As we come face to face with the disruption, anxiety and deaths caused by the Covid-19 pandemic… with the bloody destruction generated by ongoing conflicts, the latest to happen in Palestine but not only there… with the persistent and desperate attempts by refugees and irregular migrants to cross the Middle Sea and enter Europe… with the crisis that is slowly but surely approaching as climate change accelerates (though this will be a crisis for humankind, not for life in general on this planet since one species or another is sure to manage to adapt): an overriding query emerges.
What is essential in what we seek to accomplish and aspire for? How should we behave in order to achieve what is essential?
In the past, a reply would have been easy. Religious belief was accepted as the discipline that sets the rules by which to evaluate the world we live in and what we make of it. Today, when secular values rightly prevail, a religious approach cannot go far enough.
An alternative reply is still work in progress. If it ever comes to an end, chances are that it will prove to be as insufficient and dubious as the one we blindly used to accept “in the past”.
***
PROJECTS FOR RECOVERY
It is usual for the EU to launch good project ideas which it then burdens… not to say sinks… with well-intentioned and disproportionate conditionalities regarding how they should be implemented.
For recovery from Covid-19, a programme of projects by all EU member states that is financed by the Union as a whole was and is a good idea. The havoc wrought by the pandemic swept across all borders. Joint projects designed to run on the same scale to compensate for the damage that resulted makes much sense.
Yet, till agreement was reached on this modus operandi, it was also arranged that besides projects having to be centrally inspected by the European Commission, there would in addition be the possibility for member states to also plug in their own comments on other states’ projects. Among the criteria for doing so that were raised, there was one that has become very fashionable, by which it will be claimed that projects must respect European “values”.
There can hardly be any doubt that this will trigger controversies and political manoeuverings which should greatly entertain those among us who enjoy following the confusion caused by senseless disputes.
***
THE PEACE OF THE OPPRESSED
The ceasefire in Palestine is a welcome development.
However on reflecting about the situation of the Palestinians after having assiduously read as well material featured in Israeli papers like “The Times of Israel”, one cannot but raise some disquieting queries.
Can a ceasefire be equivalent to peace? Can peace be constructed solely on the premises of how one side interprets reality? And should those who reject such premises be branded as anti-peace? Or as terrorists?
Should peace mean that those who feel oppressed must accept such a state of affairs? Even if the oppression is real and not an illusion or a propaganda ploy?
Indeed can peace be genuine and acceptable if it is imposed on the oppressed?