“Rencontres de Fès” Colloquium 2004
Summary of 29 May: Democracy and Governance
The colloquium embarked on its fourth year with evocative discussions, drawing on the participants’ wisdom and their differences. The day had three parts: the first was an overall setting of scene for the five days of the colloquium; the second was a probing of themes of global democracy and governance; and the third was an engagement on the questions on participants’ minds, in the form of an end-of-the-day workshop.
The sketching of scene at the outset provided a strong reminder of the historic moment that is the colloquium’s backdrop. Mohammed Kabbaj was the first of several to underscore the sweep of history and the special challenge of today: it is not the end of history, but a convergence of major trends at this time. He traced the rationale and special significance of the Fes Festival, with its celebration of diversity and spirituality, with the complex challenges from fundamentalism never far behind. What can Fès and what we do here bring to these debates of our time? With the symbol of lighting a candle as a symbol, Faouzi Skali evoked the theme of light – its links to spirituality and to reality and above all its ancient sense of inspiration. The candle symbolizes the threads that bind, and of multiple and rich filaments – or traces – of light. He spoke of the depth of spiritual traditions and of the power of culture. He spoke of relationships between culture and power, with the outstanding question of whose culture? Does culture come from power, or does power come from culture? I spoke of the journey that we have embarked upon, with this year marking the fourth year of the colloquium. The group that is joined here, of participants both new and old, is highly complex, especially marked by its diversity but also by the loyalty and dedication of a group that has made the journey together. We need to be aware, though, that the group is larger than those physically here. We have come far together and have large dreams and ambitions for the path ahead, even as many here share a nagging frustration that the full potential of this forum has yet to be realized. We heard the message of Romano Prodi (through his delegate), who underscored the challenge and potential of Fes as part of the broad effort to engage in dialogue which helps to build a global community of cultures and peoples. His message echoed with the themes of equality, responsibility and cross-fertilization of ideas – and above all he harked back to the importance of education.
During the first day, as we explored the topic of democracy and governance, elephants as a metaphor entered the discussion often. The first notion was the elephant from the ancient parable of man in darkness who touch parts of a beast and have utter conviction that the part of the elephant they feel represent the whole: the poet Rumi long ago suggested that with a candle they might see the whole. The second was a sense that there were large and dominating topics in the forum - topics that we all feel palpably but which are not easy to discuss. Two such “elephants in the room”, are the deep concerns about the pervasiveness and unwise use of US power at this time, and the second the growing trends of fundamentalism. An elephant was also invoked by Susan Marks as a metaphor for how we might tackle these thorny questions: one bite at a time.
With the events in Iraq on all of our minds, we anticipated Lakhdar Brahimi’s visit to Fès with wonder. Mr. Brahimi ultimately had to cancel his trip here, due to his role in the Iraq negotiations, and it was perhaps a sign of divine providence, as Alain de Rosanbo might say, that Susan Marks was able to speak. Susan brought her passion and pride to the telling of a remarkable story of change and democracy in South Africa – one which many two decades ago would have called an impossible dream, now a historic reality. Her messages focused above all on the power of networks to bring change : “When spider webs unite, they can catch a lion.” Susan also reminded us that ideas have the power to ignite. Deep democracy, healing, the process of political truths, pragmatism, and common humanity and spirituality.
The panel discussion treated the same theme, of global democracy, with each of six participants presenting very different visions. The presenters explored basic questions around the meaning of democracy. They touched upon themes that will echo throughout the next four days: of the dynamic world in which we live, and the sense that we are working towards a new equilibrium; of understanding the importance of education, for youth but also for those who have been excluded. There was an almost universal sense that democracy must be built, and that it cannot be imposed. I do not believe that anyone sitting in this place this morning would say otherwise.
In outlining what democracy is, the most vivid image was that it is achieved when someone – in the story told a poor and outcast woman - can look into the eyes of a more powerful person – that is democracy. Justice, laws, rights, and common values to be defended – these were seen as elements of democracy. Another resonating symbol was a hand – there is danger in holding a tight grasp and destroying the very notion that we are trying to achieve, but the opening of the hand symbolizes the opening of the soul and generosity and sharing. We were reminded of the many difficulties that stand in the way of these ideals of democracy, with the $900 billion spent on defense against the $60 billion invested in development assistance as one set of figures cited. The discussion turned around the large and complex democratic deficit, and on the need to work together and to test ideas while pushing the pride in our own aside. Politics and economics entered into the discussion, with questions of power and wealth central to the challenge of a democracy not just created, but sustained. Then the question of where to? Christophe Aguiton marked 2001 and 2003 as the critical turning points, even within a contemporary history of major events – above all they represent changes in visions of the world and the means to address problems through the political process. Much was said of this political process, and how the changes brought by technology play on the currents in an interconnected world. A discussion of how culture and politics interact in the democratic process in the United States, with echoes to other countries also, highlighted the need for new tools and approaches in today’s world. Perhaps the strongest theme of the day was interconnectedness – with the powerful reminder that this is a central, and quite new, understanding from the world of science. The symbol of the complex pendulum illustrates vividly that the point of maximum sensibility is also the point of maximum creativity.
In the workshop, at day’s end, participants posed many of the questions which were on their mind, reflecting the broad range of ideas, disciplines, and emotions. The questions touches on knowledge, power, liberty, legitimacy and illegitimacy and the ironies of discussions of democracy at this moment in time. A discussion focused on the dynamic changes occurring both in theory and practice of democracy today, characterized as a “clash of democracies”, pitting the older, traditional architectures of representation and nation states with the more horizontal, complex processes that shape debate and mobilization. A common notion and theme was our central challenge: living the diversity represented in the spirit of Fes.
Throughout the day, many themes echoed the discussions and challenges from earlier years, highlighting the continuing journey on which we are embarked. Two critical issues came time and time again – the role of the media and the importance of education. The need to focus more clearly on issues for women and the potential as well as the difficulty in reflecting the world of spirituality in the other worlds we represent – of business, academia, politics, and family were woven through the discussion.
Presenters included: Mohammed Kabbaj, Faouzi Skali and Katherine Marshall providing introductions; a delegate relaying a message from Romano Prodi; Susan Marks giving the opening lecture; and Christophe Aguiton, Assia Alaoui Bensalah, Aïcha Belarbi, Hans-Peter Duerr and Karen Jo Torjesen participating in the round table, facilitated by Faouzi Skali and Katherine Marshall.
“Rencontres de Fès” Colloquium 2004
Summary of 30 May: Spirituality and World Problems
As the colloquium unfolds, the image takes shape of an impressionist painting, with a multitude of colors, and the overall design still emerging. Two themes, nonetheless, are reappearing consistently: interconnectedness, and the idea of traces of light – above all in the sense of what can and will ignite will and action.
For the second day, the focus was on the fundamental role of individuals – their motivation, their essence, with the nature of the human mind and soul the central source of discussion and debate. The linkages between individuals and institutions were seen as critical to our inquiry: how do we attack the challenge of change at either level, and between the two? The motifs, ideas woven through the day, were the conflicting and combining drivers of action: anger, love, indignation, compassion, humility, hate and love. Behind it lay a movement towards giving life and spirit to the common values which many see as alive and critical, even as we explore and appreciate differences in our perspectives and priorities. We were reminded, nonetheless, by one wise participant that we must see spirituality as very individual – it is what we each see and feel, with emotions figuring large. Thus, articulating what it involves is by its nature difficult, if not impossible. Richard Ernst reminded us of Gandhi’s famous saying: “Be the change you wish to see in the world.”
Yesterday’s discussions also fell into three parts. The first was an introduction to the topic of spirituality and world problems; the second a rich and far-ranging panel discussion; and the third the workshop at the day’s end.
In introducing the day, Ahmed Toufiq highlighted the vast scope of the topic - spirituality and of the problems of the world today. Spirituality is a subject so vast as to be almost dangerous to speak about. He spoke of the strengths we can draw from the scriptures, and from the inspiration of the prophets. They trace a path of love – “une voie d’amour”. He also pointed to the many linkages that he saw as important to understanding spirituality, that we must engage if we are to address the problems that face us. These include connections between the heart and the body, and the individual and the community. We must, he said, let our energies express themselves – above all generosity. He returned again and again to the paths of dialogue and the importance of hope – so that the world may come to us.
In his lecture, Richard Ernst spoke of science, and of the real potential, in looking to dialogue among cultures, of promoting synergies and links among science and spirituality. His starting point was that all problems are global and, as Joseph Stiglitz has said, we cannot fight globalization, but must work with it. Our challenge is to mediate cultural questions within the larger landscape of globalization. Dr Ernst saw many traditional cultures as under threat, in a situation akin to the threats to biodiversity, and foresaw an incredible loss for humanity if these cultures become extinct. He stressed the need to be in contact with other cultures not in theory, but in real ways – by living them. He cautioned that all is not black and white, nor good and evil. Many elements, good and evil, are present in each of us. He gave the image of people in nthe west as moles, their energies focused on digging down into the earth, contrasted with Tibetan monks, wise and focused on their books, yet together, producing wisdom. Only by working together can we reach the essence of life. Dr Ernst challenged universities to take on a greater role in today’s world. He spoke of the need for radical reform, so that universities can once again become the frontier of research for the public good, instead of research towers with increasing irrelevance to the world as a whole.
The panel discussion was complex and sophisticated. Each participant reflected distinctly different perspectives, often with quite contrasting views, and the discussion overall was marked by its high intellectual caliber and tone – it was a pleasure to watch and listen. The comments made ranged from the very personal to the very abstract. They were serious, and not so serious, too: a conclusion was a reminder that after all we are nothing but a sack of skin – an enjoinder to not take ourselves too seriously.
Eight themes percolated throughout the discussion, though this was a difficult session to track.
- The significance of human nature, with discussion of the nature of the human condition, of spirituality as the interface between external conditions and our internal suffering and joy; of the arrogance of power; of the very important role of curiosity; and of the role of indignation, anger and compassion.
- An exploration of laïcité, or the notion of a secular state. Thierry de Montbrial pointed to France’s 100 years of secularism as a vital example of the potential for the independent flourishing of church and state. He reminded us of the saying “render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s, and render unto God that which is God’s” to suggest that laïcité is a model that deserves much respect and thought.
- The power of inspiration, with the special example of Mahatma Gandhi, present with us, throughout the day. Kamla Chowdry focused on a central question of what had inspired him to adopt the non-violent approach to change. What in his normal path changed, to allow Gandhi to advocate so fervently for change in the world?
- The drivers of fundamentalism, with discussion of violence and the links to trends in fundamentalism. There was discussion of the strengths of religions, but also recognition of the evil done in its name over the centuries. How can we banish violence from our traditions?
- Continuity and change. Globalization fell under this rubric, as under others, with discussion of its velocity and the possibility of constantly changing minds and visions. Negatively, growth without constraint was described through the example of cancer, which by endless growth destroys. The plea and challenge was in our times to find ways to bring an end to wars of religion.
- The basis for grounding and balance in the world. This was a central focus of the discussions around spirituality, above all in the sense of spiritual values driving motivations and providing direction and limits on action, but also touching on the boundaries between spirituality and organized religions and the role that this might bring to the political sphere.
- The potential power of building on universal values: how far can we draw upon universal values, and to what extent are they truly universal, or common to each of us?
- Finally, many admitted to much ambivalence in their reflections on the role of spirituality before the problems of the world – different, sometimes warring views and priorities on how the different approaches intersect and interact in common space.
A saying from Goethe sparkled lively discussion at different points: “Thinking is easy; acting is difficult; acting with principle is the most difficult of all.” Some saw this as a profound expression of the dilemmas we face as individuals and as members of communities, while others questioned its validity: we are what we do, we do what we are.
A last remark, my own, is of the absence of reference to the role of women in yesterday’s debate. Faith, spirituality and religion are so important for women in so many cultures, yet there is the irony that women are seldom part of formal religious hierarchies and issues for women, such as violence, are not central to many interfaith debates. It was therefore worth remark that this topic did not surface in the day’s debates.
The workshop turned to two other areas, with a continuous challenge to focus on what it means? What do we do? The participation reflected a keen wish to pursue the discussions and wide interest in the topic. The group came to the workshop both for the discussion but also with a wish to look to it for practical ideas for action.
Among the topics that were of concern was the meaning of laïcité and its significance today, globally and in specific countries and communities. Another was an exploration of the links and differences between spirituality and/or religion. After much discussion, one participant introduced a sobering caution: there is a real danger in trying to strip spirituality out of religion – to separate the two into good and ill. If we do so, we might find ourselves in the position of going away from Fès with a comforting sense that it was a beautiful experience, but with little real appreciation that these are complex issues that involve the realities of power, conflict and tension. The theme of the dialectic of good and evil, strength and weakness, which had emerged in the morning, came again to the discussion. Questions were asked, and some, very preliminary answers given, on the role of intrerfaith dialogue and how it relates to global diplomacy and action. The main point for action is to build on the synergies and networks that are changing rapidly in this area. Education, education and more education was seen as the most important tool in addressing many of the world’s problems. The vital role of the media is dealing with these issues was cited again and again, and there was discussion of the role that universities can and should play in bringing change.