The views expressed in these blogs belong to the authors, not necessarily LICC. In this series, we’re hosting a conversation in blog form, bringing diverse perspectives into dialogue.
Editor’s introduction
‘Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth. …
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God.’
(Matthew 5:5, 9)
By God’s grace, this will ultimately be so. But right now, we need courage to hold on to this hope and wisdom to model another way, as the risk of world war seems to grow daily.
Currently, there are over 40 countries locked in conflict that destroys lives and devastates community and creation alike.
As international conflict escalates, how would Jesus have us seek shalom wherever we stand?
That’s the question this five-part blog series explores. Our contributors include military advisors, global relational peacebuilders, educators, humanitarian aid workers, academics, activists, and political aides. Some work overseas, directly engaging on the frontline. Others are serving on UK soil, dealing with the repercussions of unchecked violence come home to roost.
The articles are designed to help you become a ‘wise peacemaker’ where you are. Each author models how to:
- Listen to what’s going on and why as wartime impinges on their context and calling
- Imagine what should be going on, with biblical insight to join God’s peace-full mission
- Create practices and a response of healing action that brings God’s shalom near
- Communicate the gospel that Christ reigns even over dictators, without firing a bullet
The series also accompanies our Wisdom Lab: Peacemaking in Wartime event, at which the authors will engage in honest dialogue that will help us squarely face war’s consequences in a Christlike way.
In this instalment, you’ll read a conversation between two generations of the same family, as Miriam Schluter Atkinson, LICC’s Culture and Discipleship Project Lead, and Dr Michael Schluter, CBE, President of Relational Peacebuilding Initiatives, reflect on their political and research experience in contexts of conflict. Michael has been at the heart of peacebuilding efforts in some of the harshest conflicts of our time, contributing to ending apartheid in South Africa (1986–1994), restoring inter-ethnic relations in Rwanda after the genocide (1994–1999), and in Sudan to help end the civil war (1999–2004).
Through the lens of five key relational principles, Miriam and Michael explore what truly makes for peace, both with one’s neighbours over the fence and with foreign nations over the border.
Dr Dave Benson, Director of Culture & Discipleship, LICC
Coming to the table
The people at the table
There is an approximately 53-year age gap between the two of us. A grandfather and granddaughter decades apart, yet equally passionate about the things in the world we wish we could fix. As we sit on opposite sides of the table in the dining room, a familiar conversation begins.
It starts as it usually does. One of us beginning a vehement monologue on how we have the solution to mend an object, relationship, or even country we see as broken. This intense discussion occasionally boasts the needed qualification, or experience of the broken thing, yet a compelling argument on our capability to intervene will always resound. From friends to fellowships and newsprint to nations, the Schluters have a history of wanting to fix it all.
Michael Schluter: My name is Michael, and professionally I am an economist, trained at Durham University. I set up the Jubilee Centre as a Christian think tank back in the 1980s, and subsequent to that I got involved increasingly in Relational Peacebuilding Initiatives, an international NGO based in Geneva, working initially in South Africa, then Rwanda and Sudan. That peacebuilding interest has continued to today – I am currently thinking about and reflecting on how to bring peace between North Korea and South Korea. I live in Cambridge with my wife, and we attend a local church alongside many international friends.
Miriam Schluter Atkinson: And my name is Miriam. I have a degree in anthropology and sociology, also from Durham University, where I studied over 50 years after my grandfather. I worked alongside him in 2019 in his peacebuilding initiative in Korea, and joined LICC after a couple of years as an MP’s assistant in Parliament.
Our conversation today focuses on conflict. We share the call to peacemaking. Having grown up in a post-apartheid South Africa, my experience living in this recovering nation highlighted to me the conflict was far from over. [1] I lived alongside a bruised and battered cohort who had inherited the trauma of their parents and grandparents. However, the impact of legislated racial segregation was far from the only battleground we occupied. As part of the digital generations of the West, armed with a smartphone and social media, our new virtual reality has made us more aware of conflict around the world from our places of relative peace. We watch as our peers rally against Russia, protest on Palestine, and celebrate or trash Trump.
The issue on the table
(Please be advised, the following story contains graphic details of violence.)
MS: When I started working in Rwanda, we ran a conference in Kigali. We invited a lot of church leaders to come, and we invited the leader of Churches Together in Kigali to come and speak about the importance of reconciliation and forgiveness. This man was a Tutsi and what he did to my astonishment was give a 40-minute rant on how disgusting and horrible the Hutus had been.
This was the complete antithesis of forgiveness and reconciliation. So over coffee afterwards, I asked the Anglican Bishop of Kigali who had been invited to attend why the speaker had done the opposite of what we had asked him to do. He answered me in these simple but unforgettable words, ‘Michael, what do you think you’d be saying here today if your wife and children had been hacked to pieces by members of a different ethnic group less than a year ago?’
I realised I hadn’t engaged with the emotional trauma that these people have been through. I was naïve, I was self-absorbed if you like, and that was a huge wake up call to me. It made me realise how much I still had to learn about peacebuilding and listening to the other people in the room. I needed to listen with greater attention and intensity, particularly when talking to people involved in conflict.
MSA: When it comes to conflict resolution, I must confess my experience is not quite as far reaching. Aside from my South African peers at school protesting, be it on archaic hair rules, decolonising education, or #Feesmustfall, conversations generally have not involved the need for international lawmakers or matters of life and death.
Yet the posture both my grandfather and I adopt in our areas of conflict is the same. It may come as no surprise that this approach is inherited and inherent. Michael and I have been compelled by Jesus’ command to love the Lord our God and neighbour as ourselves (Matthew 22:37–40), and have been convinced that this command frames our pursuit of peace.
Michael is a professional economist, but this is how he describes the shift in the focus of his thinking from issues of finance to issues of relationship.
MS: I found the ‘big idea’ from something that Jesus himself says. Jesus is asked, in Matthew 22, which is the greatest commandment. The answer I was looking for is contained in his answer to a question from a lawyer. The word Jesus uses is ‘love’, which sounds like a sort of 1960s flower power in California. But I realised that love is a quality of relationships and what Jesus was teaching was that God’s interest in analysing a problem is not in terms of economic efficiency. Instead, it’s how does this affect the pattern of relationship going on in society? What does it look like to create a relational society in terms of how you organise a corporation, or the role of a government, or what you teach in the education system?
MSA: The Bible has much to say on relationships, peacebuilding, and indeed how we are to engage in issues of conflict. The Old Testament has commands on how we must limit revenge by ensuring no more than equal consequences for actions against one another. For example, ‘an eye for an eye’ (Leviticus 24:17–22). Yet, Jesus takes this response to unfairness way further by going to the root of God’s concerns. He says the greatest commands are to love God and to love your neighbour. Love has to be defined as other-person-centeredness. And these commands are central to how we shape and order our lives and community.
It therefore makes sense to apply these commandments to how we resolve and restore places of conflict. We are called to be ‘peacemakers’. In fact, in Matthew 5:9, it says ‘blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God’. This theme of peace relies, of course, on restored relationships, the ultimate example of which is the restored relationship between God and humanity, and between Jews and Gentiles, through Jesus’ death on the cross (Ephesians 2:11–22). The commandment to ‘love our neighbour’ in Matthew 22 is love in action. Peace means we are enabling all those around us to flourish (Romans 12:9–21).
The solution on the table
MS: It was my trip to South Africa in 1986 that catalysed me to get involved. The ‘Keep Sunday Special’ campaign had just defeated Mrs Thatcher, and when I encountered apartheid in South Africa I thought, ‘If the Lord can defeat Mrs Thatcher, he can also defeat apartheid!’
I’d learnt through working for the International Food Policy Research Institute that we needed to do some research. Research to show how a handover of power could be done in a way that would not wreck the economy. Without the training and people who helped me understand public policy in these terms, I wouldn’t have been equipped with the ideas necessary to get the experts in the room.
MSA: The approach that Michael and the team at Newick Park Initiatives (NPI) took is called ‘track two diplomacy’. Track two concerns intermediate-level facilitation, operating on a low-profile basis. Meetings are conducted among people close to the leadership, with influence that reaches both to high-profile and high-level policy-makers, as well to the grassroots. The prior research the team did ensured that they were familiar with and understood the policies, and more importantly the people.
Lessons of empathy are not easily learnt, and it’s the skill of walking in someone else’s shoes that builds trust and therefore encourages honesty. The understanding that individuals round a table are more than just lawyers, politicians, and campaigners, but are also sons, sisters, daughters, and fathers. Their convictions are not isolated from lessons learnt and cultivated from their kinship and culture. [2]
In South Africa, the word for hello is ‘sawubona’. Far beyond a simple greeting, the word translated from Zulu literally means ‘I see you’. It carries with it the recognition that the person before you has dignity and worth, shaped by their unseen experiences, passions, personality, and family. I far prefer this salutation to our British nicety of ‘how are you’, as ‘sawubona’ communicates an unconditional acceptance to come as you are.
MS: It was the trust that had been built up by that meeting, informally in our context, that had created the opportunity. It just shows the power of building relationships and exploring issues, as if it were an attractive process offline that creates the opportunities for political breakthroughs to come later.
MSA: Now, I am not expecting to be frequently around a meeting table with influential policymakers, bar perhaps my time in Parliament. My generation is not usually found sat around a table. Instead, our conversations concerning conflict tend to land online, with discussion often degenerating into linear communications of – and sometimes even ranting over – the latest war crime or rally date. It is polarised, with friendships on the brink over whether or not you align with one nation or another. We seldom speak about these conflicts in a room with one another, face-to-face.
The lessons my grandfather learnt in his international pursuits for peace are transferable from nations to neighbourhoods. The peacemaking he modelled was that of Jesus.
MS: It is impossible to lay down your arms, which makes you vulnerable, unless you believe the other party will do the same. So, ‘How can such mutual trust be generated?’ becomes the key question. Both our research and our experience indicate that there are two key factors to enable leaders of different ethnic groups to get to know each other over time. First, knowing each other’s backgrounds and motivation. And second, identifying the values and goals which they share.
MSA: These two key factors are easily transferable across all areas of conflict and were informed and shaped by Michael’s five relational principles, as set out initially in The R Factor (1984) and expanded in The Relational Lens (2017). To understand someone’s background and motivations and their shared values and goals, the following principles could be applied: parity, directness, continuity, multiplexity, and commonality. [3]
The response we should adopt rests on knowing who we should follow. With Jesus as our model, how do we draw alongside those who are different? How do we ask questions which help paint a picture of their background and motivation? This simple listening exercise should help in identifying the values and goals we share and point to how conflict can be resolved.
For the Gen Zer online, this is much harder. Aside from scrolling through the entirety of an Instagram profile, what we know of someone in virtual reality is heavily shaped by what they choose to present, text, and send. Can you have healthy discussions online regarding hot-button issues, leading toward conflict resolution? [4] John Mark Comer warns that online community is not real community, and we have confused connectivity with community. [5] So, where do the five relational principles apply in an online world, if at all? And how can we as Christians in the younger generations model this as people take opposite sides in escalating global tensions? Here’s my best go at it:
Parity: What does it look like for people to be treated with respect online? How can we be careful with the posture and organisation of a space, especially virtually, so that everyone feels they come to the meeting on an equal basis? How is conversation monitored and inclusive of everyone? On an online group chat, how can we include voices that are often quieter on that platform or even marginalised?
Directness: When engaging in the online world there is already less contact than if there’s a phone call. In text, we lose much communication. When discussing difficult topics of conflict, aim to be face-to-face so that facial expression, body language, and tone of voice are not lost.
Continuity: How regular are our conversations with friends or parties to a conflict? With access to a mobile phone and ability to be constantly in touch, there’s seldom scheduled regularity of conversation. Seldom do we plan what to say, or take time to consider the angles or perspectives of the other.
Multiplexity: What does it look like to see people we’re conversing with in multiple contexts? If we know them online, do we know them offline too? If we know them at work, do we know them on the tennis court? This will deepen our understanding of them and who they are, where their values come from, and will enrich any conversations going forward.
Commonality: What, beyond the state of conflict, are some shared goals and values that you identify with the other party? How can we draw on what we agree with to reach a consensus? Maybe do a cheeky social media stalk of who they follow or what they post, to discover common ground.
Extending the table
As we come to the table, there’s much we can learn from track two diplomacy exercised in the South African context.
MS: A peace process to help end apartheid was held at Newick Park in Sussex, the home of Viscount and Viscountess Brentford. Initially all the participants in the process were Christians. However, they had very different understandings of the Bible. For example, the relevance of the Exodus stories to the South Africa situation and the relative importance of the Old Testament and New Testament to find ways forward. However, the process was distinctively Christian because it focused on building relationships of trust among key players who were drawn from the different racial and ethnic groups, rather than on finding short-term pragmatic political solutions. The focus was on finding common ground between them on the key issues where they disagreed.
MSA: Now we might not be in spaces of conflict where all participants have the same religious background or value system. So, being explicit with our faith and seeking to use this as common ground may not be helpful. How, then, do we find alternative common ground while still seeking for our faith to form our posture and engagement? How do we model Jesus in these conversations? How do we make sure our work is of a high standard and quality? Can we mould the culture of the conversations and minister grace and love in all we say and do? In the same breath, how can we be a strategic mouthpiece for truth and justice as we seek peace, wherever we are? LICC has helpfully mapped out what it looks like to be fruitful on these frontlines, through the 6Ms framework. [6] It holds promise for all of life, even when in conflict and war.
MS: Clearly, what happens in life after death, which goes on forever in some sense, is arguably of more importance than what happens in the here and now. But here’s the thing. The Bible makes it clear, and Jesus stresses it, that that the decision we make in response to his grace, and what we do on Earth, sets the trajectory for eternity. God cares passionately about what happens in all human affairs and is fully aware of the motivation and attitudes, as well as the actions, of every person and group involved in political and economic affairs. God has made it clear that he is looking for and expecting us to deliver justice, and pursue what he calls ‘righteousness’, which I understand to mean right relationships between individuals, groups, and nations. Hence, all Christians need to be deeply informed and concerned about areas of violent conflict and, where possible, seek resolution and reconciliation.
Miriam Schluter Atkinson and Dr Michael Schluter, CBE
Discussion questions
- What areas of conflict are you aware of around you, be it online or in your day-to-day?
- How does Jesus’ command to love your neighbour, as discussed by Michael and Mims, contextualise your pursuit of peace?
- How might you apply the five relational principles (parity, directness, continuity, multiplexity, commonality) to an online community or the physical place where you’re called to follow Jesus?
- How has reading this article deepened your understanding of God’s command to live righteous lives? How might you deepen your relationships with those on your frontline as a way of keeping conflict at bay?
Endnotes
[1] This is the period after the ending of apartheid, which was a legal system segregating its population along the lines of race in which the white population were given greater rights and advantages. For a helpful retrospective, see BBC, ‘Thirty Years Since Apartheid Ended: What Was It, How Did It End, and Why Did It Start?’ Newsround, 9 May 2024.
[2] For more, see ‘11.1 What Is Kinship?‘, Introduction to Anthropology, Open Stax (Rice University, 2005). See also the way, amidst intractable and binary oppositions, you can complexify the narrative and help enemies lean into other identities that are more relational – this is explored by Amanda Ripley, High Conflict: Why We Get Trapped and How We Get Out of It (Simon & Schuster, 2021).
[3] John Ashcroft, Roy Childs, Alison Myers, and Michael Schluter, The Relational Lens: Understanding, Measuring and Managing Stakeholder Relationships (Cambridge University Press, 2017), frontmatter, available online here.
[4] If you’re willing to try conflict resolution online, you might find this helpful: Dave Benson, ‘Being Fruitful on Facebook: Wisdom for the Web,’ LICC blog, 25 November 2020.
[5] John Mark Comer, ‘How We Change: Community,’ talk delivered at Bridgetown Church, November 13, 2016.
[6] For more, see the 6M People stories and discussion guides, building on LICC’s video-based course and resources, Fruitfulness on the Frontline, which in turn is based on Mark Greene, Fruitfulness on the Frontline: Making a Difference Where You Are (IVP, 2014).
Helpful resources
Books:
– John Ashcroft, Roy Childs, Alison Meyers, and Michael Schluter, The Relational Lens (Cambridge Press, 2016)
– Michael Schluter and David Lee, The R Factor (Hodder and Stoughton, 1993)
– Michael Schluter, No Other Way to Peace in Korea? A Practical Path to Reunification (Relational Peacebuilding Initiatives, 2022)
– Mark Greene, Probably the Best Idea in the World (Muddy Pearl, 2018)
Articles:
– Jeremy Ive, A History of the Newick Park Initiative (NPI) and its Contribution of Building Peace in South Africa 1986–1994 (Jubilee Centre, 2014), online here
Podcasts/Media:
– Relational Peacebuilding Initiatives website, with RPI’s Korea Program and Ukraine Program
– Michael Schluter, ‘Complex Reality of International Peacebuilding’, YouTube interview with Ashutosh Garg, The Brand Called You, Season 4, episode 287, 30 January 2024
– Michael Schluter, ‘Vision for Korean Reunification Explored’, YouTube interview with Ashutosh Garg, The Brand Called You, Season 5, episode 350, 6 March 2024
– Research and initiatives associated with ‘Track two’ diplomacy, through the T2 Institute for Citizen Diplomacy
