Positive
scenarios:
Turn to the future, look at the
broader perspectives
Kosovo
Solution Series # 8
PressInfo #
216
March
31, 2005
By
Aleksandar
Mitic,
TFF Associate & Jan
Oberg,
TFF director
Relevant background links
for this series here.
Imagine...
Imagine we are in the year 2025. If
all goes well - which admittedly it doesn't always - by
that time Serbs and Albanians as well as other EU member
citizens will have a hard time understanding why so much
hurt and harm took place long ago, why there was a war
and so much hate in Kosovo. Well, of course, the
dissolution of old Yugoslavia was a much more difficult
process than the Americans and the Europeans thought at
the time. After all, throughout the 20th century, there
had been only three cases of federations splitting
without bloodshed, namely Norway from Sweden in
1905, Singapore from Malaysia in 1965 and the Slovak from
the Czech Republic in 1993.
As we know, former enemies have
learnt to live and work together. For example Americans
and Russians after the Cold War, earlier the French and
Germans, the Germans and the Danes, the British and the
Indians, etc. Time - and some efforts too - heal. Anyone
who has visited Vietnam have experienced how the people
there hate neither the French nor the Americans. Japanese
and Americans work together in a multitude of ways in
spite of how the Japanese once upon a time were treated
in the US and in spite of Pearl Harbour, Tennozan
(Okinawa) and the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and
Nagasaki. Today, the Hutus and Tutsis of Burundi have
agreed on a new power-sharing constitution after a
genocide that devastated the country and killed about
300.000 Burundians. Reconciliation, peace, trust and
co-operation after war, hurt and harm exist. And what
exists must be possible!
Are we - really - to believe that
Serbs and Albanians will never be able to do likewise and
that they must live in separate states that will have
nothing to do with each other? Those who think so belong
to a world of the past, not to the modern world, not to
the European cultural space. What a paradox that we hear
Westerners arguing for separatism and exclusivity - but
no peace - with some people and otherwise believe in
Europeanisation, globalisation and the world coming
together!
Well, let's use more imagination:
By 2025 people virtually everywhere had come to realise
that borders, exclusivity, nationalism as well as violent
repression and weapons-based national territorial
security were things belonging to the past. The 2025
world order was immensely more culturally mixed, full of
multiethnic co-operation, citizens-oriented and many felt
that the country of their own was less important than the
world of everybody. The concept of identity did not
relate only to "me being special and different from you",
i.e. on contrast, but on a common us, a recognition of
unity as one humanity in diversity. Fear as the main
attitude to meeting the stranger had declined, curiosity
and celebration of the rich possibilities within the
world community had increased tremendously, not least
thanks to a much more fair distribution of the world's
socio-economic growth. In fact, by 2025 the
UN
Millennium Development Goals (MDG)
had been met. Likewise, human and ecological security
coupled with the UN norm of creating "peace by peaceful
means" had been introduced in the majority of states and
international organisations and, thus, all weapons of
mass destruction and most of the other offensive military
capabilities had been abolished.
In short, people had found out that
they had so much to gain from being together in peace
compared with being isolated in fear. Civilisation was,
in other words, moving forward...
Dreaming? Futile, "unrealistic"
wishful thinking? Perhaps, but there are at least four
advantages in trying to imagine a better future for all:
a) It helps recognising how
counterproductive it is for conflict-resolution to focus
only on the past (which we can't change) and thereby
forget about the potentials waiting to be realised in the
future. After all, no one can drive a car safely by
looking only into the rear mirror.
b) It tells that each actor, each
single individual has a wider responsibility to the
world, a duty to contribute with local solutions that
are compatible with and promote a better world for all;
c) It illustrates how positive,
larger visions can help us achieve reconciliation and
forgiveness. When we see the possibility of a better
future we "need" hate and revenge much less, if at
all. We can then work for something rather than against
somebody.
d) It emphasizes that what
people can't imagine, they are not likely to work
for. The more positive attitudes we can build into
our image of the future, the better the chance of real
conflict-resolution and, successively, true
peace.
Being an analytical, mitigating and
facilitation think tank, TFF never suggests what the
solution should be. We believe that only the conflicting
parties themselves can find the viable solution, but
sometimes need a little help. They must be the
stakeholders and they must feel ownership in order to
implement the solution on the ground. Neither the
conflict analysis nor the solution must be "stolen" and
imposed by some third party, least of all the
international community. The conflicting parties are to
live with the solution when the internationals have left
the region. (See
more about this philosophy in PressInfo
209).
Thus, should the parties - all of
them - be able to voluntarily agree on Kosovo
becoming an independent state, fine with us. However, it
does deserve a more or less philosophical consideration:
Will the world be a better place for all if the 50-100
more or less secessionist movements are granted their own
states? If Kosovo is, why not most of the rest where
similar, sometimes much worse, repression and war has
gone on for decades? Is it wise to promote
particularistic solutions to humanity's problems or
should we at least try to meet the general challenge
of human civilisation with a somewhat larger and more
generous vision than one based on exclusivity and
nationalism, on ethnically cleaner rather than mixed
societies?
We would argue, philosophically,
that it is a defeat for humanism and for a global
civilisation whenever some people slam the door and say
that they can only live with similarity and want not to
deal with difference.
An independent Kosovo looks to us
as such a defeat for both the Serbs (yesterday), the
Albanians (today and tomorrow) and for the international
community. Or to put it otherwise, there have been enough
special splitting done in the former Yugoslav space. The
agenda of today and tomorrow is integration into Europe
and the global, diverse community; the agenda of
yesterday was nationalism and parochialism with a veneer
of human rights endorsed by Europe.
Of utmost importance in any
conflict-resolution process is the change of
vision. One of the most respected and experienced
peacemakers, Adam Curle, wrote in 1986 that:
"In the slow move towards
negotiation, settlement and the eventual restoration
of fully peaceful relations, the significant stages
are the changes of vision rather than the signing of
agreements that result from them, the gradual erosion
of fear, antipathy and suspicion, and the slow shift
of public opinion."
When at negotiations
representatives of the different parties change from
being just that to becoming human beings in the eyes of
each other, new possibilities emerge. The turning point
at the Camp David talks is said to have happened when
Anwar Sadat of Egypt and Menachim Begin of Israel
exchanged photos of their grandchildren. Furthermore, it
is well-known throughout the history of
conflict-resolution that new visions and possibilities
open up to the parties when they focus - together - on
issues and not on each other - that is, when they get
"soft" on people and "hard" on solving the problems that
stand between them.
Finally, Buddhists tend to see
suffering and violence as fundamentally rooted in
compartmentalisation of reality. Liberation from the
war-mentality becomes possible when we see each other and
our problems as part of a much larger, common whole.
Thus, the famous Buddhist monk, Nhat Hanh, is convinced
that "the two sides in a conflict are not really
opposing, but two aspects of the same reality."
In summary, the parties in the
Kosovo conflict and the international community would do
wise to reflect a little less on themselves and a little
more on their common conflict as well as on the common
European reality and larger world of which they are a
part. With a movement away from the present history-based
"only-one-solution" thinking by all sides - from which
all will lose something - towards a future-based
"many-possibilities" philosophy, everyone can win
something.
Difference is not a threat. It's a
strength.
Reduce
fear and provide a future with socio-economic
development
Most secessionist movements work
for an independent state because they have a history
filled with repression and humiliation; in many cases
they have experienced economic deprivation too. It's
humanly very understandable to want protection from that
- "we are fearful and the only protection we see is a
homeland where we are protected by borders, walls and
weapons so we shall never again have to fear." So too the
Kosovo Albanians up to 1999 and the Serbs, Roma and other
minorities in Kosovo since 1999.
Thus, the question is: how do we
reduce fear and increase mutual trust and reconciliation?
The answers are: by changing structures that lead to fear
and, equally important, help rebuild the soul, the mind
and the human communities and promote peace education and
non-violence for present and future generations - all to
enable a new peace culture to take root.
Thus, status talks are necessary
but by no means sufficient. No status decision for any
place will work if, for any side, fear continues to
dominate everyday life - and fear never comes alone, it
thrives together with its partners: hate, wish for
revenge, images of the neighbour as enemy and stockpiling
of violent means for protection.
We believe that most people living
in Kosovo and the wider region are trapped in the old
thinking because of what they have experienced for
decades. Undoubtedly, they would benefit - and peace be
given a chance - by a positive vision that effectively
combats fear. Unfortunately, the international community
has very few professionally educated and trained
conflict-managers and no organisations fully devoted to
handling conflicts with professionalism and impartiality.
Be this as it may, it must provide opportunities, models,
meeting places and facilitation for a broad-based
societal dialogue about possible futures for Kosovo and
the region that increase hope and diminishes fear.
The
economics of peace-making
As mentioned in PressInfo
214, it is very unlikely
that any status decision will be a solution if the
pervasive economic misery of both Kosovo and Serbia
proper continues. It would be a gesture of quite some
importance if the same international community that
punished the ordinary citizens and rewarded the mafia
with ten years of sanctions and then did a 78-day bombing
that also hit the people but strengthened the Serb and
Albanian extremist leaderships, decided to implement a
kind of Marshall Plan for the region and thereby
secured welfare and social security for all. It should
encompass the neighbours such as Macedonia that had its
identity and economy shaken from these thoughtless
policies.
This would be important in and of
itself, but it would also be psycho-politically
important for the citizens of Serbia, Montenegro and
Kosovo. They need recognition of the fact that they
suffered from the consequences of international politics
and the power games between their own leaders and the
very same international community.
If something like this was done,
people would likely put their grievances with each other
and with the international community behind them. Will
the international community that is now cutting down
various types of assistance to the region change its
policies and show a bit of generosity?
And there is one more fundamentally
important aspect to be taken into account: a status
decision for Kosovo must aim to - also - make it possible
for the international community to withdraw, or heavily
reduce, the presence of the UN, NATO, OSCE and the EU;
many NGOs are likely to leave too. For six years the
Kosovo province has benefited from thousands of
foreigners with high salaries renting, spending,
employing and consuming. Prices have skyrocketed, young
locals gave up their education to be employed by
international organisations, the social structure has
changed and many depend on the internationals for their
living. On the untold effects and local viability of this
presence, see PressInfo
162 from 2002.
The problems facing Kosovo the
day the international community departs should not be
underestimated. It could well plunge the province into
even deeper economic misery.
In summary, we are convinced that
everything will depend on fear reduction and genuinely
positive socio-economic prospects. Ignoring these two
main aspects will doom any final settlement of this
conflict.
The parties may, for understandable
reasons, not be up to it yet. Is the international
community?
The TFF Kosovo
Solution Series
# 1
Why
the solution in Kosovo matters to the
world
# 2
The
media - strategic considerations
# 3
The
main preconditions for a sustainable solution to the
Kosovo conflict
# 4
The
situation as seen from Serbia
# 5
The
arguments for quick and total independence are not
credible
# 6
What
must be Belgrade's minimum conditions and its media
strategy
# 7
Nations
and states, sovereignty and
self-determination
# 8
Positive
scenarios: Turn to the future, look at the broader
perspectives
# 9
Many
thinkable models for future Kosovo
# 10
Summary:
From "Only one solution" towards democracy and
peace
NOTE
Relevant
background links for this series.
Get
free articles & updates
Få
gratis artikler og info fra TFF
© TFF and the author 2005
Tell a friend about this article
Send to:
From:
Message and your name
You are welcome to
reprint, copy, archive, quote or re-post this item, but
please retain the source.
Would
you - or a friend - like to receive TFF PressInfo by
email?
 
|