The recent death of a friend's friend has opened up a can of worms that the establishment would prefer remains closed. It is understandable why they take this attitude given its effect on the economy and the fragile state of what we euphemistically call 'civil society'. Being in power has its drawbacks, you have to deal with seemingly insoluble issues. Though the electorate is in the main in the pocket of the Government, given that they do not understand or care about any issue which does not directly concern them, the ruling clique still has to take the minority and its needs into account if only to prevent social upheaval and a negative effect on the tourist trade. These fractionalised countries have split into segments each clamouring for their interests with no thought of the impact of their actions on the already abusive state of dialogue. Unfortunately the only possible outcome is the zero sum game. Civil or otherwise War will only lead to further degradation in the quality of life of the citizens (and I include the migrant workforce because without their labour and skills, the economy drops) and the loss of almost irreplaceable skills. The extensive structural damage that will take place post insanity will be both costly in terms of finance and time to repair. They will require 2 decades to make good the integral components like Power, Water, and Transportation etc.This does not account for the time needed for the people to return to a state of Mutual Trust veneer thin as it may be, so that what passes for normal society can recommence. At this point, wow, they have achieved parity with where they were before the war.
So how do we resolve the fundamental underlying issue still lurking and overshadowing all negotiations, interactions for all reasons between the parties and being a moral and legal minefield. The issue itself is a basic one. Survival. Neither of the fittest nor the brainiest but of all the protagonists. The problem is one of what we euphemistically call transparency. In other words, honesty. Until honesty in all negotiations is seen to be blatantly obvious, then a level of trust no matter how small, will allow the free passage of ideas. All the people will tell you the same thing, "it's God's own country". They love their land with a rare passion which translates into a proactive approach to opposition even in thought. The problem is that this stops dialogue dead. And if you do not converse then no exchange takes place so the situation remains at stalemate for the moment. Each side hardens their position while they accumulate the necessary tools of war and all the logistical backup they can.
So how do we resolve the fundamental underlying issue still lurking and overshadowing all negotiations, interactions for all reasons between the parties and being a moral and legal minefield. The issue itself is a basic one. Survival. Neither of the fittest nor the brainiest but of all the protagonists. The problem is one of what we euphemistically call transparency. In other words, honesty. Until honesty in all negotiations is seen to be blatantly obvious, then a level of trust no matter how small, will allow the free passage of ideas. All the people will tell you the same thing, "it's God's own country". They love their land with a rare passion which translates into a proactive approach to opposition even in thought. The problem is that this stops dialogue dead. And if you do not converse then no exchange takes place so the situation remains at stalemate for the moment. Each side hardens their position while they accumulate the necessary tools of war and all the logistical backup they can.
The inclusion of intelligent men and women from all walks of life who can represent these groups must be of the highest priority with special attention paid to the fact that in order to debate, one cannot hold a do or die position with no room for compromise. None of the sides have any desire to compromise but like Israel and the Palestinians, there is only attrition to look forward to if none of the sides agrees to both gain and give up material as well as total influence over all the matters up for discussion like land reform (if you do not use it and will not realistically, it's on the table) and other highly contentious issues. Only if the emotions governing subjects like that are neutralised can logical, factual, empirical based discourse take place. Otherwise a maelstrom of accusations and their counters begin. The real nub of the problem is finding the right people to address these issues, not the entrenched position of those accepted as spokespeople, or in positions of power ( Govt. and commerce ) or 'representatives' of the people. An openness of mind to other positions and interests is first and foremost but it must be tempered with the ability to access an overview of the issue at all times. Only in this way will the whole problem be addressed and the complete integration of the hopes, wishes and desires of all the participants will be constantly kept in mind keeping all concerned at peace since they can rest assured that no item will be overlooked or manipulatively omitted.
Trust yet again. Trust. Such a little word with vast connotations. Yet without it no parent/child, lover/lover, worker/employer, doctor/patient (the list is endless) relationship can commence let alone grow and develop. Each and every interaction between humans is based on trust no matter how little and until we acknowledge that and build on it using carefully thought out tools instead of applying knee jerk reactions, we do not stand a chance in hell of starting the process. Most countries are limitless in untapped potential and opportunity with vast resources which if managed intelligently would free the entire nation from the boom bust debt cycle it is so vulnerable to. Only by understanding that the constant looting and financial dissolution of the economy will in turn diminish the overall possibility of growth leading to everything becoming worthless and diminishing in real value terms will the process have a chance of success. The legislature has done its job and constitutionally the elements are in place. All that is required is to initiate this process by an open debate held publicly without the usual controlling mechanisms put in place by those with positions of public influence to agree to speak openly about all the issues without shying away from the unpalatable. This does not mean that hate speech or any form of nasty discriminatory rhetoric is allowed but the subjects are brought out into the open and discussed. Only then, can their ghosts and continuing negative presence, overshadowing all other considerations, be laid to rest.
In essence, this must be applied to all forms of conflict resolution whether in Ruanda, Palestine, Syria, Afghanistan, Azerbijan,African states or other national tragedies globally. Only by accepting that the current options have passed their sell by date and become unworkable will any possible positive outcome become viable. All society's have need of this since the very system in place inherently makes daily life conflictual given that survival is the biggest game in town. In the UK, thought of as a very wealthy and socially progressive nation, one third of the people are one pay check away from eviction. The USA, France, Spain etc are no different. Most of the globe is in disarray. And we want to resolve these problems? How? Surely it is time for us to progress so that we can start to solve all the other issues that we face. Like ecology, resource limits and quality of life,conflicts, etc. Let us start talking.
To boldly write what is never written.
© The International OutsiderC0.Reg.No SC715702 . All Rights Reserved. Design by HTML Codex
by 
