A lesson in peaceful listening

East African leaders are building a pathway to peace in Sudan through patient diplomacy based on trust-building and compassion.

|
Reuters
People who fled fighting in Sudan live in the Metche refugee camp in neighboring Chad.

The responses by regional peacemakers to the war in Gaza during the past two months have highlighted how the Middle East is working toward a more integrated and peaceful future. A similar shift is underway in Africa, where neighboring nations have banded together to end a brutal civil war in Sudan.

Those efforts may now be on the cusp of a breakthrough. The leaders of Kenya, Ethiopia, Djibouti, and South Sudan are set to meet in coming days.  Their goal is to chart a broadly inclusive process to restore peace and democracy. That alone would be significant. In seven months, the war has displaced more than 6 million people and rekindled ethnic violence in parts of the country still recovering from genocide a generation ago.

But the summit matters in another way, too. Coming just days after the war’s rival factions pressured the United Nations Security Council to close its political mission in Sudan, it reflects the utility of patient trust-building. Led by Kenyan President William Ruto, regional leaders have spent months listening and working to develop credibility with the warring factions and their international patrons.

Such diplomacy rests on what Workneh Gebeyehu, executive secretary of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development, a bloc of East African nations, calls a collective “moral obligation to the peace and stability” rooted in dignity and the protection of innocent life. It’s proving persuasive. The United States and Saudi Arabia now see regional peace-efforts work as the key to restarting their halting diplomacy in Sudan.

“When African states propose a formula for addressing an African crisis, world powers often put aside their difference and back it,” wrote regional experts Alex de Waal and Abdul Mohammed in The New York Times this week.

The war broke out in April when two rival generals who conspired to overthrow a transitional civilian-led government turned their forces on each other. The conflict sparked parallel peace initiatives to keep a humanitarian crisis from creating wider instability in an already fragile region. Unifying those mediation efforts requires building trust among a broad array of foreign actors with competing economic and strategic interests in Sudan.

One outcome of the summit next week might be a division of labor. Amgad Fareid Eltayeb, a fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, has argued for spreading the duty to meet military, political, and humanitarian needs of Sudan among various international mentors with a shared goal of enabling the Sudanese people to determine their own future.

That approach reflects what may be an emerging good at a time of fragmenting blocs of global power. As authors Jared Cohen and Ian Bremmer wrote in Foreign Policy Wednesday, the critical adhesive for a world in balance is trust: “At the global level, credibility makes alliances and deterrence work, increasing cooperation and reducing the risk.”

In Sudan, as in Gaza, new constellations of cooperation are forming. A new era of listening among nations may be underway.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to A lesson in peaceful listening
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/the-monitors-view/2023/1207/A-lesson-in-peaceful-listening
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe