The Institute for Global Leadership
Consultation and Training for Emerging and Seasoned Leaders
|
Reconciliation Leaders™ for The Global Compact by Virginia M. Swain "The world needs leaders made strong by vision, sustained by ethics, and revealed by political courage that looks to the longer term and future generations for whom the present is held in trust." —The Report, Independent Commission of Global Governance (1995) For ten years, a new leadership model called Reconciliation Leadership™ has been practiced, adding weight and support to state and non-governmental actors in resolving complex and intractable problems. This new leadership model addresses two seemingly antithetical world trends: a rampant global economy and a transformational leadership based on inner governance and socially responsible action to heal the cycle of violence. Reconciliation Leadership™ (Figure A) furthers what Robert Greenleaf has called servant leadership. It addresses the trends by facing the worst behavior in leaders of the global economy as well as providing the resources and action for a global work ethic to address the cycle of violence. This leadership offers conscientious study, self-reflection, practice and thoughtful evaluation of the impact they have on the world to create harmonious and healthy multiethnic environments. This leadership is for the Global Compact, an initiative of the United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan. (www.unglobalcompact.org) The leadership also addresses what Dr. Patricia Mische calls a tragic lag in our development — a lag that is spiritual and systemic.1The best of these leaders humanity is desperately needed now. These leaders are deeply connected to their moral purpose, compassion and accountability. They grasp the connection between their own unhealthy behaviors and attitudes and the challenges that face the achievement of the individual, community and global respect and cooperation. They are committed to taking personal responsibility for their own anger, pain, fear and mistrust, thus breaking the cycle of projection and blame. Coexistence and Reconciliation Leaders™ teach by their example, affirming a philosophy that champions peace and the sanctity of life. Why does this leadership address a rampant global economy? Globalization is the extension of free market private profit capitalism to the whole world. The optimists hoped that an increase in general prosperity would address inequalities between rich and poor. It was also hoped by people of goodwill that present injustices in the world market would only be temporary. The widening gap between rich and poor both lowers living standards for the poor and raises them for the wealthy. The dominant view among people who write and speak about this issue is that globalization is an inevitable technologically driven process that is increasing commercial and political relations between people of different countries with winners and losers. A rampant global economy is assumed by this reader to have gone unchecked, with no restraints, codes of conduct or legal processes.2 Corporations are entering developing countries and the global economy to make use of cheaper labor. Optimists believe that the long-range effect of the impact of cheaper labor will be that the gaining of new skills and wealth would contribute to heightening the overall wealth of a country, just as the cheaper labor in the United States did in the 19th century. However, the short-term effect of cheaper labor is designed to exploit the poor, thus widening the already wide gaps of rich and poor. At the Millennium Summit at the United Nations in September 2000, the Heads of State and Government resolved to close these gaps in the case of income inequalities, to halve world poverty by 2015. But the Summit also acknowledged that Governments alone cannot achieve these aims. Accordingly, in their Millennium Declaration the leaders endorsed the idea of strong partnerships with the private sector and with civil society organizations, working towards the shared goals of all humanity. The Secretary-General said in an address to the Leaders in the World Economic Summit in Davos earlier this year: "You in this hall may take for granted that it [globalization] can and will [achieve the shared goals of all humanity]. But it is a much tougher sell out there, in a world where half of our fellow human beings struggle to survive on less than $2 a day; where less than 10 percent of the global health research budget is aimed at the health problems afflicting 90 percent of the world's population. Try to imagine what globalization can possibly mean to the half of humanity that has never made or received a telephone call; to the people of Sub-Saharan Africa, who have less Internet access than the inhabitants of the Borough of Manhattan. And how do you explain, especially to our young people, why the global system of rules, at the dawn of the 21st century, is tougher in protecting intellectual property rights than in protecting fundamental human rights?" My friends, the simple fact of the matter is this: if we cannot make globalization work for all, in the end it will work for none. The unequal distribution of benefits, and the imbalances in global rule making, which characterize globalization today, inevitably will produce backlash and protectionism. And that, in turn, threatens to undermine and ultimately to unravel the open world economy that has been so painstakingly constructed over the course of the past half-century. In a study for The Fetzer Institute, Paul Ray of Stanford University identified some 22 million Americans3 who could provide the resources for more winners in globalization to become Coexistence and Reconciliation Leaders™ to counteract globalization and to be more sensitive to the needs of the two-thirds world. These so-called cultural creatives may not be leaders by the worlds standards, but they are most assuredly leaders by the standards of The Independent Commission of Global Governance.4 They already have a world view connected to the earth and its resources built upon the highest common ground and shared experience of the Sacred. Mische writes extensively of this new perception of global spirituality. She writes, "Our search in life for God must be worked out in a global context in the midst of global crises and global community. Our spirituality must be a global spirituality."5 The 22 million core cultural creatives of the Paul Ray study have the potential to respond to Dr. Mische's vision when Coexistence and Reconciliation Leadership™ is cultivated in them. They would learn to govern by sharing power, eliciting respect for living in right relationship to the Earth, showing compassion, and leading for social responsibility. Leaders share responsibility and act out of an interdependent mindset both individually and systemically, if Paul Ray is correct in his study. Unhealthy systems are changed when the process by which systems are governed is as important as the structure. The new governing process focuses on people finding solutions, rather than problem-solving or prescriptive leadership (the power-over model). In an effort to address Mische's concern over a lag in human development, Coexistence and Reconciliation Leaders™ make decisions about how to address challenges like climate change and global warming from the higher ground of the Sacred and global spirituality which connects them with the earth and all its resources. Such people also share power at home and at work; they redefine politics from self-aggrandizement to collaborative change-making and peaceful evolution.6 Such people become politicians in this new definition, raising consciousness, if they believe that their healed inner conflicts, will not be projected on each other, and the process of blaming others will stop. They see the victim/perpetrator model in a larger framework than either victim or perpetrator. The victim often becomes a perpetrator when there is no healing from past trauma. The perpetrator, having been victim, creates more victims. Such spiritually aware leaders apply techniques of coexistence and reconciliation in a world entangled in the use of force to make peace. These leaders offer interventions with awareness of their own cycle of violence, which can be as subtle as unconscious manipulation and coercion, so as not to perpetuate the cycle, knowing how much havoc the cycle has wreaked in families, communities, nations and global politics. Recognition in this model of the need to heal ones inner conflicts (anger, fear, shame) is a way to address the United Nations Education and Social Council's claim that war begins in the minds of people. Mische says, "We must become wiser than we have ever been before, for the world we are entering cannot be understood or addressed adequately with past visions, analyses, and systems. We must become more fully conscious and holistically spiritual than ever before, awakening and attuning ourselves to the sacred presence in all life and bowing to the inner workings of the Spirit in the Earths processes — lest we destroy our own lifeline out of ignorance, unawareness, or arrogance."7 My Contribution as a Reconciliation Leader™ In 1992, I went to the United Nations to study the reasons that the Persian Gulf Resolution passed in the Security Council. It seemed to me, a naive observer, that the United Nations was supposed to end war. In this case, an armed response seemed totally wrong. After two years of study, I began a masters degree independent study thesis project through Lesley University to explore the theory and practice of coexistence — having a minimum standard for a world safe for difference. I was also interested in developing a deeper standard, Reconciliation, by creating a Sacred Container as a holding environment in a Peacebuilding Process of Reconciliation to contain the anger, fear, and other emotions that lead to breakdown of communications and to address deep-rooted intractable disputes. My thesis project was conceived and implemented with a Sacred Container as a non-violent response to the Persian Gulf resolution to develop political will among members of the United Nations Community and provide a new kind of leadership in a global economy. It is my hope that Coexistence and Reconciliation Leaders™ could contribute to the Nobel Peace Laureates initiative, The Decade of Non-Violence for the World's Children, so that the United Nations and the international community could become a true peacemaking body, dedicated to serve its followers, the world's peoples, by finally abolishing war. A Way to Address the Cycle of Violence through The Sacred Container To spiritualize the body politic, the Sacred Container, or holding environment, is created as a safe place where people can coexist, begin to trust themselves and each other, and coexist in unconscious behavior. The need for this comes from an understanding of the shadow or unconscious part of each person and situation where we express our woundedness without our awareness. A Sacred Container is a metaphoric structure, created by participants, to share resources and power, withdraw projections of the unconscious, and dissipate emotional reactions in such a way that the outcome of the meeting is owned by everyone present. There is an untapped potential in emotional and spiritual energy that can be released for good through the Sacred Container. A piece of beautiful Swedish glass, in memory of Dag Hammarskjold, is used for participants to take turns in speaking as a vehicle where the emotions can be held to contain their turbulence in a way that is not alienating to the other. The only one who can speak is the holder of the Swedish glass. Coexistence and Reconciliation Leaders™ let go of their need to control the outcome and lightly guide the process so that participants have an experience of owning unconscious emotions. I statements are used, rather than blameful statements, so that participants own their experiences without projecting them on the others. I wrote in 1996, This leadership style addresses the dominator/victim model in people and systems by creating ground rules that allow people to share their gifts in safety, without being invalidated or denigrated. It is a respectful, fully participatory model, allowing a shared vision and mission to emerge. Many prescriptive processes are given up in individual and global politics: being an expert evolves into having expertise; blaming and evading accountability evolve into interpersonal competence and personal responsibility; reacting evolves into responding.8 In Figure B, Victimhood and Aggression: Psychological Dynamics, The Center for Strategic and International Studies has shown in their model two circles: the inner circle shows the cycle of victimhood while the outer circle shows the cycle of healing when an intervention takes place.9 This leadership style provides an intervention in the cycle of violence and helps provide a way for the victim to mourn, express grief and accept loss (outer circle). Participants share power by addressing the victim/perpetrator cycle of violence in people and systems by creating ground rules in a Sacred Container as a way to re-humanize the enemy, be accountable for unconscious inner conflicts and allow people to share their gifts in safety, without being invalidated or denigrated in a respectful, full participatory process. The process allows a shared vision to emerge. People have new choices to forgive and negotiate solutions. With such a high level of emotions causing people to raise their voices, scream at, strike and even kill one another, a Sacred Container can be a useful way for participants to begin healing from alienating experiences, withdraw their projections and build relationships across divisions. Participants create ground rules for themselves that are primarily monitored by facilitators, but also by participants. A common experience brings people together naturally when the Sacred Container is in place and emotions are contained and released. There is a need for conflict competency: first to clarify what is believed and valued when it comes to conflict, second to stimulate thinking about how conflicts in ones life have been managed, and third to see that resolving conflict in a positive manner will strengthen all relationships. A Sacred Container serves as a conflict management system for community, institutional, national and global settings. There is a need to learn the impact of cultural differences, including gender, ethnicity and race on the dispute resolution process. Because the effectiveness of various conflict management strategies are influenced by cultural considerations and differences, we need to examine the various models for training leaders to intervene in disputes where cultural differences are a factor. Reconciliation Leaders™ serve their followers by facilitating others through their transformations in the Sacred Container, in a deeply respectful I-thou10 relationship, rather than one of control and manipulations. Elise Boulding's Conflict Management Continuum11 is enhanced by Reconciliation Leaders™ working towards the penultimate part of her continuum, union. Boulding's view that we live in a society that places a high value on dealing with conflict as something that has to be won. The goal is to vanquish the adversary, or at the least successful to threaten (deter) the adversary. Yet we all know there are other ways of dealing with conflicts. These ways of managing conflict may be thought of as ranging on a conflict continuum. Reconciliation Leaders™ help move conflict from the war of extermination to integration and union, from violence to non-violence, from destructive to integrative behavior, from left to right. The violent side of the continuum (limited war, deterrence, and threat, are all violent side of the continuum. Noncompliance, arbitration, mediation, and negotiation lie in a violence-neutral middle region; and reconciliation, active cooperation, and integration/union lie on the positive, nonviolent side.12 The components of accountability, forgiveness and reconciliation are essential to the leadership needed for the United Nation's Decade on Nonviolence for the World's Children, proposed by all living Nobel Peace Laureates to begin in March 2001 in the United Nations. Otherwise the world will repeat the suffering and horrors of this century's wars, ethnic conflict and the use of force as a response to terrorism. The best of our humanity is desperately needed now. Reconciliation, according to Martin Luther King, is the final, large and difficult step in peacemaking, essential if we are to move into beloved community. If we fail to nurture a reconciling spirit that listens, forgives and persists, our protests can become harsh and shrill as we move from one struggle to the next with deepening anger and frustration. Rightly enraged at the vase scope of injustice, suffering, greed and exploitation in the world, we are tempted to externalize evil as out there, forgetting our own complicity, our own shadow (unconscious) side, our own need of redemption. Alexander Solzhenitsyn, writing in The Gulag Archipelago of his experiences in Soviet prison camps, observed that the line separating good and evil passes not through states nor between classes, nor between political parties either — but right through every human heart and through all human hearts. The enemy, the oppressor, the hurtful person, the other, is with his victim, a part of the whole human family. The cycle of evil and suffering broken when we open ourselves to the grace that enables forgiveness and, ultimately, reconciliation, to take place. To say this does not mask the real conflict involved in struggling against injustice and oppression, but it reminds us that — at every stage — the peacemaker seeks to overcome evil with good, using means that are consistent with the aim being sought.13
The challenge to peacemakers to overcome evil by good14, by developing the work and upgrading skills to provide resources, tools and processes for Reconciliation Leaders™ is essential so that that mediation and reconciliation services can be provided for the Global Compact and the International Year and Decade on Nonviolence for the Children of the World (2000-2010). In the past ten years, I committed my consulting practice resources to designing and implementing a new social development model in a Peacebuilding Process of Reconciliation with a Sacred Container as its core. (Figure C) There have been fifteen implementations, always in a political context of collaborative changemaking and peaceful evolution to advance the common good. (Collins) The conceptual framework for this model comes from my corporate experience in human resources and my fifteen years as an organizational development consultant (using models that also apply to national and global challenges), vocational counselor and certified professional holistic counselor. As one of the core cultural creatives, I designed a Sacred Container for my masters thesis project, Celebration of the Children of the World (CCW). (Figure C) CCW was designed to build on the momentum of 40,000 people from 185 countries assembling at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED or Earth Summit) in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. At a vigil of all the worlds religions at the Global Forum, a parallel conference to UNCED, I had a profound experience of the union that Boulding uses as her penultimate stage in the Conflict Management Continuum. After spending the all-night vigil worshiping with thousands in our own traditions, the Dalai Lama brought us all together in five minutes of the deepest silence I had ever experienced. At the end of the silence, a sound arose out of one person and grew so that the sound of 40,000 people present grew such that the sound became one sound. We sang and danced for joy at meeting one another anew. Strangers became joyful co-celebrants as we danced the day away. Even though there was no dispute in Rio at the Earth Summit, I was struck by the potential for such communities to transform disputes through celebration. I began conceptualizing a Reconciliation Leadership™ intervention at the United Nations by building a Sacred Container, much like what I had found at the Vigil in Rio as one of nine key characteristics or competencies of this leadership style. Fifty celebration artists and a steering committee produced the Celebration of the Children of the World event after six months of preparation. by having a vigil and performances by children. To do that, we used the Sacred Container model to build a holding environment for the steering committee to contain the emotions, presence and purpose to bring the various components of the UN community together as soul force for building global community. We realized in having our own Sacred Container, we could hold the space better for the members of the United Nations community in the event itself — international civil servants, state and non-governmental actors. In the steering committee, people were able to let go and find their common humanity because of the Sacred Container, which we realized was especially useful for post-conflict peacebuilding.15 On the eve of the Celebration of the Children of the World event, the Sacred Container was put to the test. There was a dispute between two of the steering committee members and one of our ground rules was that we wouldnt run away from conflict, but rather be a listening presence no matter how hard it was. Because of the successful enactment of that ground rule, one of the parties to the dispute was able to tell the second disputant that the experience was a positive and life-changing example for her on how to work through conflict successfully, rather than being stopped by it. Our Celebration of Children of the World, a new model for building global community (unpublished masters thesis project, 1993). It was inspired by a vigil of the worlds religions at the Earth Summit in June 1992, in Brazil, where people of sovereign nations came together for a celebratory experience of one human family, brother and sisterhood. Celebration helps people accept the sufferings of everyday life by allowing them to relax and let go. Celebration expresses the true meaning of community as they unite their hearts through a moment of wonder. The joy of the body and the senses are linked to the job of the spirit (Vanier, Community and Growth). Former Secretary-General de Cuellar says there is no more beautiful profession on earth than to unite humans. Celebration allows an experience of unity and empowerment by brining people together for an experience of joy. In the times it is not appropriate to celebrate, an appropriate ritual that would commemorate the need to mourn or express another emotional stage of growth would be available. Nine Competencies of Reconciliation Leaders™ An ability to claim leadership as vocation is the first standard and competency. Self-confidence is the second standard, which comes from knowing and claiming ones inborn gifts and talents. A willingness to face ones limitations to heal the unconscious ways leaders perpetuate the cycle of violence is the third standard. When one partners with one's consciousness in the knowledge of gifts and talents, it is a sacred act. This is the fourth standard of corporate citizenship and social responsibility. The fifth standard is the ability to facilitate a Sacred Container in an I-thou relationship. Sixth is the need for conflict competency. Conflict is healthy. What is unhealthy is our response to conflict. Unhealthy reactions lead to disputes. I call conflict competency the ability to deal with conflict in a healthy way. The seventh is the standard of facilitating harmonious, healthy, multiethnic communities, organizations, nations and global challenges. Coexistence is the eighth standard of leadership, while reconciliation is the ninth standard, re-uniting communities after protracted disputes. Reconciliation Leaders™ base their actions on study, reflection, practice, and evaluation; they build relationships; they have moral purpose and compassion. They are nonjudgemental listeners who have spent time trying to come to terms with their own past trauma, unhealthy living patterns, attitudes, and behaviors, so that they can take responsibility and not hurt, blame, or project their pain on others. Such spiritually aware leaders apply techniques of coexistence and reconciliation to a world desperately entangled in the use of force to make peace. They serve their followers by helping them through their transformations rather than controlling them. They have a respect for a sense of communion with the earth and an intention to use its resources rightly. The components of accountability, forgiveness, and reconciliation are essential to the work of transformation of leadership in the United Nations and the international community. Otherwise, the world will repeat the suffering and horror of this centurys wars, ethnic conflict, and the use of armed force rather than human force and solid dispute resolution techniques as a response to terrorism. Decision-making processes of Reconciliation Leaders™ are based upon divine inspiration, clarity of insight, open communications, heartfelt inter-personal relationships, sharing of power and intention, grounding in presence and attention. The goal is integration of personal, family, organizational, community, national and world intentions and needs in an atmosphere of dignity and respect for geographical, ethnic, political, organizational and personal diversity. In this leadership, inspiration, action from integral being, abundance, joy, love, wellness, integration, and acknowledgement of the power of the shadow as guide and teacher are its essential core gifts. Additionally, it is important to be balanced as student and teacher. Leaders seek to evoke co-operation, patience, trust, synthesis, divine direction, peace, connection and service to build a vessel of essential safety through which a transdisciplinary web can be woven. In Figure C, a spiral diagram shows how a Sacred Container, adapting A Public Peace Process16, can be shown visually, as on a spiral. Leaders who are cultivating competencies, skills and techniques of Reconciliation Leadership™ are guided through a framework, a Sacred Container, which is custom-designed for each process. Vocation as gifts and talents give the strength for Leaders to be accountable for unconscious behavior patterns in a way that is not alienating or shameful for the Leader. Leaders are community members in which the stepping stones to soidarity with one another come when inner conficts and behaviors that reinforce self interest are faced. Several more stages are mediated by appropriate questions involving silence and reflection. Participants are led to an experience of unity in community, when they are willing and when the Sacred is present. They then can experience a transcendent moment of I becoming We, in brother and sisterhood, inherent dignity and reconciliation of polarities. Coexistence and Reconciliation Leaders™ become politicians in a new political framework that is lifegiving and interdependent.17 The assumptions and the practice of the model and the leadership style apply new standards and competencies of corporate citizenship and social responsibility both to commercial and non-profit leaders to cultivate community and cooperation in development as well as to provide the leadership needed for effective 21st century problem solving and decision making. Assumptions of this model of leadership include: A community of leadership as expertise, not expert. Being an expert limits one from being open to more knowledge and precludes one from being able to say I dont know the answer to that. An interdisciplinary approach to development and leadership is needed to be in right relationship to the earth and its resources, showing the interrelatedness of all the disciplines of study and practice. Vocation as a philosophy of life is essential to any new leadership model: a job or career is not enough for the commitment needed for the complexity of 21st century problems. With intention and resources, commerce could be trusted to be partners with nongovernmental organizations and United Nations agencies, not for its own self interest, but for the interest of all. Either we partner with consciousness or perish. Problems cannot be solved at the level they were created. They need elevated thinking, beyond geographic and cultural boundaries. Current leadership models offer top-down and disempowerment approaches and are not committed to long-term, sustainable goals. We need to have a mindset to create a peace system with nonviolent approaches to address subtle and overt manipulation and coercion, reversing the current practice of threat and deterrence. Reconciliation Leaders™ embody a philosophy of life, a way of being where one leads by example and inspiration, in an I-thou relationship. One embodies a philosophy of life by clarifying ones vocational calling as well as clarifying where one can apply the gifts. One can offer ones vocation as spiritual gift, love, reconciliation, caring, and joy to bring healing and consciousness to work. Knowing ones gifts and talents is the foundation upon which leadership is practiced. When clarified in a vocational assessment process, one can be confident about these core talents and have the confidence to withstand tremendous stress and resistance. In a world of temporal power, a soul has a note, a consciousness to apply to work, a life of its own that when placed and carried with intention, becomes love and healing. Leaders can mediate coexistence environments and reconcile intractable challenges if they believe in each persons ability to find and claim goodness, unique gifts and talents, and if they build a solid career in human rights, conflict management, organization development, counseling and vocational consulting. When leaders are willing to face limitations to heal the unconscious ways they perpetuate the cycle of violence, they bring closure to the cycle. Jung called the unconscious the shadow, that part of us of which we are unaware. It consists of those characteristics we do not recognize in ourselves. Either a self-destructive tendency or a virtue can be hidden away in the unconscious. The "shadow quality" is that it is unknown to the owner; the habitual unconsciousness of a quality makes it a shadow, not its badness. We need to know the shadows presence, whether good or bad, in order to begin to take responsibility for its effect on others and on ourselves. In this kind of leadership, many prescriptive processes are given up in individual and global politics; being an expert evolves into having expertise; blaming and evading accountability evolves into interpersonal competence and personal responsibility; reacting evolves into responding. Implementations of this Reconciliation Leadership™ model... Bringing one's consciousness in the knowledge of gifts and talents as well as how one can address the cycle of violence differently is a sacred act. Vaclav Havel said in his speech to U.S. Congress in 1990 that Consciousness precedes being...The salvation of this human world lies nowhere else than in the human heart, in the human power to reflect, in human meekness and in human responsibility. Without a global revolution in the sphere of human consciousness, nothing will change for the better in the sphere of our being as humans, and the catastrophe toward which this world is headed — be it ecological, social, demographic or a general breakdown of civilization — will be unavoidable. Definitions of Coexistence and Reconciliation Coexistence is a term that means a minimal, least demanding way for people to relate to one another positively. Fundamentally, the concept is informed by an attitude of "live and let live." Coexistence is an ideal without illusions. Its objective is not the seamless union of opposites, but a practical relationship of mutual respect among these opposites. Coexistence does not deny distinctiveness; in fact, it encourages it, respecting the rich diversity in an ethnically rich global society.18 Examples of coexistence interventions are mediation and other forms of alternative dispute resolution, peace studies, civic leadership, labor relations, organizational development, consensus building, search for common ground, transformation and problem solving.19 Reconciliation is a deeper, more time-consuming process than coexistence settlement. It is a widely-used reflective peacebuilding method which searches for positive, proactive solutions to disputes, bringing healing and closure to the past and revisioning the future, so that all actors from the interplay of governments, business, international agencies and transnational social movements can work together for common goals. With reconciliation, psychological techniques and spiritual perspectives allow for accountability and forgiveness by reuniting victims and perpetrators across all the divisions, by building on the experience of the truth and reconciliation commissions by offering hope and healing for human immobilization, trauma, frustration, anger and hatred; by offering a new political process based on a felt experience of global citizenship beyond divisions to resolve common problems; and by honoring each ethnic groups traditional ways of resolving conflicts worldwide. Reconciliation is defined as calling and responding to one another in claiming each persons unique wisdom and talents and extending them to the world. In spite of humanity's woundedness, the essential self is always whole. With that wholeness comes a holiness for a needy world that we could bless with our presence. Humanity is re-invented. Soul force is a powerful alternative to armed force as Gandhi so powerfully showed in his satya graha with the recognition of aspects of self. A Case Study of Coexistence and Reconciliation Leadership™ In his book Building Peace: Sustainable Reconciliation in Divided Societies (United States Institute of Peace, 1998), John Paul Lederach says, In dealing with the challenges posed by contemporary conflict, an important meeting point between realism and innovation is the idea of reconciliation. A fundamental question is how to create a catalyst for reconciliation and then sustain it in divided societies. He goes on to name three starting points: 1) Relationship building as the focal point for both understanding the whole system and for sustained dialogue within protracted conflict settings, engaging the sides of a conflict with each other; 2) Encounter activities to express grief, loss and the anger that accompanies injustice; 3) Innovative reconciliation techniques that exist outside the mainstream of international political traditions. This case study offers an example of a Sacred Container for a Peacebuilding Process of Reconciliation as an innovated technique for relationship building. One trained Coexistence and Reconciliation Leader20 offered relationship building, encounter activities and innovative reconciliation techniques to two other leaders and a small gathering of seven former Yugoslavians refugees in the greater Boston area, co-sponsored by the Coalition for a Strong United Nations, the Boston Department of Public Health in their Partnerships for Health Violence Prevention Month project, and the Episcopal Diocese of MA Peace and Justice Commission. The group of people were invited to come to an interfaith gathering for dialogue to comfort, create refuge, safety, and a healing environment for participants from the former Yugoslavia. People who represent all sides of the issues are welcome, not to debate, but to offer solace to those concerned about the fate of the Balkans. The mutual understanding will be brought to the Hague Appeal for Peace. Several considerations were pondered in the implementation of the Leadership Model and the Sacred Container needed for the ex-Yugoslavians. We wanted this first meeting to have as few impediments and be as simple as possible to succeed. We wanted to help participants establish trusting relationships with one another, believing in the power of a holding environment as a resource for healing, in spite of the barriers imposed by the controversy in the former Yugoslavia. To that end, we asked Americans who wanted to participate to sit on the outside edge of the circle to support the participants. We required that participants speak English. We considered the possibility of trying to find an interpreter for those who didn't but decided that the added problem of some members not understanding or speaking English was too difficult to overcome easily. The second consideration was the knowledge that all would have some degree of trauma. We wanted participants who had enough emotional maturity to have a degree of control over their emotions and an ability to listen to others who were telling their stories. When interviewing them before the meeting, it was important to ascertain their thoughtfulness and their ability to hear an "enemy's" point of view. And thirdly, we had to persuade them that the meeting would be held in a respectful and sensitive manner. The Sacred Container had to be safe and non-threatening with no surprises. We let them know that ground rules were important in how we were going to handle the very vulnerable and sensitive emotions that would be present. We told them we would have suggestions for the Sacred Container, but that they would have the final word on how safety would be invoked in the meeting, making sure that they would have a stake in the outcome. Participants included a Kosovar, an ethnic Albanian, an educated and very thoughtful man who had lived in the United States for a number of years. His parents and extended family were either still in Kosovo or in one of the refugee camps. He was willing to come to the meeting. It was a relief to finally have at least one person who would be an appropriated attendee and who also had the date available. We were hoping he might have some friends or colleagues whom he could recommend. But he said he didn't know anyone he trusted sufficiently to recommend. There was so much trauma and unprocessed emotion in the Kosovar community that he didn't know anyone whom he felt sure could handle sitting in the same room with Serbs. The next person interviewed was a Serbian man in his early 40's, who had come to Boston with his wife and small children. He was afraid for himself and his family both here and in Belgrade. And he was ashamed of what the Serbs had done in Kosovo. The Serb thought about it for a week or so and then agreed to talk. He was apprehensive and wanted to understand the purpose of the meeting. Was he supposed to prepare something? We explained that politics, policy and blame were not on the agenda. Everyone would be given the opportunity to speak of their experiences, but not their political positions. Later, after we sent him a description of our meeting, we talked again and he agreed to come. The meeting was scheduled for three hours with the seven participants. They were still talking four hours later. As a Serb said, "We couldn't leave one another..." They spoke of a general lack of support for Milosevic and their common pain. The leaders stated one ground rule as part of the interviewing process. The discussion would be centered around their own direct experience rather than ideology, religion, or ethnic partisanship. The participants themselves decided on the rest of the ground rules for their Sacred Container. The leaders asked the participants for suggestions on how to contain the emotions they were feeling with a view toward a higher goal of listening to one another. Examples of the ground rules they wanted for their Sacred Container were a willingness to own their emotions in a way that would not alienate the others in the group. For example, if they were angry, upset, confused, bitter, they used I statements to own the feelings. For example, "I am so angry that my niece died last week in Kosovo," rather than saying "It was your fault my niece died." To be sure, people needed to be at a stage in their healing process and development where they could do that. We realized that not everyone could take responsibility for their pain. That is why the participants were interviewed so carefully. The Swedish glass absorbed their mistrust, anger and fear as they clutched it, taking their turn with glass in hand, lamenting and sharing their deep pain over the destruction of their country. It was compelling to be there with them. After the meeting was over, the Kosovar offered his view. It was useful for me to be exposed to this process. I felt hope meeting the facilitators and participants. That such individuals exist in the midst of the horror of the war, showed me the better side of humanity. This work moved our society forward promoting core human values. It's much easier now that there is a personal relationship where we put individuals faces into a global event. A Serbian woman, who had lived in the U.S. for many years, said she had been afraid she would unknowingly insult a participant if she expressed her feelings too strongly. She realized that there was anger in each of them that could easily have led to miscommunication. She felt the leaders reminded participants not to project their anger on each other. There is a spark of being good to your neighbor in each Yugoslav that already exists. If her/his existence is not in jeopardy, if the hatred is not passed on to their children, that spark could be used as a catalyst and a bridge for neighbors to help one another, rather than attack one another. I found that of God in everyone. Why can't we have our country as we had it before? (I found that of God in everyone is a Quaker expression.) Outside the circle of participants were an outer circle of six Americans praying for the ex-Yugoslavians to support them through the process. The Rev. Beulah Koulouris, co-chair of the Peace and Justice Commission, said in her sermon two days later, "I marveled at their ability to patiently listen. [At the end of the meeting] their apparent empathy for each other and their understanding of one another's viewpoints as each person shared their pain and their hopes for the future made it hard to leave." I asked the participants how I could bring their mutual understanding to the Hague Appeal for Peace, due to begin two days later. They asked me to talk about their hopes that the children of the world would all have opportunities to learn how to live with different types of people and learn not to be suspicious of other cultures, peoples and religions. They spoke of their hope that the world would find a way to stop a leader like Milosevic from gaining so much power. They wanted the international community to find a way to intervene without destroying life and property. I presented their insights as part of my presentation, Establishing Professional and Non Governmental Organization Services for Mediation, Reconciliation and Humanitarian Aid at the UN on the panel Building an Effective World Security System: Enhancing the Capacity of the United Nations to Prevent and Resolve Armed Conflict. at the Hague Appeal for Peace, The Netherlands, in their Transforming Violent Conflict Strand in May 1999. I was grateful to be their spokesperson, feeling privileged to know people who are willing to take responsibility for their pain and forge a new future. I explained how people's gifts and strengths can be cultivated as a step toward being Coexistence and Reconciliation Leaders™. I gave concrete examples of how people learned through their experience of violence that they must change, that people must withdraw their projections, respect and treat each other with dignity and respect. A Reconciliation Consultation in the Philippines This second consultation was the result of ten years of study and practice in Reconciliation Leadership™ and shows some techniques, tools and methods of Coexistence and Reconciliation Leadership™. The Very Reverend James B. Manguramas, EDSP, Diocesan Bishop in the Episcopal Church in the Philippines, and Dr. Grace J. Rebollos of the International Organization for Migration (IOM) invited me to facilitate an exit conference for peacemakers who had been working on a United Nations project in the Christian-Muslim (MLNF) Government-Rebel Forces conflict in the Southern Mindanao Province for 18 months, during September 24-27, 1999. The Philippines is an archipelago made up of three large island groups: Mindanao is the second-largest island with 102,043 square kilometers or 34% of the nation's total land area. Despite its huge resource advantage, Mindanao's economy has been continually trapped in a vicious cycle of under development. Mindanao's low economic performance is exacerbated by high population growth that has resulted in low employment, weak purchasing power of the populace, rising number of the poor, and a sluggish economic growth. As such, Mindanao remained economically behind the rest of the country. Before the peace treaty signed in 1996, Mindanao had been unable to harness its huge resources to address the continuing conflict between Muslims, Christians, and indigenous cultural communities. The process I was invited into would conclude 18 months of intense, practical, concrete work helping Muslim rebels integrate back into society. The purpose of the 18-month initiative was to deepen the peace treaty signed in 1996 in very practical ways by helping the MNLF rebels to become integrated into Filipino culture in this southern province. My task was to help the peacemakers deal with their feelings of anger, hurt, bitterness, and loss over the ways they had been treated by the bureaucracy of the United Nations and over the peace process ending while so much was left unfinished. Many of their hopes and dreams for what they had wanted to accomplish had not as yet happened. They had to find other work as the funding for the project had run dry, yet they wanted help with how they could still pursue the peace process individually and collectively, even as they would not actively be involved in the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) process any more. The 18-month UNDP Mobil Information Referral and Community Assistance Service (MIRCAS) process was the biggest UN operation in the Philippines and was funded by nine countries: Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Spain, Netherlands, Sweden, Norway, Belgium, and Turkey. IOM-MIRCAS was the information dissemination and confidence-building sub-contractor to the UNDP. Problems that the peacemakers reportedly had to deal with included discrepancies in the financial reporting systems, in coordinative processes, in being left out in meetings, in being "pushed around as work horses, in being treated like second-class citizens. They felt that "UNDP was missing the point about peace. Its people "get involved in too many conferences, too much training, too much politics, underhandedness and a lack of authenticity. The peacemakers related to the following statement: "I was hungry and you formed a committee to investigate my hunger. I was homeless and you filed a report on my plight. I was sick and you held a seminar on the situation of the underprivileged. You investigated all aspects of my plight and yet I am still hungry, homeless and sick." My host, Dr. Grace Rebollos, had just come from a training-workshop for peace and development advocates of the MNLF (Muslim rebel group). She was part of a team of Muslim-Christian trainers. I proceeded to provide a Sacred Container for the peacemakers to share their pain and suffering incurred during the previous 18 months of their work on the peace treaty implementation. Dr. Grace Rebollos had told me that the group needed healing and reconciliation. I consulted with Ben Errol D. Aspers (IOM-Mircas Project Coordinator) before the meeting about what I proposed to do in my facilitation and got his approval to go ahead with the reconciliation process that I proposed for the Sacred Container: acknowledging gifts, strengths and limitations, concerns; historicizing, offering a letting go process; making closing statements; and ending with a celebration. I invited participants to share with me one word about their particular gift or strength that would allow them to reconnect with the vision that originally led them to the peace process. Their chosen words reflected their core gifts and leadings many had experienced in coming to the process: grace, hope, compassion, love, peacefulness, solitude, glider, helpful, light and joy, peace, compassion, understanding, frank. Next I invited them to begin their own timeline of their experience in the peace process in a historicizing process of reflection. "Historicizing" started with a period of historical reflection with sheets of newsprint and stringing them out along a wall. Each participant was invited to make her/his own timeline first on a sheet of 8 l/2 x ll paper that could be kept confidential. Then, after one hour, a group timeline was made on newsprint with a horizontal line drawn through the center. At the far right, an arrow with the word "present" was printed on it. Then the participants were invited to proceed backwards from the present, recalling some of the most important historical events in the life of the peace process since the Peace Treaty, drawing on and building on their own personal timelines. We began by talking about the most important critical incidents in the past twelve months. That was a warm-up period. The group then moved to the previous three years since the Peace Treaty was signed. It was important to guide those present through the entire history of the peace process. Even though there might not be anyone in the group who was alive during the formative years of the dispute, there may have been stories to recollect and record. This step took two hours. It provided a gold-mine of information. The chart was hung where people could review it, debate over its contents, and make changes. The second phase of this historicizing process invited the same group to review the time-line to identify the tacit norms of the historicizing process. Tacit norms are unwritten psychological rules governing behavior in the process. Norms are hard to identify because "that's the way things have always been done" in the 18-month process. Then
it was time to invite them to reflect on the tacit norms as ongoing
concerns that still lingered within them that would prevent the
Participants were asked if they felt comfortable with going through a ceremony where they could experience a release from their concerns. They were open and willing. I explained how fire is an ancient symbol of transformation. Since they had feelings that couldn't be released on their own, they could be brought to Allah or God through the fire and then be open to being released from their pain. That which had held them back could then propel them forward. We were helped by a gorgeous sunset. In the Philippine Islands, it is dramatically beautiful. Just as everyone was telling the group what they had written down, burned their papers, and joined together to support one another through the letting go process, the sun set on each participant. Each
participant made a statement of closure at the end of the conference.
Some of them were:
Then it was time to celebrate. They had families waiting behind on the beach and someone fetched the food. There was a dinner with much laughter, reminiscences and hope expressed for the future of the process. One little group began a new peace process by beginning a non-governmental organization to continue where the UN left off. The celebration went on till the boat left to bring people back to other islands and home. I have received word from the participants and the coordinator that my work provided Reconciliation Leadership™ to help the peacemakers deal with their unresolved feelings while leaving the project and get on with their lives. Reconciliation consultation helps peacemakers let go and move on, freeing them from the cycle of violence where they would have projected their unresolved inner conflicts on others. Now, more aware and freed, the participants were joyously thankful for their experiences. Conclusion The Seville Statement on Violence21 says that peace is possible and that wars can be ended. It concludes that we are not condemned to war and violence because of our biology. Instead, it is possible for us to end war and the suffering it causes. We cannot do it by working alone, but only by working together. However it make a big difference whether or not each one of us believes that we can do it. Otherwise, we may not even try. War was invented in ancient times, and in the same way we can invent peace in our time. It is up to each of of us to do our part.22 Reconciliation Leaders™ offer a response to the Seville Statement challenge and lead by example, having a philosophy of life that confirms vocational calling to international facilitation for global challenges. They offer personal, systemic and global competencies for non-violent responses, they have a body of knowledge, credibility and confidence to offer assistance and support the participants themselves to manage their local and/or global challenge; they are accountable and responsible, providing leadership to end the cycle of violence, and ultimately to end war. The United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan proposed a soft infrastructure for the global economy by setting technical standards and norms to embrace, support and enact a set of core values in the areas of human rights, labour standards and environmental practices.23 Reconciliation Leaders™ provide the soft infrastructure for the global economy by providing inner governence with an ongoing self-assessment of their assumptions, behavior patterns and limitations that unconsciously contribute to the perpetuation of abuse and violence and can potentially undermine the power and effectiveness of their leadership. It is this deep and critical attention to their inner landscape as mirror to the dynamics manifested in the outer environment — including abuse and violence — that distinguishes these leaders and the quality of leadership they will bring to the process of coexistence and reconciliation. The fragility of globalization that the Secretary-General spoke about at Davos is a direct challenge to the self-interest of the corporate sector, and a central part of the solution is the need to accept the obligations not merely the opportunities of global citizenship. Indeed, all of you here — leaders from business and civil society organizations alike-must come to realize that you represent the vanguard of tomorrow's global society, in which markets must be open, but open markets must be fully underpinned by shared values and global solidarity. You are the first truly global citizens, and only you can give meaning to that term through your actions and advocacy to ensure everyone, rich and poor alike, has the chance to benefit from globalization. The first true global citizens, I believe, are Reconciliation Leaders™. Michael Collins has written: "When the resident goodness of our humanity is freed to visibly emerge into being, the world will then be truly reconciled. Grace will become resident mediator. The global politic and compassion will be the currency of the new economy."24 The case studies show a modest demonstration of the effects of one Reconciliation Leader™ who has applied her research and practice over ten years. It is hoped that more of these leaders will by virtue of the sincerity of their calling, their goodness, and the serious attention to their own inner transformation, transform the work of coexistence and reconciliation for families, groups, institutions, communities, nations and the United Nations Decade on Nonviolence for the World's Children. Above
all, we are in constant reflection to explore the relationship of
the inner life of mind and spirit and the outer life of action and
service, drawing on Dr. Misches Dr. Patricia Mische calls a tragic
lag in our development — a lag that is spiritual and systemic.25
Our search in life for God must be worked out in a global context
in the midst of global crises and global community. Our spirituality
must be a global spirituality.26 Notes 1 Patricia Mische, in her monograph, Toward a Global Spirituality (1995). Global Education Associates. back 2 Mark Weisbrot, Globalization: A Primer, The Preamble Center, October 1999, page 1. back 3 Forty-four million US adults (and an untested worldwide market) are called Cultural Creatives, who wish to create a new social force called the Integral Culture, according to a social research survey by Sociologist Paul Ray (Noetic Sciences Review, Spring 1996). This group of 44 million adults is coming up with most new ideas in US culture, operating on the leading edge of cultural change. back 4 The Independent Commission of Global Governance, an ad hoc group of world leaders came together to study the world at the millennium and to make recommendations. back 5 Mische, p 2. back 6 Michael Collins, in his writings and work (forthcoming). back 7 Mische, Page 2. back 8 Virginia Swain, in "A Vision of a New Leadership Model" (1996). Breakthrough Magazine, Global Education Associates. back 9 Diagram used by David Steele, Center for Strategic and International Studies, in his work in the former Yugoslavia. back 10 Elise Boulding's reminder of Martin Bubers philosophy echoes that of the New England Holistic Counselors whose precepts list a counselor-counselee relationship as "I-thou." back 11 Elise Boulding, Building a Global Civic Culture (1990). Syracuse University Press, p.141. back 12 Ibid., p. 142. back 13 Richard Deats, Fellowship of Reconciliation Journal, "Reflections on Reconciliation" edition, July/August 1995, page 3. back 14 Ibid. back 15 Virginia Swain, in unpublished masters thesis, "Celebration of the Children of the World: A Model for Building Global Community" (1993). Lesley University. back 16 Harold Saunders, in his Public Peace Process. back 17 Michael Collins. back 18 The Coexistence Initiative , 1999. back 19 Ibid. back 20 Anne Burling, Peter Smith, and Virginia Swain were the facilitators of this intervention. back 21 The Seville Statement of Violence. UNESCO, 1986, Introduction. back 22 Ibid, Conclusion. back 23 in a speech given at the World Economic Summit in Davos (1999). back 24 Michael Collins, forthcoming. back 25 Patricia Mische, in her monograph, Toward a Global Spirituality (1995). Global Education Associates. back 26 Ibid, p 2. back Diagrams
Comments and questions are welcome. Please address to: Virginia
Swain, MA, CPHC, CEO and Director phone:
508-753-7683 |
