The Fifteenth Meeting of the International Dialogue Initiative (IDI) was held in Vienna, Austria, from December 8 to December 10, 2017. The IDI was hosted by Atieh International GmbH, a strategic consulting group established in Vienna in 2010 by IDI member Bijan Khajehpour. This was the IDI’s first meeting in Vienna – the city of Sigmund Freud – and coincided with the ten-year anniversary of the IDI’s founding at the Erikson Institute of the Austen Riggs Center in Stockbridge, Massachusetts, in 2007.
During this past decade, the world has witnessed marked shifts in national and global geopolitics, including, most recently, increased nationalism in Europe and the United States, Syria’s civil war and attendant refugee issues, the ebb and flow of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Turkey’s changing role as a link between Europe and the Muslim world, the evolution of Iran’s relationship to the West, and Russian developments in Eastern Europe. Meeting in Vienna, IDI members brought renewed energy and focus to discussions of these issues and plans for engagement going forward. The IDI hosted 2017 Volkan Scholar Lydia Wilson, currently a Fellow at the Centre for the Resolution of Intractable Conflicts at Harris Manchester College, Oxford (http://www.hmc.ox.ac.uk/centre-for-resolution-of-intractable-conflicts/), and participated in a training session with Laurent Vinatier, an Adviser with the Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue in Geneva (https://www.hdcentre.org/). Additionally, the IDI hosted a public event discussing the experience of Iranian immigrants in Austria and an informal conference with current and former members of the Vienna diplomatic and NGO communities.
What follows is a summary of the Meeting’s presentations, themes and observations.
SUMMARY
Preliminary Event: Pre-Conference Training
On Thursday, December 7, IDI members Gerard Fromm and Vamik Volkan led a training event with Dr. Laurent Vinatier and other interested members of our group. Dr. Vinatier’s work with the Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue (CHD) involves efforts to mediate the conflict in Ukraine. The training session focuses on large-group psychology as it relates to identity anxieties and historical trauma. Vamik Volkan presented his Tree Model approach to organizing large-group dialogue. Dr. Vinatier, in turn, presented on his work with individual participants in the conflict and the challenges of taking a “clinical” approach to group interactions – an approach that includes historically based emotions – when participants and the various organizations involved try to hold a rational focus on conflicting interests
The IDI hopes to continue a dialogue with Dr. Vinatier and the CHD, and to use its training session with Dr. Vinatier as a model for additional training opportunities going forward.
Evening Presentation: Being The Other: Bridging the Gap between Communities
On Thursday evening, IDI members Regine Scholz, Bijan Khajehpour and Vamik Volkan participated in a panel discussion hosted by The Simorgh, a Vienna-based non-profit organization founded by Bijan Khajehpour and his wife Pari Namazie. The Simorgh encourages cultural and social exchange between countries and peoples – starting with an exchange of thoughts and ideas between Iran and the European Union – in order to develop, enhance and improve human development and communication. The panel presentation, entitled Being The Other: Bridging the Gap between Communities, examined the immigrant experience in Europe and explored how to maintain the European Union’s fundamental values – respect for human dignity, human rights, freedom, democracy, equality and the rule of law – while a culture of fear divides its citizens. Interested readers may learn more about The Simorgh, and this presentation specifically, here: http://thesimorgh.org/being-the-other-idi-panel/
IDI Meeting: Day One
- Introductions
On Friday, December 8, the IDI formally commenced its Fifteenth Meeting with a welcome introduction and opening remarks by IDI President Gerard Fromm. Members discussed conflict interventions, conferences and professional activities, both past and upcoming. Members also caught up on the activities of 2016 Volkan Scholars Stephan Alder and Omar Shehabi. A total of seventeen members were present. Lord John Alderdice joined the opening session via Skype. Two other IDI members were unable to attend. Dr. Vinatier also attended.The IDI was joined at its Fifteenth Meeting by 2017 Volkan Scholar Lydia Wilson. Dr. Wilson is a research fellow at the Centre for the Resolution of Intractable Conflict, Harris Manchester College, University of Oxford, a senior fellow and field director at Artis International, and a visiting scholar at the Ralph Bunche Institute for International Studies, the Graduate Center, City University New York. A second 2017 Volkan Scholar, Nimrod Goren, was invited but unable to attend and will join us in 2018
- Reflections on World Dynamics
Discussion began with remarks by Lord John Alderdice, who joined us briefly by Skype. He expressed his concern about the dangerous and unpredictable place in which the world finds itself in late 2017, embodied most pressingly in the announcement just hours earlier that the United States intended to move its Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. This was seen as a kind of “grenade” thrown unthinkingly into world affairs. The other metaphor that came up was that of “divorce” between Europe and the UK. It was striking that the happiness about its being a relatively peaceful divorce eclipsed the sadness that a divorce had happened in the first place. Importantly, no one now wants a “hard” border between Northern Ireland and the Republic, which is a sign of the fundamental changes that have occurred over the last twenty years.IDI Members Senem Cevik and David Fromm then reported on the results of “vision conversations” they had initiated with IDI members over the preceding several months, in which they asked members to imagine the future of the IDI and the steps necessary to achieve that future. Gerard Fromm presented the findings of a similar conversation with the IDI Board. All of this is in anticipation of a broader discussion of an IDI vision, to be led by Bijan Khajehpour toward the end of the meeting.These introductory reports were followed by a round-table discussion in which each IDI member presented personal reflections on world dynamics. Members discussed their personal projects and interventions, political and psychological shifts within their countries, new scholarship and opportunities for future engagement. One important theme was: Is democracy exhausted currently or reaching some crucial limit? For various reasons, are we now seeing that people are “electing their kings”? Is the underlying anxiety that basic dependency needs are in jeopardy? From a different perspective – that of refugee camps – it was noted that stresses of various sorts were less harmful than might have been expected if the child’s relational environment was secure. It was this stability that led to hope, even if other circumstances seemed dire. From a yet different context, one member noted that it’s the “bureaucracy” in some countries that is providing the stability and therefore the hope these days. In another country, however, joining the bureaucracy seemed to make young people less concerned with the health of their society. A hypothesis emerged that saw some current leadership as representing profound fear of the future and of the generations that will lead those frightening changes. Hence, the effort to intimidate and buy off some young people and to constrain others, for example, in the United States through massive student debt.
- Discussion of Populism
IDI member Coline Covington led a discussion entitled “The Populist Dynamic: Threats to Identity.” Frank Ochberg moderated. Dr. Covington, working from her recent research, observed that in populist environments there was an acceptance of political hegemony, leading people who seek redress of grievances to endorse policies that hurt them. She spoke of the “3 I’s” that fuel populist movements: Inequality, Immigration and Identity. The impact of globalization has been to shift economies and borders across the world, leaving pockets of unemployment and poverty in some areas and amongst some parts of the population while creating new wealth for others. She spoke of the historical notion that capitalist economic markets are by their nature self-regulatory, a notion that is not in fact borne out in reality. Economic inequality is directly correlated with free market economies. As inequality grows, those “left behind” with fewer opportunities for raising their standard of living become angry and despairing and look for scapegoats. The presence of immigrants becomes threatening as they are perceived to be the beneficiaries of employment and social care, draining resources rightfully belonging to the native. Subconsciously, the native may fear becoming an immigrant in a strange land that used to be his own. Within this ideology of fear and lack of a future, the notion of Identity takes on existential importance and the desire for security becomes paramount. The “Who am I now?” question becomes urgent as one feels abandoned by those in charge.A robust discussion ensued, with IDI members offering reflections from their own political and professional contexts. One theme had to do with leadership: on the one hand, leadership that fosters adaptation by listening to the changes in the environment; on the other, leadership that demands a fight to the death to defend the group’s threatened identity. Underlying is a sense of existential anxiety, such that the “achievement” of one authoritarian leader was seen as the “infantilization” of his society. A “cynical” contract ensues: “We’ll take care of you if you don’t look too closely at how we do that (and what we are doing for ourselves in the process).”Populist dynamics were described as valuing feelings far more than facts, as facts are seen to be manipulated by the elite. We underlined the degree to which promise followed by betrayal, or hope followed by deep disillusionment, is a driving dynamic in situations ranging from electoral surges to recruitment into terrorist groups. One tragic cause of these misguided efforts to make something right is despair, “deaths of despair” now being one sad explanation for the opioid crisis in the US. There is a profound longing in people these days for something to believe in, for a feeling of belonging and for making sense of what’s happening. Belonging and beliefs are part of secure large-group identity. The longing for sense-making speaks to people’s wish for a restored capacity to think, to really understand what’s happening to them. From one angle, this is the IDI’s work: creating reflective spaces where the exploration of feelings can lead to restored thinking.On the theme of leadership, Dr. Covington noted President Macron’s invitation, “En Marche: Let’s make the future together.” It’s optimistic, inclusive (together) and agentic (make), and, in that latter sense, counters the enforced passivity – the loss of the capacity to make – that so many people feel today, whether in the area of manufacturing or politics. One member, in response to the contrast between Presidents Obama and Trump, hypothesized that Western society today is fundamentally not “together.” Going back to the metaphor of divorce, it’s as though we lurch from valuing care (for example, the effort toward universal health care in the US) to valuing boundaries (the immigration issue). In fact, both values are extremely important, but it’s as though we take for granted that leaders (perhaps at an emotional level representing maternal and paternal figures or values) have long ago divorced; they are incapable of working together for the good of those who depend on them and so simply try to prevail over the other.Two final observations about this discussion. One, it began with a story about dreams, which were critical to a leader facing an identity crisis in his group. This is an example of what is called social dreaming, that is, dreaming on behalf of one’s group. This methodology has a well-developed theoretical and practical background, and may prove useful in the IDI’s work. Second, we came to a point of tension within the discussion that seemed to be about our own group identity: that is, that the IDI is not an intellectual activity, but an experiential and personal one. This brought us back to that original leadership story: in a seriously threatening context, adaptation by listening is crucial, but if identity – or in our case a psychoanalytically-informed mission- is lost, what’s the value of survival?
- Dialogue with Representatives of International Agencies
At the end of Day One, the IDI hosted a reception and extended discussion with representatives of international agencies, including members of Vienna’s diplomatic community. A primary theme in this conversation was the importance of how people from different, and sometimes seriously conflicting, contexts talk to each other. The importance of “respect” – including respect for a country’s cultural achievements – was referred to more than once, along with the way that a country’s feeling disrespected has the sometimes counter-productive outcome of unifying it against the other. Closely related to respect was the theme of “regard,” which has a visual element to it. Does one party look at the other? Do each really see the other? Conversely, do they shame each other through disregard?A third theme had to do with the isolation and “loneliness” of some countries today, where current and past trauma seems to manipulate policy and therefore future relatedness to other countries. A final theme had to do with repetitive and seemingly stuck roles representatives of countries and NGO’s can fall into. Is this the playing out of basic identity elements within these contexts? How demoralizing, and therefore damaging to new opportunities, is this tense, even objectified, role relatedness? On the other hand, might it also be a way each party protects itself in a conflict situation, such that any movement toward the other is first grounded in a sense of control and security?
IDI Meeting: Day Two
- Reflections on the Dialogue with International Agencies
Day Two began with members sharing reflections, further thoughts and even a dream relating to the discussions of the preceding day. The theme of “being seen” or not came up again as did the profound importance of recognizing the cultural achievements of dialogue partners. Recognition facilitates the kind of emotional containment necessary for the elaboration of personal experiences. So does working from, as one member put it, “the most positive interpretation” of what might be happening. We agreed that working from this stance is critical to the success of a dialogue, but we also noted that government agencies, because security is at stake, might reflexively work from the most negative interpretation. Following observations about possible better designs for this kind of event, we closed with noting the inter-generational transmission of a sense of profound mission to current representatives of conflicting nations, a charge and a loyalty that makes it difficult, but also important, to come to terms with the guilt for one’s own, and one’s leader’s, contributions to the conflict. - Radicalization and Counter-Narratives: Volkan Scholar Lydia Wilson
The IDI then welcomed 2017 Volkan Scholar Lydia Wilson, who presented her work interviewing returning/captured ISIS militants in an effort to map the pathways in and out of jihadism and to explore points of decision-making. Regine Scholz moderated. Through a method of extended, “appreciative inquiry,” Dr. Wilson attempted to determine how “fused” militants were to the ISIS ideology. Fusion theory, as Dr. Wilson described it, seeks to identify the extent to which individuals “fuse” their identities to larger groups. When the identities are “fully fused,” the boundaries of one’s self-identity become porous and an insult to the group is perceived as an insult to the individual. Moreover, a fully-fused sense of large-group identity is often self-reinforcing in that an injury to one member is experienced as an injury to all.Dr. Wilson found that her interviewees thought that they knew their own story, but that, over time, a deeper story emerged. She noted the deep anxiety and isolation of these young men for whom both adolescence and opportunities feel lost, young men who ask “what is there to hope for?” and, receiving no answer, are drawn to ideology, especially when that ideology promises to “take complete care of your life.” Often, the deeper story involved genuine betrayal by someone in authority in the young person’s life, leading to vulnerability to, and exploitation by, a jihadist narrative promising to set the world right. Essentially, group ideology replaces failed leadership in the young person’s life. It promises the utopia of the “caliphate”, and rationalizes vengeance as justice. One of Dr. Wilson’s conclusions was that jihad has “hijacked the dreams of troubled young people.”Dr. Wilson invited IDI members to help her process the interview material, the format for which was not standardized and quite wide-ranging, and to develop new ways of looking at the data. IDI members offered several observations. These included looking at how leadership has failed the young person. Many recruits seem to be enacting a transgenerational transmission of trauma, specifically the trauma of displacement and humiliation to their parents. Their narratives might prove extremely important to understanding the next generation’s actions. We noted that betrayal, and sometimes catastrophic disillusionment, by someone in authority is the critical factor in what is called “moral injury”, now seen as central to war-related PTSD. Some data from returning jihadists also suggests that cold-blooded killing is used as an initiation rite for recruits, which – from the testimony of someone who did return – makes the recruit feel both strong but no longer human, and therefore cut off from the human world and no longer able to leave the group. This and other data also suggest that the narratives offered to these young people may be considerably less important than the quality of the relationships that are on offer to them. Dr. Wilson’s stories indicate that such relationships do not see the recruit as a victim, but rather as determined to be “faithful” to something, even if that something is to be understood at a deeper and very personal level.
- The Middle East: Evolving Dynamics
In the first afternoon session, IDI members took up evolving dynamics in the Middle East. The discussion was led by IDI members from the region and moderated by Robi Friedman. Of particular interest were steps taken by the United States Government with regard to relations with Iran and the location of the U.S. Embassy in Israel. Several members noted the sense of exhaustion and paralysis within the Israeli-Palestinian context, especially the stale quality of leadership on both sides. Yet some thought the embassy issue might paradoxically provide an opening for renewed thinking.More in the foreground now are struggles between Saudi Arabia and Iran (and their respective proxies) in which both countries seem to be competing to dominate regional Islamic identity (within which are also Arab and Non-Arab identities and Sunni and Shiite communities). Along with Israel, they are also competing for regional economic dominance. New leadership in Saudi Arabia seems to be attempting to modernize the state through the adoption of various liberal policies. It’s not clear yet if these will really take hold, given an entrenched culture and leadership methods that contradict the values it seeks to promote.Members raised various questions. Is it U.S. strategy to scapegoat Iran? Why is Saudi Arabia in Yemen, and what was its motive with regard to Lebanon’s President Hariri? Why did it support the Kurdish referendum when it was clear it couldn’t succeed? The metaphor of a “chess game with no strategy” came up, and whether some countries were engaged in policies of “strategic confusion,” playing multi-variant games to see what pans out. This line of thought fits U.S. behaviour currently; President Trump is often described as generating chaos, either as a strategy of deflection or of short-term testing of options or simply the result of profound confusion. At this point, our discussion itself seemed confused and lacking traction. Members regained focus by discussing possible projects, including starting or continuing to participate in specific dialogues. Two members spoke somewhat optimistically about the potential to partner with Iran on issues like security and energy production, especially if the Israel-Palestine situation could be set aside for purposes of the negotiation.
- The Populist Dynamic: Disinformation and the Weaponizing of Social Media
Day Two concluded with a presentation by Anatoly Golubovsky on social media disinformation campaigns, moderated by Ford Rowan. Dr. Golubovsky discussed the historical origins of disinformation – “fake news” – in Russia and its more recent large-scale weaponization as social media eclipses traditional media. He observed that social media – which allows the user to opt in and out of larger groups – enables the creation of uncritical audiences for disinformation. He discussed the sophistication of social media targeting and offered the Ukraine as an example of a conflict fuelled in large part through social media.IDI members discussed the implications of large group identities coalescing around social media platforms and what it means to be self-selecting (either wittingly or unwittingly) a large-group identity. One implication of such self-selection is that dialogue, and the critical thinking dialogue brings, does not occur. Another implication is that membership is often based on emotion: i.e., on liking or disliking something or someone. The speed of events on social media discourages fact-checking, and a sort of tribalism is amplified and enforced by online dynamics. Seemingly shared values are projected, as if onto the canvas walls of a tent, the screens of social media having become the platforms for such projection. As one member put it, authoritarian systems of control have become systems of influence.Another member added the metaphor of social media as a “panopticon prison,” in which “we are seen but can’t see the seer.” This observation highlights the paranoia-generating aspect of social media, which seems to pull for anxious flight from the public sphere into trusted pairs or small groups. Other IDI members noted opportunities afforded by social media, in shaping constructive large-group identities, in breaking down differences between large groups, in narrowing the accountability gap between people and their governments, and in social media companies’ willingness to work with credible partners. The #MeToo phenomenon may well illustrate the essential role of social media in generating collective testimony against institutionalized oppression.
IDI Meeting: Day Three
- General Discussion: Re-articulating our Vision
On Day Three, the IDI gathered in a half-day session to discuss the work of the first two days and make plans for the future. Members offered reflections on the meeting and on their experiences of the IDI generally, including the manner in which they use IDI learning within their own practices and the opportunities they see for additional IDI interventions. Bijan Khajehpour lead the group through a SWOT analysis – an exercise used to assess an organization’s Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats – as part of a discussion directed toward refining the IDI’s vision, mission and strategy moving forward.
Monday, December 11: Post-Meeting Event
On Monday, after the conclusion of the IDI’s 15th Meeting, President Emeritus Vamik Volkan presented to the combined Harvard and Stanford Clubs of Vienna on IDI concepts and interventions. Gerard Fromm and Bijan Khajehpour contributed additional remarks, which were followed by discussion and a reception.
——————————————————————————————————–
NEXT IDI MEETING:
The 16th Meeting of the IDI will take place in fall of 2018 at a location to be determined after Board consultation.