The political economy of global peace-building

The political economy of global peace-building

Juwono Sudarsono, Lecturer, University of Indonesia, Jakarta

The greatest challenge for civic leaders throughout the
Islamic world is to face up to the revolutions brought about by
unfettered globalization -- political, economic, cultural,
technological and military. Globalization simultaneously
unleashes forces of tremendous change at all levels: Global,
regional, national, provincial and local. Driven by powerful
scientific and technological forces from the growth poles of
North America, the European Union and Japan, globalization
invariably results in traumatic patterns of inequity and
injustice in the developing world.

Advances in science and technology in the past 50 years have
transpired in leaps and bounds, more than all the world's
technological progress in the previous 150 years. Yet, more than
80 percent of the world's population reside in the developing
world with scant access to basic human needs, let alone to the
benefits of economic advancement and scientific progress.

Conversely, more than 70 percent of the world's political,
economic, cultural, technological and military sources of power
and influence are in the hands of 22 industrialized countries, of
which the G-8 commands 60 percent of its human, technological as
well as scientific resources, skills and capital.

The U.S. alone, which comprises 5 percent of the world's
population, consumes 25 percent of the world's energy resources.
Its defense budget of about US$380 billion a year is more than
the combined defense budgets of the next 12 major powers.

These structural inequities have persisted since the early
1970s and deepened sharply over the past 10 years. The G-8
countries and their multinational corporations have sway over the
commanding heights of the world's human, scientific and capital
resources, sanctioned through multilateral organizations ranging
from the UN Security Council, the World Trade Organization (WTO)
and the plethora of international agreements which tend to favor
the powerful few over the despondent many.

Small wonder that in the Middle East the clash of political
interest, economic capacity and military strategy result in a
devastating effect when combined with the issues of religious
conflict and national self-determination.

The questions of contemporary Palestine and Iraq aside, the
structural inequities surrounding the Middle East today make the
clash of "the West vs. Islam" or" the West against the Rest"
ever more popular, if misguided, topics of heated debate.

Sept. 11, 2001, redefined contemporary world politics and
economics since non-state actors representing "violent rage
against international injustice" was dramatically applied, using
perverted Islamic precepts as powerful conceptual weapons in the
conduct of asymmetric warfare by the weak against the powerful.

The Arab nationals who participated in the Sept. 11 attacks
were educated middle-class young men who traveled to, lived and
studied in Europe and North America, societies and cultures which
for decades had mainly perceived Middle Eastern countries and
cultures with contempt.

Osama bin Laden exploited these feelings of rage and despair,
fueled by his own personal anger against the Saudi government
for allowing American troops to "desecrate" the holy land of
Islam, by allowing their presence following the Gulf War in 1991.
Perhaps even more tellingly, the structure of political and
economic inequities within societies in the Middle East
themselves became sources of anger and frustration among the
growing number of the young.

Their desire to climb the social ladder were relentlessly
blocked by the network of cronyism and privileges enjoyed by the
ruling elite. There are three sources of hostility which our
friends and colleagues in the West must address.

First, Western foreign policy towards Israel and Palestine
will continue to be futile until substantive progress is made on
the peace process. Governments and corporations in the West
invariably impose double standards over the issues of trade and
economic relations as well as on human rights and democracy.

The narrow-minded bargain of political and military support to
oligarchic elites in exchange for access to oil (40 percent for
Europe, 14 percent for the U.S.) cannot be politically nor
economically sustainable over the long run. The Middle East must
cease to be seen as "a string of gas stations in a murderous
neighborhood".

Secondly, Western policies often openly marked by contempt
for the Arab world and by fear of Islam. In the view of many
Muslim leaders, the recent diplomatic attempt to link Osama bin
Laden with Saddam Hussein reads like a plot designed to further
wound and provoke anger among Muslims everywhere.

Third, living in abject poverty and often under political
repression, the Muslim poor in developing countries have little
recourse to overcome problems at home. Hence they blame the West
for their predicament and condemn their local ruling elite of
apostasy for being coopted by the primeval economic interests of
Western "imperialism". The unemployed and rejected poor are the
ones who suffer from the most corrosive sense of personal
humiliation. They are the most vulnerable to the perilous
manipulation of Islam's teaching of peaceful change by radical
groups bent on violent rage.

Political reform and economic development are the keys to a
viable solution. A long-term international plan for the Middle
East, partially funded by G-8 countries, sanctioned by the United
Nations, co-administered by the Arab League and supervised by
the Organization of Islamic Conference can go a long way towards
political and economic reform.

As the world's most populous Islamic country, Indonesian
Muslims are striving to consummate three major initiatives.

First, we are determined not to continually blame the West
and the developed world for all our domestic problems.

Secondly, we must fight hard to overcome the embarrassment of
the wretchedness among our urban underclass and rural poor. Not
less than 40 million Indonesians, most of them Muslims, are
currently unemployed. These problems must not be seen as beyond
repair. Concrete action must be administered to reconstruct our
society and economy within an increasingly equitable and
cohesive political union that Indonesia's brand of inclusive,
tolerant and pluralist Islam provides.

The vast majority of Indonesian Muslims are determined not to
let Islam be hijacked by sectarian thuggery, which can only
damage Islam's true message by stultifying avenues to the
imperatives of ijtihad.

We are determined to continuously strive to bring Indonesian
Islam to the realities of the present and the challenges of the
future, to engage in dialog and enlightenment with the
economies, societies and cultures of the West, as well as with
China and Japan.

We must not look back to past glories. Through our hard work
in inclusive and pluralist national peace-building, Indonesian
Muslims can surely contribute positively to national and
international peace-building.

The above was an excerpt of the article presented at the
International Conference of the International Islamic Forum for
Science, Technology and Human Resources Development in Jakarta,
March 14, 2003.