Al-Arabiya, UAE
May 4 2013
The lost key to peace in Middle East
Saturday, 4 May 2013
by Ceylan Ozbudak
Over the past two years, as Libya went through a violent revolution,
as Egypt exchanged dictatorship for civil unrest, as the buzz of
drones drowned out the sounds of everyday life in Yemen and Pakistan,
as Syria descended into a bloodshed not seen since ancient times, and
most recently, as chemical weapons have begun to emerge as the most
dire threat against open society since the onset of the nuclear age,
the city of Brussels has been hosting peace talks between Serbia and
Kosovo. With scarcely a mention outside the countries involved, these
former sites of tragedy in the 1990s have managed to craft terms of
independence for Kosovo, over coffee and scones.
The talks began with a petition before an international tribunal of
competent jurisdiction, were facilitated by a neutral mediator, and
appointed by mutual consent. This has been a textbook illustration of
how a dispute can be resolved peacefully. We are all supposed to learn
in elementary school lessons such as listening, then speaking, and
then listening some more. Humankind has been capable of this high
order of communication for many centuries.
Why has there been more media interest in slanders, fights, and
insults than in such a successful process? The unspoken media mantra,
`If you’re not going to fight, we’re not going to write’ has simply
pushed the majority of the good news aside. Still, if we don’t pay
attention to what is actually working, how will we avoid the mistakes,
which made the 20th century the bloodiest century of recorded time?
For almost a century, the Western intelligentsia had a convenient
assumption that public opinion is a lump of clay, to be informed and
shaped by a certain class, and led to whatever narrative they promote.
Whatever its past merit, this assumption is much more questionable in
2013 than it was in 1995 or even in 2005. Within ten years, we have
seen social media open doors to personal communications and
relationships which would have never been feasible before. The initial
consequence is that public opinion is becoming less and less
homogenous and increasingly articulate. That’s not a good thing. It’s
a great thing.
Armenians and Turks
After this positive development regarding Serbia and Kosovo last week,
another equally cheerful event went unnoticed by the majority of the
media, which seems to thrive so much on perpetual conflict and
sensationalism. Just last week, Aram Atesyan, the Deputy Patriarch of
the Orthodox Armenian Church, granted a televised interview and
answered the question `What does it mean for the Turkish Armenians to
study in Armenia?’ This was his answer:
`Armenia represents father and Turkey represents mother. Because we
call Armenia the father land and Turkey the mother land. We Armenians
are children, left in between a mother and a father, who are fighting.
The two are fighting and we are crying. And we are waiting in
anticipation and impatiently for our parents to reconcile no matter
under which circumstances, we are waiting for them to hug each other.’
The Turkish and the Armenian peoples are rejecting the path of
perpetual accusation and recrimination in favor of peace, respect, and
cooperation toward a brighter day. When we look at our shared history,
we find the brotherhood and the trust we seek now in our past. Under
many Ottoman sultans, there were Armenians serving as ministers,
advisers and parliament members. Armenian generals led the Ottoman
armies. When Ottoman Sultan Mehmet II conquered Istanbul, he brought
an Armenian priest from Bursa with him. In 1461 he gave the priest a
patriarchate in the new capital of the Sultanate. In that time, only
the Greek Orthodox Church had a patriarchate in the city. While in the
West the constant focus is on the past and allegations of genocide, we
are looking toward a better future: than counting the bones of who
died in 1915. Armenians and Turks.
How does it help us to accurately evaluate this nature of the region
and then integrate it into a secular and democratic system? Public
opinion is no longer a monolithic unit. Every individual is a
distinctive voice within the chorus of humankind. Many of us cherish a
deep desire to live happily, in fellowship with God. Consequently, we
see that people do not always agree with their politicians and
continue to hold the views of their religious leaders dearer. In most
places in the Middle East, mosques are full during Friday prayer, and
the whole community listens to the imam very intently. For religious
Jews in Israel, the declarations published by the Sanhedrin Court are
like orders. For Christian Armenians, the opinions of the Patriarch
serve as advice, and they trust the Patriarchate. Likewise, Muslim
opinion leaders are widely covered in the media. The great majority of
the Turkish people look to their religious leaders for advice even
concerning the pending negotiations with the PKK. Indeed it is not
unusual to see tribal leaders or religious people even on the most
secular TV channels. The dominance of religious outlook on the social
mood clearly demonstrates the religious orientation of people in this
region.
Europe and North America in their attempts to solve the problems of
the Middle East have always made the same mistake of ignoring the
religious dimensions, the very fabric of these lands, and the people
who represent those values. This has always turned out to be a blind
alley for them. It has become an exhausting pattern for many analysts
now to see that their conventional policies and usual diplomatic
maneuvers no longer work in the region. New people who do not exactly
fit the standards of the Western world are on the rise in their
careers as the rulers of these lands from Tunisa to Egypt to Turkey
and more to come. It is time that our Western friends understand
treating the Middle East with the values of the Western world and
thinking every society has the same approach is not only wrong, but
counter-productive. The failures of Western `democracy promotion’ in
Iraq and Afghanistan testify to that fact. People with the desire to
contribute to the peace processes in the region need to include
religious and intellectual leaders, which are strong voices of their
communities. Secretary Kerry can gain new momentum for Arab-Israeli
peace if he brings Jewish, Muslim, Christian religious leadrs around
the table. Will he?
_________
Ceylan Ozbudak is a Turkish political analyst, television presenter,
and executive director of Building Bridges, an Istanbul-based NGO. She
can be followed on Twitter via @ceylanozbudak
Also appeared in the Saudi Gazette:
http://www.saudigazette.com.sa/index.cfm?method=home.regcon&contentid130505164272
http://english.alarabiya.net/en/views/news/middle-east/2013/05/04/The-lost-key-to-peace-in-Middle-East.html