Freedom and Peace

Until a few years ago, the survival of the Maltese people depended on the millions of liri provided by the British as rent for a military base on the island. There was hardly an economy or local industry to generate income for the country's welfare. When a Labour Government in the early seventies decided to negotiate with the UK government the withdrawal of the British base, few believed that Malta would be able to cope without them. Even several members of the Labour cabinet were sceptical. These negotiations took place in parallel to a commitment by Malta to develop a strategy for economic and social development as well as to a commitment to develop a foreign policy based on neutrality and non alignment ( which in the Cold War meant equidistance from West and East). The Cold War is dead and buried but Malta is constitutionally bound to a policy of neutrality ( like 4 other member states of the European Union: Austria, Finland - both will have EU presidency next year, Ireland and Sweden) which is meant to translate into a pro-active commitment for peace. It is pertinent to discuss how such a constitutional commitment could be pursued in contemporary terms. Ranier Fsadni, gives his views in an article on today's Times on how Malta's foreign policy could be defined by pacifist interventions in our region:

One way to start this process of rethinking would be to ask if we should have a defined policy on desirable kinds of pacifist interventions (as distinct from piecemeal initiatives). The question is an open one. For what it's worth, my own response would be that we should have a defined policy. Three areas of intervention, particularly, attract my attention.

First, there is the process of reconciliation that must follow in areas that have experienced civil and militarised conflict. War and violence leave psychological as well as physical scars; they maim communities, not just individuals. Individual and collective memories remain in turmoil unless they are addressed. In some areas of conflict, voluntary organisations arise to address these issues - for example, organisations that bring together mothers of victims. Such organisations, where they exist, could be targeted for special financial and other support; where they do not exist, they could be encouraged to form. Focusing our support on such organisations would be a way of giving civic roots to a peace made between politicians.

Second, there are ecological and energy issues. Many conflicts, including in the Mediterranean itself, have an ecological dimension - claims to water supplies in the Middle East, for example. Special aid to foster environmental security would be a contribution to peace keeping and making.

Third, there is what Egypt's ambassador to Malta, Fatma Al Zahraa Etman, called Europe's "cultural deficit" in her intervention at the recent Wilton Park conference held here. Ms Etman observed that an educated Arab from the southern Mediterranean usually knows much more about European culture than an educated European knows about Mediterranean Arab culture.
She suggested that this European cultural deficit has political implications, if cultural insensitivity leads to dangerously false perceptions of the region. Ms Etman believes that this cultural deficit can only be addressed in a systemic way by education systems, not by optional crash courses in culture. A third plank, therefore, of a Maltese positive commitment to peace would be the systemic attempt to reduce this European cultural deficit.

How effective can a Maltese positive policy for peace be? Well, this naturally depends on how many allies we can win over. Perhaps we should think not of being "non-aligned" but in terms of which European partners we can most likely align ourselves to.

MLP commemorates Freedom Day