The U.S. would benefit from listening well to its dinner guests from Africa nations.
Commentary by Dr. Samuel Mahaffy. In many communities in Africa, it is a tradition to welcome a visiting guest with a meal. Sharing a meal is a way of building and affirming relationship. The U.S. – Africa Leaders Summit, hosted by the White House this week, affords the United States the opportunity to welcome 51 Heads of State and senior leaders from Africa. This unprecedented event should be an opening for the United States to change course in its engagement with the nations on the African continent. To the extent that the U.S. has recently paid attention to nations in Africa, it has largely been in the context of pushing its own economic and political agenda. We choose regional partners and exclude others based on our perceived interests. The U.S. agenda is valued above the relationship with African nations. Relationships that begin with an agenda are rarely long-lasting. The U.S. – Africa Leadership Summit has a transparent agenda of enhancing U.S. economic development and access to natural resources in the African continent. The text of remarks by Linda Thomas-Greenfield, Assistant Secretary of the Bureau of African Affairs states the explicit agenda for the Summit of “increased American investment on the continent.” Our first investment with the African continent ought to be in relationship building. A starting point would be to listen to our African neighbors. Some questions that might be asked at the dinner table of the U.S. Africa Leaders Summit might be: “What are the dreams and aspirations of your country?” “What can we do to support peace in the region?” How can the U.S. be good neighbors?” The great gift of the guest at our dinner table is what we can learn about ourselves from their presence. Does the U.S. have the courage to hear why its development agenda and even its proffering of economic aid is mistrusted in much of Africa? The President of Eritrea likely echoed the sentiment of other African nations when he stated that what Africa needs is investment partners and not charity. Unfortunately, that wisdom may not be heard at the U.S. Africa Leaders Summit, because Eritrea was one of just a few nations excluded from the invitation list to the White House. If the U.S. truly seeks enduring relationships with African nations and partnerships for both security and economic development, the foundation must be respect for the right of African nations to self-determination. Development agendas need to be their own and not driven by outside forces. The West has much to learn from Africa. It is time for the U.S. to be listening more and talking less in its relationships with African countries. A further step toward positive engagement with Africa would be to deepen our relationship with African immigrant and refugee communities in the U.S. The U.S. Africa Leaders Summit ought to be less about playing ‘catch-up’ to the investment and development work that China and other countries are building on the African continent. It ought to be more about listening and learning from Africa. We have the potential to learn much from the 51 Heads of African nations gathered in Washington D.C. To do so, there must be respectful dialogues that lead to long-term trust relationships. We must be willing to listen not only to those African nations that are “in good standing” with the U.S. and aligned with our agendas, but those that have differing views, opinions and perspectives. Meaningful dialogue begins with inclusion and not with exclusion.
*********************************
Samuel Mahaffy, Ph.D. was born and raised in Eritrea, East Africa. He is a non-profit facilitator and consultant who has assisted more than five hundred nonprofits and NGOs around the world. In addition to serving as a Senior Advisor to Salaam Urban Village Association, he writes regularly on topics of peacemaking, Africa and Eritrea on his website at www.samuelmahaffy.com and the Peace and Collaborative Development Network at http://www.internationalpeaceandconflict.org/
The African Leaders Summit is a great idea. The selective exclusion of some countries is not.
The singular exclusion of Eritrea from the invitation of African leaders to participate in the U.S. Africa Leaders Summit in Washington D.C. is misguided, inappropriate and does not serve the cause of peace and prosperity in the Horn of Africa.
The Summit, called by President Obama to be held in August 2014, is an historic opportunity for dialogue. We commend President Obama for taking this historic step. The exclusion of Eritrea from the dialogue process is unfortunate. Hank Cohen, former U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs has pointed out that it is “time to bring Eritrea in from the cold.” ( http://africanarguments.org/2013/12/16/time-to-bring-eritrea-in-from-the-cold-by-hank-cohen/).
There are compelling reasons to include Eritrea in any meaningful dialogue about fostering stronger ties between the United States and Africa (http://samuelmahaffy.com/2014/05/visiblizing-eritrea-africa-country-eritrea/. Eritrea has had significant successes in “sustainable economic growth and development”–one of the central topics of the Summit.
The exclusion of Eritrea from the invitation list is particularly illogical. Eritrea has been singled out for significant criticism for human rights violations. Yet, the Summit invitation list includes countries in the region–some bordering Eritrea–that are currently involved in imprisoning protesting students, arresting journalists, and flagrant violations of human rights.
It is time for the United States to engage in respectful dialogue with Eritrea. Analysis of events in the region show that Eritrea has the potential to be an island of stability and a partner for promoting regional peace. The call for respect for human rights should exclude no country. Neither, should the invitation to dialogue.
The exclusion of Eritrea is clearly political. It is also ill-conceived. Eritreans in the United States make significant contributions in nearly every metropolitan area. Professional Eritreans are lawyers, social workers, nurses, and caregivers. They are taxi cab drivers, restaurant owners and tax payers. In short, they are our neighbors. They are a community that contributes much to the cultural diversity that make cities like Seattle, Minneapolis, Washington D.C., San Diego, Philadelphia and other population centers great places to live. Eritreans here, who make a great civic contribution, are disrespected by the exclusion of their homeland from the invitation to the White House.
We are initiating a petition to President Obama that he reconsider the decision to exclude Eritrea from the invitation to the U.S. Africa Leaders Summit. That petition is also being sent to U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and to Assistant Secretary Linda Thomas-Greenfield who leads the Department of State’s Bureau of African Affairs.
Our position is not a political one. It grows from a conviction that peace in the Horn of Africa and the continent as a whole is furthered by dialogue that is inclusive and not exclusive. The conversation about human rights and peaceful international relationships begins with opening doors and not shutting them.
We invite you to contact your U.S. Congressional Representative or the White House directly to encourage and support an inclusive dialogue that does not selectively choose to eliminate some African leaders.
This post was written by Samuel Mahaffy, Ph.D., Senior Advisor to Salaam Urban Village Association in consultation with Amanuel Yohannes, Executive Director of Salaam Urban Village Association. Both Samuel Mahaffy and Amanuel Yohannes were born in Eritrea and reside in the State of Washington. Samuel Mahaffy is a consultant and facilitator who has assisted more than five hundred nonprofits and NGO’s and is active in supporting immigrant and refugee families in the United States. Salaam Urban Village Association, in partnership with the East Africa Institute, is planning a visit to Eritrea to further dialogue and collaboration between Eritreans in the United States and in their homeland. Dr. Mahaffy writes regularly on topics relating to Africa and peace-making on his website at www.samuelmahaffy.com and on the Peace and Collaborative Development Network at http://www.internationalpeaceandconflict.org/forum/topics/stepping-toward-the-dance-step-of-peacemaking#.U8cIgNZOWM8.
Eritrea is invisiblized by its detractors. U.S. foreign policy, Western strategic alliances and media propensity to cover Africa only when and where there is a dramatic crisis, conspire to invisiblize countries like Eritrea.
Eritrea is a country and a people worth celebrating.
The scholar and linguist Noam Chomsky sees an insidious Western agenda in such invisiblization. In a book he co-authors with Andre Vltchek he suggests that “Western misinformation has been clearly targeting countries that have been refusing to succumb to Western dictate.”
Even significant achievements of Eritrea and its people are little noted in the Western press. When Meb Keflezighi won the Boston Marathon this year, headline reports were that he was the first American since 1983 to win the race. He surely is an American. I had to dig deeper to find that his heritage was from Eritrea—surely a significant aspect of his great achievement.
Despite efforts to invisiblize Eritrea, one thing is certain: Eritrea is. As Eritreans around the world celebrate this month the 23rd anniversary of their hard-fought battle for independence, the reality of Eritrea’s existence is one that some countries still need to accept.
Eritrea is little in the news in the West. Eritrea isn’t seizing fishing boats off its coast and holding them for ransom. Eritrea isn’t harboring terrorist groups planning attacks on Western targets. Eritrea isn’t seeing extremist groups murdering shoppers in malls or kidnapping school girls.
I weary of explaining to intelligent fellow Americans what Eritrea is. Eritrea is the country where I grew up. Eritrea is where my heart still resides. Ignorance of not only Eritrea, but the African continent, astounds me. It is a sad truth that there are those in the U.S. who think that Africa is a war-torn impoverished country. To be very clear: Africa is not a country. Eritrea is. It is neither war-torn nor impoverished.
There is more than banal ignorance in the invisiblization of Eritrea. U.S. foreign policy is shaped as much by the countries and people we tend to ignore as it is by the relationships that we court. The U.S. has courted a relationship with Ethiopia with dubious benefit. Eritrea has been largely ignored at the price of missing out on a relationship with a stable country in a troubled region of Africa.
If the U.S. Secretary of State, John Kerry, who I greatly respect, were to privilege me with a meeting, I would humbly suggest that Eritrea isn’t does not make for good foreign policy on the Horn of Africa.
Eritrea has its faults. It cannot and should not be exempted from the scrutiny that the world gives to all countries in regard to human rights and basic freedoms. But, invisiblizing the country is a non-starter for a conversation about human rights. Accepting that Eritrea is provides a starting point for such a conversation. In the interest of honesty, our own record on human rights must also be scrutinized. The U.S. history of horrific human rights violations at Guantanamo and drone-attacks-without-borders has tarnished our credibility to be the arbiter of other nations’ human rights record.
When we acknowledge that Eritrea is, we will see a country that has the potential to be a stable and stabilizing presence in the often chaotic and war-torn environment of the Horn of Africa. It is a country rich in diverse languages, cultures, and traditions. While there has been criticism of Eritrea’s lack of tolerance for multiple religious groups, it is significant that this is a country where the religion of Islam and the Orthodox Christian church have co-existed for centuries. In the capital city of Asmara, there is a Coptic church and a mosque within stone-throwing distance of each other. But, there are no stones being thrown.
The achievements of Eritrea in the areas of infrastructure development, health care, and education are rarely mentioned in the Western media. Since its independence, Eritrea has made significant progress on its own development agenda without assigning control of that agenda to outside groups.
It is time for the U.S. to accept Eritrea—as most nations of the world do—as an important member of the family of nations. A first step toward Eritrea might look like shared acknowledgment of the integrity of Eritrea’s borders established under international agreements. It would honor the Eritrean people to recognize on this anniversary the price they paid for their independence with scant support from the outside world. The Eritrean people, who have fought so hard to earn their independence, will never sell that independence to the highest bidder. Without a doubt, Eritrea will continue to chart its own course.
Eritrea is a country and a people worth celebrating. Find an Eritrean community to celebrate with—if not in Eritrea–in Sweden, Europe, England, Canada, and in every major U.S. city. These are our neighbors—your neighbors. Get to know them. Your life will surely be richer!
************************************************
Dr. Samuel Mahaffy, was born in Asmara, Eritrea and grew up in Senafe, Eritrea. In his work as a consultant and facilitator to more than five hundred nonprofits and NGO’s, he has found ways to support refugee and migrant communities from the Horn of Africa living in the U.S. He earned his Ph.D. from Tilburg University in the Netherlands through the Taos Institute of which he is now an Associate. Samuel Mahaffy regularly blogs on topics related to peacemaking and Africa on this website and on the Peace and Collaborative Development Network (http://www.internationalpeaceandconflict.org/). Follow him on Twitter @samuelmahaffy. This blog post was first published on the Peace and Collaborative Development Network at http://www.internationalpeaceandconflict.org/profiles/blogs/visiblizing-eritrea#.U3_QsWcU-M9.
On rare occasions, a new work will both redefine a discipline and contribute to the birth of a new paradigm. Integrated Peacebuilding: Innovative Approaches to Transforming Conflict (Craig Zelizer, Ed.) is such a work. In the array of disciplines related to conflict resolution, peacebuilding and international development, this work brings forward an integrated approach that views “peacebuilding as a lens” (p. 9).
Integrated Peacebuilding: Innovative Approaches to Transforming Conflict
Sustainable peace is an underlying motif in this book. Viewing peace as a long-term process, this work seeks to find a process of “transforming relationships and structures in society to decrease the likelihood of future conflicts” (p. 7).
There are several significant strengths to this work. First, it views peacebuilding in all its complexity. It engages peacebuilding in terms of health, security, environmental change, religion, media, gender, and international development. The scholarship is diverse as are the topics covered. Much of it comes from Georgetown University and its long-standing focus on conflict resolution.
It is from the multi-lens perspective on peacebuilding that this work suggests the redefinition of a discipline. Conflict resolution studies begin with a problem to be solved. Peacebuilding suggests a strengths-based approach of creating a multi-sector and multi-stakeholder paradigm for creating peace through responding to local community needs and priorities.
It is the great gift of this book that it frees peacebuilding from indentured service to the hegemonic interests of ‘global security.’ If peacemaking is defined by securing an international development agenda for exploiting economic and energy resources and building new trade markets for multi-national corporations, it has no future worth pursuing.
This work suggests that “peacebuilding is not effective without addressing the basic needs of people through economic opportunity, basic health services and a functioning legal system” (xii). It challenges us to ask the compelling question: “Whose interests are being pursued in peacemaking efforts?” Peacemaking efforts, which are intervening in local conflicts without respect for local traditions, cultures, priorities and needs, risk prolonging and deepening conflicts, no matter how well-intentioned they may seem.
Integrated Peacebuilding is a scholarly work. I see it as essential reading for anyone involved in the practice or disciplines of conflict resolution, international development or peacemaking. I highly recommend it to agencies and organizations involved in international development.
After reading this important work more than once, I am left yearning for a companion volume that might be written in lay-persons language and be focused toward the ever growing audience of community members and leaders.
The cover picture of Integrated Peacebuilding shows a community of color demonstrating for peace. Peace is the yearning of the human heart. We need a follow-up to this important work that will answer our collective yearning with new wisdom and understanding on how we can transform relationships—at a community level– to secure lasting peace. I pass this challenge back to the great scholars who have shared their insights in this work.
***************************
Page references are from Integrated Peacebuilding: Innovative Approaches to Transforming Conflict. Edited by Craig Zelizer. Published by Westview Press, 2013. Information on acquiring this book is available at http://www.westviewpress.com/book.php?isbn=9780813345093. The Editor of this work, Craig Zelizer created the Peace and Collaborative Development Network (PCDN) (http://www.internationalpeaceandconflict.org/), an engaging and interactive site for dialogue on peacemaking.
Eritrean Cooking: Rich Relationships and Recipes from East Africa
It may seem strange that an organizational facilitator with a deep passion for peacemaking would write a cookbook. It is even stranger coming from a man who loves to cook, but rarely measures any ingredient! Beyond strange, it may seem presumptuous that a white man in the United States would explain how to make injera—an art traditionally practiced by women of East Africa who feed villages and families in Eritrea and Ethiopia. So I have some explaining to do!
This work is about much more than cooking. Yes, it contains recipes growing out of the Mahaffy family’s experience of living in Eritrea for very many years. It is dedicated in honor of Arlena Mahaffy, the matriarch of our family, who raised seven children of her own in Eritrea, embraced many other children, and provided medical care and a helping hand to countless Eritreans.
But, this book is as much about relationships as it is about recipes. It is a narrative about the people and culture of Eritrea. It shares some insights on what the West might learn from the cultural traditions of East Africa. Finally, it is a narrative that weaves from the metaphor of eating from a common dish an emerging understanding of a new approach to peacemaking through relational presence.
The core message of this narrative is a simple one: Peacemaking is more likely to succeed if it begins with the relationship instead of beginning with the agenda. Efforts at peacemaking most often begin with an agenda. The agenda, of course, is to end the conflict at-hand. What happens when we begin with the agenda in any decision making process, is that we immediately loop back into the positions that are oppositional and that set us apart.
In the East African practice of eating from a common dish I find a rich metaphor for peacemaking that begins with valuing the relationship above the agenda. This insight comes from my experience of community gatherings in the United States that include Eritreans and Ethiopians sharing a meal from a common dish. This sharing of a meal is significant because of the deadly war between Eritrea and Ethiopia that cost so many lives. Somehow, refugees from both sides of this war, find a way to share a meal together and discover ways they can build community and collaborate in their new homeland.
At the celebration of my Ph.D. graduation at Tilburg University in the Netherlands through the Taos Institute, Dr. John Rijsman of Tilburg University remarked that many of the great peace treaties between nations were first forged after parties shared a meal together in one of the many fine restaurants in Brussels, Belgium. This is another example of peacemaking that grows from beginning with relationships instead of beginning with an agenda. “First, come sit with me and share a meal.”
I wonder how global conflicts and efforts at peace negotiations might be different if the starting place of engagement was a shared meal. Might Israelis and Palestinians begin with breaking bread together instead of beginning with negotiations about territory? Had the run-over of Crimea by Russia been paused long enough for a shared meal and a deep conversation, might there have been a different outcome that did not leave the world’s great military powers posturing for positional power?
I can imagine some readers scoffing right now and suggesting that this is a simplistic view. Yes, it is simplistic. It is as simplistic as the view of Eritrean women like Abrahet Kidane who believe that with a little teff flour and a little water they can feed a family, a village and a nation fighting for its independence. You see, Abrahet Kidane was my Eritrean teacher many years ago who taught me the art of making injera. It is an art that she practiced with joy and a song on her lips as she bent over an outdoor mogogo oven, carefully pouring batter onto the flat surface of a covered oven constructed from mud and cow dung.
Eritrean Cooking weaves rich relationships and recipes together to frame a dream that the world can find a more peaceful path. It invites the reader to slow down and smell the rich aroma of spices from East Africa being merged into an exquisite meal. It suggests that the place where we are present to each other is the place where peacemaking begins. So step into some peacemaking. Like injera making it will take persistence to get it right. It will require slowing down and practicing attentiveness.
The shared feast and the deepening of relationships will be reward enough. As the steam escapes and rises when the lid covering the injera is removed, may our prayer rise with it for peace between nations. May we hold hope and vision for the day when the lion lies down with the lamb and when ‘enemies’ sit down to share a meal from a common dish.
Posted: August 2, 2014 by Amanuel Leave a Comment
Guests from Africa at the Dinner Table
Commentary by Dr. Samuel Mahaffy. In many communities in Africa, it is a tradition to welcome a visiting guest with a meal. Sharing a meal is a way of building and affirming relationship. The U.S. – Africa Leaders Summit, hosted by the White House this week, affords the United States the opportunity to welcome 51 Heads of State and senior leaders from Africa. This unprecedented event should be an opening for the United States to change course in its engagement with the nations on the African continent. To the extent that the U.S. has recently paid attention to nations in Africa, it has largely been in the context of pushing its own economic and political agenda. We choose regional partners and exclude others based on our perceived interests. The U.S. agenda is valued above the relationship with African nations. Relationships that begin with an agenda are rarely long-lasting. The U.S. – Africa Leadership Summit has a transparent agenda of enhancing U.S. economic development and access to natural resources in the African continent. The text of remarks by Linda Thomas-Greenfield, Assistant Secretary of the Bureau of African Affairs states the explicit agenda for the Summit of “increased American investment on the continent.” Our first investment with the African continent ought to be in relationship building. A starting point would be to listen to our African neighbors. Some questions that might be asked at the dinner table of the U.S. Africa Leaders Summit might be: “What are the dreams and aspirations of your country?” “What can we do to support peace in the region?” How can the U.S. be good neighbors?” The great gift of the guest at our dinner table is what we can learn about ourselves from their presence. Does the U.S. have the courage to hear why its development agenda and even its proffering of economic aid is mistrusted in much of Africa? The President of Eritrea likely echoed the sentiment of other African nations when he stated that what Africa needs is investment partners and not charity. Unfortunately, that wisdom may not be heard at the U.S. Africa Leaders Summit, because Eritrea was one of just a few nations excluded from the invitation list to the White House. If the U.S. truly seeks enduring relationships with African nations and partnerships for both security and economic development, the foundation must be respect for the right of African nations to self-determination. Development agendas need to be their own and not driven by outside forces. The West has much to learn from Africa. It is time for the U.S. to be listening more and talking less in its relationships with African countries. A further step toward positive engagement with Africa would be to deepen our relationship with African immigrant and refugee communities in the U.S. The U.S. Africa Leaders Summit ought to be less about playing ‘catch-up’ to the investment and development work that China and other countries are building on the African continent. It ought to be more about listening and learning from Africa. We have the potential to learn much from the 51 Heads of African nations gathered in Washington D.C. To do so, there must be respectful dialogues that lead to long-term trust relationships. We must be willing to listen not only to those African nations that are “in good standing” with the U.S. and aligned with our agendas, but those that have differing views, opinions and perspectives. Meaningful dialogue begins with inclusion and not with exclusion.
*********************************
Samuel Mahaffy, Ph.D. was born and raised in Eritrea, East Africa. He is a non-profit facilitator and consultant who has assisted more than five hundred nonprofits and NGOs around the world. In addition to serving as a Senior Advisor to Salaam Urban Village Association, he writes regularly on topics of peacemaking, Africa and Eritrea on his website at www.samuelmahaffy.com and the Peace and Collaborative Development Network at http://www.internationalpeaceandconflict.org/
Posted: July 16, 2014 by Amanuel Leave a Comment
Invite Eritrea! Dialogue Begins with Inclusion not Exclusion
The singular exclusion of Eritrea from the invitation of African leaders to participate in the U.S. Africa Leaders Summit in Washington D.C. is misguided, inappropriate and does not serve the cause of peace and prosperity in the Horn of Africa.
The Summit, called by President Obama to be held in August 2014, is an historic opportunity for dialogue. We commend President Obama for taking this historic step. The exclusion of Eritrea from the dialogue process is unfortunate. Hank Cohen, former U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs has pointed out that it is “time to bring Eritrea in from the cold.” ( http://africanarguments.org/2013/12/16/time-to-bring-eritrea-in-from-the-cold-by-hank-cohen/).
There are compelling reasons to include Eritrea in any meaningful dialogue about fostering stronger ties between the United States and Africa (http://samuelmahaffy.com/2014/05/visiblizing-eritrea-africa-country-eritrea/. Eritrea has had significant successes in “sustainable economic growth and development”–one of the central topics of the Summit.
The exclusion of Eritrea from the invitation list is particularly illogical. Eritrea has been singled out for significant criticism for human rights violations. Yet, the Summit invitation list includes countries in the region–some bordering Eritrea–that are currently involved in imprisoning protesting students, arresting journalists, and flagrant violations of human rights.
It is time for the United States to engage in respectful dialogue with Eritrea. Analysis of events in the region show that Eritrea has the potential to be an island of stability and a partner for promoting regional peace. The call for respect for human rights should exclude no country. Neither, should the invitation to dialogue.
The exclusion of Eritrea is clearly political. It is also ill-conceived. Eritreans in the United States make significant contributions in nearly every metropolitan area. Professional Eritreans are lawyers, social workers, nurses, and caregivers. They are taxi cab drivers, restaurant owners and tax payers. In short, they are our neighbors. They are a community that contributes much to the cultural diversity that make cities like Seattle, Minneapolis, Washington D.C., San Diego, Philadelphia and other population centers great places to live. Eritreans here, who make a great civic contribution, are disrespected by the exclusion of their homeland from the invitation to the White House.
We are initiating a petition to President Obama that he reconsider the decision to exclude Eritrea from the invitation to the U.S. Africa Leaders Summit. That petition is also being sent to U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and to Assistant Secretary Linda Thomas-Greenfield who leads the Department of State’s Bureau of African Affairs.
Our position is not a political one. It grows from a conviction that peace in the Horn of Africa and the continent as a whole is furthered by dialogue that is inclusive and not exclusive. The conversation about human rights and peaceful international relationships begins with opening doors and not shutting them.
We invite you to contact your U.S. Congressional Representative or the White House directly to encourage and support an inclusive dialogue that does not selectively choose to eliminate some African leaders.
******************************************************************
This post was written by Samuel Mahaffy, Ph.D., Senior Advisor to Salaam Urban Village Association in consultation with Amanuel Yohannes, Executive Director of Salaam Urban Village Association. Both Samuel Mahaffy and Amanuel Yohannes were born in Eritrea and reside in the State of Washington. Samuel Mahaffy is a consultant and facilitator who has assisted more than five hundred nonprofits and NGO’s and is active in supporting immigrant and refugee families in the United States. Salaam Urban Village Association, in partnership with the East Africa Institute, is planning a visit to Eritrea to further dialogue and collaboration between Eritreans in the United States and in their homeland. Dr. Mahaffy writes regularly on topics relating to Africa and peace-making on his website at www.samuelmahaffy.com and on the Peace and Collaborative Development Network at http://www.internationalpeaceandconflict.org/forum/topics/stepping-toward-the-dance-step-of-peacemaking#.U8cIgNZOWM8.
Posted: May 23, 2014 by Dr. Samuel Mahaffy Leave a Comment
Visiblizing Eritrea — Africa is not a Country: Eritrea is.
Eritrea is invisiblized by its detractors. U.S. foreign policy, Western strategic alliances and media propensity to cover Africa only when and where there is a dramatic crisis, conspire to invisiblize countries like Eritrea.
The scholar and linguist Noam Chomsky sees an insidious Western agenda in such invisiblization. In a book he co-authors with Andre Vltchek he suggests that “Western misinformation has been clearly targeting countries that have been refusing to succumb to Western dictate.”
Even significant achievements of Eritrea and its people are little noted in the Western press. When Meb Keflezighi won the Boston Marathon this year, headline reports were that he was the first American since 1983 to win the race. He surely is an American. I had to dig deeper to find that his heritage was from Eritrea—surely a significant aspect of his great achievement.
Despite efforts to invisiblize Eritrea, one thing is certain: Eritrea is. As Eritreans around the world celebrate this month the 23rd anniversary of their hard-fought battle for independence, the reality of Eritrea’s existence is one that some countries still need to accept.
Eritrea is little in the news in the West. Eritrea isn’t seizing fishing boats off its coast and holding them for ransom. Eritrea isn’t harboring terrorist groups planning attacks on Western targets. Eritrea isn’t seeing extremist groups murdering shoppers in malls or kidnapping school girls.
I weary of explaining to intelligent fellow Americans what Eritrea is. Eritrea is the country where I grew up. Eritrea is where my heart still resides. Ignorance of not only Eritrea, but the African continent, astounds me. It is a sad truth that there are those in the U.S. who think that Africa is a war-torn impoverished country. To be very clear: Africa is not a country. Eritrea is. It is neither war-torn nor impoverished.
There is more than banal ignorance in the invisiblization of Eritrea. U.S. foreign policy is shaped as much by the countries and people we tend to ignore as it is by the relationships that we court. The U.S. has courted a relationship with Ethiopia with dubious benefit. Eritrea has been largely ignored at the price of missing out on a relationship with a stable country in a troubled region of Africa.
If the U.S. Secretary of State, John Kerry, who I greatly respect, were to privilege me with a meeting, I would humbly suggest that Eritrea isn’t does not make for good foreign policy on the Horn of Africa.
Eritrea has its faults. It cannot and should not be exempted from the scrutiny that the world gives to all countries in regard to human rights and basic freedoms. But, invisiblizing the country is a non-starter for a conversation about human rights. Accepting that Eritrea is provides a starting point for such a conversation. In the interest of honesty, our own record on human rights must also be scrutinized. The U.S. history of horrific human rights violations at Guantanamo and drone-attacks-without-borders has tarnished our credibility to be the arbiter of other nations’ human rights record.
When we acknowledge that Eritrea is, we will see a country that has the potential to be a stable and stabilizing presence in the often chaotic and war-torn environment of the Horn of Africa. It is a country rich in diverse languages, cultures, and traditions. While there has been criticism of Eritrea’s lack of tolerance for multiple religious groups, it is significant that this is a country where the religion of Islam and the Orthodox Christian church have co-existed for centuries. In the capital city of Asmara, there is a Coptic church and a mosque within stone-throwing distance of each other. But, there are no stones being thrown.
The achievements of Eritrea in the areas of infrastructure development, health care, and education are rarely mentioned in the Western media. Since its independence, Eritrea has made significant progress on its own development agenda without assigning control of that agenda to outside groups.
It is time for the U.S. to accept Eritrea—as most nations of the world do—as an important member of the family of nations. A first step toward Eritrea might look like shared acknowledgment of the integrity of Eritrea’s borders established under international agreements. It would honor the Eritrean people to recognize on this anniversary the price they paid for their independence with scant support from the outside world. The Eritrean people, who have fought so hard to earn their independence, will never sell that independence to the highest bidder. Without a doubt, Eritrea will continue to chart its own course.
Eritrea is a country and a people worth celebrating. Find an Eritrean community to celebrate with—if not in Eritrea–in Sweden, Europe, England, Canada, and in every major U.S. city. These are our neighbors—your neighbors. Get to know them. Your life will surely be richer!
************************************************
Dr. Samuel Mahaffy, was born in Asmara, Eritrea and grew up in Senafe, Eritrea. In his work as a consultant and facilitator to more than five hundred nonprofits and NGO’s, he has found ways to support refugee and migrant communities from the Horn of Africa living in the U.S. He earned his Ph.D. from Tilburg University in the Netherlands through the Taos Institute of which he is now an Associate. Samuel Mahaffy regularly blogs on topics related to peacemaking and Africa on this website and on the Peace and Collaborative Development Network (http://www.internationalpeaceandconflict.org/). Follow him on Twitter @samuelmahaffy. This blog post was first published on the Peace and Collaborative Development Network at http://www.internationalpeaceandconflict.org/profiles/blogs/visiblizing-eritrea#.U3_QsWcU-M9.
Posted: May 5, 2014 by Amanuel Leave a Comment
Peacebuilding as a Lens — A Review of Integrated Peacebuilding: Innovative Approaches to Transforming Conflict
On rare occasions, a new work will both redefine a discipline and contribute to the birth of a new paradigm. Integrated Peacebuilding: Innovative Approaches to Transforming Conflict (Craig Zelizer, Ed.) is such a work. In the array of disciplines related to conflict resolution, peacebuilding and international development, this work brings forward an integrated approach that views “peacebuilding as a lens” (p. 9).
Sustainable peace is an underlying motif in this book. Viewing peace as a long-term process, this work seeks to find a process of “transforming relationships and structures in society to decrease the likelihood of future conflicts” (p. 7).
There are several significant strengths to this work. First, it views peacebuilding in all its complexity. It engages peacebuilding in terms of health, security, environmental change, religion, media, gender, and international development. The scholarship is diverse as are the topics covered. Much of it comes from Georgetown University and its long-standing focus on conflict resolution.
It is from the multi-lens perspective on peacebuilding that this work suggests the redefinition of a discipline. Conflict resolution studies begin with a problem to be solved. Peacebuilding suggests a strengths-based approach of creating a multi-sector and multi-stakeholder paradigm for creating peace through responding to local community needs and priorities.
It is the great gift of this book that it frees peacebuilding from indentured service to the hegemonic interests of ‘global security.’ If peacemaking is defined by securing an international development agenda for exploiting economic and energy resources and building new trade markets for multi-national corporations, it has no future worth pursuing.
This work suggests that “peacebuilding is not effective without addressing the basic needs of people through economic opportunity, basic health services and a functioning legal system” (xii). It challenges us to ask the compelling question: “Whose interests are being pursued in peacemaking efforts?” Peacemaking efforts, which are intervening in local conflicts without respect for local traditions, cultures, priorities and needs, risk prolonging and deepening conflicts, no matter how well-intentioned they may seem.
I find excitement in the strand of conversation in this work that shifts peacebuilding from a focus on an international security agenda to a more relational approach. It resonates with my own conviction that peacemaking must begin with the relationship rather than with the agenda http://www.internationalpeaceandconflict.org/profiles/blogs/12-aspects-of-peacemaking-through-relational-presence#.U1VrdNZOWM8 . I deeply believe that beginning with an agenda is the fatal flaw of most peacemaking efforts (http://samuelmahaffy.com/2014/04/peacemaking-through-relational-presence/) .
Integrated Peacebuilding is a scholarly work. I see it as essential reading for anyone involved in the practice or disciplines of conflict resolution, international development or peacemaking. I highly recommend it to agencies and organizations involved in international development.
After reading this important work more than once, I am left yearning for a companion volume that might be written in lay-persons language and be focused toward the ever growing audience of community members and leaders.
The cover picture of Integrated Peacebuilding shows a community of color demonstrating for peace. Peace is the yearning of the human heart. We need a follow-up to this important work that will answer our collective yearning with new wisdom and understanding on how we can transform relationships—at a community level– to secure lasting peace. I pass this challenge back to the great scholars who have shared their insights in this work.
***************************
Page references are from Integrated Peacebuilding: Innovative Approaches to Transforming Conflict. Edited by Craig Zelizer. Published by Westview Press, 2013. Information on acquiring this book is available at http://www.westviewpress.com/book.php?isbn=9780813345093. The Editor of this work, Craig Zelizer created the Peace and Collaborative Development Network (PCDN) (http://www.internationalpeaceandconflict.org/), an engaging and interactive site for dialogue on peacemaking.
Posted: March 31, 2014 by Dr. Samuel Mahaffy Leave a Comment
From Peace Making to Injera Making
It may seem strange that an organizational facilitator with a deep passion for peacemaking would write a cookbook. It is even stranger coming from a man who loves to cook, but rarely measures any ingredient! Beyond strange, it may seem presumptuous that a white man in the United States would explain how to make injera—an art traditionally practiced by women of East Africa who feed villages and families in Eritrea and Ethiopia. So I have some explaining to do!
This work is about much more than cooking. Yes, it contains recipes growing out of the Mahaffy family’s experience of living in Eritrea for very many years. It is dedicated in honor of Arlena Mahaffy, the matriarch of our family, who raised seven children of her own in Eritrea, embraced many other children, and provided medical care and a helping hand to countless Eritreans.
But, this book is as much about relationships as it is about recipes. It is a narrative about the people and culture of Eritrea. It shares some insights on what the West might learn from the cultural traditions of East Africa. Finally, it is a narrative that weaves from the metaphor of eating from a common dish an emerging understanding of a new approach to peacemaking through relational presence.
The core message of this narrative is a simple one: Peacemaking is more likely to succeed if it begins with the relationship instead of beginning with the agenda. Efforts at peacemaking most often begin with an agenda. The agenda, of course, is to end the conflict at-hand. What happens when we begin with the agenda in any decision making process, is that we immediately loop back into the positions that are oppositional and that set us apart.
In the East African practice of eating from a common dish I find a rich metaphor for peacemaking that begins with valuing the relationship above the agenda. This insight comes from my experience of community gatherings in the United States that include Eritreans and Ethiopians sharing a meal from a common dish. This sharing of a meal is significant because of the deadly war between Eritrea and Ethiopia that cost so many lives. Somehow, refugees from both sides of this war, find a way to share a meal together and discover ways they can build community and collaborate in their new homeland.
At the celebration of my Ph.D. graduation at Tilburg University in the Netherlands through the Taos Institute, Dr. John Rijsman of Tilburg University remarked that many of the great peace treaties between nations were first forged after parties shared a meal together in one of the many fine restaurants in Brussels, Belgium. This is another example of peacemaking that grows from beginning with relationships instead of beginning with an agenda. “First, come sit with me and share a meal.”
I wonder how global conflicts and efforts at peace negotiations might be different if the starting place of engagement was a shared meal. Might Israelis and Palestinians begin with breaking bread together instead of beginning with negotiations about territory? Had the run-over of Crimea by Russia been paused long enough for a shared meal and a deep conversation, might there have been a different outcome that did not leave the world’s great military powers posturing for positional power?
I can imagine some readers scoffing right now and suggesting that this is a simplistic view. Yes, it is simplistic. It is as simplistic as the view of Eritrean women like Abrahet Kidane who believe that with a little teff flour and a little water they can feed a family, a village and a nation fighting for its independence. You see, Abrahet Kidane was my Eritrean teacher many years ago who taught me the art of making injera. It is an art that she practiced with joy and a song on her lips as she bent over an outdoor mogogo oven, carefully pouring batter onto the flat surface of a covered oven constructed from mud and cow dung.
Eritrean Cooking weaves rich relationships and recipes together to frame a dream that the world can find a more peaceful path. It invites the reader to slow down and smell the rich aroma of spices from East Africa being merged into an exquisite meal. It suggests that the place where we are present to each other is the place where peacemaking begins. So step into some peacemaking. Like injera making it will take persistence to get it right. It will require slowing down and practicing attentiveness.
The shared feast and the deepening of relationships will be reward enough. As the steam escapes and rises when the lid covering the injera is removed, may our prayer rise with it for peace between nations. May we hold hope and vision for the day when the lion lies down with the lamb and when ‘enemies’ sit down to share a meal from a common dish.