The Guardian’s Jonathan Steele has for some time placed himself in the middle of a ding-dong which, let’s face it, would have most of us running for the hills. Since 9/11 Mr Steele has reported from Iraq and Afghanistan – the particular hills he hangs out in, are not places of asylum..

This week, asking the question “Is it time to talk to the Taliban?”. Mr Steele describes a significant sea change in the approach of many in the know towards an acceptance of the need to talk to, perhaps share power with, the much-feared Taliban. One of those he interviews pragmatically states that “Every war has to end with talks and negotiations”, thereby implying, why not start now?

Such unlikely turnarounds are not without precedent – South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission and power sharing in Northern Ireland spring to mind of course. On the anniversary of the Brighton Grand Hotel bomb I was fortunate enough to be present at the first public meeting of Jo Berry and former IRA man, Pat McGee, who had murdered her father. The meeting was set up by Jo Berry as part of the process of forgiveness and healing which she sought.

On reading the piece I was immediately struck by the emergence of information which supported a slightly different view of the Taliban. In Solution Focus work we refer to these as “exceptions”. The victims of the Taliban had understandably labelled them as brutal murderous and medieval in their attitudes to women, whilst what was emerging were stories of women’s education supported and the fact that many women felt a degree of safety under Taliban rule. The pragmatic wish is to find peace, like many who have bridged such a divide in the past, peacemakers will need to hold their noses and work hard to build a new future which does not focus on, whilst at the same time fully respects and acknowledges, the past.

In doing so such “exception” helps to bring about a different approach – our enemies cannot “always” be brutal if they are sometimes are “helpful” or “merciful”. This is not a fluffy line of thought. It is entirely pragmatic – if the aim is harmony it’s going to take some work. Entrenched positions and the demonization of others are critical in war, it’s not easy to kill people who have the potential to be our friends.

Contrast this approach to that of the US. Their strategy is to bomb extensively, “shock and awe” if you like, hoping to weaken the Taliban into surrender. In doing do so they are likely to cause further resentment and hatred, spreading around the world to those who connect with radical Islam and possess and ambivalence to the US and it’s friends – pretty dangerous.

How does this relate to the workplace? Well when we find ourselves thinking that Tom never empties the dishwasher, Eileen is always rude, Rudi never gets work in on time – we may like to think about exceptions to these beliefs, not to excuse performance problems but to provide a more even platform for discussion.

Many of you will know the words of Jelaluddin Rumi

“Out there beyond the ideas of right doing and wrong doing there is a field – I will meet you there”

Comments