Interview with Theo Sitther of the Mennonite Central Committee

Theo Sitther is the Legislative Associate for International Affairs at the Mennonite Central Committee. Mennonite Central Committee is a relief, development, and peace agency of the North American Mennonite and Brethren in Christ churches, providing disaster relief around the world alongside their long-term international development programs. He works in monitoring legislation, specifically US foreign policy, in areas of peace making, militarism, economics and trade agreements. He has been a Mennonite since he was thirteen when his family moved to the US from Southern India, and after graduating from Hesston College and Eastern University worked as a lobbyist for the Center on Conscience & War.

When we were assigned an interview with someone who practices non violence in their daily life, I thought it would be interesting to seek out someone from a Mennonite organization. I’ve always thought that the Mennonite notion of a ‘peace church’ was quite beautiful, and have a lot of respect for the way that Mennonites commit their lives to nonviolence, nonviolent resistance and reconciliation, and pacifism. In this interview, I sought to better understand what Theo Sitther’s job entailed on a day to day basis, and ask him his personal views from a Mennonite perspective on the world’s present situation and the future that lies ahead.

Q. What are some of your major projects?

A. One of the main things I work on is Columbia. We specifically work with Mennonite churches there working with conflict transformation and peace building efforts. My role is looking at US policy towards Columbia and the amount of military aid the US gives Columbia and the kind of effect it’s having on the country. But I also work on other issues such as Haiti, primarily looking at food security issues there, but also issues related to Afghanistan, North Korea and Burma as well.

Q. What is a typical day for you?

A. My job is twofold. My work in DC involves policy work, meeting with members of congress, being a part of working groups here and responding to legislation. The other half involves corresponding with our constituency and letting them know what’s happening in Washington related to the work we’re doing.

A typical day would be responding to questions. Actually, right before I came to meet with you here I was in an interfaith working group meeting discussing what the new congress might be doing and how we might respond to different issues that may come up, how we can work with the new president, and how we can best respond to a lame duck Congress.

Q.What does being a Mennonite mean to you?

A. Being a Mennonite for me means fully living out my Christian faith in my daily life, which includes being a peacemaker, working for peace- building directly in a conflict area, working for changes in a policy or working for economic justice and holistic justice for communities to bring about a more peaceful and just world. Essentially it just means doing all that I can to be a positive force for good in the world.

Q. What is the personal motivation for the work that you do?

A. One major motivation is the sense of doing good and thus being able to make a difference in the world. Especially in the face of this financial crisis, US foreign policy is affecting everyone all over the world. We see the negative effects of what the US is doing everyday worldwide. But also, I’m a Christian, and my faith very much motivates me. Being able to respond to God’s calling as a person of faith and doing this work is what a being a Christian is all about for me.

Q. What do you think are the main problems that America faces today?

A. One of the major problems I think we’re facing is America’s excessive militarism- this country spends billions of dollars on its military spending and the amount is monumental compared to other countries. There’s a big gap between this and how much America spends on social programs. One of our biggest critiques is that we spend a lot of money on military defense. Yet you walk out of Union Station and homeless people surround the nation’s capital. We have real problems at home that need to be addressed, because a lot of our own citizens are struggling to get by every day. I do think that the US has the ability to respond to different needs around the world, but I think we need to do it in a more human kind of way. We need to start promoting life rather than death in our policy abroad.

Q. How do you think the concept of non violence fits into American foreign policy?

A. As a person of faith it would be easy for me to argue that there should be no wars, and that we shouldn’t fund our military the way we do now. But violence is currently an inevitable part of our world, and so American foreign policy needs to account for that. But I think I would say that we need to balance that amount of effort that we put into war making with the amount we put into peacemaking. Right now there’s a significant imbalance and this needs to change if America is actually going to promote non violence in any major way abroad. I think that the balance definitely needs to be heavier on the side of peacemaking rather than war mongering.

Q. Do you think there is a relationship between American popular culture and violence?

A. Absolutely. The amount of violence we see in the media definitely de sensitizes our collective conscience. Our brains our numbed by things like video games, for example, and we’re simply no longer affected by images and notions of real violence.

Q. What do you think the average person can do every day to contribute to a more peaceful and non violent world?

A. The first step is to educate yourself about what’s happening in the world. I came into this work because I would read up on different world issues, from war to starvation, economic instability and natural disasters and wanted to do something proactively in my daily life to bring about positive change. People don't know what’s happening beyond the confines of the United States and that’s one major cause of the apathy we see in this country when it comes to world affairs. So educating yourself is probably the first major step.

Q. Once you’ve accumulated information, you have to do something with it. Different people can contribute to the world and the cause of peace in different ways. One way, as US citizens living in a democracy where you can engage with your elected officials, is to actually go out and speak to your members of congress and/or government to make your voices heard. Citizens should do this not just in election year but throughout the year. It’s our duty.


Reflections

I am sometimes wary of organized religion and their peace making and charitable efforts, and thus while I have always respected the Mennonite doctrine of being a positive force for good in the world, I was unsure of how this aim would manifest itself. After talking to Theo Sitther, I have gained a better understanding of what the Committee does, and was extremely impressed by their global efforts to rectify the injustices of the world in all of their forms- poverty, hunger, violence and warfare to name a few.

With religion as the cause of so much violence today, God’s message to us all is often misconstrued and lost. For me, Theo Sitther’s understanding, and indeed the Mennonite understanding overall, of what God wants from all of us resonates strongly with my own personal beliefs- that it is our most fundamental duty of our time on this earth to work in whatever way we can to bring about ‘a more peaceful and just world’ as Sitther remarks. For the Mennonite Central Committee and my interviewee, this is primarily through advocating for policy changes to create lasting change in under developed communities throughout the world. Despite the fact that I never thought I’d want to be involved with a religious organization such as this, I actually could see myself wanting to be a part of the MCC and the incredible work they do.

Monks Brawl in Church of the Holy Sepulcher

Israeli Pacifist: The Life Of Joseph Abileah

For decades the Palestine-Israel conflict has caused innumerable casualties and atrocities on both sides. Amid this violent dispute, numerous proponents of peace have advocated nonviolent alternatives to the bloody skirmishes between the Palestinians and Israelis. Joseph Abileah is one of these advocates for peace and has spent the majority of his life working to end this conflict through nonviolence. In Israeli Pacifist: the Life of Joseph Abileah, Anthony G. Bing carefully outlines the life and works of this persistent peace-maker.

Bing stresses that Abileah was an ordinary man. Joseph Abileah was born to a Jewish couple in Austria, where he lived most of his childhood. Since an early age, Abileah loved music and he later became a skilled violinist. His adoration of musical harmonies drove him to strive for the same kind of harmony in real life. As a small boy, Abileah moved to Haifa, a town in Palestine where Arabs and Jews lived together in peace. These childhood experiences showed Joseph that peace between these two disparate groups was possible and realistically achievable. As a young man, Abileah reveled in sight-seeing and found a new connection with the land. This connection helped him to see the common brotherhood between the Jews and the Arabs, “The fundamental brotherhood of Arab and Jew appeared to him as an almost mystical union, and his experiences with the land on both sides of the Jordan River convinced the young Abileah that the land should be as undivided as the kinship” (19). This belief in the brotherhood of Arabs and Jews strongly influenced Abileah in his future work as a peace-maker.

By an early age, Joseph formed his worldview based solely on his own experiences. He was convinced that fear was intertwined with hatred and once fear was eliminated, hatred could be forgotten. Furthermore, he firmly believed that a Jewish state should not be established on the basis of violence. With this worldview, Joseph embarked on his quest for reconciling the Jews and the Arabs through nonviolent alternatives.

Joseph devoted himself to work camps, where Jews, Arabs, and foreign volunteers worked together to rebuild villages and help bridge the gap between Palestine and Israel. He also made frequent excursions into Palestine to supply homeless Palestinians with essential materials. Soon Joseph began to involve himself in organizations with like-minded people and ideals. These organizations included the War Resisters International (WRI), where he was elected to the International Council of the WRI, the League for Human and Civil Rights (LHCR) and the American Friends Service Committee, to name a few. One of Joseph’s major contributions was his memorandum to the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP). This memo advocated rejection of the partition plan, the union of Palestine and Transjordan under the ruling of King Abdullah, total disarmament, and multiple other proposals dealing with education, health, and economics. This plan was considered by UNSCOP and Abileah was invited to make an oral presentation to the committee. Although this invitation was withdrawn some months later, Joseph remained true to his memo and advocated these proposals throughout his lifetime, especially the union of Palestine and Transjordan. Another major happening in Abileah’s life was when he was asked by the Israeli League for Human and Civil Rights to represent the organization at the UN’s special hearing on suspected Israeli infringements on human rights in the Occupied Territories of the West Bank and Gaza. Although Abileah was a little reluctant, he testified in two hearings in front of the UN Committee. At these hearings Joseph, like always, spoke of his own experiences and interviews with Palestinians in the Occupied Territories. Joseph was later noted as being especially helpful. Finally, Abileah is particularly proud of his formation of the Society for Middle East Confederation. The establishment of this society had been a dream for Joseph and he successfully accomplished it. The Society for Middle East Confederation is centered around “solving the Middle East conflict by cooperation of Arabs and Jews on the economic and political level. These range from a BENELUX pattern (economic cooperation) to a full confederation of states, providing equal status and representation to each of the member-components” (156). The accomplishments of Joseph Abileah are numerous and his persistent optimism and belief in nonviolent methods is unwavering. Bing portrays Abileah as a true peace-maker and a strong individual who deserves the admiration of Palestinians and Israelis alike.

This book is incredibly well-written and Bing does an extraordinary job at outlining the life and labors of Joseph Abileah. The beginning of each chapter conveniently includes the dates in which the events of that chapter occurred and multiple pictures and primary sources are helpful in understanding the writings and events in Abileah’s life. Furthermore, Bing is careful to explain the historical events surrounding Joseph’s life. By providing a historical context and background to Abileah’s works, Bing shows the hostile environment in which Joseph was advocating peace and nonviolence. The only qualms I had with this book was that there were not enough quotes or opinions from Joseph’s close friends and family. Although there are a few, I felt that it would have been helpful to see his friends’ and family’s perspective on his works and personality. Overall, this book was a very interesting and easy read for anyone interested in the nonviolent life, or even those who wish to learn about a great man that should be admired the world-over.

This book truly made me want to learn more about the lives of other pacifists and nonviolence advocates. This bibliography has shown me the meanings of true courage and steadfast perseverance. I was struck by Joseph’s unwavering faith in the goodness of the human heart and I am interested in reading more about supposedly normal individuals who have made extraordinary contributions to humankind. For me, this book was a launch pad for my journey into learning more about, and hopefully embracing, nonviolence.

Who has the power? Joker Interrogation scene

It's odd to use a clip from the latest Batman movie to make a point about the power of nonviolence, particularly when it's being used by the villain! But take a look . . .



It certainly isn't an example of principled nonviolence, but you get a sense of who has control and power using what. At least the ferries scene fares better for human nature!

Are the nonviolent struggles of Buddhists in Tibet and Burma promoting peace in other areas of the world?

From the Slate article, the question arises:
Are the nonviolent struggles of Buddhists in Tibet and Burma promoting peace in other areas of the world? These struggles obviously have not gone unnoticed on the international scene or here in D.C. where vigils and protests have been held over the past year. Now the Dalai Lama has become probably the most famous world religious leader in his campaign for support of Tibet and, along with the struggles of his people, sparked a popular interest in Buddhism. Many Buddhists criticize the Dalai Lama for becoming a media spectacle and an object of consumerism, but maybe this really is an efficient strategy for disseminating the story of nonviolence that is Tibet. Consumerism is not really the Dalai Lama's fault anyway, and picking up Buddhism from the internet or a bookstore is really not as superficial as it may sound to many practicing Buddhists. I speak from personal experience when I say that buying a popular book about Buddhism and reading about Buddhism online can transform inner violence: no doubt, I would not be writing this message otherwise.

It is important to remember that, as I indicated, Tibet and Burma are not just tragedies of violent oppression, but also examples of nonviolence in action. We must thank those who uphold nonviolence as an end in and of itself and not merely a strategy to be discarded when it fails to conquer the oppressors, for, like Jesus when he forgave the Romans on the cross, they are role-models for humankind. This so-called nonviolence should not come only in the form of negation, but as an affirmation.

Contributing to the popular influence of the events are media that increasingly portray this aspect of affirmation alongside that of the negative: CNN's show "Buddha's Warriors" gave air to a monk who had been clubbed on the head by police. "How do you respond to that?" asked the interviewer. "Respond with love," he answered.

And now it is our turn to respond to this message with a love of our own in support: here is the cycle of love and compassion upheld by principled nonviolence. Can we devise any more strategies to improve the efficiency of delivering this message?

Dignity, Equality and Inalienable Rights

A Review of Archbishop Tutu's Memoir:

God Has A Dream

Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu was born in South Africa on October 7, 1931. He grew up in a segregated country where he was considered a second-class citizen. He was educated in the Bantu system, which was the inferior schooling designated for black communities. Though he had hoped to go to medical school, his family was unable to afford it, so he followed in his father’s steps by teaching after his graduation from the University of South Africa in 1954. He later began his theological studies and in 1960 he was ordained as a priest, after which he furthered his education in England. From the late sixties through the mid seventies he held a series of positions in South Africa and England, finally settling with his family in South Africa in 1976, first as the Bishop of Lesotho and then in 1978 as the first black General Secretary of the South African Council of Churches.

Archbishop Tutu’s political activism began in ’76 when he returned to South Africa to witness the Soweto riots, which were a series of protests against the apartheid education laws. His focus was peaceful social change based on reconciliation, which he explains in depth in his book God Has A Dream. In 1984 he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his role as a unifying force in the active, peaceable fight against the apartheid government. In 1986 he was elected the first black-African Archbishop of South Africa. To date Archbishop Tutu has held a series of positions in international peace and reconciliation movements and has been awarded a series of honorary doctorates and prizes for his work in social activism.

Tutu’s wife, Leah, of fifty-two years and his four children have been an inspiration to his continued work for the betterment of the human community. Early in his career he was deeply inspired by the examples of Mahatma Gandhi, Mother Teresa, Martin Luther King, Jr., Rosa Parks, and the Dalai Lama. As he worked toward toppling the oppressive South African government, he also drew on the example of Nelson Mandela, who had been angry and violent upon his incarceration and was transformed by his experience into one of the greatest moral leaders in history. The greatest inspiration for Tutu has been his relationship with God, as developed through his academic and spiritual training, his reading of the Bible, his experience living in God’s world and practicing His principles in his daily living.

God Has A Dream is a book written by the Archbishop (with Douglass Abrams) as a collection of his observations and experience regarding affecting non-violent change for a more peaceful, equal, loving future for the human family. The book is divided into chapters, each dedicated to a particular aspect of Tutu’s experience with and reflection on the non-violent transformation of his country’s socio-political system.

Tutu’s book focuses very clearly on several themes, using a series of descriptions, ideas, experiences and stories to illustrate these points. Primarily, he seeks to impart his vision of God’s dream for us. The entire book revolves around the relationship between God and humanity, our various responsibilities and the various possibilities in light of the state of the planet, as well as our willingness to partake in God’s ideal. His foundation is clearly in his religious training, though it is certainly not limited to his interpretation of the Bible. He uses Scripture to support his ideas, more by weaving the myth into his reality than by depending upon direct scriptural guidance.

That the foundation of the book is rooted in religious ideals is both a strength and a weakness. Because of Tutu’s emphasis on ecumenical understanding, this book will speak to anyone who has a fundamental belief in God, whether they be Christian, Muslim, Jewish, or otherwise. He periodically addresses the question of theology in his discussions and makes clear that his ideas will work for anyone who chooses to live by them. His philosophy is not one that depends on a certain kind of religious commitment or denominational devotion. He is more concerned with the unity of humanity than with the propagation of Christian ideals. At the same time, the book is replete with references to God and Christianity. While that is his experience, and must necessarily be a part of his memoirs, it could turn away those who outright reject religion an ineffective or even harmful in conflict resolution. Tutu’s solution is simply to ask that everyone who can do so have an open mind.

His major strength lies in the method of his approach. Throughout the book Tutu offers not only his opinion on past experiences, but also provides a solution for current and future conflicts. He address is not a pie-in-the-sky look at the world. He concretely recognizes the faults and difficulties we face as a human community and proceeds to explain a method of transformation and reconciliation that has worked in similar, seemingly-hopeless situations of oppression. A very clear example of this practical attitude is the postscripts, which he dedicates to a list of international organizations and their contact information as well as a series of questions and reflections for the reader to address oppression and non-violence in his/her own life. Both of these are simple and direct ways in which the reader can bring his words to life, hopefully further affecting non-violent change throughout the world.

The most obvious weakness of his work is that his argument for reconciliation is a radical step away from the common retributive justice upon which most world-wide judicial systems are based. In order to put into affect his ideas about compassionate reconciliation (which is notably different from turning a blind eye to injustice), the entire social structure of every country would have to change beginning with the individuals calling for a new judicial paradigm. This would create a shift in the government that would allow a new form of justice to reign. The difficulty is that our systems are so deeply-rooted in our socio-political structure that we would have to restructure society in order to create this kind of change. People who enjoy the benefits of outright and structural violence would have to be willing to give up their positions of power, probably due to a massive revolution (ideally a peaceful one), forcing a shift in power. This great social transformation wounds like a beautiful ideal of peace and equality, but when applied to the grand scheme of social corruption, it appears to be an awfully overwhelming task.

Upon reading Archbishop Tutu’s God Has A Dream I certainly felt inspired. His speech flows beautifully and gracefully, leaving the reader with a sense of floating through another world in the hands of a trusted guide. His journey through racism, theology, violence, apartheid, peaceful revolution, reconciliation, and beyond is a powerful story that encourage hope and motivation towards transformation. I deeply admire Tutu’s willingness to speak his mind, though his opinions may not always be popular, though his solutions may not seem simple or easy, though his ideals may seem lofty. I have often heard people question his certainty, labeling it as arrogance. (This has particularly been the case regarding his speeches on Rwanda and Israel.) I wonder if his experience and promises are truly universal or if the people who do not yet believe simply lack the understanding that is required to live such a life of transfigured suffering.

Boycott in Prince William County, VA

According to local news, a week-long boycott started today to protest anti-immigrant policies in Prince William County. This photo is from WUSA9.

Click here to see the video from WJLA.

One of the most effective methods to getting people's attention is to make it matter to them economically. Let's stay tuned to see what the outcome is of this action!

Immigration Activists try Freedom Rides

"Dreams Across America" is a Freedom Ride on Amtrak for immigration reform. Starting with 100 legal immigrants in Los Angeles and ending with 429 in Washington, DC, the focus is more on dialog and changing attitudes than specific legislation (though the timing coincides with last ditch efforts to salvage the immigration bill.). It is an ambitious, fresh approach after the backlash of the large rallies we saw earlier.

Their website is visually appealing, very interesting and consistent with their objective of reaching out and telling stories. The drop down menu on hard facts is a wonderful tactic in dealing with attitudes of those unmoved by the human element, but it needs much more development, particularly the section on contributions to the economy. There are opportunities to build community with people sharing video and text stories. There's a montage segment that brings a tear to my eye - to see the diversity in ages and gender and ethnicity and to see allies represented on this tour is very effective. The site's blog could be another tool, but there's a glitch right now with lots of code showing at the top.

Will it be seen? Will this campaign have a chance to be effective? Having legal immigrants and allies is less threatening, the approach has a chance to touch hearts, but without extensive coverage and timing, where will it go? The Washington Post covered their arrival yesterday. But on local news, there was a piece on graduating children of undocumented immigrants and their hopes for a provision that would allow those with great grades to stay in the country, but nothing on their websites today. The rally will be today. Let's check coverage this evening.

Welcome to Dynamic Nonviolence!

Nonviolence as a philosophy and nonviolent direct action as a strategy have both been around for a very, very, very long time. As such, students and practitioners know that there is much to be learned from the experiences and insights of others across history and across the globe. The purpose of this little blog is to have a spot where we can share these experiences and insights, ask questions and advice, and talk about resources that could be of help in teaching, in action, and for inspiration. I'll try to do this without preference to particular political affiliations, and focus on the process and effects of the action.

I'm going to start with a favorite. Soulforce is an amazing faith-based group whose mission is, ". . . freedom for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people from religious and political oppression through the practice of relentless nonviolent resistance." What was particularly classy this week was their public statement regarding the death of Jerry Falwell. They separated the sin from the sinner, offered heart-felt condolences to the family and to Rev. Falwell's associates, honoring the man, and expressing sadness that he never understood that the GLBT community members are God's children, too. For an interview with Soulforce founder, Mel White, click here.