April 2005
Education in the Muslim World
Introduction
Education and Conflict: USIP Engages with the Muslim World
Pamela Aall, Director, USIP Education Program
In any society, education is a major vehicle for the transmission of ideas, attitudes, and beliefs. This means that control over educational content and access to classrooms can become valuable commodities in a conflict. Education—and especially the teaching of history—can perpetuate negative judgments about the “other,” engendering hostility and aggression among the young, and firing up the fever to go to war. But educational content and teaching approaches can also provide powerful means to change these attitudes, to promote tolerance and a willingness to settle conflicts without resort to violence.
In order to increase the capacity of the educational sector in countries in conflict to promote conflict prevention, peacemaking and post-conflict reconciliation, the U.S. Institute of Peace has developed a program on education in zones of conflict. This program works to help teachers and professors understand and teach about the nature, sources, and dynamics of conflict and about approaches to conflict prevention, management, and post-conflict reconstruction and reconciliation. It works to enhance the ability of teachers and scholars to incorporate peace education and conflict management into curriculum and classes. In these workshops, the U.S. Institute of Peace does not promote a single model of conflict management, but assists local educators and organizations to develop their own methods and frameworks for enhancing the contributions of education to peace efforts in conflict areas. In so doing, it engages not only with educators and educational authorities, but also with leaders of civil society.
In addition to this program activity, the Institute has also supported the field through awarding fellowships and grants to individuals and organizations dedicated to promoting peace through educational programs. The articles in this issue of Muslim World Insights highlight some of the work that the Institute has undertaken or sponsored on education in Islamic societies. Insights editor Abdeslam Maghraoui explains the role that educational institutions—and specifically madrassas—have played in the Muslim world. Staff members Imad Harb and Jeffrey Helsing and Senior Fellow Benedicto Becani describe educational needs and peacebuilding programs in Iraq, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and the Mindanao conflict in the Philippines. Other features include descriptions of selected USIP- supported projects and a list of other organizations active on educational issues in the Muslim World.
- America-Mideast Educational and Training Services, Inc. (AMIDEAST) is a private, nonprofit organization that strengthens mutual understanding and cooperation between Americans and the peoples of the Middle East and North Africa. Every year, AMIDEAST provides appropriate English language skills training, educational advising, and testing services to hundreds of thousands of students and professionals in the Middle East and North Africa; supports numerous institutional development projects in the region; and administers educational exchange programs. Founded in 1951, AMIDEAST is headquartered in Washington, DC with a network of field offices in Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Morocco, Qatar, Syria, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, West Bank/Gaza, and Yemen. (http://www.amideast.org).
- The British Council (Great Britain’s international cultural relations organization) works with many Muslim countries to support educational development. In Iraq, for instance, it is undertaking a major effort for training Iraqi university presidents and administrators at Birmingham University in the United Kingdom. In a statement, the British Council said that the aim of the training program was “to provide Iraqi administrators and academics with the proper knowledge in administration and teaching skills and to boost links between Birmingham University and higher education establishments in Iraq.” (www.britishcouncil.org).
- The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, commonly known as UNESCO, is a specialized agency of the United Nations system established in 1946. The Organization’s main objective is to contribute to peace and security by promoting collaboration among the nations through education, science and culture in order to further universal respect for justice, for the rule of law and for the human rights and fundamental freedoms. Under its current “Education for All” campaign, it conducts research and runs programs in countries in Africa, the Middle East, and South and Southeast Asia (www.unesco.org)
- The United Nations Children Fund (UNICEF) advocates and works for the protection of children’s rights to help the young meet their basic needs and to expand their opportunities to reach their full potential. Among other programs, they have developed peace education programs in a number of countries, including Afghanistan and Indonesia (www.unicef.org).
- The mission of the Association of Arab Universities is to enhance cooperation among universities in the Arab world. It is associated with central governments through their respective ministries of education. (www.aaru.edu.jo).
- A relatively new education network, the Arab Civic Education Network (Arab Civitas), has emerged in the Arab world with the goal of nurturing and coordinating the efforts of Arab organizations and individuals working in the field of civic education. The network seeks to build civic awareness and promote active citizenship in a way that individuals, particularly young people, become aware of their rights and responsibilities and those of others. Arab Civitas works to strengthen, coordinate and enable existing organizations, in Arab countries, that work in the field of civic education. (www.arabcivitas.net).
Teaching Tolerance in Mindinao
Benedicto Bacani, USIP Senior Fellow
During my daughter Hannah’s 5th birthday party, she opened one of her presents and immediately asked me to set it aside because her Muslim friends were still around. I understood what she meant after seeing what she got: a piggybank. Hannah is now nine years old. When we moved to our rented house in Maryland, our home for the period of my fellowship with the United States Institute Peace, she suggested that we abstain from eating pork in the house. The house we are renting is owned by a Muslim friend from the Philippines.
Last December, Jaina, Hannah’s friend in Mindanao, sent her a Christmas card and a note on how her clan celebrated the end of the season of Ramadhan. Jaina wondered whether Hannah misses the familiar sight of the star and crescent hanging from light posts in our city to symbolize the twin celebration of Christmas and the end of Ramadhan.
Hannah is a Christian and Jaina, a Muslim. Yet they both attended kindergarten in a child peace learning center, one among five pre-schools in Mindanao that implements a peace curriculum. Children there are taught tolerance and respect for religious and cultural diversities, among other values.
In advocating for integrating peace education in the curricula of schools in conflict zones like Mindanao, I always point to Hannah and Jaina as Exhibit “A” – compelling proof that teaching peace values to children in their formative years can significantly promote respect for pluralism, which in my mind is the most potent weapon against all forms of religious extremism.
In one forum, I was asked whether it is possible that I may be overstating the argument for peace education, including for children who have not yet been directly affected by violent conflicts such as the centuries-old conflict between Christians and the Muslim minority in Mindanao. I knew the person who posed the question was just being polite; what he wanted to say was that I was naïve in believing that children who have been taught peace can escape the prejudices embedded in Philippine culture that divide Muslim and Christians.
This assertion is valid in some respects.
While Hannah learns tolerance and respect for Muslims in school, she gets a daily dose of unsavory remarks about Muslims after school, some coming from our own relatives and friends. In Christian communities, negative stereotypes of Muslims as being war freaks, traitors and untrustworthy are strong. On the other hand, Hannah’s Muslim friend Jaina is likewise indoctrinated by her elders that Christians are landgrabbers out to take away Muslim lands. It is not an infrequent occurrence for my wife and myself to try to “undo” the unpleasant things Hannah hears about Muslims while reinforcing the peace values she learns in school.
In deeply rooted conflicts like that in Mindanao, there are few role models for religious tolerance among the older generation. In the conflict zones, students are often torn between what they are taught in peace education classes, on one hand, and their own family and community values, on the other. In a culture where family and community values take precedence over all others, it is wishful thinking to believe that the young can change or even question their elders’ strong abhorrence to those whose faith are different from theirs. We can only hope that, once these students get on with their own life, they will be able to live by the peace values they learned in school.
It seems to me that there is something “generational” in the continuing animosity between Christians and Muslims in Mindanao. When professors from my university were designing an inter-religious dialogue program for students, they were worried about the prospect of the discussions on religion getting out of hand and thus further worsen animosity between Christians and Muslims. So they came up with a design that limited the initial session to questions about each other’s faith, with answers to be made only in subsequent sessions. During the pilot class, the ten Muslims and ten Christian students reacted strongly against the questions-first-answers-afterwards rule. They insisted that they should be able to answer questions about their own faith, staged a “mutiny” of sorts, and on their own took control of facilitating the discussions. While the students were engaged in a spirited and frank and yet respectful discourse, the facilitators, by then sidelined as observers, felt both amused and shamed by the capacity of young people to go beyond their own fears and their own culture’s prejudices.
In that session, the young gave our generation an important insight: While we claim to teach tolerance and respect for diversity, we continue to allow our fears, biases and prejudices to rule our relations with those who do not share our own beliefs. How much of the fears and biases of this generation are transmitted to the next is a question that begs an answer in this era where intolerance that breeds religious extremism disturbs the peace in pluralistic societies.
In Mindanao, there are serious efforts in instituting programs to promote tolerance among the young generation. Most universities and colleges in the conflict zones are currently integrating peace education in their curricula and are engaged in peace-building activities through peace education centers or institutes. Notre Dame University, a Catholic school with a substantial Muslim student population, pioneered peace education in Mindanao. The architect of Mindanao peace education program is Dr. Toh Sweeh Hin, the 2000 UNESCO peace education laureate who conducted workshops for the pioneering group of peace educators.
The Mindanao peace education programs promotes a holistic framework of education for a culture of peace with six crucial issues. They are 1) dismantling the culture of war; 2) living with justice and compassion; 3) building cultural respect, reconciliation and solidarity; 4) promoting human rights and responsibilities; 5) living in harmony with the earth; and 6) cultivating inner peace. The framework also adopts four pedagogical principles: holism where issues of peace and violence are considered dynamically interrelated; centrality of values formation, where justice, compassion, caring for life, spirituality, “one world orientation”, and active non-violence are promoted; dialogue through active teaching and learning strategies, and conscientious reflection, where the active and critical consciousness of learners is formed, empowering them in the process to be catalysts for change.
Lately, there have been real efforts to enrich this framework by integrating Islamic perspectives in educating for peace. Universities in Muslim-populated areas such as the Mindanao State University and non-government organizations like the Philippine Council for Islam and Democracy are spearheading efforts in promoting Islamic perspectives on peace, violence, democracy and dialogue. There are also movements toward integrating peace education in Madrasah education as well as ongoing programs to promote community-based non-formal peace education. These grassroots programs have resulted in some cases in the establishment of peace zones or spaces/havens for peace where communities have declared their areas off-limits to military and rebel combat operations.
Despite the strides of peace education in Mindanao, there are concerns that those in it are already moderate Christians and Muslims and that educating for peace is not actually making a substantial impact on terrorist groups that use, or more accurately misuse, religion to advance their agenda. We must pursue at all times opportunities to reach out to extremist elements, both Christian and Muslim. But it is equally important for us to continue working toward ensuring that moderate Muslims and Christians continue to take the path of peace in resolving violent conflicts.
We must also never forget that countering terrorism is not only about military operations, but addressing the conditions that breed religious extremism. In Mindanao, these conditions are poverty, injustice and oppression, political and economic marginalization and lack of educational opportunities. The War on Terror cannot be won by military action alone. I am unwavering in my belief that effectively addressing grievances that push people to fundamentalism and building more tolerant societies through education are the long-term solutions to terrorism.
(Bacani is Senior Fellow at the United States Institute of Peace and Dean, College of Law, Notre Dame University in Cotabato City, Philippines)
Higher Education in Iraq: A Forward Look
Imad Harb, Program Officer, Education
The Education Program at the United States Institute of Peace has been involved since the beginning of 2004 in a project for introducing conflict resolution, peace education, and democracy curricula into the higher education sector in Iraq. Our approach sees higher education as a pillar in the re-construction of the country after decades of authoritarian rule and sanctions. In the following essay, I will discuss Iraq’s authoritarian legacy, the principles guiding our work, and the programs we have undertaken so far regarding this vital sector.
Problems Facing Higher Education in Iraq
Iraqi higher education has suffered under authoritarian rule and during years of sanctions imposed by the United Nations after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1990. As a political ideology intent on controlling society and its resources, authoritarianism under Ba`thist rule has worked to deprive the higher education sector of a great number of its personnel through intimidation, imprisonment, exile, and elimination and has robbed it of the spirit of inquiry and innovation it sorely needs to rejuvenate itself. Loyalty to official ideology, arbitrary policies and programs, and personalized leadership that even sought to re-write Iraqi history to suit its whims resulted in a brain drain that deprived Iraq of some of its brightest and most promising academics. As centers of intellectual activity that must thrive on the free exchange of ideas, Iraqi universities saw a deterioration of their institutional status that they had worked to cultivate since the establishment of a higher education sector in Iraq at the beginning of the twentieth century.
What added to the general malaise of higher education institutions and life in Iraq was the imposition of a sanctions regime on the country in 1991. Higher education institutions saw their material wellbeing deteriorate: classrooms became bereft of basic services; laboratories lost equipment to neglect and old age; books were outdated; and libraries lost their research facilities. Thousands of faculty members suffered from inadequate salaries and many supplemented their incomes by taking on second jobs, driving taxis, or selling their books and other belongings. The looting that gripped the country and its institutions following the American invasion of March 2003 only added to the general destitution of universities.
An Approach for Addressing Higher Education in Iraq
While the general needs of Iraq’s higher education sector span the full spectrum of development, from physical plant to faculty rehabilitation to curricula, the Education Program at the United States Institute of Peace has taken upon itself the task of attempting to help strengthen faculty and curricula in the areas of conflict resolution and democracy and the salient topics that are part and parcel of these two areas. In working on these areas, our program sees its approach as consisting of the following principles:
- Rehabilitating the human capital: We see this rehabilitation as including the administrator, the faculty member, and the student. All three have a major stake and role in the future of their sector. For different reasons, many have been intimidated, imprisoned, exiled, killed, or co-opted. They must be made to feel free and independent, important to the enterprise, financially satisfied, connected to others and to the outside world, and safe from arbitrary rule and policies.
- ‘Iraqifying’ the effort: Iraqi academics and leaders must feel that they are the main instigators of reform and the best achievers of its coveted results. Historically, professionally, and from a nationalistic point of view, Iraqis were and are capable of succeeding in any endeavor. Only by controlling their higher education system will academics feel that they have a sense of ownership and will commit the necessary expertise and experience to revitalize their sector.
- Thinking of universities as civil society actors: While universities are the primary venues for higher educational attainment and training, they can also be seen as essential for the development and flourishing of civil society in Iraq. Their role in such a development can be as active participants and venues for meetings, research, publication, etc., and as trainers for future generations of graduates and alumni who, themselves, would be members of organizations involved in a vibrant political and social agenda for the country.
- Emphasizing conflict resolution strategies: As a society in transition from authoritarian rule, Iraq is in need of training in peacemaking and conflict resolution. Most Iraqis are opposed to the violence gripping their communities and universities can help in facilitating inter-ethnic and inter-religious violence. As diverse venues for higher education and as educators of future leaders, universities are uniquely equipped to educate the public about peace, the proverbial ‘other,’ and tolerance.
- Institutionalizing democracy and the rule of law: In both staff and curriculum development, emphasizing democratic politics and practices and the rule of law can set universities on a clear path for the future. In the specific area of curricula, democracy, human rights, the rule of law, and diversity must be evident, indeed prominent. Professors must be allowed to freely choose their material and research and students must have the freedom to join their own organizations or even remain apolitical if they so desire. However, we believe that political parties should be kept outside of academic life.
- Making the role of women central: The above recommendations will be more successful when emphasizing women’s issues and their access to the higher education system, as both practitioners and students. They should be given more responsibilities in developing their educational system and in bringing forth their concerns.
- Independence of operations: Higher education institutions must be state-funded but must retain their operational freedom to become nuclei of democratic development. They must also have their own rules and regulations and be immune to the political whims of political authority. A process of adjudication should be freely implemented for academic disputes.
These are some of the ideas around which the Education Program’s work revolves. While they are general in nature, they help to chart a way out of the poor conditions that Iraq’s higher education sector finds itself. In the future, this sector might also tackle other issues such as privatization, open and virtual universities, partnerships, student exchanges, etc.
Summary of Education Program’s Work
We have held two meetings with academics from Iraqi universities. The first was for fact-finding and was held in September of 2004 with administrators and faculty members from the University of Baghdad. The Iraqi representatives made presentations about the physical inadequacies of the system as a whole and discussed ways for updating curricula and preparing and training teachers. Following that meeting, the participants decided to establish an educational unit for teaching peace, human rights, and democracy at the University of Baghdad. That unit has now become official after the Iraqi Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research approved the establishment of a Unit for Peace Education and Human Rights.
The second, broader meeting brought together academics from seven universities to discuss the civic mission of the Iraqi university. Peace education expert Dr. Andrea Bartoli, from Columbia University’s Center for International Conflict Resolution, lectured on the university’s social role, and Iraq and Middle East expert Dr. Eric Davis, Director of Rutgers University’s Middle East Center, discussed the historical socializing and democratizing mission of Iraqi universities. Iraqi participants from universities in Baghdad and the north discussed ways of making the university a part of its environment. Issues debated included the university’s role in introducing peace studies and democracy to society, explaining the forthcoming constitution to the people, helping to introduce conflict resolution to secondary school curricula, and faculty preparation of students in service learning activities.
In addition, the Education Program has been instrumental in choosing curriculum materials that are currently being translated for distribution among Iraqi university programs. We have also helped to translate into Arabic Institute Special Reports about political Islam, Ijtihad, postwar Iraq, the Iraqi Special Tribunal, donor activities in Iraq, European initiatives for Arab democracy, and the Iraqi constitutional process.
Conclusion
The brief outline of the Education Program’s approach to assist in rehabilitating the Iraqi higher education sector points to a commitment to modest, albeit fundamental, principles that should be part of every effort to develop postwar, democratizing societies. We see our attempt as a necessary complement to Iraq’s own commitment to reconstructing and rehabilitating Iraqi society and the state. In this endeavor, we see Iraqi universities as a dynamic partner, indeed a major player. We also see that the success of Iraqi universities in the coming period will surely be aided by the expressed desire among Iraqi academics to commit themselves to the enterprise of developing a modern and democratic Iraq.
Palestinian-Israeli Education Efforts: Opportunties and Challenges
Jeff Helsing, Program Officer, Education
Working with the USIP education program, a number of Israeli-Palestinian organizations devoted to education have found common ground through the mutual needs of their students in the classroom and their desire to improve their teaching and their respective subject matter curricula rather than through a program of peace education or even any common concept of what a final peace between Israelis and Palestinians might be. The contribution of such education efforts to peace between Israelis and Palestinians is not teaching young people about peace but conveying the concept of peace, including tolerance, respect, citizenship, rights, and non-violence through teaching and lessons.
Most Israeli-Palestinian education organizations—in particular, the Middle East Children’s Association (MECA), the Peace Research Institute in the Middle East (PRIME), and the Israel/Palestine Center for Research and Information, (IPCRI)—are not actually engaged in peace education efforts; rather they are people-to-people programs in which Palestinian and Israeli educators collaborate on educational needs. The stated goal of these programs is not to bring peace between Israelis and Palestinians but to meet the needs of their students and allow participating teachers to enhance the quality of education in their respective communities. The premise is that such educational goals will be better accomplished through the collaborative effort of Palestinians and Israelis. And, if such programs succeed in contributing to a qualitative difference in the way history or literature or even mathematics, for example, is taught then there is the potential for such education efforts to make a contribution to peace between these two peoples.
Educators have much to share with each other and techniques that are common: e.g., student-centered teaching, sharing of and encouraging multiple perspectives, and dealing with trauma and conflict. In short, these programs are very much focused at the micro level: the immediate target is the individual, the student. This is done through a focus on pedagogy (how to become better teachers in their subject matter), sustained dialogue with peers and with the “other,” and the building of relationships. There also is a practical, functional collaboration on curriculum. And, it is ultimately an investment in the future in the belief that what these teachers do in the classroom, what they teach and how, can make a contribution to building a sustainable peace between Palestinians and Israelis.
The goal of these organizations is ultimately educational. The education practiced by these joint organizations is not about peace—it is for peace; which means that it can be about human rights, rule of law, equality, equity, tolerance, multiculturalism, trauma healing, health, women’s empowerment, or civil liberties. It is important to remember that teachers, even in conflict situations, need to focus on day-to-day practice in classrooms and in teacher-student relationships. In many ways, how a teacher conducts a class can be as significant as what is taught. For example, democratic practice and student empowerment are important to implement in the classroom, regardless of subject matter. It is critical, therefore, to get educators who participate in these Israeli-Palestinian programs and are part of these organizations to focus attention on the ethos of their practice as teachers.
It is also important for Israeli educators to hear of and understand the difficulties that their Palestinian counterparts face in the classroom. Palestinian teachers have less flexibility in using unapproved content or deviate from the established curriculum. There are also psychological challenges that are important to grasp. Living under occupation, an inability to travel freely, poor resources, and closure of schools for long periods in the name of security are all significant obstacles to good education. And, they also make it more difficult to incorporate lessons about tolerance, non-violence, peace and human rights into the classroom. It is equally important for Palestinian educators to hear how Israelis also have to cope with the trauma faced by young people who are often scared to go outside or travel on a bus or go to a pizza parlor. In this way, there can be significant shared experiences.
Too often, with the failure of the Oslo peace process Palestinians came to view peace education as pacification. Even the best-intentioned coexistence efforts between Israelis and Palestinians were regarded as reinforcing an unacceptable status quo and most were hampered by distrust, language barriers, and a belief by many Palestinians that Jews wanted to work with Palestinians primarily out of a sense of charity or even pity, not on a basis of equality. So these programs do not shy away from conflict or controversy. They work through conflict in order to reinforce the objectives of the programs. Even among Israeli and Palestinian educators, who have a common agenda and profess to promote peace and tolerance in their classrooms, schools and communities, there are often clashes of language, clashes of perception, clashes of facts. For example, the term justice, or even human rights, is often seen as an agenda for a minority group to challenge the position of the majority and not always as shared human ideals.
One of the unique aspects of the PRIME program is the acknowledgment of different narratives or histories between Israeli Jews and Palestinians. There is a belief that one must move beyond a dispute over facts and move to an understanding of the different perspectives of each group. In the draft of a guide for teachers who will be using the shared history approach, the PRIME teachers view their role as encouraging the discussion of controversial issues, asking questions, listening to the other’s story, and presenting the complexity of the historical events, the often contradictory nature of the facts.
There are a number of obstacles to such programs. These include the simple logistical challenges of Israelis and Palestinians crossing over the green line to meet with each other. The security situation makes it that much more difficult, particularly with the advent of the security fence or the “wall.” Yet, in some ways, the difficulties of meeting and working together prove to each community the commitment of the other. In some cases, teachers have met in the open at checkpoints when Palestinian educators have not been allowed to pass. Teachers from both the MECA and PRIME organizations have taken considerable risks to meet, often spending an entire day going from checkpoint to roadblock to checkpoint for 10-12 hours, in many cases to go less than ten miles in all. Israelis have spent considerable time at checkpoints working to get Palestinians cleared by vouching for them or pressuring the soldiers in charge. Teachers on both sides are often questioned by their own families about risking their lives to go into a situation that is considered unsafe. Thus, in many cases, it is easier for Israelis and Palestinians to meet outside the region. And, when so many resources are devoted to finding ways to get together, the process of working interactively can become somewhat inefficient and the organizations have to guard against bilateral meetings becoming ends in themselves. It is critical not to lose sight of the fact that the ultimate goal is to enhance the teaching and curriculum in each community.
An additional burden—some term it a risk—is that it is not easy to return to one’s local community. Some participants are viewed as traitors or dismissed as naïve idealists, often taunted upon return with comments such as, “have you created peace yet?” In a meeting of Palestinian and Israeli teachers, one Israeli remarked that she has to spend more time convincing other Israelis of the importance of education and the need for a sustained peace than her Palestinian counterparts. In addition, education authorities have not yet embraced the products of such Israeli-Palestinian efforts. Education officials in both the Israeli government and Palestinian Authority are aware of the work of the groups engaged in such education efforts. In fact, these groups all make it a point to inform the government authorities of their efforts. However, there is no expressed interest in adopting any of the materials or lessons into the official curriculum of either community. Israeli teachers have greater opportunities to touch on subjects outside the official curriculum than do their Palestinian counterparts, but over the long run, the objective is to demonstrate the value of the materials and teaching methods so that they will be adopted in most classrooms in both communities.
It is not easy for organizations wishing to create teaching materials and methods that promote peace and tolerance is not easy to work in the political climate of the past five years. And, that is why the collaboration between teachers of both communities is so critical. They understand so little about each other and their perspectives, that it is critical for an Israeli teacher not only to show his or her students the Palestinian perspective but to gain insight from Palestinian peers about that perspective. The key is to show that each perspective, each historical narrative, derives from certain needs, beliefs, and values. One need not adopt them nor defend them; but these joint Israeli-Palestinian organizations strongly believe that they must be understood in order to foster better communication and tolerance between both peoples, who ultimately must find a way to live as neighbors. By working together, the teachers learn from each other. They contribute ideas to the teaching and content of the other, but perhaps most importantly they will be able to explain the other side’s perspective to their own students, their own community—not to defend or promote the other perspective but to show where they are coming from, including where they have mutual interests and what their fears and needs are. This helps break down stereotypes and promotes greater tolerance.
There is also a need to address the trauma induced by the ongoing conflict. All of these Israeli-Palestinian organizations believe it is important for students to be able to think conceptually and move beyond the conflict that demonizes the other. The Middle East Children’s Association has noted: “Our region is inundated with the sense of victim-hood, which is further used as justification for not taking responsibility for one’s acts. Similarly many children feel victimized by the adult world, and many teachers feel victimized by society. A victim is not a good partner. In overcoming trauma, rather than sustaining the victim-hood, one can try to re-channel the experience as a means to assuming responsibility for themselves and their own actions. The capacity to take responsibility for oneself is crucial in forming partnerships.” [Memo to the author, 7/24/04.]
None of this can occur without pedagogical instruction and training. And, teachers can provide very positive role models for young students. Rather than encouraging incitement in the school they provide students with an example of working with the other community. This does not mean that everything is rosy. Not in the least. These programs reflect the reality of the conflict. Clearly, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict continually hovers over their classes just as it continually casts a shadow over the lives of most Palestinians and Israelis. But what is most impressive about these programs is that most of the participants stick with them. Sessions may get emotional and strained, and they may need a break from each other but they come back together. One of the critical variables is the leadership of these groups. Those that are successful embody an equity between Palestinian and Israeli at the top, as the co-directors practice what they preach. They create an equitable, and consultative, partnership that models a relationship in which Palestinians and Israelis work cooperatively, productively, and in peace with each other.
Madrasas: Between Dogmatism and Cultural Renewal
Abdeslam Maghraoui, Associate Director of Research and Studies for the Muslim World Initiative
Throughout the Muslim world, madrassas, or schools of religious learning, have come under scrutiny following 9/11. The madrasa system -- the endowment of a school attached to a mosque -- varies from a one-day school to a full curriculum that trains future imams, jurists, and scholars. The United States made the revision of school curricula in Muslim countries a top priority because some madrassas, in Pakistan in particular, have become centers for Islamic extremism and recruitment of violent radicals. Yet, the political power and cultural influence of madrassas in Muslim societies is broad. As purveyor of religious knowledge, moral standards, and cultural values in the Muslim world, madrassas can play a positive or negative role. The search for new knowledge and innovation have been an integral, though neglected, part of Islamic educational traditions. Madrassas can become, as they were in the past, centers of modern knowledge and cultural renewal with far reaching positive effects on the Muslim world.
The birth and development of Islam’s most influential educational centers took place during the Umayyads (Damascus 661-750 AD) and the ‘Abbasids (Baghdad 749-1258). Muslim rulers sponsored the translation of Greek works and generously supported Muslim scholars who wrote substantive commentaries on the Greek heritage. But this scholarly activity was centered around individual theologians, philosophers, or literary figures rather than institutions. The oldest and most important religious institutions of learning in the Muslim world were in North Africa. The most popular madrasas include:
Al-Azhar: Founded in Cairo in 969 AD as a mosque, Al-Azhar was named after “Fatima Al-Zahraa,” the prophet’s daughter. Al-Azhar gained prominence as an institution of religious learning and knowledge following the flux of Muslim scholars from Cordoba, Cartagena, Seville, Granada, and Valencia between 1236 and 1261. Today, Al-Azhar has some 90,000 students that come from across the Muslim world.
Al-Qarawiyyin: Founded in Fez in 859 AD by Fatima Al-Fihri, a young princess who migrated from Tunisia to Morocco, Al-Qarawiyyin was a mosque, an educational institution, and a center for public discussions. In addition to the traditional Islamic sciences – jurisprudence, interpretation, and religious commentaries -- Al-Qarawiyyin’s curriculum included: linguistics, rhetoric, logic, mathematic, medicine, astronomy, and chemistry. During the medieval period, this madrassa attracted Muslim as well as non-Muslim scholars and students. Non-Muslim students of Al—Qarawiyyin include Maimonids (1135-1204) and Gerbert of Aurillac, known as Pope Sylvester II (930-1003).
Zaytouna: A mosque and a school of religious learning, Zaitouna was founded in Tunis in 732 AD on the site of an "olive tree" (or zaitouna) under which a Tunisian scholar used to teach Islam to students. The Aghlabid Sultans rebuilt it in the ninth century, making it a focal point for the cultural and religious life of their reign after Al-Quarawiyyin. Today, Zaytouna remains a major institution of modern religious learning and renovation in the Muslim world.
In other parts of the Muslim world, such as Turkey (during the Ottoman period, 1281-1924), Iran (various Persian dynasties 1501-1924), and South Asia (Delhi, Benghal, Kashmir, Gujarat, and Mãlwa Sutlans, 977-1589), the construction of a mosque and alongside it a madrasa was a well-established tradition and system. As in North Africa, these schools were largely supported by individual donations (Awqaf) from Sultans and wealthy individual and families. Madrasas provided scientific and educational services to the community and supplied the authorities with knowledgeable individuals in matters of Islamic jurisprudence, management experience, and insights into communal material matters and spiritual needs. Above all, however, madarasas were intended to provide every believer with the necessary knowledge to thrive in worldly matters and instill the moral values and ethical codes to live within the community.
For centuries, Islamic religious institutions have considered “revelation” the ultimate source of knowledge, hence bringing Ijtehad, or human interpretation, to a close. The devaluation of “reason” and the subsequent exclusion of religious scholars and institutions from the process of modernization during the last century turned madrasas into fervent guardians of religious dogma and anti-modernism. But this needs not be the case.
Education-Related Grant-Funded Projects in the Muslim World
Over the past five years, under the broad theme of education in the Muslim world, the Grant Program has funded some 36 projects, totaling almost $1.5 million. Recent grants are underwriting a range of projects in North Africa, the Balkans, and the Middle East as well as in South and Southeast Asia. For example, a grant to Abderrahim Sabir of the Human Rights Education Associates is supporting an assessment of Moroccan school textbooks and curricula in an attempt to promote greater tolerance and respect for women’s equality. In cooperation with the Ministry of Education, the initiative will result in a report in English and Arabic detailing the research findings and offering policy recommendations for the revision of textbooks and related curricula.
In the Balkans, a grant to Milica Bakic-Hayden at the University of Pittsburgh is supporting a project to promote the study of religion in institutions of higher learning in Serbia and Montenegro and in Bosnia and Herzegovina, emphasizing tolerant understanding of Islam, Christianity and Judaism. In addition to faculty training workshops, the project will create a course syllabus, implement two full semester university courses, and produce a textbook, entitled Many Ways of Being Religious: An Introduction to the Study of Religions.
A USIP award to an Iraqi women’s organization in Baghdad is funding a mosque-based educational effort to promote inter-communal understanding between Shi’a and Sunni women schoolteachers and mothers.
In India, a grant to Alex Mathew at Catholic Relief Services is funding the development of peacebuilding education in private secondary schools in Gujurat. The initiative, which includes an analysis of how private schools are affecting conflict dynamics in Gujurat, will produce a set of policy recommendations on how schools can play a more active role in mitigating the negative impact of inter-communal tensions and promoting peace.
USIP funding to Voluntary Service Overseas in the Philippines is underwriting a training and workshop program to improve relations between Muslim and Christian youth in the provinces of Lanao del Norte and Lanao del Sur in Mindanao. In an effort to advance a culture of peace, the initiative is developing training modules and will implement workshops for some 600 high school and college students as well as out-of-school youth.
Muslim World Experts
The work of the Muslim World Initiative is being coordinated by Dr. Abdeslam Maghraoui who joined the Institute in September 2004 as Associate Director of the Research and Studies Program. Beyond Dr. Maghraoui, the Institute's expertise on the Muslim World is extensive. Please click here for more information.
