Report :

(This article was published in Al-Ahram newspaper on 03.03.2008)

For many years it was taken for granted that the world order is dominated solely by the United States of America, supported by its European allies. As such, the European role was thought to be merely complementary to that of the US generally speaking, taking into consideration disagreement in viewpoints from time to time. However, it seems that the developments recently have shown many US blunders, whether in terms of the war on terrorism or intervention in Iraq. This was accompanied by the rise of the role of Europe in many of the current issues in the Middle East.

Such has become very clear in the approach of the Europeans to the Palestinian question and the nuclear issue of Iran, as well as the participation in the UNIFIL forces in South Lebanon, and the role played worldwide due to the deployment of many European troops affiliated to NATO in Kosovo and Afghanistan. Moreover, the extension of NATO membership to include new members from the eastern part of the continent added a new demographic and geographic dimension. It has become an indicator not only of the solidarity of the unified European entity, and its ability to face challenges, but also of the flexibility thereof, enabling it to accommodate any members fulfilling the prerequisites of membership. Thus, the role that could be played by the continent was strengthened and reinforced, on both the regional and the international levels, and in hot conflict spots. It was high time for such a thing to happen, given the fact that Europe is an entity that is rich with human and technical resources, especially that there exists a great number of European research centers specialized in the management of conflicts, whether individually or in cooperation with other international agencies, such as the United Nations. This became very clear in the manner with which the EU dealt with the issue of the independence of Kosovo, and the management before that with the issue of the extension of membership.

From this perspective came the seminar and workshop organized by FNST, the German organization working closely with the German Liberal Party. The workshop was held in the town of Gummersbach, close to Cologne, around the prevention of disputes and the management of conflicts. It hosted members from hot conflict spots from the Middle East, Africa, Latin America, and Eastern Europe. There were various themes addressed including the changing nature of international conflicts in today’s world, the modern approaches towards conflict prevention and management, and in turn the procedures followed for peace and stability building, while focusing on the issues specific to each area individually. Moreover, a full session was dedicated to discuss the methods for international intervention to resolve conflicts, and the proposed methods for turning disputes through liberal policies, which is a natural evolution of the discussion due to the close connections between the institution and the liberal party. There was also a review of the obstacles to international intervention, and the acceptance of the target states and societies of such mediation efforts, in addition to the role that could be played by the UN and the criticism addressed to this role and to the manner with which the Security Council manages its business. There was also a discussion of the extent of the need to reform the structure of the International organization including the expansion of the membership to the Security Council, due to the accusation of its selectivity, and double standards.

Certain issues were selected as examples of case studies expressive of the efforts by the research centers in Europe, such as the case of Northern Ireland, the issue of the desire of the Abkhazia region to gain independence from Georgia, the conflict in Sri Lanka due to the unrest caused by the Tamils, and finally South Africa as a success story for the change – despite all the complexities of the internal situation. The whole objective is to search in detail for the roots of the problem followed by the efforts exerted, and finally the European attempts to settle the current conflicts. This test was meant to cover all of the hot spots worldwide. This was accompanied with an explanation of the manner with which institutions are working to address these conflicts, which relies primarily on the diversity of participants from the civil society, so that their work would tend towards the unofficial.

The program also included visits to a German institution specialized in the field of international conflict management, which Bonn International Center for Conversion (BICC). This is a consultancy and research center aiming at supporting peace and development through the prevention of armed conflicts and the contribution to reconstruction efforts, through monitoring disarmament processes of the disputing parties, and facilitating the reintegration of the warring factions into the society by providing consultations and expertise to apply appropriate programs and projects. The African continent is deemed the main source of work for this center, as it had worked in Sierra Leon. However, future efforts are focused on East Africa, and the current project is focused on Sudan. 

It was very interesting to see that during this workshop the main point of focus was the role of Europe and the future vistas whether on the economic, political or military level, after the continent, according to one of the participants, had become in itself an empire in the positive sense of the word. In his opinion this supportive power seeks to achieve peace and stability, regionally and internationally, due to believing that stability in the end serves the interests of Europe. It plays this role without overlooking the limitations and risks of geographical expansion, including the problem of the accession of Turkey to the EU.

This is an acceptable image taking into consideration the European success whose 50th anniversary was celebrated as a record of the longest peaceful eras in the history of the continent. This success reflects the trust unified Europe has in its capabilities and that it represents a successful model of changing the regional competition among two major poles, Germany and France, for instance turned into a positive cooperation fostering European cooperation. On the other hand, this positive perception does not overlook the possible obstacles faced by the unity from time to time. Among the major challenges, according to Jorgo Chatzymarkakis one of the major presenters during this workshop, a member of the European Parliament, and one of the zealous supporters of the unified European entity, is the problematic of dealing with the Muslim presence in Europe, now that it has become a reality. In this regard, he was totally against European bigotry in accepting the “other” as was the case in the past, and currently with the caricatures of Denmark. He believes that this acceptance has become a must, especially that the numbers of Muslims are no longer small, which drives him to a serious search for finding a simple and a clear formula for the integration between European and Muslim principles, in a manner that precludes clashing that surfaces every now and then causing problems to the second and third generations of Muslim communities. He is therefore, trying to find common grounds, due to his belief that difference enriches rather than destroys society. As such, the status of the Muslims – who always feel discriminated against – needs to be focused on by Europe in order to avoid many of the problems that could pose a challenge in the future.