1. I negoziati di pace, generalmente, sono incentrati sulle dimensioni politica ed economica. Quale è la Sua percezione della necessità di toccare aspetti più profondi e genuini della riconciliazione e come si può ottenere questo?
It is very clear that the first requirement of any political negotiations for peace is the desire for peace, something which cannot be based solely on political and economic needs. Rather, I believe that the spirit of the problem is human and therefore negotiations and solutions must include all aspects of humanity. For example, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is for the Palestinians a conflict full of torment, anger and pain and denied rights, primarily because of the occupation, while for Israelis it is a conflict full of fear because of Jewish history, the desire for power and domination over a sense of victimization and the need for security which has led to an irrational, indiscriminate and inhumane occupation. In addition to ideological motivations, there is also the use of religion as a political tool in conflicts, rejecting the Lord, the laws of humanity, morality and peaceful negotiations. The politicization of humanitarian and religious issues only serve the political vision which leads to rigid, negative impact on the desire for peace to the degree of feeling weak and sometimes neglected and betrayed. Normalization transforms the charge of peace from sin to virtue. Peace has become the enemy, taking the life of everyone, but more than that, life (which is the most sacred thing in the world) is a cheap sacrifice in a system where land equals economics and where politics are put above all else. The pain of human beings can be self-absorbing or can be transformed into a kind of reconciliation. I believe absolutely that the people do not want reconciliation – not because they do not want peace – but because of the absence of a system enabling them to deal with anger and to work through the pain in order to give life, not death. I believe we can activate reconciliation to be part of the process of peaceful political negotiation through the following approaches.
2. Quali sono le condizioni nelle quali, al di là dell’assicurare gli interessi della parti in conflitto, può essere stabilito un processo incentrato su un senso di equità e dignità?
The best way and the circumstances in which they can secure the interests of the parties in conflict to reach a solution is first to reach an agreement. The conviction that every circumstance is a pre-condition for reconciliation should not be so in the political negotiations. It is necessary to have functioning common institutions based on the conditions for the process of dialogue and agreement. I consider non-violence and non-violent resistance the best way to deal even with the most difficult cases of injustice. The most appropriate conditions for dialogue and reconciliation will be enabled if there is a conviction that the solution is based on the recognition of the suffering others and their right to live in dignity. Preconceptions of others become liabilities and dispelling them is a collective responsibility, especially for the media, which is sometimes more political than the politicians themselves. Moreover, the multiplicity of political parties makes conditions on the ground more hostile as competition among them becomes hatred and abuse of the other in order to prove that each party belongs more to the nation or land, the State or political identity. I repeat here that the popular mass movement of non-violence on the ground is certainly pushing the envelope and attempting to control what happens on the ground.
3. Quanto il perdono è essenziale alla dimensione della riconciliazione? Alla radice della Sua cultura politica e/o della Sua fede religiosa quali sono i principi che implicano o escludono il perdono? Quali versi o detti che fanno parte del Suo personale patrimonio spirituale possono, nella sua opinione, avere un significato universale
In the Palestinian-Israeli situation, tolerance is impossible given the occupation, continued injustice and violence. In my opinion, tolerance is based on a sense of justice, the recognition of the crime and a taste of peace through tasting rights.I also believe that tolerance is the highest degree of reconciliation and there is no religion that does not provide for tolerance and reconciliation. I do not think that any religion encourages war or puts less emphasis on peace than another, but what makes tolerance far-fetched is primarily the continuation of injustice. I say again we cannot work on rehabilitation prior to treatment, and after my experience in the armed resistance as well as in reconciliation efforts and nonviolent resistance, I have come to truly believe that Gandhi’s connection between love (himsa) and non-violent resistance (syatagraha) is essential.
4. Il perdono richiede qualche forma di pentimento da parte di coloro a cui il perdono viene offerto? Il perdono ha condizioni o è senza condizioni?
The pain in our lives has never been conditional, how can tolerance?! Hate does not mean the disappearance of love and anger does not mean the end of the peace, but rather coming to terms with the pain and removing the hatred. A trend that is really alarming is when one wants to be a victim. Inevitably there are people who choose to be criminals, or perhaps it is some way to deal with pain and fear through the compromising of others.Reconciliation is when you create a bag of tears and cease to hate the pain; tolerance is to be able to bury the bag in our memories or in a tomb of love and not in the body of hate.The process of repentance is very important in reconciliation, which in my view is a fundamental pillar of tolerance or forgiveness, and both must come through the system and the value of justice. Repentance is primarily intended to recognize the abuse, error or crime and all these factors help to facilitate tolerance although it is impossible to compensate for love. If we experienced loss, help us to deal with the pain, to once again begin to sense that we are not a victim and to start a march from the three stages:1) Victimhood 2) surviving 3) New life and creativityAnd this is the power of reconciliation.
I secoli hanno insegnato che in politica, nelle relazioni internazionali, nella diplomazia ciò che appariva immutabile è invece arrivato in modo apparentemente improvviso, inatteso alla sua fine; questioni che sembravano di impossibile soluzione si sono invece dischiuse in modo altrettanto inatteso, allorquando un nuovo paradigma si è offerto, spiegato, imposto agli spiriti e alle coscienze.
Il negoziato, l’interposizione, la restituzione, gli organismi internazionali, l’impegno delle religioni per la pace – prima che nascessero sembravano obiettivi irragiungibili. E sono invece diventati ciò senza cui oggi non sapremmo nemmeno pensare.
Oggi molte situazioni vecchie e nuove sembrano avere trovato nel conflitto una tragica stabilità, e nella violenza un dato prevalente. E c’è uno strumento che ha iniziato a farsi presente sulla scena internazionale – i processi di perdono e riconciliazione – che ha agito su quadranti altrimenti condannati a rimanere come erano.
Per questo, davanti ad una bibliografia ormai corposa e a situazioni ormai note, ci sembra necessario sollecitare uomini con maggiori responsabilità politiche e con la sensibilità spirituale più ampia a chiedersi dove e come il perdono può diventare uno strumento d’incontro: per affinare il tema, spogliarlo da residui ideologici, renderlo meno vago.
ARA PACIS INITIATIVES FOR PEACE ONLUS
Organizzazione internazionale senza scopo di lucro dedicata alla dimensione umana della pace
Torretta de’ Massimi – Via della Pisana, 600
00163 Roma RM (Italia)
English Version of the arapacis.org is under development