We recommend a very important essay written by Lebanese intellectual Ziad el Sayegh, with whom the Info Ops Foundation has worked closely on projects countering disinformation and promoting the idea of citizenship and good governance in Lebanon and other Middle Eastern countries. The essay is devoted to the role of Christians in the Middle East in the face of growing tensions and challenges. It is part of an important debate about the role of religion, its relationship with politics, and the distortion of its role by extremists. In his essay, Ziad el Sayegh refers to a comprehensive document entitled “We Choose Abundant Life,” which discusses the role of religion in building civil society, ensuring good governance and other aspects related to the necessary political and social changes.
In his essay, Ziad el Sayegh draws attention to the dangers that come from combining religion with political regimes for protection. This is because it leads to a distortion of the role of religion, its spiritual mission and, as a result, generates problems for its credibility. The author writes:
Religion, as a spirit, dogma but also as an institution, loses its persuasive ethical message in terms of accountability and responsibility if it sticks with political regimes for the sake of protection, influence, or if it be comes dependent therefrom […] it is necessary to rediscover ways in which religion and religious communities increasingly can function as an ethical guarantor of public order rather than of a certain political regime […] it should rather engage in dialogue on public policies instead of simply watching unresponsively the politics professionalism of any authority […] exaggeration in both the political and the religious arena while talking about the need for continuous reform proves that both actions are tarnished with structural defect […] Good sustainable governance based on sustainable public policies is the key to reformation of societies. This can be only produced by a common good mentality, as well by the conviction that the ethics can serve the building of human dignity and peace.
The author further refers to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) defined in “We Choose Abundant Life,” stressing that religion is linked to them by maintaining public order, building public policies, and promoting good sustainable governance, stressing the necessity to bring back the ethics to the public space based on a contextual theology.
The author goes on to list the necessary steps needed to achieve a sustainable policy in the Middle East. Ziad el Sayegh writes:
Moving from simple development initiatives to sustainable policies in the Middle East requires fundamental efforts that are summarized below:
- Redefining the concepts of minorities and majorities in the region
- Moving from broadening religious common spaces to building a common vision for a civil state that strengthens and solidi es the citizenship of individual identities of various groups
- Connecting religious actors, development policy makers, as well as civil society organizations to foster knowledge exchange about diverse communities
- Building partnerships to ensure deep understanding of perceived tensions between certain SDGs and religious values and to ad dress them
- Disseminating knowledge about the SDGs to local religious groups and empower them to participate in the global development discourse and mobilize local resources for achieving Agenda 2030
- Encouraging the local engagement of religious groups with the SDGs implementation as active partners with national governments
- Delineating the socio-economic interests as key factors in any peace building framework
- Inciting social and economic reforms based on the sustainable development pillars that support human well-being and quality of life- independent of faith or religion
- Reinforcing freedom of practicing religious rites, safeguarded by mutual knowledge and by overcoming prejudices
- Supporting the freedom of religion and belief (FoRB), expressed by the right to convey one’s faith distinctively in his community through the broadening of communication of commonalities and the intellectual deliberation on issues related to faith from various perspectives; i.e. legal, political, cultural, theological and socio-economic; even admitting the right to disbelief
- Adopting the freedom of conscious integrity and ethics that implies accepting others and respecting their dignity
- Discussing common concerns and reinforcing these with collective interests to encourage interreligious dialogue with experts from multidisciplinary sectors
- Fostering new interreligious projects for human rights and peace building in the region
- Restructuring educational curricula to address the challenges the region is facing
Ziad el Sayegh opposes a policy based on the concept of minority and majority, arguing that such an approach should be replaced by the principle of inclusive citizenship, which would accommodate different individual and group identities. It is worth noting in this context that in the Middle East, particularly in Arab studies, a conceptual apparatus in sociology and political science that differs from that of Europe has emerged. This is particularly true of concepts related to identity and the definition of minorities. The latter is highly controversial and has been rejected by many scholars.
It also seems that Ziad el Sayegh’s approach is very much influenced by the French post-revolutionary model of the nation as a demos comprising a community of equal citizens. In the ethnos-based model prevalent in Europe, however, the concept of minority identity, whether ethnic or religious, does not necessarily lead to the kind of pathological phenomena Sayegh writes about. Europe has dealt with this in a different way, i.e., by fitting minority rights into the standard of human rights and liberal democracy. The fact is, however, that political system models must be contextualized territorially, as Sayegh also writes. Transferring European models to the Middle East without considering local contexts is not only a sign of arrogance but also a path to failure. The problem is that in the West the wrong conclusion is too often drawn, i.e., that democracy, freedom, human rights, civil society are concepts foreign to Middle Eastern culture and that a dictator’s strong hand is needed there. The problem with countries such as Lebanon, Iraq and Syria is that the consequence of a complex ethno-religious structure is a confessional (ethno-sectarian) system, which, while ensuring the participation of all groups in power, blocks the development of a civil community and gives rise to many pathologies.
Ziad el Sayegh therefore writes:
Interreligious dialogue about shared values requires focusing on common interests related to human dignity. Obviously, the SDGs constitute a solid foundation to support religious freedom in its moral and legal dimensions with a pragmatic approach where inclusive, active and productive citizenship is the cornerstone. In this context, the mental and ideological framework of minorities and majorities in the Middle East must be refuted […] a paradigm shift from the Minorities-Majorities framework towards the Inclusive Citizenship’s model is needed […] Minoritism is mostly a mental disease an ideological structure taking precedence over demographic, religious, or ethnic reality. Appealing to the mentality of the minority plays on the strings of extremism, and lures internal or external protections, which results in dependence, fear and intimidation. [….] What we are experiencing today is an attempt by some political regimes, as well as some majority social and religious groups, to play on fears and intimidation, a tense and pathological behavior that is killing the civil space and diverse communities in our societies.
Ziad el Sayegh points out that the complicated situation Christians are currently in in the Middle East also exposes them to the wrong decisions for what the author considers seeking patronage from authoritarian regimes:
Christians in the Middle East are dealing today with a complex reality in witnessing to their faith in the public sphere and the effectiveness of this witness in taking part in governance. This reality exposes them to two main traps that they need to avoid: the first concerns their demographic decrease both numerically and geographically, which prompts them to adhere to totalitarian ideologies, authoritarian regimes, power surpluses, and alliances with other minorities with whom they have intersecting interests. !e second lies in thinking that if they are able to occupy positions of influence, and acquire benefits and authoritarian protections, this can ensure the continuity and the value of their presence in the Middle East, even if this runs against their fundamental historical principles in defending freedom, human rights, and coexistence based on the logic of citizenship and the kind of solidarity this requires with the faithful of other religions and those professing secular values.
But Ziad el Sayegh also sees the pitfalls facing majority groups in the Minorities-Majorities framework, which he criticizes. This concerns particularly the threat to become what he calls a “bloated majority”.
The most dangerous thing in any society is for a religious or ethnic group to become a bloated majority because this will impose the risk of an elimination, oppression, or exclusion to other social, political or religious groups, that is, to slip into asserting the right to rule alone, impose its traditions, monopolize the sources of legislation, or exclude other groups from sharing the responsibility of preserving pluralism. Even if ballots reproduce majorities, the soundness of the steps and the firmness of the vision of such a majority must emanate from their conviction that the other is an essential part of any existential choice, otherwise this will result in gradual suicide. This approach is, politically speaking, not about distorted consensual democracy, but rather about an acknowledgment of democracy that takes into account the existence of opposition, differences and distinctions. The bulge of the majority is dangerous for majorities per se if exercised in a spirit of domination, exclusion, or intimidating subjugation.
Ziad el Sayegh also criticizes liberals for their, as he puts it, slackness:
The central question in all of the above can be summed up in the astonishing absence of Christian, Muslim, Jewish, other religions as well as the humanist liberals from the experience of building a peaceful identity, despite the complexities of its pluralistic structure.
The author also believes that the answer to the cultural challenges facing Middle Eastern Christians today lies in reinventing Arabism as a cultural space and inclusive cultural concept. At the same time he addresses the concerns that may be raised by non-Arabs by firmly rejecting the policy of forced, ideological Arabization that contradicts the spirit of cultural openness, which was pursued by authoritarian regimes of Baas party in Syria and Iraq. It is worth to remind that this authoritarian kind of Arabization was invented in the middle of XX century with big contribution of non-Muslim, including Christian, intellectuals, who saw the rising Islamism as an existential threat. Arab identity was supposed to be an alternative to the identity based on religion, however it led to suppression of non-Arab identities. However that approach wasn’t based on a citizen model but on an authoritarian one.
Ziad el Sayegh also refers to the Arab Spring, stressing that although various factors led to the destabilization of the region, the very idea that drew young people to the streets is alive. Moreover, according to the author, the Arab Spring irreversibly changed mindsets and narratives and activated youth and women against patriarchal masculinized structures that controlled our communities and religious organizations for centuries and to large extent still do so. The author also aptly points out that the growing phenomenon of rejection of religion in the Middle East is due not so much to an ideological choice of atheism as to a critical approach to religious authorities and exposes the shallowness of the current religious discourse in general and the distrust of a large number of young people in the institution of religion as well as the way it responds to public affairs.
Ziad el Sayegh emphasizes the significance of human fraternity and its relation to civic state and citizenship and addresses the problem of weaponization of religion by extremist groups:
it is necessary to define the concept of religions and human fraternity on the one hand, and the civic state and citizenship on the other hand […] to rebuild a Christian presence guided towards sustainable development, it is necessary to define the concept of religions and human fraternity on the one hand, and the civic state and citizenship on the other hand. […] even in religions with a human, mystical or natural absolute dimension, the preservation of human dignity, social peace, the generalization of justice and freedom and the promotion of a culture of human fraternity are maintained. This is the depth of religions, but some ideologies have offended religions, and have distorted the readings thereof, by tending to monopolize the truth, and excluding the other to the point of atonement, which is an attack on religions themselves in their name. Hence, it is necessary not only to purify religious identity from the impurities of arrogance, the claim of possessing the truth, and the atonement of the other, but also from anyone tarnishing their purity and seeking goals that have nothing to do with their apostleship. it is crucial to benefit from the truth of religions as a value dimension to exploit the dimensions of dialogue for peace, pluralism for cultural richness, justice for equality and human dignity. Hence, religions become a valuable contributor to the identity of every human being. Even an atheist, becomes, in the religion of man, linked to the human fraternity.
Ziad el Sayegh further stresses the role of identity based on citizenship in opposing fanaticism and extremism:
Citizenship, both as a concept and as a value, spearheaded the Arab Spring uprisings in Tunisia, Egypt, Syria, and, later on, in Iraq and Lebanon. Popular movements showed that the citizens’ rights had been violated and infringed for decades, until this deviant situation turned into the norm, often based on arguments such as religion, confession, race, and region. Hence, the uprisings challenged the concepts of minority and majority in the name of a citizenship based on individual rights, and called for citizenship to be at the centre of political practice and a beacon for political and social reform […] these uprisings, despite the attempts to paralyze and neutralize them, were the starting point for new ways of looking at the relationship between citizenship and other elements of identity such as religion, confession, race, and colour, based on citizenship as an umbrella that acknowledges, embraces, and respects differences.
At the end of his essay, Ziad el Sayegh addresses the issue of Middle Eastern Christian-Jewish relations in the context of the Palestinian issue and the situation in Gaza:
The international scene is fraught with tension, with a rising demand for linking any peace with justice, coupled with pressure for ceasefire in Gaza, where the spark of war has spread to Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Yemen in a dangerously complex geopolitical situation. […] In the face of all forms of extremism, how can the militarization of religions be stopped ideologically, and how can religions be dedicated as active elements in building justice and peace? […] synod of Christians in the Middle East was not simple, as the Bishops of the Synod expressed that: “Israel cannot exploit the idea of the promised land in the Bible, nor the idea of the chosen people to justify settlements in Jerusalem or the occupation of the Lands”. This means that it is not possible to accept the invocation of religion as a basis for injustice, and that peace can only be made by justice. Time has come for the establishment of the State of Palestine, the return of refugees, the cessation of settlements, and the condemnation of the separation wall.[…] Christians are invited to develop a theological and intellectual approach that allows us to open a new page in relations with Jews, who have always been an integral part of the Middle Eastern tapestry and its pluralistic identity. Christians are invited to engage them in a serious dialogue based on the values of justice, peace, the dignity of creation and humanity, by taking an opposite direction to the dialogue pursued by some Western Christians who are biased towards Zionism, whether because of the Jewish Holocaust complex, or out of guilt feelings stemming from centuries of antisemitism, or even to please the Zionist lobby. Such dialogue would push for justice for the Palestinian people, calling to account the policy of occupation and invasive settlement, seeking to establish true peace, and refuting the concept of the religious state, which impedes the rise of the civil state.
Finally the author addresses also the Christian – Muslim relation, emphasizing the role of University al Azhar and hawza of Najaf, as highly respected Sunni and Shia Muslim institutions, in opposing religious extremists:
Muslims are brothers in humanity, Arabism, and citizenship, and we built the first Arab renaissance with them. We will build the second Arab renaissance with them through our partnership in protecting the values of love and mercy on the basis of equal citizenship. The Azhar and Najaf are continuously called upon to stand as voices of reason against some Islamist extremist views and to preach qualitative development in their civilizational commitment to the document Human Fraternity.
Ziad el Sayegh ends his essay with such conclusions:
Christians in the Middle East, who are at the heart of the fabric of national identities, need to renew their theological discourse, reform their ecclesiastical institutional performance, and free their geopolitical choices from illusion and isolation, and thus move forward in engaging with the public sphere for public and common good. In other terms, involvement in politics is built on integrated public policies on all political, legal, educational, economic, social, cultural, health and environmental levels, serving the philosophy of the Human Security. Here lies the key way forward to sustainable development that preserves human dignity, peace, and stability on the path towards social justice and equity.
Author: PhD Witold Repetowicz