By Ronald Brown
What better vantage point to view the chaos convulsing the Muslim world than from atop the tallest building in the world, the Burj Khalifa Tower in Dubai.
The 163-story tall skyscraper stands in the very center of the Muslim world, almost equidistant between Morocco and Indonesia and the Republic of Kazan in Russia and Empire of Sokoto in Nigeria. For my annual January academic vacation, I decided to settle into the glistening desert city of Dubai and take a Muslim view of the world as Muslims must see it.
As I glanced in all directions from atop the tower, I became acutely aware of Samuel P. Huntington’s argument in his paradigm-shattering book, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order (1996). He argued that the nation-state system that has dominated the world since the Peace of Westphalia in 1648 was rapidly ending. Nine vast religion-based civilizations will dominate the 21st century. The Confucian, Hindu, Orthodox Christian, Western Christian, and Buddhist civilizations were rapidly reclaiming their former greatness, with Latin America, sub-Saharan Africa, and Japan still finding their ways.
The Muslim world, on the other hand, which has no natural boundaries and abuts many of the other emerging civilizations, is convulsed with revolutions, foreign invasions, terrorism, and occupations. It is still struggling to throw off centuries of French, British, Russian, Chinese, and most recently, American colonial rule or influence, amid clashing visions of what form a restored Islamic civilization will take.
But my view of the Muslim world from the Burj Khalifa convinced me Muslims are intent on restoring their lost political and religious unity under the rule of a caliph that the Prophet Mohammed founded.
Huntington recognized that the emerging global actors of the 21st century will be 1) civilizations, and 2) they will be fueled by religious passion. The Hindu-based Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) is propelling the rise of India, Confucianism inspires the rise of China, evangelical Christianity drives the revival of Western Civilization, and militant Islam fuels the Muslim quest to become a major world power. India has even gone so far as to erect statues and temples dedicated to Bharat Mata, the Mother India Goddess, which I pondered during a recent visit to India.
Although a Harvard political scientist, professor Huntington recognized that the determining characteristic of 21st century religions will be their this-worldly orientation. No longer willing to wait for heavenly bliss after death, contemporary religions have embarked on establishing paradise on earth.
Evangelical Christians, BJP Hindus, Zionist Jews, Confucian Chinese, and political Islam are all dedicated to constructing heaven here and now. Zionist Jews describe West Bank settlements as “redeemed” lands. Evangelical Christians firmly believe the USA is “One Nation Under God.” Vladimir Putin is convinced Mother Russia is the chosen instrument of God in preserving the true faith. The Chinese Communist regime is convinced they are restoring the perfect society as prescribed by Confucius.
Huntington’s map of the nine civilizations destined to dominate the 21st century.
The Koran likewise prescribes almost every aspect of daily life from the times of daily prayer to the rule of the caliph, from which foods are permitted and which taboo, from how to do banking to the use of Arabic in worship, and from the obligation of pilgrimage to how to trim a man’s beard. Central to Islam is the unity of all Muslims as one nation, the umma, and the rule by the caliph.
As I walked around the observation deck of the tower, I contemplated the state of the Muslim world in each of the four directions. In the west, the ruins of George W. Bush’s 2003 invasion of Iraq were still burning, and Americans, Russians, and a host of foreign-sponsored militias bombed Syria daily. What the Muslim world refers to as the “Crusader” alliance of American and European troops had just defeated the most recent attempt to erase the hated French- and British-imposed boundary line between Syria and Iraq, expel non-Islamic cultural influences, and restore the caliphate. ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant), in spite of its barbarism, was nonetheless much admired and remained an inspiring vision for many Muslims I met. James J. Zogby, the well-known American pollster, had just published an article in the Gulf News (Jan. 1, 2018, p. A2) stating the majority of Muslims he polled agreed with the goals of ISIS to unite the Muslim world and restore the caliphate but disapproved of their violent tactics.
For five years, a caliph had again ruled for the first time since Turkey and Britain abolished the Ottoman Caliphate in 1924. To many Muslims, ISIS had erased the hated British- and French-imposed artificial border between Iraq and Syria. In Dubai, people constantly insisted to me (in private) that ISIS brutality was no less bloodthirsty than that of the Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Israelis in Palestine, the Russians in Chechnya, the Chinese in Eastern Turkistan, or the Filipinos in Mindanao. For one brief moment for some Muslims, the dream of a united Islamic umma had become a reality and a caliph had again ruled.
Even further west the Israelis, with firm American support, continue to expand Jewish settlements in the West Bank and expel Palestinians from East Jerusalem while some six million displaced Palestinian Muslims remain in refugee camps in Jordan. In December, President Trump recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and stated he would move the American embassy to the city, something no other nation had done since 1967. In the eyes of Muslims, the 50-year Israeli occupation of Jerusalem, Islam’s third holiest city, remains a major crime against the Muslim world.
Even further west, British- and French-established and American-supported states and regimes spread from Egypt to Morocco and deep into Senegal and Nigeria. They help keep corrupt monarchs, presidents and dictators in power, and most recently, supported continued military-backed rule of nearly 100 million Egyptians.
Finally, in the far west lies the land of the so-called “Great Satan” itself, the United States, where, according to the Muslim press, followers of Islam are persecuted and can even be killed because of their religion. In Muslim eyes, statements by some American politicians and religious leaders, as well as hate groups (exemplified by the violence last year in Charlottesville), call for the end of Muslim immigration, even the expulsion of Muslims, and support what they characterize as the many “Crusader” wars the U.S. has waged worldwide. President George W. Bush, so many reminded me in Dubai, had intentionally called his wars against Afghanistan and Iraq a “crusade” with all the Christian holy war and theological meaning. President Trump is seen by them as the proud heir of this American anti-Islamic crusade.
Muslims repeatedly reminded me that not only did the American “Crusaders” murder Osama bin Laden but deliberately desecrated his body by throwing it into the sea. Like Jews, Muslims do not accept the Christian practice of burial at sea. Jews and Muslims are peoples of the desert, not the open seas. Although the U.S. Navy claimed that traditional procedures for Islamic burial were followed, no Muslim scholar or clergyman would condone such an offense.
Turning to the north, another view of the Islamic world appears. Just across the Persian Gulf, the Islamic Republic of Iran is locked in a bitter battle against an unholy coalition of Saudi Arabia, Israel and the U.S. Iran is seen as a regime that restored the Islamic unity of church and state, and established a strong state that has the resources and conviction to resist Western domination and sanctions. Most Muslims I met were convinced the schism between Iranian Shiites and Arab Sunnis, though real, was being exploited and aggravated by outsiders.
In the far north, Putin’s Russian Empire has no intention of liberating the ten million Muslims in Tatarstan and the Caucasus. Freed from Soviet domination, the almost 100 million Muslims of Central Asia remain shattered into six “republics,” all firmly under Soviet-era nominally-Muslim dictators. In the eyes of most Muslims I met, Russia is an equal participant in the American-led crusade against Islam.
The author at the Burj Khalifa Tower in Dubai.
The press in the Muslim world constantly reports on the persecution of Muslims in Russia as well as in Western Europe and the USA where anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim sentiment is growing. Every mosque bombed, Muslim raped, attacked or killed is reported in detail and memorial services held with the same solemnity as those held for Westerners killed in their anti-Islamic wars. Like the American press that reports in detail every victim of Islamic terrorism, the press in the Muslim world reports every Muslim killed by Americans, Europeans and Israelis with pictures of the memorial ceremonies and interviews with their families and survivors. “Not one person who water-boarded, raped, tortured, or murdered Muslims in Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo (prisons) has been shot for war crimes” I repeatedly read in the press and heard from people. “You don’t even use the word ‘torture’” I so often heard. “You just call it abuse.”
As I turned to the south, an equally sad view appears. A corrupt absolute monarchy rules some 35 million Saudis. From an all-time high of 100,000 troops in Saudi Arabia alone, the U.S. military continues to help maintain the monarchies and dictators of the Middle East in power. Saudi Arabia currently leads a coalition waging wars in Yemen and Somalia. Muslims do not fail to remind Americans that the current Saudi regime is so unstable and weak that it has to rely on infidel American Christian and Jewish soldiers to protect the sacred cities of Mecca and Medina.
Turning to the east, an equally dire vision of the Islamic world came into view. Afghanistan continues to remain a war zone between the USA and Muslims from across the Islamic world, and Pakistan is an economic basket case trying to balance American economic handouts with the rise of its Muslim identity. In India, the BJP, the Hindu nationalist party, is intent on erasing its secular history and imposing a militant Hindu policy on the country’s 200 million Muslims. The Muslim Rohingya, who have fled Buddhist Myanmar, the Muslim Pattanis of Thailand, and Mindanao Muslims of the Philippines are seen as all persecuted, allegedly with American aid. The Chinese government views its 20 million Muslims as hostile and is brutally turning the 11 million Uyghurs in Xinjiang Province into a minority through massive Han Chinese immigration.
Standing atop the Burj Khalifa Tower, I was struck by the power of the vision of the lost paradise that had existed under the Prophet Mohammed and the early caliphs. The Muslim world does not intend to remain a carved-up carcass of a once-glorious empire. The destruction of ISIS, the killing of bin Laden, and ongoing “War on Terror” aside, the vision of a united Islamic world ruled by a restored caliph remains powerful in the Islamic world. Muslims will not stand aside as China, India, and Russia restore their greatness, Europe struggles to unite, and the USA forges ahead in its quest to “make America great again.”♦
Dr. Ronald J. Brown is a professor of history, political science and ethnic studies at Touro College, and teaches courses in world religion at Unification Theological Seminary. A docent at the New York Historical Society with degrees from Harvard Divinity School, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and the University of Geneva, Switzerland, Brown is the author of A Religious History of Flushing, Queens; Into the Soul of African-American Harlem; and How New York Became the Empire City.
Dr. Brown’s essay is interesting and well-written.
It is elaborated from a very special vantage point and offers a vast and panoramic view of space and contemporary history. We are really privileged to have someone up there telling us about the world from a very specific viewpoint. We need that.
The author’s insights and subjective views are backed by several references to the Clash of Civilizations, the best seller of Samuel Huntington.
Though I enjoyed reading Dr. Brown’s essay, I asked myself, “What is the Principle viewpoint on this?”
I shall discuss only two points of the views expressed, in light of Unificationism
1. Eschatology and the emergence of four great cultural spheres
1.1 We should remain critical of Huntington. His view of the world is apocalyptic and rather catastrophist. Writing against Fukuyama’s idealist view (The End of History and the Last Man, 1992), Huntington gave a realistic, yet tragic and dialectical view of human history. He says we are inevitably heading for a bad outcome through some sort of karma, we shall harvest the bad fruit of the evil seeds we once sowed. This view is inspiring another scholar, Peter Sloterdijk. In Rage and Time (2006, Zorn und Zeit in German, mimicking Sein und Zeit from Heidegger), Sloterdijk argues that anger, resentment, and revenge are the driving forces of human history and may lead us to a bloodbath.
1.2 Chapter III of the Divine Principle, called Eschatology, offers a somewhat different perspective (see Eschatology, section II, 2.3 Human History Is the History of the Providence of Restoration). We have gone through indemnity and we shall see the kingdom, provided we fulfill our human portion of responsibility. To prepare for the Last Days, God has prepared 21 cultural realms which became four, namely Judeo-Christian (the Western World), Hinduism (India), Far East religions (Asia) and Islam (from Dakar to Djakarta). There is a central providence based on Christianity, and a more peripheral providence. My suggestion to Dr. Brown is that, without rejecting the expertise of Huntington, his great erudition and good insights, we may have a more distanced view.
Would that be OK?
2. Cain and Abel
Dr. Brown talks about radical views expressed in the Christian world (Evangelicals), in the Hindu world, in the Jewish world, in the Muslim word. Radical views are not always wrong, they are just extreme. We need to apply Dr. Sang-Hun Lee’s methodology: analysis, critique, counterproposal.
We may find radicals among the fanatic Abels (cain-type Abels) and among fanatic Cains (Cain-type Cains). Fortunately, we have many Abel type Abels who are more than willing to welcome Abel-type Cains, and help them make an acceptable offering to God. Mandela and De Klerk could negotiate in South Africa, because they both had repudiated their radicalization.
In postwar India, Gandhi tried to unite Jinnah and Nehru. But the Muslim Jinnah was a Cain-type Cain, unable to negotiate. (Nehru was a too soft Abel). It does not mean that the whole modern Pakistan is like Jinnah. We have to find good and righteous people on both sides. Likewise, many people in Israel and in Palestine would like to compromise. In Palestine, the Gaza Strip is more radical than Jordan. Galilee is more peaceful than the average Israel society.
As Unificatiionists, we should have a clear epistemology. I think that the view from Burj Khalifa Tower is a good starting point, but we may see the same landcapes with various glasses. Dr. Brown’s glasses are good, but we may see if other glasses can be used.
Dr. Brown has initiated a good discussion, and I am grateful he has, my epistemology would a bit different. When we arrive at a clear and unified epistemology, we may propose a good action plan, which should take the form of a foundation for the messiah. The foundation of faith includes understanding well and the foundation of substance is acting well. Right speech and right deed.
Thank you again, Dr. Brown, and I hope we can have a good discussion on these issues.
Thank you, Laurent. Very good. I think you meant “eschatology” not “epistemology” in the next to last paragraph?
Dr. Brown, thank you for this very nice essay and photos too. It is good to hear, and believable, that Muslims abhor the violent means of caliphate restoration. Let me ask, what means do they imagine will succeed?
Dr. Brown’s fine essay jogged my memory about Samuel Huntington’s book and his “apocalyptic” vision at the time of its publishing. Sadly, but perhaps not surprisingly, many of his suppositions have materialized.
In a 1993 essay written for the Council on Foreign Relations, Huntington presciently observed:
“World politics is entering a new phase, and intellectuals have not hesitated to proliferate visions of what it will be-the end of history, the return of traditional rivalries between nation states, and the decline of the nation state from the conflicting pulls of tribalism and globalism, among others. Each of these visions catches aspects of the emerging reality…It is my hypothesis that the fundamental source of conflict in this new world will not be primarily ideological or primarily economic. The great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural.”
According to Huntington, that essay “struck a nerve” and became the impulse for his much-heralded book. In the chapter titled, “The West and the Rest,” he stated the three major issues that would cause conflict in the new millennium would be:
— Western Arrogance
— Islamic Intolerance
— Sinic Assertiveness
Certainly the West’s attitudes with regard to freedom, civil liberties, human rights, and jurisprudence fly in the face of Islamic culture and China’s political realities, and are seen as a type of arrogance. Yet freedom is the key to any attempt at fashioning a culture predicated on love, charity and altruism. The “right to choose” (in any matter) is sacrosanct in Western culture.
Divine Principle postulates that God acts in accordance with the principles that govern relationships and love, hence even God couldn’t intervene in the Human Fall. This would have constituted a violation of God’s own principle of volition being central to the realization of love. Moreover, the accomplishment of God’s will (which is absolute) is predicated on human responsibility. “Although God’s Will of the providence of restoration is absolute and beyond human influence, its fulfillment necessarily requires the accomplishment of the human portion of responsibility.” (Exposition of Divine Principle, p. 156).
In this context, it becomes incumbent for individuals to take responsible action conterminously with God, otherwise we cannot expect that goodness will be realized in any significant fashion, thus freedom is not merely a construct of “the Great Satan.”
Echoing Dr. Hendricks’ query: Can Islam comport with this view of DP, or is acquiescing to the Unificationist concept of “Godism” (in which freedom is a sine qua non) the road to the dreaded condition of cultural syncretism for Islam? It’s an important question and, as Laurent Ladouce suggested, it warrants further discussion.
Thanks to Dr. Brown for this enlightening perspective and looking forward to further discussions.
A well-written and valuable but deeply troubling assessment by Dr. Brown. Thank you.
Ronald Brown’s perspective seems to be that the Islamic world has conquest at heart. (I would only object to the idea that America and Russia are the cause of this conquest mentality, which has been the case for rather longer than either current leader has been alive. The great and righteous Atatürk, for example, struggled against the Caliphate a century ago.)
If Ronald Brown’s assessment of Islamic conquest is true, then the response by Presidents Trump, Putin, and many others is quite understandable. Putin is extremely popular in Russia, having just won a new six-year term by a margin of 76% to 11%. Russians clearly like a strong leader.
If history is any guide, the response by Mr. Trump and Mr. Putin is mild compared to the conflict that is to come if Islamic visions of conquest described by Dr. Brown come to pass.
Will Westerners flee Western European countries as refugees to Russia a generation or two from now? Russia certainly has the space.
Another view from the Burj Khalifa Tower of Dubai is possible.
I see common points between some Arab States, namely the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Bahrain, and Kuwait. Most are small states, even micro-states. They could be compared (in some ways) to Singapore and Brunei (Southeast Asia), and to states like Luxemburg, Monaco, Liechtenstein, and Andorra (Europe).
Many of these small states combine ancient tradition and modernity, conservatism and high-tech vision for the future. They are often monarchies, guided by a prince or a duke, acting as a parental figure. In these states, the Unification movement is often symbolic or cannot be very active, for various reasons. These states have much influence, some of them are very powerful. Far from being isolated by their small size, landlocked situation and conservatism, they are often key actors of globalization, and are very open, externally, to the whole world.
This prompts us to think of a possible Providence for the micro-states of the world. Let me highlight two points:
1. HJ Cheonwon, the micro-state of the Unification movement
God may have built micro-states in Europe, the Middle-East, and Asia as preparations for the emergence of the Unification micro-State, in Cheongpyong. As True Mother aims at restoring entire nations worldwide, she is also steadily building the infrastructure of a unification micro-state, called the HJ Cheonwon (since 2016). Mother has called it our Vatican as well as the capital of Cheon Il Guk.
It has many attributes of a sovereignty, people and territory. Besides the Training Center of Heaven and Earth, our main place of pilgrimage, we have the palace, which serves as royal residence of True Parents. It is also the headquarters of the Unification movement, and a conference center for VVIPs. In 2020, the Cheonji Sunagwon will be completed. In a way, True Mother follows policies which have already proved visionary and successful elsewhere.
Near the Palace, we have the UP Academy forming our cadets, and the international high school of Cheongshim, one of the best high schools of Korea.
In the valley, the Cheongshim Peace World Center is the biggest indoor facility of Korea, and the second biggest in Asia. Soon, a five-star hotel will be built.
Altogether, around 20 public buildings are already operational and about 1,500 people are permanent residents in Sungsari and Seorak, where they work for the Providence, worship God, and witness to the local population. This place, which was one of the most remote and isolated areas of South Korea, can now be reached in 40 minutes from Seoul by car. God is trying to convey His final and concluding message to the whole world, 7.6 billion people, from this place. When you live there, and work there, you may understand what a central and representative family means.
My conclusion is God is now currently running His universal diplomacy from a micro-state and we can see, through other micro-states, how a small entity can have world influence.
2. Pioneers of the Hobby industry
Let us go back to these Arab states mentioned above. Why are they so immensely rich? How did they become so wealthy in a few decades, in the middle of nowhere, with only sand around and (almost) no water? How can hell on earth become (some sort of) paradise?
All of them have significant revenues from petroleum. The United Arab Emirates has been successfully diversifying its economy. 79% of UAE’s total GDP comes from non-oil sectors. Oil accounts for only 2% of Dubai’s GDP. Bahrain has the Persian Gulf’s first “post-oil” economy because the Bahraini economy does not rely on oil. Since the late 20th century, Bahrain has heavily invested in the banking and tourism sectors.
These states are high on the Human Development Index. According to the World Bank, most of these Arab states have been the world’s most generous donors of aid as a share of GDP.
What is now the driving force of their development? They have converted almost entirely to what Father broadly called the hobby industry, which includes tourism, leisure, sports, arts, services, transportation, hotels, shopping, and entertainment. Soon, Las Vegas will look small compared to Dubai in terms of entertainment. But because Dubai is in a very conservative region, the entertainment industry there is less polluted than other places and much more family-oriented. Emirates (founded in 1985) is now the fourth largest airline in terms of international passengers and second-largest in terms of freight-ton kilometers carried. Qatar Airways is not doing bad.
Some of these states are now operating major sports competitions and are opening some of the most beautiful museums.
If we were to define their economic vision, they seem to be headed toward a new enchantment, or some kind of dream-like world. Whereas much of the world is in despair, they seem to say, “come here, let us celebrate, we can work later. We are not born to work but to feel joy, so let us have joy now.”
We may not expect this message to come from there, and we may be skeptical. Of course, we know that much of it is fake and artificial, but it is not shallow or vain.
Maybe God is watching at drafts of what the future capital of Cheon Il Guk may resemble, after the 430 newly blessed have multiplied in 430 more. And this is dream-like but possible.
Isn’t there reason for skepticism regarding all of these civilization descriptions? Just to look at the U.S., is it reasonable to describe it as evangelical? It seems to be pretty evenly divided between the religion of progressivism and Christianity, and the kind of evangelicalism of our regime seems constantly on the verge of self-destruction.
Before 9/11, it was a common view that Islam disliked the West because of its Disney/Hollywood culture which was spreading materialism and superficiality around the world. President Bush argued “they” hated “our” freedom, which presumably meant religious freedom. Islam has a profound ambiguity towards Jews and Christians, whom they sometimes respect and sometimes detest as People of the Book.
It is ironic that Islamic self-assertion could take the form of turning itself into superficial culture, like Las Vegas.
I wrote an AU Blog essay on the issue of Hollywood vis-a-vis Islamic sensibilities. It’s an important topic.
“John Batchelor Show” guest Michael Vlahos used to discuss global geopolitics in terms of the self-assertion of cultures such as China and Islam. And one thinks that cultures have such a right — until you realize that only individuals have rights, and that the claims of Islam and China would be more plausible if they respected the rights of their citizens or members. I write this as Xi is attempting to establish dictatorial powers for life.
During the second Iraq invasion, liberals mocked Bush for “attempting to create Jeffersonian democracy”. Their sense of superiority was barely concealed. But we should be convinced that “all men are created equal” and that our rights come from God and not from a mullah or a party. Let us hope and work for the political and the spiritual liberation of our brothers and sisters. Often the best way to do this is to be a “shining city on a hill” as we were for the Italians, for example, in the 19th century.
Many thanks to Peter Elliffe and David Eaton’s points.
1. My initial point was just to suggest that these small Arab states have moved from an oil-based economy to a new form of development where the hobby industry plays an important role.
2. The hobby industry that Father emphasized is expected to clean and purify the entertainment culture from its excessively hedonistic and naricissistic elements. Regarding the entertainment and cultural life on Broadway and in Hollywood, we may remember that the deepest critiques of its deviations have often been from the movie directors themselves. “All about Eve” (1951) and “Barefoot Comtessa” (1953), from Mankiewicz, “The Goddess” (1958 from John Cromwell, ) or “Imitation of Life” (1959, from Douglas Sirk), are all about the dangerous illusions of Hollywood, especially for actresses. Even until today, the sharpest critiques have come from Hollywood itself.
3. As far as I understand, our True Parents were always very concerned about entertainment, fun, joy, creativity. And they have invested a lot in Las Vegas, to restore and recreate this city. We should be open-minded: the Hollywood culture can and should be redeemed. And in the Muslim world, it is not all about fanaticism, jihad or things like that. The Abu Dhabi Emirate has opened a Louvre Museum in 2017. Maybe they try to apply a hadith which states, “Allah is beautiful and loves beauty”
4. The Principle reminds us that, during the time of the Crusades, Christians could rediscover Greek phllosophy and science through their interaction with the Arab world. I quote, “In medieval feudal society, the original human nature had long been repressed. Hence, people were all the more ardent in their pursuit of these values, which arose from the external promptings of their original nature. They began to probe into the classical heritage of Hellenism, which they imported from the Muslims as a result of expanded contacts with the East after the Crusades.” (Part II, chapter 5, The Period of Preparation for the Second Advent of the Messiah, 1.1 the Renaissance)
5. I know it may be a bit disturbing, but this is what our scripture tells us and it is the historical truth. Today, many good ideas, even in the economic fields, have come from Muslim thinkers such as Muhammad Yunus (Bangladesh, founder of Grameen Bank and the father of microfinance) or Mahbub ul Haq (who developed the index of human development).
6. I sincerely believe we can avoid a clash of civilizations and make the choice of a dialogue of cultures. This is what our Unification movement is doing: it brings people together who otherwise would remain separated. We of course should remain very vigilant because Arab-Muslim world remains chaotic and is sometimes extremely hostile to the West, but among the most dedicated Ambassadors for Peace of our movement, there are many very good Muslims. Please remember the very deep heart of Dr. Sakeena Yacubi upon receiving the Sunhak Peace Prize last year. My whole point is to bring some elements of nuance and balance into the discussion.