What a remarkable period in history we are presently witnessing in the eastern Mediterranean and Middle East. The people of one arab country after another taking to the streets to overthrow their rulers in an attempt to usher in democracy. Seeing footage of the mass protests, passions are high and courage is very much to the forefront. After decades of emotional suppression, there is a powerful wave of honest and open expression directed at the country's leaders and their supporters.
Watching these scenes unfold during the last two months, I was reminded of some powerful insights that were shared in one of the workshops conducted during the Spirituality and Justice seminars. The insights were in relation to how confrontation between two parties is actually a rare occasion for honest expression of thoughts and feelings. The focus for that conversation was relationships between prisoners and staff.
Imprisonment constitutes a severing of human relationships. Behind high walls, gates and fences, the prisoner is physically cut off from society at large. Contained within the institution, the prisoner is isolated from his personal social network of family, friends and neighbours.
In such a context, it comes as no surprise that both prison staff and the prisoners often find it difficult to communicate with openness and mutual respect. How can staff and prisoners relate to each other as persons of equal worth when everywhere there are signals of rank and status which distinguish them?
Is it any wonder that staff and prisoners find themselves in opposition, which may result in confrontation. The conventional view sees confrontation as, at best, a breakdown in communication and, at worst a threat to security. But confrontation also offers an opportunity for communication for along with an outburst of hostility, it provides an eruption of honesty. Confrontation is a rare and precious chance to communicate directly with the person - the real person, not the prisoner/role.
During such times, there is a need to be in control of ones emotions for only then can the outburst can be perceived for what it is: a breakthrough and not a blockage. However negative the interaction, however brief the time available to us, however pressing the external demands upon us, if we operate with awareness of ourselves and concern for others then we can, with them, transform the confrontation into a positive interaction, expressing value and regard for both the other person and ourselves.
For example, imagine at one end of a corridor, a prisoner is pacing, shouting obscenities. At the other end stands a member of staff, first cajoling and then commanding. Their raised voices attract the attention of other prisoners and staff who watch warily, sizing up the situation, wondering whether to intervene. What started as an angry exchange between individuals has become a contest of power between representatives of enemy camps, fuelled by the presence of an audience.
Their language will be different but, in fact, both are looking for the same outcome: "Respect me!" United by a common fear of losing face it is hard to see a way out. In fact, what is needed is not a ‘way out’ but a ‘way through.’ It is only possible for the prisoner and staff member to extricate themselves from this conflict by engaging with and taking notice of each other. At this point, they are ignoring each other, each conscious only of their own needs and feelings and oblivious to those of the other person.
When we feel unable to put ourselves in the other person’s shoes, it is often because we are wearing a matching pair. If we seek to bring about movement, then it is always far easier to take a small step yourself than to compel another to walk. Importantly, if your first step is sideways rather than forward, then so much the better as communication alters dramatically when we shift from ‘face-to-face’ to ‘alongside’. By doing this, we are moving from the demand, “Respect me!” to the acknowledgement, “I respect you” and this entails no loss of self-respect. In valuing others, we do not diminish ourselves.
A willingness to communicate, no matter what the other person says or does, can transform a ‘no win’ interaction into one offering mutual gain, where there is no need for bargaining: ‘I’ll respect you if you respect me’ is a hostage to fortune, dependent on the other person’s response. By contrast, ‘I respect you and I also respect myself’ is an exercise of power, lying wholly within your own sphere. There is nothing the other person can do to weaken this standpoint. Offering respect to an ‘opponent’ confers strength upon yourself.
If the staff member addresses the prisoner’s need to be respected, then it is much more likely that the prisoner will feel able to reciprocate. However, while consumed by their perceived ‘need,’ neither will have the capacity to offer recognition to the other. The goal is mutual respect and so, to reap cooperation, we must sow communication, even in the fields of confrontation. In such a way, the contested ground will, in time, come to be perceived for what it is: shared ground.
And for Libya and Col. Gadaffi? Can this apply?
Well, Lord Malloch-Brown, the former Foreign Office Minister, is of the opinion that the conflict is approaching a position of stalemate. He opinions that the only way forward is for the warring parties sit down around the table and seek political solution. For this to happen, some level of respect is vital. So maybe, just maybe, the contested ground will, in time, come to be percieved for what it is: shared ground!
