Peace Begets Peace – Pt 2
Subscribe to this blog to receive weekly radio listings for Garden of the Soul Radio. Tune into the show Wednesdays at http://blogtalkradio.com/lynn-serafinn
In response to my first article ‘Peace Begets Peace’, one person (anonymous post) replied:
A nice story but unfortunately irrelevant to the situation in Gaza. The truth is that the child has openly declared that he wants to kill his mother and she is trying to take the knife out of his hands. She knows that he always keeps his promises and is stabbing her for more than 8 years over and over again. She is overreacting because she is afraid of blood poisoning and has had enough. I’m all for everlasting peace. But, when the Hamas says he will not stop short of killing me, I have to believe him. I just can’t see what we can talk about.
While my initial article was written with a view towards peace in general, and not necessarily talking solely about the violence in Gaza, these comments are surely a wonderful expression of the frustration that is undoubtedly felt amongst the nations in question. I can personally relate to the imagery from the perspective of my marriage breaking down 6 years ago. Yes, when any relationship has gotten to the point that you are tired of being ’stabbed’ (using your metaphor), then fight or flight appear to be the only two options. However, I have learned a lot about fighting and flying, and how these appear to be the only options when we are in the midst of a situation. However, if we take a metaview of this, or any, hostile situation, I believe ‘peace begets peace’ does indeed apply on a larger scale.
I completely agree that when a relationship, whether between two people or two peoples, has broken down to the point where they are no longer able to hear each other, and communication is obscured because contempt has replaced it, it can seem like there is no way to fix the wounded relationship. There is a point, as you say, when one or both parties feels too wounded to trust any longer, and the relationship becomes toxic.
If you were a married couple in a toxic situation and could no longer endure it, you would divorce. In a divorce, solicitors are employed because, left to their own devices, the two parties would probably do nothing but shout, defile, blame and threaten each other. There is no more trust between them, so they are incapable of managing their affairs without the assistance of a disinterested third party, who has no real vested interest in the outcome. A solicitor might work well to help the severing process, but what a solicitor does not do is heal the relationship because it is assumed it does not want to heal.
Unfortunately, in the matter of nations, dealing with a toxic relationship is a different matter. You cannot divorce each other, yet still third parties (i.e., other countries) are frequently ’employed’ (or deployed) to act in the role of ’solicitor’ wherein property and boundaries are set, whether through additional warfare, sanctions or resolutions. However, there are several reasons why this is not likely to be particularly effective in the long-term. The first is that a third party nation rarely, if ever, has a genuinely disinterested relationship with either nation, so their intervention is bound to feel like manipulation to one, or even both, of the parties. Secondly, while a divorce lawyer can walk away from his clients thinking that it will be up to the clients to heal themselves as they separate from each other, it is practically impossible for two nations (and I use the word ‘nation’ to mean the people, not the geographic boundaries), especially two that have been living as closely as Israelis and Palestinians have, to separate from each other physically, emotionally, culturally or economically. And while couples who have divorced may or may not heal separately with time (some never do), nations have the disadvantage of not being able to truly separate and heal, nor do they have the luxury of taking time in their collective process because the rest of the world is depending upon their stability.
So when dealing with nations, what we need is not a divorce at all, although we traditionally use these tactics. What we need here is a means of actual healing of the relationship itself, not just of the separate nations. I do understand that sometimes it might be deemed that immediate action of a political or military nature for the purpose of ensuring the safety of oneself is necessary in the short-term. But in the long-term what is needed is for those who are more able to see past the blur of cultural prejudices to help the relationship, not in the role of the ’solicitor’, but as the healer.
Healing the relationship is not a matter of conducting mediation for the purpose of making resolutions. It is a global process of rebuilding the trust between the parties so that they can see the humanity in each other, and therefore feel inspired to be at peace with each other. No peace can come without both parties being willing to release their judgements, blame and contempt, and this will not happen until their view of both ’self’ and ‘other’ is shifted. So long as both parties hold tightly to the ‘us’ and ‘them’ of the situation, toxicity will remain. And saying that ‘we’ will not release this view until the ‘other’ party does, only perpetuates the problem. Only when the ‘us and them’ perspective is shifted can healing occur, whether between two individuals or between two peoples. When this shift finally does happen, more choices become apparent, and then a lasting peace, and not just a ‘patch up job’, can take place.
I suppose what I am say here is that when one is caught in the crossfire, yes, there are things that may need to happen to ensure your survival. But if we rise above the situation and see what is needed at a larger level, trusting that it is possible, then our actions will be motivated by a different energy, and a different result is more likely.
As someone who considers herself in a healing profession, I am dedicated to doing my bit for the ‘bigger picture’. While I might not be able to take the knife out of the hand of the belligerent child, I hope to help change the situation so that the child no longer wishes to pick up the knife at all, except to slice the bread he will share with his neighbour and friend.
I firmly believe that all of us can begin this process when we start at a local level and heal the wounds within ourselves by shifting our internal energy to a place of peace, even when there is a turbulent storm raging around us.
I am grateful to this writer of this comment for giving me the chance to hear his anguish over the current situation.
January 18th, 2009 at 18:33
I’m an Israeli and I do feel for the poor Palestinians caught in the cross fire but what can we do.
I’d like to share an experience I’ve had. I was a reservist soldier some years ago and I’ve had the following dilemma: Someone was shooting at me from behind a crowd of kids. I did not shoot back which was a very bad behaviour. My decision could have orphaned my friends’ kids or even mine.
A more recent example: if a 5 year old is sleeping in her bed and under that bed are hidden missiles that are going to be used to kill my kids. What should I do? Bombard that house or not?
The problem is that we (Israel and the West) are playing chess on a backgammon board. The other side has different rules. If a Muslim explodes himself in the middle a crowded market he will go straight to Heaven and get 72 virgins to serve him. That is what they learn at school from day one, even earlier.
It is such a pity. The Jewish & Muslim Golden ages (the 12th century in Spain) was when we cooperated with each other. Then, the enemy were the Christians and the Inquisitors.
If you want to see the ‘bigger picture’ learn the facts. Newspapers get only the ‘yellow stuff’ and simplify things.
There is not a single Palestinian Peace movement. They don’t learn any peace songs at school. We have dozens of them. I could go on forever.
We all are crying for them, but if they won’t compromise on any thing, sorry, my children come first.
If I hate them for anything is that they put my children in front of dilemmas like those I have described before.