11/05/2005: Canon Andrew White

Cardinal Bea,the Father of modern Jewish Christian relations, though he died in 1968 he was the architect of Nostra Aetate having been asked by Pope John XXIII to deal with this major issue in his capacity as President of the Secretariat for Christian Unity.

I would like to look this evening at the role that religion can play in Peace making in the Middle East. As well as to look at the cost of that Peace making in the region.

It is commonly said that the complexities and threats of the Middle East involve the three I’s:
Israel/Palestine
Iraq
Iran
It will be the first two I’s that I want to concentrate on this evening, though my conclusions apply as much to the situation in Iran as in the other two I’s the whole. The Middle East is a profoundly religious place. It is the supposed birthplace of creation and the very heart of the beginning of civilization. It is the area in which Salvation history begins and it is here that the three great monotheistic faiths have their birth. It is also here that we see the beginnings of some of the religious violence. From the time of the Hellenistic Empire, in the assaults against the Holy temple in Jerusalem, to the Christian Crusades to the role of the Hamas and Islamic Jihad and the attacks against Shia Mosques and Churches in Iraq today.

Whether we like it or not these are profoundly religious acts of destruction, carried out by religious people often against religious people. If we as religious people continue to deny the role of religion in conflict we will prevent ourselves from dealing with the rout cause of such violence. Oliver McTernan’s influential book “Violence in G-d’s Name” sums up the issue in its very name. If we are to make progress in peace making we must take seriously the religious issue at a political, diplomatic, academic and religious level. If Religion is in part responsible for the instigation of violence it has to be part of the cure.
So let’s begin by looking at the Israeli Palestinian conflict, a conflict in which at long last there has been some positive development in past days.


Searching for peace in the Middle East is a well worn occupation. For years diplomats and politicians have sought to find new ways of ending this long conflict between the children of Ishmael and Isaac. It has been a conflict of people and land mirroring in a way the very covenant first revealed to the patriarch Abraham. Despite this endless conflict and the various peace processes taking on names of places around the world, Oslo Taba, Wye River, Camp David, to mention but a few, none of them took seriously the religious dimensions of the land that is called Holy.

The Middle East is one of the most religious regions of the world. Religious involvement in conflict is usually not positive and something we must try to avoid. Yet pretending it does not exist is almost as dangerous as religious bigotry itself. When it comes to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict there has been a growing religious dimension to the conflict.
The most recent Intifada even carries the name of one of the most holy places in Islam the Al Aqsa. As one looks at the Israeli/Palestinian conflict you immediately see a large number of issues with serious religious connections such as the issue of land, Jerusalem, the holy places. Added to this are a large number of issues that are vital to both politicians and religious leaders.
As Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has said, “to you as Christians this is the Holy Land but to us as Jews this is the Promised Land” (quoting the Pope). To Muslims it can be added that this is Waf (Islamic Territory) thus to the three main religious traditions in the land this is no ordinary place. To add to the perceptions of those in the land there are the views of millions of evangelical Christians around the world not least in the USA who believe fervently that Israel is the fulfilment of Biblical Prophecy, to mess with it is to challenge the very heart of the Almighty. We know that this position to a considerable extent influences the only super power left in the world today.

Rabbi Michael Melchior a member of the Knesset and Orthodox Rabbi has said that the big question that must be asked is “ WWW. What went wrong with all the other Peace plans?” One of the answers must surely be that they did not gain religions legitimisation. It was partly for this reason that after the beginning of the second Intifada plans began to bring together the key religious leaders of Israel and Palestine. A document was worked on until late in the night secretly in Jerusalem. Jews, Christian and Muslim leaders came together to work out a joint commitment to work for peace and to work against violence and terror. The meeting was to take place in Alexandria, Egypt. The chair was to be the then Archbishop of Canterbury and the Grand Imam of the Alazar Sheik Mohamed Sayed Tantawi.

The meeting had the backing of both the President of the P.A. (Palestinian Authority) and the Prime Minister of Israel. Calls were made on both individuals before finally boarding a flight to Egypt. With security there were 40 people in the delegation. Nothing could have prepared us for what was to come. An intense meeting took place; the original document was now proving to be a stumbling block for part of the delegation. Once again negotiation took place day and night, the Archbishop of Canterbury described chairing the meeting as the hardest of his life. At the end of the second day we finally had the agreement of all parties and the Alexandria Declaration was signed. For the first time in history a declaration was signed by representatives of all faith traditions of Israel and Palestine calling for a religiously sanctioned cease-fire and an end to violence and the demonization of the other.

A truly historic day and a historic document. This however was not an end in itself but the beginning of an equally complex process, a process which would take us through the increased violence in the land they call Holy and the major backlash against the PA by Israel called “operation defensive shield”. This included having a role in the negotiations to end the siege of the Church of the Nativity of Bethlehem and the various other conflicts which had a significant religious dimension. Part of the declaration called for a permanent committee to implement the declaration. It has met regularly to try and move forward what became known as the Alexandria Process.

Eventually out of the Alexandria Process has come the religious track of the Middle East Peace Process. This track recognises the need to engage with both the religious and political leaders. It has never sought to replace the political process but to complement it working with the Political leaders to try and implement a lasting peace in the region. The process is complex and has involved the establishment of various centres in both Israel and Palestine which seek to make known the religious dimensions needed in peace making.

Despite the offer of funding from the GOI (Government of Israel) and the PA (Palestinian Authority), the process has not taken funding from the local authorities but instead has been funded by the USIP (United States Institute of Peace), The British and American Governments, Coventry Cathedral and the Church of Norway. It is a highly expensive process always lacking in funds but it is a process. Anybody who thinks that one meeting will produce lasting results is sorely mistaken. For anything to work it must have a lasting presence which will enable the search for peace to continue even when things seem most difficult.

Today there is the development of a religious track of the peace process which owes it birth to the Alexandria Declaration. It is seeking to engage on the issues of women, education, humanitarian aid, social reform and education. The journey is still long but those involved will not give up what in essence is a battle for peace. It was at a meeting in Europe that one of the audiences asked one of our leading sheiks, Tal El Sadr what he thought he was doing. After listening to the question he took Rabbi Melchior’s hand and said Rabbi Melchior is my brother and we will walk this long and difficult road together until we find peace for my job is to pull up the thorns on the road and to plant flowers”. Sheik Tal El was one of the founders of the Hamas and now he is totally dedicated to the search for peace.

The belief that people can change is fundamental to any process of searching for peace. If people cannot change then there is no point in this work. That is why we must not just have a process of nice people talking to nice people. On the whole it is not the nice people that cause wars. Our challenge is to engage with some of those who are responsible for the perpetuation of violence, or if not those themselves those who can influence them.

As Prof. Hans Kung has said “If there is no peace among religions there will be no peace amongst nations”. That is why the work by people like Doug Johnson who wrote “Religion the missing link in State Craft” is so important. With the post 9/11 world acutely aware of the level of danger in the world it is more imperative than ever that religious leaders are involved in Peace Making in the Middle East and else where. Already the Alexandria Declaration has inspired peace making in other parts of the world where there is conflict not least in Northern Nigeria and Iraq.

There is no easy solution or magical answers to religious peace making it is long term and difficult work. It requires people who are committed to the issue for the long term and not just the immediate. That is why the partnership with the United States Institute of Peace is so important as one of the few agencies that recognise both the difficulties and the long-term nature of the work. Days are spent in the region each month just encouraging the different partners to keep at this search for peace or else trying to gain permits for the Palestinian delegates to enter Israel for key meetings.

It is the engagement with the other that breaks down the demonization of the other which has kept the parties apart. It is highly complex and difficult work. Often it appears as if the whole world is against us yet despite the opposition we continue. The opposition comes from many different sources not least the religious leaders themselves. Then there is political opposition or even diplomatic opposition. The opponents often provide such hostility because there is the sense that they are threatened by us doing the work that either they are meant to do or have failed to do. At the same time it is often these very people who have provided immense support. Those who are secure enough in themselves to work with us rather than against us.

The search for peace in the Middle East is a highly complex and difficult process. It is filled with joy and sadness yet with the religious dimensions of the conflicts growing internationally it is more important than ever. It takes time, money and immense commitment. Often there is the need for a third party who can be trusted by all sides. Though as already stated it is impossible to maintain the support of all individuals continually. Peace in the Middle East will come, but only when the religious and political leaders are willing to put aside their differences and work together for lasting peace in a land where the capital is called the City of Peace.


Searching for peace in post war Iraq is a very different matter and one that was never going to be easy. With such an ethnically and religiously diverse nation it was always going to be problematic. Early contacts with both the British Foreign Office and the State Department revealed that religion and religious peace making was not high on their agenda. One letter from the FCO stated that the priority had to be getting water and electricity functioning again. At this stage it was only the USIP and various private individuals who saw the need for religious peacemaking in post war Iraq. Within days of that letter, we received a message from the British Government that they could not even sort out water and electricity because religious and tribal issues were getting in the way.

Early on it was decided that the Ministry of Aw Qaf (Religious Affairs) was problematic and thus would not be established in the CPA. Early post war there was those within the CPA who were greatly distressed about this issue. There were indeed problems with the former ministry but there were with all the ministries. Relationships with the Iraqi religious leaders could not be formed overnight. It was therefore highly fortunate that for the previous five years I had been working closely with many of Iraq’s religious leaders, the good and the not so good. These relationships proved to be vital post war.

Of specific importance was the relationship with the Ayatollah Hossain Al Sader. It was
with him that many of the early crucial meetings took place. On several occasions I
was asked by Ambassador Paul Bremmer to take him to meet with the Ayatollah. Having
been a persecuted Shia majority leader he now had a new prominence in the new Iraq.
It was at an early post war meeting that he stated that an Institute of Religious Tolerance
was needed. In depth discussions we tried to ascertain the methodology of such
a vision. Building on the Alexandria Declaration in Israel and Palestine it was decided
that a document signed by the various religious leaders needed to be signed after a key
meeting. Days were spent visiting the various religious leaders to gain their support for this initiative. Whilst most of them were very positive many were extremely difficult.

Some leaders, particularly amongst the Sunna were convinced that I was really a CIA
agent trying to get them to admit guilt for the developing insurgency. It was when they
realised that I was a close friend of some of the Sunna leaders who were very prominent
before the war that their attitude towards me changed. This was the beginning of the
increasing realisation that the Sunna minority were feeling increasingly marginalised. This became one of our early priorities to try and encourage the Sunna leaders to play an
active role in the restoration of Iraq. This itself was not easy. Many of the Sunna
leadership were afraid that if they were seen working with us they themselves would
become a target for violence. Sadly this proved to be true. After working for over a year
for one of the key Sunna leaders to return, the home of a fellow sheik was bombed just a
day after we had taken a group of Sunna leaders to meet with some of the leaders of the
CPA.

Meanwhile the work continued on the foundation document to be signed by key religious
and tribal leaders on 23rd February 2004. The meeting took place at the Babylon Hotel in
Baghdad. The whole event paid for by the British Government happened with great
expectation. Chaired by Dr Mowaffak Al Rubaie a Shia member of the Governing
Council, the meeting attracted a wide variety of religious and tribal leaders. The debate
was intense. What the group wanted to ensure was that their nation did not fall into the
danger of sectarian divide. The document was eventually signed and the meeting ended
with the pledge to establish a Centre for Dialogue Reconciliation and Peace.

Over the following months the work intensified. At the same time the religious tensions
between the various communities continued. The main division continued to be
between Shia and Sunna. This was made worse because of the developing de-beatification process which was seen by many as being a means of targeting the Sunni leadership. Many of their tribal and religious leaders had their assets and money sequestrated. This in turn resulted in several of the Sunni leaders who had returned, leaving Iraq, because they could no longer afford the security that they now needed.

The signing of the document that became known as the Baghdad Religious Accord was just the beginning of the process. What was to follow was an increasingly complex process of continued inter religious dialogue. This was not the nice inter faith encounter that is often experienced in the west. It was and continues to be interreligious dialogue at the cutting edge. Here it is a matter of life or death. It is not an issue of saying nice things to each other in the safety of western suburbia here it is often painful, there is shouting and tears but in the end there is usually greater understanding and a renewed commitment to the search for peace.

The Centre, formed after the signing of the Baghdad Religious Accord, eventually became known as the Iraqi Institute of Peace. It was found outstanding premises in Baghdad. Even this was not without its problems as its location was in a Shia area and each religious grouping wanted it in their own area. On the evening of its opening it was surrounded by 39 armed guards protecting the various dignitaries inside. Not the usual setting for the opening of a Centre for Peace! But this was Baghdad one of the most dangerous cities in the world.
Immediately the IIP set about establishing it various forums to oversee its main objectives. These were as follows.
1 Women Religion and Democracy
2 Inter-Religious Dialogue
3 Media
4 Youth and Young People
5 Conflict Resolution
6 Human Rights and Religious Tolerance
A holistic list encompassing several of the key issues facing Iraq today. How do women fit into the new Iraq? In particular what is to be the role of religious women? Following the launch of the women’s forum which had the support of all the clerics, the first thing on their agenda was what can be done to end domestic violence against women and the law that allows multiple wives?
As regards Inter-Religious Dialogue there was the need to create an environment whereby this new phenomena could take place. In the old Iraq there was an unnatural respect of the other based on fear rather than understanding of the other. There was little if any real dialogue and encounter. This process in itself is not easy to establish when there is still much fear and lack of understanding of the other. Despite these concerns there has been a real attempt to see the other as they see themselves.

The role of the Media in Iraq today is not one without controversy. Every form of Media has its own political stance and this can be particularly problematic when you are trying to establish an environment of peace in the midst of chaos. The Media forum has sought not just to enable the present media to understand the significant role they can play in creating an environment where peace can return but has also been working to enable the media to understand the positive role that the Media can play. To this end the forum will be producing its own written materials to enable the message of peace to be heard.

The Youth and Young Peoples forum aims to ensure that the message of tolerance, understanding and peace making is adopted by the future generation. We all know that young people are the future but trying to influence them positively is a major confrontation in itself. There is the need to work with and challenge not just the Ministry of Education, Schools and Youth Institutions there is the need to also to challenge the religious leaders in their methodology of relating to young people.

The Conflict Resolution forum has by necessity been one of the most active. Seeking not only to deal with different aspects of the ongoing conflict but also seeking to play an active role in the release of the many hostages that have been taken since April 2004. Since the hostage crisis has begun the forum has successfully worked towards the release of several individuals. Many more have been killed and this has been particularly hard on the staff of the IIP when they seemingly fail at the task in hand. Recently one of our own staff was killed whilst searching for a hostage. However the many disappointments have not prevented the team from continuing their endeavour of seeking peace in chaos.

The final forum deals with the issue of Human Rights and Religious Tolerance. The issue of human rights has been at the fore of the attempts of Iraqi reconstruction, partly because there were such grave human rights abuses under the former Iraqi regime. A ministry even exists for human rights but once again the religious dimensions of this enormous subject had been forgotten. Like all of the IIP’s work it was clear that this was not just a Baghdad issue thus centres have been established throughout the nation. The aim of this forum is to learn from the mistakes of the past and not to bury them but to enable them to let people and the nation move forward ensuring that the mistakes of the recent history of Iraq provide vital lessons for the future of the nation.

If anybody had ever thought that the work of peacemaking was easy, and for the weak in life the experience of Iraq has proved differently. The attempt to create a peace respected by religious and secular has been a huge challenge. Winning the war is easy compared to gaining the peace. Iraq has taught us that as many resources need to be put into peacemaking as they are into waging war or even the work of post war reconstruction. As yet they are not. The USIP and the British FCO (Foreign and Commonwealth Office) have provided a huge amount of support in this endeavour, both regarding the commitment of funds and in the provision of support and training. The work has just begun and it may appear as if the battle is being lost but as the only non Iraqi in the IIP team I am convinced that amongst my Iraqi colleagues they will not give up until the peace is won.

Religion can and must play a crucial role in peacemaking. Not just in the Middle East but throughout the world. We need our Government to take it more seriously so that it is not just seen as a nice sideline to peace keeping but one of the core issues. The reality is that the Governments to date have been scared of religion and its role in conflict. They have almost avoided it as if to pretend that these issues will go away if they are not confronted. They will continue to increase. 9/11 was the day that changed the world, its root was not just sociological and political at its heart it was religious.

In the last Conservative party manifesto I was delighted to see that there was a pledge to provide an ambassador for Religious Freedom. This is very much needed but of even greater importance is the need for an Ambassador for Religion and Conflict or should I say Religion and Peace Making. In the USA there is at least a Congressional funded Institute of Peace created at the same time as the US Centre for Strategic Studies, a crucial centre which addresses the balance somewhat of the billions which are spent on war. I am not a pacifist, we need a good strategic defence policy but just as much as this we need to deal with the religious components of peace making. Only then will there be hope in the Middle East and true safety in the world.

In closing I want to make the following points if faith is going to play a positive rather than just a destructive role we must ensure the following:
1. That the international community resources religious peace making
2. That historic bodies like the CCJ are properly resourced to do their work.
Clifford Hill in his recent book called the Wilberforce Connection states that there is a need for a “fully comprehensive interfaith dialogue that is essential for the future peace of the world if we are to be saved from a century of religious violence that threatens to engulf the whole world”
3. That we avoid the pitfalls of the demonization of the other

In the words of William Wilberforce “How can we judge fairly of the characters and merits of men, of the wisdom or folly of actions unless we have……an accurate knowledge of all particulars so that we may live as it were in the times, and among the persons of whom we read; see with their eyes and reason and decide on their premises’
4. Religious peace making must not just be seen as a fringe activity
5. That the Government appoint a senior person as an ambassador or minister for Religious Peacemaking.
6. We have to be willing to engage with some of the more extremist faith leaders
7. We must realise that this is long term and not short term work

If and only if these issues are taken seriously we may just be able to avoid the catastrophe of religious violence that threatens not just to engulf the Middle East but the entire world. The cost of making Peace is indeed very great. But we must be as willing to be as radical in our quest for peace as the terrorists are in their quest for war.