| You
might also wish to read the results of the Alliance Forum for
Building Peace, which took place from December 2001 to June 2002,
by no means obsolete 
The following information has been sent by Marti Olivella, from
Barcelona, Director of NovaCis, in charge of the e-forum of the
International Facilitation Team of the Alliance and John Stewart,
from Zimbabwe, member of the International Governing Council of
the Non Violent Peace Forces . Web site of the "Nonviolent
Peace Forces"
You
will also find a short presentation of the fourth Dialogue and
Controversy Round Table, which was one of the innovations of this
latest edition of the WSF.
Here are several articles written following the latest WSF, Porto
Alegre 2003. Through them, we wish to illustrate the diversity
of the Allies’ contributions to this event.
|
This is the presentation
made by Nadia Aïssaoui, an Algerian living in Lebanon, during
the controversial debate of the World Social Forum of Porto Alegre
last January on the question: Against the wars of the 21st
century, How can peace be created between peoples?
Doomed to Hope
Nadia Leila Aïssaoui - Algeria-Lebanon - nadialeila@hotmail.com
 How
is the problem understood?
Speaking about building peace today seems more like expressing
utopian ideals than a possible reality.
How is it possible to face up to the global unleashing of
violence that we are now witnessing?
In my speech, I shall attempt to present several directions of
consideration on the reasons for war and on our responsibility
in building peace.
How can war be defined?
War is the symbol of the failure of humanity
and its powerlessness to stem the death wish within every human
being.
War is not only armed conflict but covers all systematic forms
of violence that have become intrinsic components of society based
on a patriarchal system that has always glorified the use of domination
and force as means of assertion.
War is all forms of injustice that generate violence. Whether
these forms are racism, sexism, economic discrimination, occupation
of another’s territory or armed conflict, what is at stake
is human dignity and rights.
The alarming figures of the United Nations Development Programme
for 2000, describing the living conditions in today’s world,
show that the stakes of economic and political power have become
far clearer at global scale, with the progression of neo-liberal
ideology that has declared war against millions of human beings.
For example, it states that:
- more than a billion human beings live on less than one
dollar a day;
- the fortunes of the 200 richest persons in the world exceed
the revenues of 41% of the world’s population (2.8 billion
human beings);
- the fortunes of the three richest persons in the world
exceed the GNP of the 48 poorest countries together;
- 300,000 children and millions of women are subject to slavery
and prostitution;
- 26 wars are now in progress around the world (including
18 in Africa).
- 2.5 million have been killed and 12 million others have
been displaced during the last ten years.
In view of all these figures, it should not be
forgotten that spending on defence contributes to the wealth of
a war-based economy maintained by the military-industrial complexes
whose beneficiaries are powerful Western countries (especially
the United States) and their allies in the regimes of the third
world.
These military-industrial complexes control a large share of the
media that generates a climate of all pervading fear. Television
channels overflow with serials (often offered free to the countries
of the South) that promote violence and virility. Since television
has taken the place of parents crushed by work, it has become
a vector of socialisation and education for violence and sexism.
At the same time, censorship, misinformation and control of information
are current practice when used to justify defence budgets and
they prevent transparency regarding the nuclear sector and its
impact on the environment and the world.
How can the Arab context be understood on the
basis of these global conditions?
To return to the sources of wars and violence, we can see that
violence in Arab countries (and perhaps in many other countries
around the world) is meted out at several levels: in family relationships,
in social relationships (political and economic) and in the management
of public affairs by the different regimes in place.
- On family relationships: The hierarchical structure of the patriarchal
family gives total authority to men and their male successors.
They wield coercive power and control over women, so that the
latter introvert and reproduce the systems of domination from
which men profit in every way.
- On social relationships: Social organisation is directly founded
on the family structure to such an extent that the strategic positions
of power are exclusively monopolised by men, thereby relegating
women to the private sphere, despite the fact that women are increasingly
asserting themselves in the world of work. Thus it is not surprising
to observe the increase of violence expressed towards them and
to any social actor that disputes the dominant order. This violence
is expressed by threats to the safety of women in public life
but also by the radicalisation of laws inspired by religious texts
that regulate their personal status, turning them into second-class
citizens. Other categories in society that call this order into
question are also subjected to severe repression if not total
absence of freedom and democratic expression.
- Regarding the management of public affairs by the regimes in
place: the Arab world is ruled by dictatorships often installed
by military coups d’états, that have generated a
system relying on clientilism and secrecy rife with corruption,
the monopolisation of wealth by a minority, and the marginalisation
of women, thereby creating frustration, and giving rise to and
widely expressed by radical political Islamism.
However, the Arab world is also faced with a
complex and unique situation stemming from the Israeli colonisation
and occupation of Palestine. This colonisation and occupation
have been supported for decades by the United States. Europe,
on the other hand, remains silent about this aggression suffered
by the Palestinians and which paralyses the entire region, strengthening
the authoritarian regimes in place by giving them pretexts for
militarisation, while accumulating tension, frustration, anger
and hate.
All the dimensions and stakes of the war exist
in Palestine right now. It is precisely in this conflict that
the credibility of those in favour of progress by action in the
world is at stake, exactly as it was in the South African combat
against apartheid.
What can be done to build lasting peace?
As we see it the question is not so much the
existence of proposals for peace, or how to implement them, since
the balance of power has swayed in favour of the logic of war.
From this standpoint I shall try to present several proposals
and return to Palestine once again, as I repeat that only a just
peace in this country and the liberation of its people will contribute
towards considerably modifying the entire situation in the region
and thus the world.
The construction of a culture of peace requires
work that must be done at several levels:
- The individual and collective level: freeing ourselves
of patriarchal logic requires that each of us also frees ourselves
from the present hierarchical system and seriously calls into
question the scale of dominant values. The feminist movements,
for example, succeeded in formulating critical thinking when
women were able to demystify the ideologies and stereotypes
inculcated by patriarchal society. Deglorifying the myth of
war and the warrior is the first step required to build a
culture of peace. Then it is necessary to use education to
emphasise the importance of values needed for life, that is
to say solidarity, equality and justice instead of competition,
domination, money and profit.
- Work for the construction of participatory democracies
that take into consideration the hopes of peoples, and replace
the military, monarchical and reactionary regimes that govern
the Arab world. This must be done through efforts that bring
together progressists and aim at changing the present balance
of power. Political culture, practice and commitment are essential
for creating another balance of power. We are greatly inspired
by the Brazilian system insofar as Brazilian society has succeeded
in freeing itself from dictatorship without bloody consequences.
The pluralism and dynamism of the left offers wider horizons
than previously with the renewal of thinking.
- To succeed in bringing about democratisation, the construction
of alliances between civil societies at international scale
can constitute a means of pressure by mobilising public opinion
via mass demonstrations and politically by voting, boycotts
(oil companies, networks supporting the occupation), and so
forth. This is the surest way of inciting Western governments
to demand respect for human rights and the freedom of the
individual before any economic co-operation agreement between
our countries.
- The cancellation of the third world debt is vital for their
economic development provided that it is accompanied with
international monitoring to avoid corruption and waste.
- The reform and democratisation of international economic
and political institutions (IMF, the World Bank and the WTO).
- The need to reform the systems of the United Nations, whose
role is limited at present to validating double standard policies
imposed by the United States and their allies to suit their
own interests. The examples of Israeli contempt for UN resolutions
is blatant when compared to the situation of Iraq. The reform
would concern the abolition of the right of veto, held by
the five powers responsible for selling more than 90% of the
world’s arms. It would also concern taking into account
the position of civil societies and their proposals, since
their views are seldom or not at all represented by their
governments.
- Civil society must constitute a laboratory for renewing
politics and redynamising political parties, currently hamstrung
by their rigidity and incapacity for regeneration. Civil society
in democratic countries has the means to influence those who
govern them. It is a responsibility towards the just and legitimate
causes of peoples gagged by their own leaders or colonisers.
The Palestinian cause, to give an example, has never been
given as much media exposure or had as much support from public
opinion since the commitment of Western and international
activists. They are capable of making their public opinions
aware and thus influence internal and external political strategies
through the ballot box.
Now, returning to the question of Palestine,
the proposals are concrete and have been widely diffused:
- the organisation of an international campaign for the application
of UN resolutions (194 voted in 1949 related to the refugees’
right of return, resolutions 242 and 338 voted in 1967 related
to the Israeli retreat from the occupied territories, resolution
1392 voted in 2002 related to the creation of a Palestinian
state).
- the retreat of the Israeli army from all Palestinian territories
occupied since 1967;
- the dismantling of all the Israeli colonies in the occupied
territories
- an independent and sovereign Palestinian state in control
of its borders, air and water, with East Jerusalem as its
capital;
- the right of return for the refugees;
- recognition of responsibilities to make reconciliation
possible.
Without an independent and viable Palestinian state, the peoples
of the region will never live in peace and security.
Finally, on the question of Iraq, it is vital
to face up to the war and American-British aggression, while supporting
the Iraqi people to rid itself of its dictator. Now is the moment
to mobilise or never.
There is also the issue of facing the consequence of this war
on Palestine and the Palestinian people, especially if, tomorrow,
Israel elects a war criminal (Sharon) at its head for the second
time running. He will certainly use the pretext of the war in
Iraq to take his destructive ambitions for Palestine and its people
to their logical conclusion.
We are condemned to hope and are above all condemned
towards building and giving life to this hope. |
