Humankind seems to be heading in some direction – a direction of vengeance and hate. This looks less like “heading in,” and more like “falling into,” a situation one cannot easily guess; a destination one can hardly know. To say that their destination is hell is perhaps succumbing to pessimism; but to say that they are bound for heaven is simply delusional. Hearts beat with anger, pride is rampant, ideas are broken, and judgment is careless. Any search for dialogue is artificial, and stems from self-interest. Discussion forums function as battlefields or arenas. It seems as if everything is set to divide society into different factions. People behave rudely and speak aggressively while groups engage intolerantly. In the words of Mehmet Akif, “Loyalty is nowhere to be found; promises not honored; trust is a meaningless word / Lying is the currency; deceit is everywhere; justice is obscure…” As society weeps, its enemies rejoice.

To halt this downward spiral, we must act with tolerance and love. We need faithful and loving hearts devoted to the worldly, and other-worldly, happiness of humanity. We need selfless souls, like Bediuzzaman who said, “There is neither love of heaven nor fear of hell in my eyes; I am ready to burn in the flames of Hell, if this will secure the faith of my people.”

Love is a universal language that addresses the human spirit without words. It is a magical source of power that attracts and enchants hearts, and that no one, not even wild spirits, can resist. Yes, even the uncivilized understands its soft, friendly language.

Love holds the power and magic of prophetic influence. When love, in its unique language, rains upon the vastness of our soul, we feel its message deep in our soul, and are immediately inclined to accept it.

Even without uttering a word, one can convey the “book” in their soul, with all its pages and chapters, to another person when their heart beats with love, their face reflects honesty, and their eyes smile with genuine sincerity.

According to the degree of its sincerity, the sound and breath of love often stir our feelings, carrying us from trust to submission, from submission to acceptance, and from acceptance to faith. It whispers to our spirits wondrous meanings that cannot be conveyed by the most eloquent speeches nor even by the most famous books.

Love’s cryptic melodies echo on the hillsides of our hearts like the songs of nightingales. They embrace us like lullabies, so sweet that they move us to tears of delight and joy.

Love, with its air like a mother’s warm embrace and its magic like keys that can open any door, is a splendid faucet that fills our hearts with the essence of all creation and eternal beauty. As we feel the river of affection flowing from this pure faucet, our emotions rise and our spirits soar; breaking through the ceiling of our ego, we attain a sense of eternal exhilaration.

Hearts that breathe the invigorating, purified air of love feel, and reveal the boundless depths of being human. They comprehend the mysteries of eternity. In fact, they reach eternity, take on the color of eternity, and say, “for His sake,” while they shower their surroundings with love. They become souls who seek eternity everywhere.

Love existed before us. It was the first melody that awakened mankind to existence, and the first cradle in which he was rocked. Here, we aim to murmur once again in the name of love, with a new accent in an old pitch; with a new rendition of an old melody; and a simple shift in style, hoping that love will conquer enmity, hatred, despair, and discord. After this, who knows how many burning melodies will be sung with new expressions and voices; who knows what piercing songs will be sung that will illuminate our world like fireworks.

If mankind could only enter the simple, magical path of love, they could surpass the steepest summits of hatred and anger that appear insurmountable to others. They could pass over seas of blood, walk in spring climates like the hillsides of heaven, and embrace spirits illuminated with love. Their lives   would unfold in the warmth of a bird’s nest and the safety of a mother’s bosom; allowing them to experience the beauty of being human.

At a time when mankind has been defeated by revenge and hostility, and the masses are being dragged into disputes and fighting; when might silences right, and those in power behave like tyrants towards those who oppose them; when the cruel and oppressive are applauded and praised, and the innocent are pushed around, we must again assert the power of love, even if we do so with shaken hopes. We assert this and believe that love will change the rhythm of our lives, elevating us from the ordinary to the extraordinary, from floundering in banality to ascending to transcendence. We nurture the hope that we will catch those lucid dreams we felt and lived in our childhood.

To the degree that we can equip ourselves with love, respect, and understanding, society will change, and so will the color of things and events. True human values will emerge, and the dozens of advantages we gain by being “the honored creature” will be preserved rather than squandered. All the beauties that arise from belief and culture, which have been lost in history, will be revived and restored; in fact, they will be ours again, allowing us to relive the life we once knew and taste infinite and timeless pleasures and delights, all at once. If only we, too, could awaken to this faith and the deep love therein, as the first believers did…

A consocational democracy is a type of democracy which emphasizes the importance of power-sharing and decision-making among different segments in society. But is consociational democracy the most suitable form of democracy when it comes to establishing lasting peace in post-conflict societies?

Consocational democracy addresses problems in democratic state building that result from deep segmentation. These divisions as a result are easily defined and measured where real boundaries (political or otherwise) exist. As a result of these environmental and social conditions there exists a natural tendency for competition and the supporting of ethnically-based parties (Andeweg 2000).

The consocational framework is dependent on elite cooperation. This is the centerpiece of the model and is based on the premise that communal violence between groups is often exacerbated by elites so that when these elites have a voice in government, they have a vested interest in maintaining its integrity. Although elite meddling in conflict is the most potent, it is not the only incendiary in inter-group relations (Andeweg 2000).

Under the current model where a society has the characteristics necessitating a consocational framework, the sub-groups have two choices: to remain a part of the country or to separate. These two forces pull on individuals of each group in which decisions are often based on various factors. Those societies that do not cooperate are termed “centrifugal.” In this case, the sub-groups emphasize separation over integration. Consocationalism is a top-down integration/cooperation mechanism that seeks to overcome centrifugal forces (Andeweg 2000).

Loyaltiyes and state building

One of the forces that create these centrifugal tendencies is also one of the characteristics that make communal life possible i.e. group loyalty. According to A.A.M. Kinneging (2004) loyalty, “pertains to a bond that withstands the passing of time and the winds of change: a bond that is conceived of as lasting, permanent, unbreakable, even holy” (Kinneging 2004, 68). This definition of loyalty indicates how intractable it is when integrating many different groups with different loyalties under one government. In this case, as Kinneging points out, the community is higher than the individual. In ethnically homogenous countries this presents no problem and allows democracy to flourish at all levels. Often times this is not the case in heterogeneous societies where either the state enforces a loyalty to its institutions, such as in the republican liberal democracy model, while still maintaining individual rights or enforces it in such a way that violates individual rights in an undemocratic manner.

Loyalties typically follow racial or religious lines. They can even be more fragmented such as loyalty to one’s town or city. Evidence can be seen in the sport’s world. Loyalty is typically to a person or an institution (Healy 2007). Loyalty to the nation-state has been somewhat of a recent phenomenon. The lack of loyalty can be detrimental to state integrity when it is towards another group. The lack of loyalty between sub-groups is something that consocationalism does not address as it represents an administrative/electoral solution to a heavily divided society. It does not address the psychological/emotional element that loyalty forms a part of and which in essence is the backbone of society.

Lijphart envisioned consocationalism as a temporary solution in which it was only meant as a transitory phase to greater levels of democratic cooperation (Andeweg 2000). This of course assumes that through elite cooperation and living peacefully alongside each other under one roof, it is possible that these groups would eventually reconcile their differences and move to greater integration. Unfortunately, there is the other direction such as entrenched differences that only get worse with time that may stalemate/postpone the conflict i.e. not resolving the conflicts (Fox & Miller 2007). Still, consocational democracy is considered the best option for deeply stratified societies because it recognizes, among other things, that some sub-groups have a complete way of life that requires a certain level of autonomy from the state.

The risk in this approach is that these sub-groups may look at the government as a burden or unnecessary overhang on complete control of their affairs. In response, the state may have a few choices at its disposal that may either create incentives such as the consocational framework or force a state identity upon all sub-groups, essentially eliminating them.

Bosnia: Adversarial communities under one roof

Bosnia is composed of three adversarial communities that have existed since the 15th century. Primarily, these communities came into existence around a particular religion. These religions of interest in the Bosnian case are Orthodox Christianity, Catholic Christianity and Islam. The Serbian people primarily follow Orthodox Christianity, the Croatians follow Catholic Christianity, and the Bosniacs follow Islam. These communities erupted into full-fledged war in the early 90’s when the Orthodox Serbs engaged in genocide against the Muslim Bosniacs (Kasapovic 2005).

These people were subject to the first consocational system of the world, the millet system which was implemented by the Ottoman Empire shortly after conquering the area that is now the former Yugoslavia. The millet system, which has roots in the religion of Islam, gave different religious communities their own autonomy headed by an elite (millet bashi) who was responsible for different religious and civil areas. After the fall of the Ottoman Empire, the various nation-states that emerged did not act so kindly on the remaining Muslim groups and either forced them to leave or massacred them. The Bosniacs represented a unique example as well as other indigenous ethnic groups who converted to Islam during Ottoman rule (Katsikas 2009).

These communities have historical differences that cannot disappear overnight. The Orthodox Serbs and Catholic Croatians owe their divide to the Great Schism in the 11th century between Constantinople and Rome (Norwich 1999). The Muslim Bosniacs and Orthodox Serbs owe their divide to Serb defeat at the hands of the Ottomans in the 14th century (Kinross 2003). Although present-day communities probably give little thought to these events, the mimetic transmission of hatred means that these communities are seemingly locked in an adversarial relationship.

After the 1995 Dayton Peace Accord, a consocational-type government was established. Kasapovic described it as an “asymmetrical confederation” in which the country is divided into two parts with one part being more consocational between Bosniacs and Croatians and the other representing a more homogenous state of Serbs. At the national level equal representation is given to the three groups, mutual veto exists, autonomy is given to each group, and consensus is maintained (Kasapovic 2005).

More than fifteen years after the Dayton Peace Accord there is peace, but as Kasapovic pointed out, this is only because all groups consented to peace. Kasapovic notes that the state is still highly unstable because there is no consensus on its organization and there are continuing external threats that may tear the country apart (Kasapovic 2005). This instability means that these groups, by and large, have not resolved their differences.

He argues that there are three reasons for this inefficiency of the model of consocational democracy, one “at the level of Bosnia and Herzegovina as a state, and one more at the level of the Federation as a state sub-entity: no consensus on the state, no consensus on the political system, no consistent strategy of international actors in establishing a democratic state, and the unfavorable two-segmental structure of the Federation with one segment outnumbering the other” (Kasapovic 2005, 9).

The fact remains that despite living in a consocational-type system for six centuries, the different groups that compose Bosnia’s adversarial groups have not cooperated at any level that would have caused them to avoid the deluge in the early 90’s. This indicates that although these people are living together under one country, they harbor distrust or hatred of those who compose the other group. The fact that they are all part of one country appears to have no influence on the perceptions towards the other group.

Considering that this conflict has been ongoing at varying intensities for several hundred years, an unfreezing process is needed. The concept of unfreezing has its roots with the organization theorist Kurt Lewin who proposed an unfreezing, moving/changing, and re-freezing process. In the process, values are changed and thus can be labeled change management. The re-freezing may have more clout with individual organizations, but the re-freezing creates an organized way of thinking akin to concepts of efficiency i.e. an established uniform identity (Levasseur 2001).

The involvement of religious leaders has importance in this case. Since these conflicts involved Christian and Muslim communities which are international religions, and since these conflicts also involved an international response, these local conflicts have implications that are not only local. International religious leaders should remember to be sensitive to religious sentiments despite their distance from Bosnia.

Haynes pointed out that one of the problems of the roles religious leaders face is that they lack the capacity to build a strategy for peace (Haynes 2009). As members of an international faith, these leaders would have access to a large network of resources that would facilitate them in their role as peace-makers. One of the aspects that may be appropriately addressed in Bosnia is training these leaders to both acquire these resources as well as use them appropriately. This would make their role far more influential than the elites.

The side effect is that many of these religious leaders may have instigated violence against the other or continue to preach hatred towards the other. These leaders need to either be isolated by the national government or reprimanded severely by those leaders of international representation. The globalized world makes all this possible. The world in this essence can either be a harbinger of peace or a catalyst for war at the local level.

Religious leaders should be engaged in dialog with each other as much as other community members are engaged in workshops both inventing solutions and implementing them. Once a healthy environment of dialog is fostered, then either naturally or through planned social action, inclusive networks should be developed. These networks can create cooperation and community.

Lastly, the existence of these networks means that the state as a reactionary entity becomes a mirror of that society. In this case, the consocational model of governance might work and if possible a more unified democratic format may be chosen. The result would be a multi-group democratic state with shared loyalties to the state, one’s own group, and to another group. This does not guarantee continued peace, but at least secures it much more tightly than as proposed under the consocational framework alone.

Hummel is a doctoral candidate at the School of Public Administration, Florida Atlantic University.

References

• Andeweg, Ruby B. 2000. “Consociational democracy,” Annual Review of Political Science 3, no. 1: 509-536.
• Fox, Charles & Hugh Miller. 2007. Postmodern Public Administration, Armonk, New York: M.E. Sharpe.
• Haynes, Jeffrey. 2009. “Conflict, Conflict Resolution and Peace-building: The Role of Religion in Mozambique, Nigeria and Cambodia,” Commonwealth & Comparative Politics 47, no.1: 52-75.
• Healy, Mary. 2007. “School Choice, Brand Loyalty and Civic Loyalty,” Journal of Philosophy of Education 41, no. 4: 743-756.
• Kasapovic, Mirjana. 2005. “Bosnia and Herzegovina: Consociational or Liberal Democracy,” Croatian Political Science Review 42, no. 5: 3-30.
• Katsikas, Stefanos. 2009. “Millets in Nation-states: The Case of Greek and Bulgarian Muslims,” Nationalities Papers 37, no. 2: 177-201.
• Kinneging, Andreas A. M. 2004. “Loyalty in the Modern World,” Modern Age 46, no. 1/2: 68.
• Kinross, Lord. 2003. The Ottoman Empire, London: Folio Society.
• Levasseur, Robert E. 2001. “People Skills: Change Management Tools – Lewin’s Change Model,” Interfaces 31, no. 4: 3.
• Norwich, John J. 1999. A Short History of Byzantium, New York: Vintage Books.

Ikhlas requires that one pursue nothing worldly while worshipping and obeying God, that one fulfills the duty of servanthood only because God orders it, and that one remains silent concerning any personal experiences of God’s special treatment and special gifts and seek only His approval and pleasure.

Sincerity is one of the most significant qualities of those most faithful or loyal to God; loyalty is regarded as a source, and sincerity as a sweet water originating from it. The most eloquent of humanity, Prophet Muhammad, upon him be peace and blessings, declared that one who drinks uninterruptedly from this water for forty days will find channels of wisdom opened from his or her heart to his or her tongue, and that such a person will always speak wisdom.

Loyalty or faithfulness is the primary attribute of Prophethood, and sincerity is its most lustrous dimension. Sincerity is innate in the Prophets; all other people try to obtain it during their lifetime. Among them, for example, the Qur’an describes the Prophet Moses as one made sincere (19:51).

Faithfulness and sincerity were as intrinsic and essential to the Prophets as air and water are to the lives of those who communicate the Prophets’ message to others in every age. In addition, they were the Prophets’ most important sources of power. The Prophets were convinced that they could not take one step forward without sincerity, and the representatives of the cause of Prophethood must believe that they will be able to achieve nothing without it. Faithfulness and sincerity are two wings or two deep oceans extending from Divine Favor and Grace to an individual’s heart. One who can sail in these oceans or fly with these wings will reach the destination, for they are under God’s protection. God values that which is done to please Him, regardless of its apparent size or importance, not the quantity of deeds. Therefore, He values a small deed done with sincerity over many deeds done without sincerity.

Sincerity is an attitude of the heart, and God views an individual according to his or her heart’s inclination. The Prophet, upon him be peace and blessings, declares: “Assuredly, God does not consider your bodies, nor your appearances. Rather, He considers your hearts.” Sincerity is a mysterious Divine credit granted to those who are purehearted in order to increase what is little and to deepen what is shallow, and to give finite (limited) worship infinite reward. One can use it to purchase the most valuable things in the markets of this world and the next, for it is esteemed, welcomed, and respected where others suffer great misery. This mysterious power of sincerity caused God’s Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings, to declare: “Be sincere in your religion; little work (with sincerity) is enough for you,” and: “Be sincere in your deeds, for God only accepts what is done with sincerity.”

If we consider a deed to be a body, sincerity is its soul. If a deed represents one wing of pair of wings, sincerity is the other. A body without soul is of no worth, and nothing can fly with only one wing. How fine are Mawlana Jalal al-Din al-Rumi’s words:

You should be sincere in all your deeds,
So that the Majestic Lord may accept them.
Sincerity is the wing of the bird of the acts of obedience.
Without a wing, how can you fly to the abode of prosperity?

The following words of Bayazid al-Bistami are also very apt:

I worshipped my Lord for thirty years with all my strength. Then I heard a voice saying: “O Bayazid! The treasures of God Almighty are full of acts of worship. If you intend to reach Him, see yourself as small at the door of God and be sincere in your deeds.”

For some, sincerity involves hiding from others when performing supererogatory deeds and avoiding all show and ostentation. For others, it means that whether one is or is not seen while performing religious deeds is not important. Still for others, it means being so involved in worship or religious deeds in consideration of God’s pleasure that one does not even remember whether one should be sincere or not.

Self-supervision is an essential dimension of sincerity, and a truly sincere person does not consider any possible spiritual pleasure that may be derived, or speculate upon whether it will ensure entrance to Paradise. Sincerity is a mystery between God and a servant, and God puts it in the hearts of those He loves. One whose heart is awakened to sincerity does not worry about being praised or accused, exalted or debased, aware or unaware of deeds, or being rewarded. Such a person does not change, and behaves in the same way in public and in private.

Notes

1. Muslim, Birr, 33; Ibn Maja, Zuhd, 9.
2. ‘Abd al-Ra’uf Munawi, Fayd al-Qadir, 6 vols. (Beirut 1093 ah / 1682 ce) 1:216.
3. Ibid., 1:217.