Political Strategies III: Fighting Fundamentalism

(March 26- April 2, 2004)
by Jim Clerigo

Jim Clerigo

First of all, the seminar has changed my perception about Germans. I used to tell myself that all Germans have a superior race complex. Well, my misconception soon vanished after a one-week stay in Germany. This is perhaps the greatest impact the seminar had on me.

Friday, 26.03.2004

I arrived at the Frankfurt airport at 4.55am, ten minutes ahead of the scheduled time of arrival. I wondered how it happened but I let the question slip out of my mind. Upon getting off the plane, I was engulfed by a very cold air. Yes, this is the European wind, Germany to be exact. I walked for half an hour inside the airport whose breadth seemed endless. I felt grateful that the Filipinos helped me locate my next flight.

From the Cologne airport, I traveled to Gummersbach, together with participants from Indonesia and Egypt. Our driver told us that there were participants who arrived ahead of us. We had a three hour rest before eating our lunch.

The seminar formally started on the first day before dinner. We were introduced to the two facilitators and interpreters and briefed on the equipment we would use for the duration of the seminar. A short history of the FNF was presented. Before we adjourned, we were tasked to introduce a participant on the next day’s session. So we each had to interview one co-participant.

Saturday, 27.03.2004

The second day was greeted with a lively start. All of us introduced our partners before formally starting the talk on fundamentalism. There were twenty participants in all from South and Southeast Asia, Africa, South America and Eastern Europe representing different sectors such as the academe, NGOs, government, and the private sector.

As the first lecture progressed, several participants tried to give comments but were refrained from doing so by the facilitators; they were told to wait for the open forum instead. The definition of fundamentalism presented by one of the facilitators thru the use of PowerPoint presentation elicited varying comments from the participants. However, the facilitators were quick to point out that there could be no single definition of the word, and said definition may vary in different regions.

We had our first group work. The topic given us was about the manifestations of fundamentalism in our respective countries. Our group was composed Southeast and South Asia. All the groups presented beyond the time limit so we were reminded after everyone had finished reporting that we should discuss everything the group had talked about only within the time limit.

There were several clashes of ideas during discussions especially on the labeling of certain groups as fundamentalists. The participant from Malaysia considered herself as a fundamentalist, and she was proud of it. According to her, Malaysia emerged from the ashes because her country focused on the Islam’s fundamentals which are discipline and respect for the rule of law, and of course, Allah.

Emotions ran high during the discussions especially when the issues of corruption and oppression by governments were touched. Had the facilitators not been good at directing the flow of the debates, tears could have flowed in Gummersbach. I could not blame the participants. They merely shared their first hand experience on the abuses by their governments. They called it governmental fundamentalism.

Sunday, 28.03.2004

The third day started with presentations of the participants from Pakistan and Kosovo. The lack of democracy, corruption, and government inefficiency were common in both countries. I thought that the Philippines was more fortunate than these two countries although corruption and government inefficiency exist.

We were again subdivided into different groups. This time Southeast Asia was mixed with South America. Our grouped discussed the conditions of the fundamentalist groups in our respective countries. We agreed that poverty breeds fundamentalism, although not applicable in all. We also identified corruption, lack of identity, poverty, inequality, uncertainty, paternalism, fanaticism, isolation, centralization of power, oppression of the poor, and ideology as factors that cause fundamentalism to grow in a country.

Monday, 29.03.2004

The fourth day was the most exciting because we had the chance to have an informative dialogue with a staff of the head of the Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development in Bonn, a 45 minute drive from the Academy. After this dialogue, we went to Cologne. The first thing I did upon reaching the place was to look for a Chinese restaurant because I really missed the taste of a real Asian food. I was joined by fellow Southeast Asians from Malaysia and Indonesia. Walking around Cologne, I was mystified by the Cathedral with its gothic design and gigantic works of art. It was a very beautiful masterpiece from the past.

Tuesday, 30.03.2004

As to be expected, the fifth day started on time. Except for two latecomers, we were all seated before participants from Indonesia and Uzbekistan had started on their report. They both gave us information on the present state of their countries. It was an emotional and informative discussion. The open forum was cut short to give way to the lecture on the effects of fundamentalist groups on the state before regrouping us again. This time I was separated from the Southeast Asian group. My name was listed together with the participants from Egypt, Argentina, Azerbaijan and Nepal. This was a very diverse group relative to the groups I had on the second day. As a proof, I had an argument with a lady participant from Argentina regarding the definition of education and the fundamentalists’ effect on it. I argued that education is not limited to the four corners of a classroom, that education has no boundaries, that education is better outside the school. There was no agreement made but we had a consensus that both our concept would be included in the report. I also mentioned in the discussion that the Philippines is perhaps the freest country in Asia or maybe the whole world in terms of freedom of speech and access to information that is why education in my country is accessible to all Filipinos and is not affected by any fundamentalist groups as defined in the seminar. We all agreed that access to information is a very important aspect of education. The report went well, thanks to our presentor.

We finished the day earlier than planned only to be told that we would have an activity on the next day that was not included on the program. The facilitator informed us that we would be having a debate. Al Qaeda and Sendero Luminoso members would defend themselves before a special court created by the Security Council and the United Nations in view of the bombings of five passenger planes parked in the International Airport of London. I was volunteered by the facilitators to be one of the Al Qaeda members. As a result, I read and studied Al Quaeda materials downloaded from Internet before heading to the bar. Although I kept thinking about the debate, I still enjoyed the night dancing and drinking with my fellow participants. The bar was one of the best facilitator I had ever encountered in my life. It allowed me to express everything I had wanted to say and do. In short, the bar was very successful in exposing my other side, and probably, all the other participants as well.

Wednesday, 31.03.2004

I woke up earlier than usual because I still had to write my opening statement. I had everything written on my mind, so that, when I started writing all the words flowed smoothly.

After breakfast, the “terrorist participants,” composed of Filipino, Russian, Peruvian, Indonesian and African, discussed the rules. The meeting was brief and the debate started as soon as we went inside the seminar room.

The first to deliver his side was the Russian, a “Sendero Luminoso member.” He argued that he planted bombs in the planes because it was his right to do so. He said he only retaliated because his men were oppressed by the government of Peru, aided and encouraged by different governments such as the US, UK, and others. I opened my speech by saying that my group does not recognize the court. I continued by saying that our only court is the court of Allah, which is heaven. A short interpolation by the court-appointed lawyers followed after we presented our case. The judge took a five-minute break to decide after the hearing and came back with the decision that all of us, “members of the two terrorist groups,” were found guilty of the crime of murder. We were “sentenced” to stay for another two weeks in the Academy to embrace the concept of pluralism and harmony with all the people no matter what religion they believed in. Fun never abandoned us, in spite of the tedious activities we were into.

Some participants never understood the moral of the activity. Several had said that it was a waste of time, but others countered that it was a very productive one. I agree with the latter not because I was a direct participant, but because it was a great way to understand why other people practice terrorism. Although we all know that terrorism has no place on earth, it is important to know why it happened and continues to happen.

There was another regrouping and this time, I was back with my fellow Asians. We deliberated on the counter strategies to fight fundamentalism in our respective countries. The models presented by the facilitators were very helpful in analyzing the situations in Asia. We found out in our group discussions that most of the fundamentalist groups in Asia have religion as basis.

The day ended and we were all excited to go to the bar to continue our “debates” over beer and wine.

Thursday, 01.04.2004

The seventh day was, sad to say, the last. For seven days, we were strongly bonded together, only to be separated forever. The feeling of uncertainty clouded the seminar room. The chance of meeting all of them again is near to impossible. This is the cruelty of having a seminar participated in by people from around the world.

We all know that this would be the hardest day so we made the most of it. Our original groupings on the first day were retained since our group work was devoted on counter strategies we would implement when we return home. South and Southeast Asia had the same problems but different solutions. We avoided having arguments since this would be our last day together. We just listened to everyone and agreed to whatever he or she said.

The very last activity before our farewell dinner was the evaluation of the seminar and everyone and everything involved with it. Aside from a few suggestions that a wall clock be installed in the seminar room, a much more detailed map be used instead of the present one, we all agreed that the food was great, the venue was excellent, the hospitality of the people running the activity was first-rate, and above all the facilitators were simply the best.

We all spent our last night together in the bar dancing, drinking, exchanging addresses, sharing stories and reminding everyone to keep in touch. Everyone hoped that we would be seeing each other again. Although that is near to impossible, we were all definitely sure that we would all be together in the fight against fundamentalism. Long live Gummersbach!!!! Long live Friedrich Naumann Foundation!!!