Two Letters to Mr Adams-Tait - Author of "George Soros 'The Crisis of Global Capitalism"

(I)

'Love is attentiveness; Romance is simple consideration; Soul is the continuation of life and Veracity is the work of Soul.' I consider this to be a statement of an emerging 'One World Feeling' - a Renaissance, if itis Willed, a meld of science and spirituality.

In your essay, "George Soros 'The Crisis of Global Capitalism'", you say that "Society ruled by relationship tends to be stable, stultifying, lacking in opportunity, but rewarding for the conformist." Certainly, this can be a captured ideology - a static equilibrium of a status quo of so-called 'peace and prosperity'.

Nonetheless, it could also mean that power gained by competition and narcissism has lost track of the solutions to the problems facing globalization - the fledgling 'One World Feeling'. Surely, relationships can be viewed in a sense of dynamic equilibrium as well - changing and adapting as a matter of communications; reassessments driven with effort; enhanced virtually by the World Wide Web and expanded holistically in concert with body; heart; mind and soul. As example, the Russian people took a step forward in their response to the Kursk tragedy with an expanded outcry - an emotional response that questioned Putin's leadership of their country. This kind of response was a vivid contrast to the relative silence that fomented the secrecy of the Chernobyl disaster in 1986. This contrast was described by journalist Maura Reynolds of the Los Angeles Times ("Tragedy teaches former soviets openness lesson: Russian public will no longer accept Chernobyl-era secrecy", Sunday, August 20, 2000).

It was curious to me that Thomas Friedman, in his book "Understanding Globalization: The Lexus and the Olive Tree" seeks to refine the emerging globalization in the context of dimensionality and holism. He says: "Today, more than ever, the traditional boundaries between politics,culture, technology, finance, national security and ecology are disappearing. You often cannot explain one without referring to the others, and you cannot explain the whole without reference to them all."

Peacebuilding, my favorite semantic, cannot be centered on economics alone as I think there an imbalance of the treatment of globalization in the peace process. Globalization has been discovered, if you will, in the last ten years or so as an outcome of collapsed economies i.e the Asian monetary crisis for one and others are well-documented in "The Crisis of Global Capitalism" by George Soros. But what, pray tell, is a 'global citizen'? Is there such a species? Could a profitable 'peacebuilding industry' be cultivated in the defence of a 'global citizen'?

A world influenced by humanity can see what is happening. It can assess what is happening. It can try and learn and try and learn - over and over again but human ecology has its so-called "limiting" factors. Richard van Fleet has pointed this out to me in our conversations in the Open Society Discussion Forum at George Soros' Open Society site ( http://soros.org/osi.html ). He says: "The amazing thing is that I have been testing this climate/parasites theory of the prosperity of nations by defying anyone to name one single solitary exception for a while now. No one can name one. An amazingly accurate model. Far more accurate than these economic/political/racist/etc. reasons that everyone loves so. They all have clear exceptions." (Richard Van Fleet - 10:02pm Aug 24, 2000 (95.) - http://soros.org/osi.html ).

And so I replied to Richard with: '"Climate/parasites" are globalissues. Let me add 'violence' - to create 'climate/parasites/behavior'. Suppose peacebuilding between Israel and the PLO were expanded beyond economic and diplomatic agreements to include discussion and agreements on climate; parasites and behavior. I wrote a letter to the Jerusalem Post suggesting basically that Dr. Gerry Brady's "A Global Project for Personal Responsibility" ( bridgetothefuture.org ) be considered for harm reduction and concomitant peacebuilding via "commitment; compassion; knowledge; respect and calmness." Now, your [Richard's] theory adds two more potential discussions on global issues - that of climate, in particular, the issue of fresh water in the Middle East and also the global distribution of rainfall over arable land, which as I recall, has been changed due to El Nino.' Climate and epidemics of infectious diseases, of course, have no boundaries and are shared problems/solutions. As for infectious diseases, I have made two contributions to Pro-Med - an Internet site which reports mainly on outbreaks - mainly of resistant forms of bacteria and new viral diseases. While at Pro-Med, I wrote to epidemiologist Dr. Jack Woodall with the question of (basically): is human intervention in the environment responsible for the global spread of all new diseases that we see reported at Pro-Med and he agreed with this contention...' '...My point is that Israel and the PLO share the same issues that all of us share in the context of the trend of globalization; a 'One World Feeling.' I really think that Israel and the PLO have the opportunity to show the world that they can come together both as nations with a lasting peace agreements and nations that recognize globalization has replaced the Cold War. A vision for peacebuilding could be that nations who wish to foment a peace accord between themselves also include a peace accord which is exemplary on a global scale and addresses global issues' (Philip Henika - 11:52am Aug 25, 2000 (96.) http://soros.org/osi.html ).

(II)

I really think that world peace can be achieved on the long term and that a 'One World Feeling' is already in progress.

Peace begins with the traditional stand-off. While watching C-SPAN recently, I was privy to Newt Gingrich's assessment of the Middle East situation as being in a state of "nonwar". It follows that peace is more involved when it is a peace that is "kept". A good discussion of peacekeeping are the activities of the United Nations in the Balkans. A recent evaluation of the success/failure can be found at http://www.un.org/News/dh/latest/page2.html#1 (click on News Archives; correct for August 23, 2000 and then click on "Annan endorses far-reaching proposals for UN peacekeeping operations"). I suggest the third phase is, for lack of a better term, multidimensional peacebuilding as an application of Thomas Friedman's quote that I used before: "Today, more than ever, the traditional boundaries between politics, culture, technology, finance,
national security and ecology are disappearing. You often cannot explain
one without referring to the others, and you cannot explain the whole without reference to them all."

In your reply to me you said: "Over the years I have come to the conclusion that we are never going to agree on everything and that the only system that comes close to allowing us to live with these contradictions is a free society in which we tolerate difference rather than a system which tries to
suppress differences. This appears to be similar to the view expressed in
the book by George Soros." However, may I be so bold as to suggest that
tolerance can be considered yet another example of static equilibrium? Can
tolerance be expanded in the form and substance of multidimensional peacebuilding?

I think it can and I think mediation is the key diplomacy.

In a letter to me with regard to the Middle East peace process (September 10, 1998), Senator Dianne Feinstein stated that: "Ultimately, Israel's security can only be guaranteed by reaching a permanent peace with its
neighbors. Israel's security is a fundamental interest of the United States, so the success of this peace process requires our full attention. While we cannot impose a solution on Israel and the Palestinians, U.S. mediation can help the two sides take the difficult steps necessary to achieve a peace agreement. It is my belief that when traveling abroad, Members of Congress should act in the best interest of our nation and represent U.S. foreign policy which should not be partisan." I agree with this but I don't think the terms "should" or "should not" apply to mediation. These terms imply that the U.S. is lecturing Israel and the PLO. Should they simply tolerate our insistance on mediation? This reminds me of the loophole in testing quantum theory; the idea that the experiment itself interferes with the accurate measurement of natural phenonema.

It seems apparent that interference cannot be a major factor while trying to move a peace process from the acceptance of tolerance to proactive,
multidimensional peacebuilding. I was first introduced to the term
"peacebuilding" in a letter from Canada's Minister of Foreign Affairs Lloyd
Axworthy (March 24, 2000). He says: "On November 17, 1999, I visited Kosovo
to show Canada's strong support for Canadian citizens, other members of the
international community and the people of Kosovo, who are engaged in the
challenging task of building a sustainable peace. While in Kosovo, I
inaugurated the Canadian Government Office in Pristina. This office will
play an important liaison role and will ensure the efficiency and
effectiveness of Canada's new peacebuilding initiatives. You may find a
copy of a related news release on our Web site at http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca. " The term "peace-building" also came up in the United Nations in relation to improved peacekeeping ( http://www.un.org/News/dh/latest/page2.html#1 ; click on News Archives; correct for August 23, 2000 and then click on "Annan endorses far-reaching proposals for UN peacekeeping operations"): "The Panel [Panel on UN Peace Operations chaired by Ambassador Lakhdar Brahimi] warns frankly that
"without renewed commitment on the part of Member States, significant institutional change and increased financial support, the UN will not be capable of executing the critical peacekeeping and peace-building tasks that the Member States assign to it in coming months and years." The report candidly describes what it says the UN "has bitterly and repeatedly discovered over the last decade," namely that "no amount of good intentions can substitute for the fundamental ability to project credible force if complex peacekeeping, in particular, is to succeed." While reaffirming that the consent of the local parties, impartiality and the use of force only in self-defence should remain the bedrock principles of peacekeeping, the Panel nevertheless clarifies that impartiality should not imply lack of action. In cases "where one party to a peace agreement clearly and incontrovertibly is violating its terms, continued equal treatment of all parties by the UN can in the best case result in ineffectiveness and in the worst may amount to complicity with evil." And so, this quote hints that the UN considers peacekeeping and peacebuilding in the same vein but it hints at the ultimate form of interference - the foment of a "complicity with evil".

Dr. Gerry Brady of bridgetothefuture.org discusses evil in a post at George Soros' Open Society Discussion Forum: gerry BRADY - 10:08pm Aug 7, 2000
(78.): "With regard to the issue of ultimate truth. There is one ultimate truth
which can be reached without any "leap of faith" ..... it is that evil exists. This truth can be deduced by a disciplined, logical analysis of the human condition. Alexander the Great, Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Amin, etc etc etc etc etc weren't just "naughty boys" who had some dramatic psychological event/s
occur in their lives. They were truly evil. Psychological explanations simply don't sufficiently explain many events in mankind's history. Why does the serial
killer stop at the traffic light and the Pedestrian Crossing on his way to
committing a random act of brutal violence? He/She may even wait patiently for
the little old lady to cross. Why are these people so relieved to be caught? Why do they almost always wonder why they weren't apprehended earlier (sometimes after giving away their identity in quite crude ways)? I have not yet found a psychologist who received any training in their university years on the subject of evil. And yet the history of mankind is littered +++ with the phenomenon. The Romans crucified thousands of men in orgies of violence and mayhem ... but no one discusses it in the context of Christ's crucifixion. There is virtually no desire to deal with the matter from our intellectual elites. Denial is a safe haven but it is still denial. For too long, the matter has been effectively hijacked by the religions of the world as a "religious" matter. And yet, it is historical fact. The battle is enjoined ....... good versus evil."

I have also studied for the last four years the potential relationship between the manifest of Millenium prophecy in culture and whether or not prophecy is directed by humans or self-fulfilled as act of God. By far, the greater number of cases that I have studied could be traced to humans and human agenda i.e. ifthere is to be a manifest of Revelations as World War III then it is highly likely that Revelations will be directed as a manifest of evil by
individual(s) who believe it is their time to act as we pass through the Millennium.

I have asked if relationships can evolve dimensionaly and holistically in body; heart; mind and soul and I have asked if multidimensional peacebuilding can move tolerance past its potential static equilibrium. Maintainance of the status quo is not enough; mere tolerance is not enough and, in order to achieve world peace, directed violence must end. Hence the phrase "harm reduction". Once again, I quote Dr. Brady: "The basic premise of the project ("A Global Project for Personal Responsibility") is that the sub-conscious urge for self harm is the single most powerful cause of most abnormal human behaviour. The ultimate aim of the project is to move the human condition towards one where self harm behaviour due to sub conscious urges is minimized and eventually overcome altogether on a global scale." ( bridgetothefuture.org ).

Philip "Rick" Henika

ps I saw an article on the front page of a local newspaper with the byline
- "There's no scientific evidence to support substantial [genetic] differences between groups [racial]." And the title: "Race is only skin deep, DNA researchers say. The more they learn about the human genome theless biological meaning our physical appearance labels seems to have." By Natalie Angier. New York Times. Saturday, August 26, 2000). I couldn't find it on-line but it is worth the read as it implies that we are biologically a 'One People'; possibility with a 'One World Feeling?'