Author Archives: alisha nijjar

Peace as a Profession

Posted on by

Anyone in this major has probably been faced with a “what is that?” in response to stating they are a Peace Studies major. Now that the major has been changed to Peace and Justice, I haven’t had as many questions, but interestingly, many people have to stop and inquire about what Peace Studies actually is. Answering that is the key to whether Peace can be a profession. 

So, what is Peace? Because it is so much more than the absence of arguments or conflict. Peace studies is an interdisciplinary field that explores the causes of conflict and violence and strategies for promoting peace, reconciliation, and social justice at local, national, and global levels. It emphasizes the interconnectedness of our world and how you must consider various disciplines, such as political science, sociology, psychology, anthropology, and international relations, to understand the dynamics of conflict and develop effective methods for conflict resolution, peacebuilding, and sustainable peace. It aims to foster a deeper understanding of how to address these underlying issues and build a more peaceful and just society by examining the root causes of violence, including issues related to inequality, discrimination, human rights abuses, environmental degradation, and political instability.

I declared the major not even halfway through my semester in the intro course. Shifting from Business Administration into a social science was eye-opening but also exciting. There are so many ways to view the world and explore the things around us, how they happen, and why they happen, and Peace Studies held the answers, or at the very least, the lessons necessary to discover those answers ourselves.

I’ve been lucky enough to be able to meet people from a vast selection of backgrounds and professions throughout my time at Chapman, and it’s so very interesting to see the role that peace plays in them all. From economics to health, there are identifiable factors for decisions, news stories, and policies that can be better understood through peace studies. The addition of justice to the major doesn’t detract from that. If anything, it places a greater emphasis on studying the why behind conflicts, as it allows us to better understand the different sides of conflicts and fosters a greater joint empathetic and compassionate outlook for the people around us.

There are more obvious fields in which peace acts as a profession, as we’ve seen by the emergence of fields such as peacebuilding, conflict resolution, and mediation. Professionals in these fields work towards preventing and resolving conflicts, promoting social justice and human rights, and establishing sustainable peace in communities, regions, and globally. We’ve witnessed professionals work in various capacities, including mediators, negotiators, diplomats, humanitarian workers, researchers, educators, and policy analysts. These peace professionals utilize various skills and knowledge, which are things we’re being taught in the major. Through their efforts and contributions, we might someday have a world where conflicts are managed more constructively and peaceful coexistence is prioritized. All of these factors make peace a viable and essential profession.

An Interview with Reverend Nancy Brink

Posted on by

Reverend Nancy Brink is the current Executive Director of the Fish Interfaith Center at Chapman. She is an ordained minister in the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), the same religious group that founded Chapman University. She was a congregational minister for about 30 years before coming to Chapman as the Director of Church Relations and University Chaplain. At the start of this academic year (2023-2024), she was promoted to the new Executive Director of the Fish Interfaith Center.

I met Nancy during my freshman year over Zoom when searching for a Sikh organization on campus. While I was unsuccessful in my search, she invited me to begin attending the weekly Interfaith meetings that Fish hosts with representatives of the different faith organizations on campus. While I have grown used to seeing Nancy most Friday mornings for Interfaith over the last four years, earlier this semester, she invited me and a few other faith leaders of campus clubs to join her in a class called Cultivating Compassion. The name is a bit on the nose, but it was a wonderful experience. 

At the start of the interview, we spent a bit discussing the course and how its teaching is interdisciplinary and can benefit anyone in their day-to-day interactions and global relations. Nancy told me she loved the course because it referred to and drew on sources and ideologies that have fueled movements in the past that we have all come to know. Her main two examples were with Dr. King and the Civil Rights Movement and Mahatma Gandhi’s India Independence Movement. While speaking about these movements, their successes, and and their following, she brought my attention to something she noticed that really stood out to her. 

She told me that while reflecting on the Black Lives Matter movement as it echoed around the nation and beyond our borders following the death of Georg Floyd, she couldn’t help but think it didn’t have the same echoing and staying power that the Civil Rights Movement had as it didn’t have the same spiritual backing. As a woman connected to faith and who values its guidance, she shared a lens I had never considered before. Despite the fact that I knew Dr. King was a religious leader who would speak of his faith and use its lessons in his sermons and addresses, I never connected the intense relation that the people had to him and the movement with how they may also be connecting on a more spiritual level. Gandhi and King were able to use their faith as motivation, which acted as an additional level of connection between the people and the reason why the movement was necessary.

Nancy explained that the class reminded her of how connected we are, how we are connected through the idea of “Big God” and how we have our own “Retail Versions,” but they all fall under faith and belief in some higher power. Something that really stuck with me was when she explained that “the class had this ability to help cultivate compassion which is incredible and important, but it can help us learn how to withstand the brutality, to help us come together, in spite of the pain, which is so powerful.” Nancy’s main takeaway from the course and how it can relate to peace– peace of mind, peace in personal relations, peace in justice and global relations– was that it teaches us very practical and tangible methods to grow a heart of compassion, compassion for yourself, as well and then for compassion for others. In the end, it’s the way to stop the cycle of reactivity. 

The second half of the interview focused on religion’s role in peace. Nancy has visited many places, experienced different faiths and cultures, and has come out of it grounded in her beliefs, so she is appreciative of the differences. When I asked her what she thought the role of religion in peace was, she told me it was “To ground people in the truth that our lives are bigger than just our individual histories and needs.” 

She reminded me that we’re all a part of something bigger, even if we don’t necessarily see it or never try to act on it. She was quick to remind me that when we turn our back on the bigger picture, all it truly does is shrink the world. She did counter that by adding that when we try to tap into the larger picture, there is so much possibility and creativity in that world to be seen. When I asked her to expand on that, on the world of creativity and what tapping into it allows someone to do, she explained that the grounding effect of religion in peace and justice is not the doctrine that saves us or helps us; it is the deep and spiritual practice, the prayer, the meditation, that brings us back and reminds us of why we are connected, of how we are connected. It allows us to ground ourselves and keep from lashing out, to remember why we are doing what we’re doing. 

She gave an example right after that and asked me what I knew about the William Pettis Bridge and John Lewis. While I was familiar with John Lewis and his role in the Civil Rights Movement, I was unfamiliar with the William Pettis Bridge. Nancy took a moment to explain that day in the movement. When members of the Civil Rights Movement arrive at the bridge, intending to cross in their march only to find the State Troopers waiting. State Troopers then advanced and beat them. John Lewis led that march and led it again a few days later after recuperating from his injuries. Nancy looked at me and asked me to consider: where does that come from?

Where does the drive and ability to rally despite the brutality come from? The marchers had been praying and singing as they prepared and walked toward the bridge they had been taught in the School of Civil Rights. Taught the practices of nonviolence, why it was so important not to respond to violence, and how it unmasks the violence of others. 

Toward the end of the interview, we spoke a bit about how religion has been taken and abused as a method by which people separate themselves from others. In Peace Studies, we learned about the concept and practice of othering fairly early, which we expanded on. Religion is meant to connect on the level of spiritual influence. Following my question, Nancy asked me to stop taking notes for a moment and to breathe with her through a meditative exercise where we explored how we feel when we feel so connected to our faiths. It is the joy, wonder, and acceptance that we feel in our faith and communities that can bridge the gaps that some try to widen. 

She explained that the feelings I’d shared when I went to the Gurudwara versus the ones Nancy experienced growing up going to Church were not different at all. She explained that it’s not about the doctrine or the stories. It’s about the practice, the service, the familiarity, and “connecting to God, capital G, the one who is above all, the one that echoes across all faiths.” 

The most significant takeaway I had following the conclusion of my time with Nancy was that we can find individual peace and a chance for greater unity and understanding by respecting and appreciating the similarities and differences as they all connect us to God or any form of a  Higher Power and that it is only to our detriment that is so difficult for us to recognize that on a more regular basis.

“Shared Humanity” in Reflection

Posted on by

A conflict can make or break a friendship. The way conflict is dealt with or ignored can be a determining factor in its success or failure. The region that initially brought Mira Sucharov and Omar Dajani together was the conflict they shared their journey with us regarding. It was humbling to listen to. To hear about how these two highly educated individuals could feel the same way we do, passionate in their position even if it put them at odds, but then for them to recognize that and be able to take a step back before starting a conversation where both sides had an opportunity to speak. 

They explained to us that their friendship had been built over the years. Years of working together, trips, and research. Through all they shared, I found their compassion for each other and life as a whole so moving. There were topics they spoke about that were obviously difficult not only for us to hear but for them as well, and yet they gave space to each other even while talking to us. They never raised their voices or fists against the other, even when they had disagreements, and that stems from their compassion. 

When considering the conflict the Israel/Palestine conflict, I contemplate identity theory often. I think about how we form our identities and the struggle with acknowledging our intersectionalities, and I wonder how we are meant to build peace when it is sometimes so difficult to not only recognize another’s identity but to respect it. It is essential to consider how identities are constructed within an individual and as a group and how they can evolve in response to social, political, environmental, and economic factors. When people label themselves as something, they choose their community and embrace an identity, but they are also a part of that identity’s history and formation. Conflicts emerge when identities clash. The differing views can exacerbate tensions, discrimination, and violence, which, in the end, will end up reshaping or reinforcing the existing identity itself. 

The key to navigating will be compassion and conversation. Sucharov and Dajani gave us a great example when they were sharing. Sucharov explained how she thought offering a phrase in Hebrew to some of the people she and Dajani met during their travels could be a way to bridge the gap and show their similarities. It wasn’t until Dajani corrected her that she realized she was only disrespecting the other identity. They explained that Dajani was kind in his explanation, educated her on the difference, and helped her see why it wasn’t what she was aiming for. Sucharov admitted it was hard to hear, but it was a shift she took to heart and then adjusted for. Starting the conversation and being a part of it was difficult on both ends, even when it’s about good intentions, but these conversations are crucial to moving forward. 

Compassion within communication, especially in conflict, is also incredibly pertinent. It is easy to stand by one’s convictions and preach about them to anyone who will listen. It’s harder to be open to listening to another’s conventions while firm in your own. It takes compassion and patience to listen to someone who might disagree with everything you believe in and not write them off. To respect another person and their beliefs, traditions, and history while still holding your close is a powerful ability. It is needed to truly build peace the way we talk about it in our courses. 

My biggest takeaway was the strength that both individuals demonstrated—their ability to appreciate each other and their friendship despite their disagreements and differences. I mentioned earlier that listening to them speak to us about a conflict that is so personal to them was humbling, and it was. They took time to come and visit us on our campus to share about their lived experiences. They talked of the history, their beliefs, the conflict, and hope for the future. It was inspiring to see and really spoke to the hope aspect of the conversation. To see them, unwavering in their own beliefs but open to hearing the other out, responsible enough to recognize when they may not be available to the other’s opinion, and being able to take that step back, that is what we need. Those are the skills we want to develop within ourselves and every generation that comes next, because that will be the vehicle of change, the driving force of hope, as we work towards peaceful resolutions in conflicts of all shapes and sizes.