ethical
values of its heritages. For this reason, there has been a tendency
on the part of politicians and others, while pursuing a peace agenda,
to avoid religious institutions and their representatives, viewing
them as an obstacle. In the shadow of all the terrible things that
have been done in the name of religion, this is understandable.
However, I believe it to be a tragically counterproductive approach.
If we don't want religion to be part of the problem, we must make it
part of the solution. During the last four and a half years of
violence, the territorial conflict has increasingly been presented as
a religious one. Not only was the last Intifada portrayed in
religious terms (in the name of Al-Aqsa), but propaganda has
increasingly used religious terminology to de-legitimize and even
demonize the other. This "religionization" of the conflict is
extremely dangerous. As long as the conflict is perceived as a
territorial one it can be resolved through territorial compromise.
If, however, it is seen as a struggle between the Godly and the
godless, then we are doomed to an eternal cycle of bloodshed.
Galvanizing the religious leadership to support peaceful
reconciliation, to oppose incitement and prejudicial
misrepresentation on all sides, is thus an urgent imperative - and it
is possible, especially if political leadership supports it. In
addition, to really combat extremists, and not just contain them, we
need to give the moderates (whom I am convinced are the majority)
more visibility. Because their voices are not sensational or
bloodthirsty, they are hardly heard at all in the media, leading to a
distorted public perception and a destructive cyclical process.
There is already positive movement in this regard. Three years ago,
when violence between Palestinians and Israelis was at its height,
fifteen religious leaders and representatives of the three main
Faiths in the Holy Land - including the Sephardic Chief Rabbi of
Israel, the President of the Palestinian Sharia Courts, the Latin
Patriarch, and deputies of the Greek Orthodox and Armenian Patriarchs
- were all hosted in Alexandria by Sheikh Mohamad Sayyed Tantawi, the
Grand Imam of Al Azhar. The initiator of this gathering was the then
Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord George Carey. This historic gathering
(the first ever summit of leaders and representatives of the three
main religions of the Holy Land) issued an important declaration
condemning violence in the name of religion as desecration of
religion, and calling for peace and reconciliation, as well as
education towards those goals. The effect of this declaration was
substantially lost by the ongoing violence on the ground. However,
the signatories did go ahead with the establishment of a committee to
help implement educational initiatives for the promotion of peace and
mutual religious respect. Centers in Israeli and Palestinian
societies have now been established under the auspices of this
committee to promote these goals.
In addition, recent interfaith meetings involving notable Israeli and
Palestinian religious figures, as well as those from the wider Middle
East and beyond, reflect the increasing desire of religious leaders
to be part of a process of peace and reconciliation. Arguably the
most remarkable of these was the successful gathering of some one
hundred and fifty leading rabbis and sheikhs that took place in
Brussels last month under the auspices of King Mohamad VI of Morocco
and King Albert II of Belgium. The meeting, which received widespread
coverage, especially in the European media, sought to emphasize both
the past historic legacy of interfaith cooperation, as well as the
central shared values of the religious traditions. Sheikh Talal Sidr
of Hebron (who is also one of the key protagonists of the Alexandria
committee) declared in his remarks on the opening evening that only
when the three religious traditions live in mutual respect will there
be real peace in the Middle East.
Recognizing the limitations of institutional religion, especially in
our part of the world, it would be more than naïve to expect it to
spearhead any political breakthrough. However, when there is a
political window of opportunity, as there is now, it is essential
that religious voices and leadership are actively involved in its
support. While religion may not be able to initiate a political
resolution of the conflict, it is an essential component for a
successful political process, providing the psycho-spiritual glue for
long-lasting and effective peace.
* Rabbi David Rosen, former Chief Rabbi of Ireland, is active in many
interfaith, civic, and peace organizations promoting
Israeli-Palestinian cooperation, and is a founder of Rabbis for Human
Rights.
* This article is published in partnership with the Common Ground
News Service (CGNews).
Feb 22 2005
Religion Must be Part of the Solution
Rabbi David Rosen
Taking up the metaphor of "a window of opportunity," one might point
out that someone bent over in pain will be hard-pressed to see any
light from the window, or even believe it exists. This applies to a
large segment of the Israeli and Palestinian populations, which, even
if not suffering directly from the violence of the last four and a
half years, has been substantially traumatized by it.
Personally, however, I have no doubt that we are at a remarkable
turning point. No less significant than the impressive democratic
Palestinian support for Mahmoud Abbas (aka Abu Mazen) is the
remarkable political turnabout of Ariel Sharon. One has to grasp the
almost metaphysical meaning of "settlement" in Zionist mythology in
order to appreciate that the advocacy of dismantlement of even one of
the settlements - and led by the man who symbolized their
establishment - is a development of enormous positive significance
toward a resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It is of
course possible that the vagaries of Israeli politics may postpone
implementation. However, there is no doubt in my mind that even if
lamentably delayed, this Rubicon will be crossed and an inevitable
and inexorable dynamic will ensue. Already, security cooperation has
advanced with rapidity, and the likelihood is that Israel's
unilateral disengagement will increasingly be bilateral and
cooperative. As events on the ground begin to change, the
populations' skepticism will change as well.
The greatest danger, of course, comes from extremists on both sides.
To my great distress as a religious person, such extremist violence
usually occurs under the pretext of religious duty. Indeed, the Oslo
Peace Process was torpedoed substantially on both sides by the use of
religion as justification for violent actions. We have to do our best
to neutralize such extremists, and while this requires effective
security and legal action, this is not enough.
For better and worse, religion is inextricably bound to the
identities of the parties involved in the conflict, and it is
exploited even by those who are far from the spiritual and ethical
values of its heritages. For this reason, there has been a tendency
on the part of politicians and others, while pursuing a peace agenda,
to avoid religious institutions and their representatives, viewing
them as an obstacle. In the shadow of all the terrible things that
have been done in the name of religion, this is understandable.
However, I believe it to be a tragically counterproductive approach.
If we don't want religion to be part of the problem, we must make it
part of the solution. During the last four and a half years of
violence, the territorial conflict has increasingly been presented as
a religious one. Not only was the last Intifada portrayed in
religious terms (in the name of Al-Aqsa), but propaganda has
increasingly used religious terminology to de-legitimize and even
demonize the other. This "religionization" of the conflict is
extremely dangerous. As long as the conflict is perceived as a
territorial one it can be resolved through territorial compromise.
If, however, it is seen as a struggle between the Godly and the
godless, then we are doomed to an eternal cycle of bloodshed.
Galvanizing the religious leadership to support peaceful
reconciliation, to oppose incitement and prejudicial
misrepresentation on all sides, is thus an urgent imperative - and it
is possible, especially if political leadership supports it. In
addition, to really combat extremists, and not just contain them, we
need to give the moderates (whom I am convinced are the majority)
more visibility. Because their voices are not sensational or
bloodthirsty, they are hardly heard at all in the media, leading to a
distorted public perception and a destructive cyclical process.
There is already positive movement in this regard. Three years ago,
when violence between Palestinians and Israelis was at its height,
fifteen religious leaders and representatives of the three main
Faiths in the Holy Land - including the Sephardic Chief Rabbi of
Israel, the President of the Palestinian Sharia Courts, the Latin
Patriarch, and deputies of the Greek Orthodox and Armenian Patriarchs
- were all hosted in Alexandria by Sheikh Mohamad Sayyed Tantawi, the
Grand Imam of Al Azhar. The initiator of this gathering was the then
Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord George Carey. This historic gathering
(the first ever summit of leaders and representatives of the three
main religions of the Holy Land) issued an important declaration
condemning violence in the name of religion as desecration of
religion, and calling for peace and reconciliation, as well as
education towards those goals. The effect of this declaration was
substantially lost by the ongoing violence on the ground. However,
the signatories did go ahead with the establishment of a committee to
help implement educational initiatives for the promotion of peace and
mutual religious respect. Centers in Israeli and Palestinian
societies have now been established under the auspices of this
committee to promote these goals.
In addition, recent interfaith meetings involving notable Israeli and
Palestinian religious figures, as well as those from the wider Middle
East and beyond, reflect the increasing desire of religious leaders
to be part of a process of peace and reconciliation. Arguably the
most remarkable of these was the successful gathering of some one
hundred and fifty leading rabbis and sheikhs that took place in
Brussels last month under the auspices of King Mohamad VI of Morocco
and King Albert II of Belgium. The meeting, which received widespread
coverage, especially in the European media, sought to emphasize both
the past historic legacy of interfaith cooperation, as well as the
central shared values of the religious traditions. Sheikh Talal Sidr
of Hebron (who is also one of the key protagonists of the Alexandria
committee) declared in his remarks on the opening evening that only
when the three religious traditions live in mutual respect will there
be real peace in the Middle East.
Recognizing the limitations of institutional religion, especially in
our part of the world, it would be more than naïve to expect it to
spearhead any political breakthrough. However, when there is a
political window of opportunity, as there is now, it is essential
that religious voices and leadership are actively involved in its
support. While religion may not be able to initiate a political
resolution of the conflict, it is an essential component for a
successful political process, providing the psycho-spiritual glue for
long-lasting and effective peace.
* Rabbi David Rosen, former Chief Rabbi of Ireland, is active in many
interfaith, civic, and peace organizations promoting
Israeli-Palestinian cooperation, and is a founder of Rabbis for Human
Rights.
* This article is published in partnership with the Common Ground
News Service (CGNews).