Sep 16, 2006 1:00:57 AM cite

Peace will come to the Middle East when there become a clear understanding of what and/or more importantly whose agenda is at work there. What there needs to be is enough people on the ground to speak in a clear and loud voice the first two lessons one learns as a very young child, the first is ?Stop? and the second is ?No? [It could be an agenda for a whole big meeting about which order they should be in, remember the Vietnam Peace talks]. It sounds simplistic to equate the trouble in the Middle East to a school yard brawl, however the only real difference is that to many people get killed. To suggest that both sides need to grow up, is not a moot point, it needs to happen in conficts the world over, but this question was asked about the Middle East.

by RedSevenOne

Sep 10, 2006 8:37:00 AM cite

I would consider two root cause for ME violence and unrest: (1) Religious roots: ME is a crossroad to all major (divine) religious bodies: Judaism, Christianity and Islam. All sacred sources of these religions has prophecies concerning this region. All see this region as a place of future wars and turmoil. The concept of Christ and anti-Christ is there in all these major religious bodies. This is why every one wants a hold of that region. (2) Materialistic roots: ME is both geographically, and materialistically a golden place. It is in the Middle of the World, it has moderate climate all over the year, it has lots of Oil and minerals, it is rich in water sources, etc. All these qualities of ME would cause the saliva of any hungry super-power to pour continuously from mouth.
Today US is in the ME for both of these reasons: The neo-conservatives with the evangelics wants to go there to face Armageddon, and also, they want the Oil and riches of the ME.

by sharaf

Sep 10, 2006 1:53:35 AM cite

Two reasons: 1) As a society, Israel is still in deep denial over the violence that allowed the very founding of the country to occur. Israelis are beginning to come to grips with the occupation, but the real issue is 1948. 2) The US (a society that is also in denial about its founding violence) continues to enable Israel's denial financially, diplomatically, and militarily. A change in attitude in these two settler-colonial societies could make a huge difference.

by djleftover

Sep 10, 2006 1:46:19 AM cite

the palistines and thier cohorts the Arabs, don't want it. fir if there were peace in that region then those regimes would have to answer for thier own way they treated the palistinians. Until the "EVIL JOOS" are gone they will be the fall guiy for all that is bad in the middle east.

by chucklesdgh

Sep 9, 2006 3:43:33 PM cite

because the USA externalize their internal great divide. why this is so, i don't know.

by AvB

Sep 9, 2006 12:10:00 PM cite

Antoschka - Ekaterina Moshaeva: I am not a politician, but I think there is actually nothing new in the world, and politicians and interested circles act according to a principle “share and reign”. There would be no peace in the Middle East till some interested groups of people like businessmen and politicians wouldn’t be stopped, who share power and treasures of the earth and use labour and energetic potential of people. If someone does not stop them, they will continue to achieve what they want. Those people act only to pursue their own interests. They do not see, or they actually don’t care about the problems, about which worries a great mass of all people in the Middle East. Here, at the “round table” I saw two men from two different enemy countries Lebanon and Iraq; they shook hands and meant “we have nothing against each other”. Yet thousand of deaths, thousands of victims on both sides give an argument for a new escalation. And I think it is time to break, because someone should stop this insanity. We can only hope that the mental and moral potential of the mankind could do it. It is possible to stop it only if we put all our voices together.

by Antoschka - Ekaterina Moshaeva

Sep 9, 2006 12:10:00 PM cite

Abbas Beydoun: I come from the Middle East and I thought many times of this question, so I am afraid of giving a simple answer to a very complex question. I think that countries in the Middle East do not trust each other enough to be persuaded of peace and they want peace in a form so that they are away from each other, so peace in the Middle East was not real. I believe that these countries should really believe in peace and Israel has to do that particularly because it alleges that it is democratic, but actually this state handles the others as uncivilized people and as they deserve death and it deals with them barbarically. I think that the west deals with Israel as a democratic state, so the west should require from it to behave democratically.

by Abbas Beydoun

Sep 9, 2006 12:10:00 PM cite

Alvaro Restrepo: There is no peace in Middle East yet because there are no intentions to recognize the right of others to exist. I think that the Jewish people, who has suffered so much, has no right to do what it is doing with Palestinians. Precisely because of its history, Jewish people have the moral and historical responsability of finding the right way to Justice. We can't accept any longer what is happening to Palestinians there. The United States support this infamious process because of the big economic power that Jewish people has in that country. We must accept all these people's right to exist, to coexist, to share a territory, to share those historical places which belong to all of them. The only possible way to peace is reconciliation. Nevertheless Jewish have built a wall, a wall which is only going to cause more wars, more violence and more hate.

by Alvaro Restrepo

Sep 9, 2006 12:10:00 PM cite

Ana Lucy Bengochea:

by Ana Lucy Bengochea

Sep 9, 2006 12:10:00 PM cite

Andries Botha: They are all as dangerous as each other, because they are at the behest of unstable humans. What is interesting to me is the assumption that somebody has been given the power to decide whether or not a optimum instrument of destruction can be released. I find it more interesting for us to decide why it was necessary at all for there to be any nuclear bombs. Why is it that we – why do we feel it necessary as part of our so-called civilization to have such optimum and extreme weapon of destruction at our disposal, whether you are American, Israeli, French, or Iranian, whoever. It seems to me that the nuclear bomb is the ultimate weapon or instrument of persuasion. Once you have it, the threat of it makes people take you seriously, so then you say, now I require this or I require that, if you have the nuclear bomb, the threat of our unstable humanity releasing this weapon of destruction, forces people to take your requests, or your threats, or your promises, far more seriously. But I do think it’s a terrible indictment that we should have them at all.

by Andries Botha

Sep 9, 2006 12:10:00 PM cite

Angaangaq Lyberth: Moishe, did you know that where all the great religions stemmed from? As a native person they tells us that when you make a commitment to the Great One you will be tested, he will send you tests. And lo and behold the very land in which the great teachings of these books of the man who made us, in English we call them prophets, have given us has caused us to have incredible difficulties in the very birthplaces of those teachings. Moses, Christ and Mohammed come from that region. Zoroaster, Abraham-- Abraham, Moses, Zoroaster, Christ and Mohammed come from that region and those people are still fighting about the very beautiful teachings of those spokesmen, the prophets who gives the teachings to uphold for the safety of mankind and here we are fighting about it. Why don’t we have peace there yet? We’re still trying to translate things to all benefit, to put down others. What right do we have to put down such beautiful teachings like Moses, like Zoroaster, like Christ, like Mohammed, like [inaudible]? We have no right to do so. If we take on the teachings we will realize that it’s progressive. All of them are progressive. Remember when Abraham came nobody could read or write. When Moses came we was just learning to understand the significance of writing. When Christ came we were in there. When Mohammed came we were able to read more. With [inaudible] coming now we all can read and write. Everyone has a right to seek and to understand the truth. When everyone does, they will realize that with a progressive revelations we have nothing to worry, but to advance to a betterment of the world so we can come to a new level of reality within. Moishe I hope that I’ve been able to answer your question.

by Angaangaq Lyberth

Sep 9, 2006 12:10:00 PM cite

Anthony Arnove: Well, I think the question of why there is no peace in the Middle East is a complicated one, but fundamental to answering the question is the question of what is called a peace process and the assumption that the United States, the European Union and other countries are pursuing a process of trying to resolve a conflict and that it is often basically attributed to Palestinian or Arab intransigence and maximalism that that process hasn’t achieved its aim. The United States often refers to itself as an honest broker in the Middle East, but nothing can be further from the truth. Naseer Aruri has written a book called “Dishonest Broker” that shows the real history of the United States for all in actually systematically blocking the underlying issues that create conflict and tension in the Middle East. And really, if you want to understand the roots of the conflict in the Middle East, we have to understand why -- the way in which Israel was created as a colonial settler state and the massive disposition of more than 700,000 Palestinians, why that fundamental injustice has led to a situation that has led to such instability in the Middle East and in the world today, a situation that really threatens to engulf far beyond the Middle East regions in a more and potentially even nuclear war. And so, there is a fundamental inequality there, but there is also a greater inequality and problem which is that the United States has seen the Middle East as a region of concern for the same reason that before it was an object of colonial concern because of its geography in terms of its location, for the proximity to very important trade and shipping routes. But, increasingly, it is importance as a source of energy, the location of two-thirds of world’s oil, but also the great majority of the world’s natural gas reserves. So, it is an area of tremendous conflict because those resources are a value to the United States, a value to other states, and the people who live in those countries have been dispossessed and have been subjected to dictatorship, to oppression and tremendous violence by states that seek to control those resources and by their indigenous allies, the elites of Arab world and also by the state of Israel. So, the United States has backed dictatorships, backed oppressive regimes that will give it access to those resources and suppress movements for democratic change, suppress nationalist movements, which creates the kind of anger, which creates kind of frustration, which creates the kind of social circumstances that lead to instability today. But, really, ultimately, resolution of political conflicts could be possible.

by Anthony Arnove

Sep 9, 2006 12:10:00 PM cite

Anuradha Koirala: I think because there are some people who want to benefit from it by selling [inaudible], to increase economic and to show they’re powerful. That is why I think it is not ending.

by Anuradha Koirala

Sep 9, 2006 12:10:00 PM cite

Anuradha Mittal: I am quite sure that my colleagues sitting around this table from the Middle East can answer this question better than I could. I would use the example of my own country India and Pakistan and why we are not able to reach peace; a lot of that has to do with the politics. Politics is the game that is played by the people in power to maintain their power that they would like to see the conflicts remain. So, people are engaged in the conflict rather than be able to focus on the larger issues that confront us. It is international geopolitics. I think countries like India and Pakistan or the Middle East do not have peace because the international geopolitics does not want peace. In the case of Middle East, I do know from my friends who live there that almost 80 percent of the population and more in both Israel and Palestine, for example, want two nation state, but there are vested interests and the ones who would like the sound of the war drums that they would continue promoting war, promote conflict instead of actually promoting peace. And that is the real reason that we have not yet been able to have peace and, of course, that there are many ways of promoting these ideas. You see, for example, in the recent conflict in Lebanon or the humanitarian crisis of Lebanon, the role that the Western media, the corporate media plays; and basically their ratings are going up. They would love conflict situations that their news programming is about spreading the lies and the myths. For example, Bush administration would like to use the media to have the whole world believe that if anyone disagrees with them, they basically have weapons of mass destruction. So as long as that is happening, we will not have peace in the world because peace has not been given a chance and it has not been given a chance by the people who want to ensure that there is conflict because they gain from that conflict. As long as there is conflict, there will be sales of weapons to Third World countries. U.S. will be dumping its weapons to Israel. Palestine and other people will -- some of the people will be looking at ways such as those of suicide bombings. So, there is somebody who gains from it; and I would say also follow the money and the answer comes from that. That’s why we don’t have peace in the Middle East or in other parts of the world.

by Anuradha Mittal

Sep 9, 2006 12:10:00 PM cite

Ashok Gangadean: I find this question very interesting in terms of what we mean by peace. And it’s obvious that there is continuing chronic patterns of violence going on in the Middle East but really all around the planet. And I think we should see this is symptomatic, the Middle East is symptomatic of chronic patterns of alienation and war and violence and the lack of peace. And it really calls to mind, what is a culture of peace and what it would be to achieve peace, true peace? And again, if we look at our global wisdom, and our global consciousness, the collective wisdom of the ages that recognize that peace is not just détente between people, but really comes from the heart and the deep connection when we celebrate diversity between ourselves. And recognize ourselves in each other across borders. And recognize our deep sacred interconnectivity in the fabric of life. It’s in that consciousness, awakened global consciousness and global spirituality, that we really find true peace. And, as long as we are in the egomental, egocentric patterns of culture, there is no chance of peace in that consciousness. Einstein is quoted as saying that, “The consciousness produces certain problems, that consciousness cannot be the very consciousness that brings a solution." And this is very appropo here as well. That the ego-consciousness inherently brings the lack of peace, and fragmentation, alienation and violence cannot be the cultural space in which we achieve true peace. This is the great lesson of what we are seeing, for example, in the Middle East and all around the world. There cannot be peace in that old cultural space. It’s functional and unsustainable. And it’s only when we can cross as mature beings into a culture of peace and to the peace alternative, the culture based upon love and compassion and care, that’s integral, and we discover the sacredness of our life, when we reach that culture form, there will no violence and war and the way that we see it. That’s the key to peace in the Middle East and peace across the planet.

by Ashok Gangadean

Sep 9, 2006 12:10:00 PM cite

Audrey Kitagawa: This is a very complex question, and it is grounded in a very, very long and complex history, but it has a lot to do with the political will of not only the countries that comprise the Middle East but the other countries that are not in the Middle East but have interests in the balance of power in the Middle East. It also speaks to the political will of the leadership of these countries in the Middle East as well as not located in the Middle East. It really speaks to the potential of a shift of power if these countries were to be divested of their respective positions. -- We do need to address the issues of justice, human dignity, and what is actually going on on the ground with the people actually live in the Middle East. Political will does not always translate to human justice, human dignity. And therein lies a significant problem.

by Audrey Kitagawa

Sep 9, 2006 12:10:00 PM cite

Avi Primor: Well, I believe the reason is that there are fanatic people on both sides. On both sides. There was a time when parts of the people in the Middle East thought they could sweep away the others from the Middle East. I mean, some arabians thought they could destroy the state of Israel. As long as they believed this and were convinced that it was justified, they had no interest in peace. The state Israel had to defend itself in order to survive, but has its own fanatics, nowadays known as the "settlers" who want to inhabit parts of the palestinian region as they assume that this country is israelian property from a godly instruction which cannot be ignored. Nowadays, I believe, most of the people on both sides , i.e. most palestinians, most arabians and most israelian people do know that there is no alternative, that they have to accept the situation, the others. The israelians know that they cannot rule another country, that they are not supposed to rule another country. And the palestinians and the arabs know that they cannot sweep away the state Israel from the Middle East. That they are doomed to live with a state Israel. Nevertheless there are fanatics, fundamentalists on both sides, who always turn the situation to riot and violence and thus worry and devastate the population. I believe if we somehow bring the democracy into lead, if the will of the bigger part of the population wins, then we will have peace because the way is very clear, how we are supposed to walk it. There hast to be a palestinian state, and an israelian state, and both need to cooperate. This is the only possible solution.

by Avi Primor

Sep 9, 2006 12:10:00 PM cite

Benjamin Fahrer: Why is there no peace in the world? The answer in a way is very simple about peace. We must first ask, if we have peace within ourselves? How can we have peace anywhere if we are not at peace with ourselves? Mr. George W. Bush, who is not truly the president of the United States, has proven he’s not. Is he at peace with himself? How can he speak of peace? How can one speak of peace, when you’re not at peace with yourself? First, we must come to a peace with ourselves. Once we understand this, then we can start radiating out, rippling out into the world. In the Middle East, there is so much conflict. When there is so much conflict, it disrupts the groundation of the human spirit. When this is imbalance, it’s very hard to achieve an internal peace; therefore, it’s very hard to achieve an external peace. Hopefully, someday soon, there will be peace within our hearts that we can then express externally into the world. Peace exists within our hearts at all times, we just need to access this. We need to meditate on, why were here? And what we’re we doing? Need to review the effective of the sun and the beauty of this world. The peace that, that is ever present within the moment, we can tap to that moment of peace. This is truly the purpose of our life is to obtain peace, that we can sit here unaffected by everything. This is a very beautiful gathering. The people from all over the world, so many people are here for peace. The woman from Iraq, the woman from Afghanistan, brought here to help bridge this connections so we can learn from our indigenous friends and our professors on how to create a more peaceful world. And I believe opinions with oneself. Let’s make peace. Ohm shanti. shanti. shanti. Ohm peace, peace, peace Ohm shanti, shanti, shanti Peace is in every moment and breath.

by Benjamin Fahrer