The third dialogue session of the "Hope" project entitled "Discussing hate speech and countering extremism"

Ezdina Organization held its third dialogue session in its office in the city of Qamishlo/Qamishli, under the title “Discussing hate speech and combating extremism” on 22.10.2020, where the session started at 10:00 and ended at 16:00.


The lecturers
The session was moderated by the Yazidi journalist, Jaber Jindo, and the director of the Aso News Network, Sardar Malla Darwish.


Participants
8 people from representatives of religions and members of religious institutions in Northeastern Syria participated in the session according to the following percentages: Males 57.1% Females 42.9%.

• Gulistan Abdullah, Psychological Counselor.
• Dalal Khalil, Co-Chair of the Democratic Islamic Society Conference.
• Hanna Somi, Head of the Department of Christian Religious Sciences at Rojava University.
• Sheikh Mohammed Al-Qadri, Member of the Shura Council in the Islamic Democratic Conference.
• Abdulrahman Badrkhan, Vice-Presidency of the Democratic Society of Islam Conference and a lecturer at the Islamic Academy.
• Farouk Tozo, Co-head of the Yazidi House in the Jazira region.
• Sozdar Mohammed, Religious activist.
• Aladdin Al Rashi, President of the Educational Center for Human Rights in Germany.

National background of the participants:
A variety of religious representatives from national backgrounds in the region participated in the session, which contributed to enrich the session through their participation, the national distribution of the participants: Kurd 85.7%, Syriac 14.3%.

Religious background of the participants:

A variety of religious representatives from religious backgrounds present in the region participated in the session, which contributed to enrich the session through their participation, proposing their ideas, where the religious distribution of the participants in the session was as follows: Muslim 71.0%, Christian 14.3%, Yazidi 14.3%.

Participants' Cities:

Qamishlo/Qamishli, Amuda.


Summary report:
The session began with an acquaintance and welcoming between the lecturers and the participants in the session, representing clerics, opinion leaders, influential personalities and specialists. Session's most important topics:

• The concept of extremism, hate speech, and violence.
• Stereotypes prevailing in society that advocate hate speech and incitement to violence and extremism.
• The role of clerics in the issue of hate speech and incitement to violence and extremism.
• The reasons for the phenomenon of extremism and hate speech.
• Effects of extremism and hate speech.
• Who is responsible for extremism and hate speech.

How the session continued:
The two facilitators were focusing in the session on clarifying concepts in a simple way about extremism and hate speech, from a definition of these concepts based on international conventions, in addition to simplified definitions of these concepts by the participants, and mentioned a number of stereotypes prevailing in society that clarify these phenomena, and create a common space more for interaction and brainstorming with the attending personalities to be able to expand the discussion of the important issue of society. In this regard, the lecturers mentioned several topics, including:

Hate speech and its extent of spread, incitement to violence and its causes and accompanying conditions of war, and religious extremism, that we have inherited as a society over the ages due to a mistaken understanding of the meanings of many interpretations of religious sources, and the political conflict in the region since 2011, and the repressed reprisals that this conflict has led to, as most of the participants focused. However, religions in general have always called for tolerance and humanity, but circumstances have occurred in reality from people who are far from religion, and the focus has been on some inherited customs and traditions that were and still sow the rift between the components of the region, and ideological education under dictatorial regimes, in addition to many realistic examples that occur to us on a daily basis from saying this is a Yazidi, and this is an extremist Muslim, and this is from the Chaldo-Assyrian component ... etc.

Among the facts was a great positive emergence in the role of religious scholars of all religions and sects that operate in a practical and proper manner in northeastern Syria, motivated by tolerance and a move away from hate speech and violence, especially since the region suffered a lot from terrorism, which constituted creating a common space for everyone to work on rejecting terrorism and violence.

There was wide participation and examples of trying to spread hate speech and extremism, cases of standing up to it, and the need for diversity and tolerance in Al-Jazeerah to be a model for Syria.


Then the participants moved with the facilitators after taking a short break to take up the causes of these phenomena, and they mentioned a large number of reasons, including the acquired customs and traditions, the ideological intellectual legacy, the lack of specialized organizations working in combating these phenomena, racism in all its forms, confusion between belonging and extremism, lack of The existence of laws that deter these phenomena, the role of some media agencies, and discrimination and discrimination based on religion, color, gender and other reasons.

Then they proceeded to mention the results and effects resulting from these phenomena, which are considered major problems that stand in the way of justice and living in peace, and among these clear effects on society:

• Violence in all its forms (domestic violence, gender-based violence, gender-based violence, religion, thought, color).
• The clear distance from negotiation tables that call for peace and the peaceful resolution of disputes.
• Loss of confidence between the components of the region.
• Confusion between freedoms and rights.
• Using the media to promote hate and violence.
• Using education in many areas of Syria as an ideological agenda.
• Extremist groups as an economic alternative.
• Dealing with the displaced and refugees.
• International interventions.
• Extremism from idea to action as a result of circumstances in the conflict.
• Focusing heavily on the subject of education and the content of the curriculum, and then determining the scope of responsibility that was made through the participation of all facilitators and participants by placing all persons (as individuals, organizations, institutions, media, authorities, religious scholars, in addition to the state structure) within the scope of responsibility for negatively influencing And positively on these dangerous phenomena in societies.

Session results
Participants proposed a set of solutions to counter hate speech:

1. Regular workshops on countering extremism and hate speech.
2. Creating a broad common space between the concerned parties to create a kind of confronting extremism, terrorism and hate speech.
3. The presence of specialized organizations working to reduce or solve these phenomena.
4. Adoption of international bodies for this process.
5. Funding and supporting projects that work to combat violence, hate speech and extremism.
6. Looking at a person being only a human being (regardless of his color, gender, or affiliation).
7. Coordination to develop constitutions and legislation in the higher authorities to combat these phenomena.
8. Opening special sections on countering extremism and hate speech in all organizations working in combating violence.
9. Holding training workshops for media outlets to educate them about the dangers of hate speech and how to avoid it.
10. Issuing annual reports that monitor hate speech in all areas, which will contribute to the formation of a kind of oversight.
11. Forming committees to combat hate speech and extremism
12. Reviewing and standing up to educational curricula In addition to that, one of the attendees suggested conducting advocacy campaigns to reduce these phenomena.

It is worth noting that there was a clear interaction by the participants in the session who focused on following up the treatment of these phenomena.
The session concluded with a post evaluation that demonstrated the value of the increased knowledge of the participants and the clear impact that the dialogue session had on the participants.
The conclusion included a broad discussion about the possibility of investing in the issue, so that Ezidina and other institutions work effectively to continue this issue to circulate it with the attendees in their influential role.
Among the attendees were figures founders of a democratic view of religion, such as the University of "Rojava", which includes the Department of Democratic Islam, as well as interest on the part of the Chaldeans, Syriacs and Yazidis in the issue of curricula and education.

Poll during the session:

Pre-evaluation:
1- The concept of hate speech lies in:
Ethnic and religious discrimination and fanaticism for them 85.7%
Discrimination of a person according to his race, color, and sex 14.3%

2- The concept of extremism lies in:
Exaggeration of clinging to a certain feeling 42.9%
Promoting a specific act without knowing its effects 14.3%
Adhering to a certain opinion and moving away from neutrality 42.9%

3- Reasons for the phenomenon of extremism and hate speech:
Customs and traditions acquired without knowing their effects 28.6%
Fanatical thought and ideology 42.9%
The lack of an accountability mechanism among the existing governments and authorities 14.3%
Media discourse by radical political parties 14.3%

4- Effects of extremism and hate speech:
Loss of confidence between components of the region 57.1%
Confusion between rights and duties 28.6%
Recruiting the media to spread hatred and violence continuously and indirectly 14.3%

Post evaluation:
1- How would you rate the performance of the session facilitators?
Good 33.3% - Very good 66.7%

2- How would you rate the performance of logistical matters at Ezdina office related to the session, including services?
Good 16.7% - Very Good 83.3%

3- Did you gain information in the dialogue session that would increase your knowledge?
Good 33.3% - Very good 66.7%

4- Do you have any feedback or suggestions?

• More discussion sessions that help gain more knowledge.
• Documenting posts, following up on their interest, and not neglecting them.
• Repeat such sessions.
• Redefining the Yazidi religion.
• Welcoming was amazing and so was the hospitality.