First, I must mention how wonderful I thought this conference was. The diversity in content, organization, consideration, and character of all those involved made the couple of days an amazing experience. Thank you to IMI and all the presenters!
Day two started with Ray Leki's energetic and rather grim look into the drug-related violence in Mexico. The fear produced by gruesome yet anonymous acts of violence has taken a severe toll on the residents of Ciudad Juarez, where so much of the violence takes place, but also on the US consulate workers and their Mexican-citizen colleagues. Within Ciudad Juarez, elements of intimidation and coercion have seeped into every aspect of its residents' existence. This has created communication barriers as each person can no longer do what formerly felt safe. The most seemingly innocuous endeavors have become filled with danger and apprehension. Leki posed a simple question with a very complex set of solutions, "how do you create a context where people safe to express emotion?" How can you get a traumatized community and a foreign population of equal traumatization to get beyond a communication impasse that is a product of stress and fear? What does that dialogue look like? Unfortunately, this same general area of dealing with crises, fear, and building resilience as a response-is applicable across so many different contexts. I began thinking of the ideological effects of those living in countries which govern based around deeply embedded systems of sustained fear and social control. Much like the former USSR or the modern North Korean state...
Motoo Unno had many of us squirming in our seats with discomfort as we looked into the Congressional Hearings around the faulty Toyota vehicles that began to make problems last year. The two sides were speaking different languages far beyond the mere linguistic difference. An absolute lack of mutual understanding the expectations and purpose of the hearing made for what must have been an incredibly uncomfortable three and a half hours. It made me wonder how a similar Congressional hearing across different cultural scapes would have compared. I was specifically thinking of Tony Hayward's (CEO of BP) hearing where he took a grilling but was also met with sympathy (Rep. Joe Barton) in what became a politicized issue. Toyoda had no such luck in this instance and instead was forced to come away with a serious loss of face amongst those who ultimately will continue to judge him, the Japanese.
Akbar Ahemd, like Lara Logan, was both eloquent and poignant. The issue he raised has such timely relevance that his message seemed to echo even louder. While he painted a somewhat dire picture of the US' standing in the Muslim world, I appreciated that he retained optimism and ultimately put the responsibility in the hands of people. I don't know if the world has moved beyond the days where the first lady could be greeted with flowers in Lahore, but, with the urgency communicated by Mr. Ahmed, we must never stop pursuing this ideal.
The last session of the day for me was getting acquainted with the famed Mr. Khan. Again, there were cringeworthy moments, but the point was clear-cultural collisions are suddent and unexpected due to the way in which interactions unfold dependent on each individual's cultural context. The role play was applied into a framework provided by Dr. Weaver, a series of explanations I have been privileged to hear as a student in his class at AU. He mentioned Khan throughout his lectures, and so to sit in on the exercise was a fitting pinnacle to the conference.
Again, many thanks to IMI and everyone involved. It was a wonderful experience, one that I will take away many lessons from.
No comments:
Post a Comment