Dialogue in times of crisis: ‘You don’t have to be an expert to show compassion’

class=”sc-29f61514-0 dXbCZE”>

SonntagsBlick: Hannan Salamat, Dina Wyler, what is actually a constructive dialogue?
Hannan Salamat: Many people think that speaking is the most important thing. But actually it’s also very much about listening. And not just about learning, but also about unlearning things.
Dina Wyler: You must also be aware of your intentions: are you entering into an argument to win? Or are you ready to really listen, broaden your horizons and change your perspective?

How do you assess the current debate on the conflict in the Middle East?
Wyler: We see how the tone becomes increasingly tense and the fronts harden. It’s not about listening, it’s more about introducing your own arguments. So we talk past each other. The restaurant metaphor fits this: in a noisy restaurant, at a certain point you speak louder and louder to be heard. Everyone ends up shouting at each other instead of collectively agreeing to be quieter.

Soft sounds are rarely heard at the moment, especially on social media.
Wyler: Unfortunately. From feedback on our work, we know that many people are grateful for these quiet sounds because they feel heard and seen. The visibility of nuanced voices is now more important than ever.

Why is it so difficult to talk about the conflict in the Middle East?
Salamat: It is human nature to simplify complex topics to achieve a certain level of safety. We tend to think in categories, which loses the real complexity of topics. The conflict in the Middle East is a good example of how people tend to develop strong opinions. Paradoxically, however, this supposed clarity makes the events more difficult to deal with, because they cannot simply be broken down into clear conclusions or fixed positions.

Can one even have a say in this complex conflict without prior knowledge?
Wyler: You can do anything, but you must be aware that your own perspective is always limited. And such a difficult subject must be approached with a certain degree of humility. For many people, this is an incredibly painful time. It is especially difficult for those affected to talk about it. As an unaffected person, you must therefore work even harder to have a sober dialogue and not fuel the conflict further.

One side is accused of anti-Semitism, the other of putting the suffering in the Gaza Strip into perspective. How do you start a meaningful debate when the fronts are so hardened?
Wyler: It is best not to use social media, it is much more difficult there. I think it is extremely important that we do not deny each other our experiences. We must first lay a foundation by sincerely acknowledging the other person’s pain. Until this is the case, we cannot talk constructively about the conflict.

Many people are currently posting statements about the conflict in the Middle East on Instagram or X. What advice do you give to people who want to make a statement?
Wyler: Short tile statements on social media serve no one right now. I feel like a lot of people post things like this because they feel powerless and want to do something. But depending on what you post or what terms you use, this can lead to even more polarization.
Salamat: Perhaps one should also wonder what other forms of solidarity are possible. For example, you can call affected friends and ask how they are doing. Or if you hear anti-Semitic or anti-Muslim hatred – online and offline – take action against the sender.

Dina Wyler, you often talk about how the ‘yes, but’ should become ‘yes, and’. What do you mean?
Wyler: It’s about the intention with which you conduct a conversation. ‘Yes, but’ means that you want to convince someone of your own opinion. But the conflict in the Middle East is so complex that you can discuss it for hours and respond to every argument with “yes, but”. If you want to have a constructive discussion, I advocate “yes, and”. This does not mean that we deny each other’s experiences, but that we add more and more pieces to the mosaic. This makes things increasingly difficult, but the conflict in the Middle East is difficult. You have to recognize that certain things can be true at the same time. That can only be done with a ‘yes, and’.

Why is it so difficult for many people to tolerate this simultaneity?
Salamat: As mentioned, people tend to simplify complex information and concepts to better understand them. This often leads them to look for clear and unambiguous answers and fear ambiguity. Ambiguity can cause uncertainty and anxiety because it is difficult to draw clear conclusions or take firm positions. People usually feel more comfortable when they can make clear decisions.

How can one express sympathy for both sides without exposing oneself to accusations of relativization?
Wyler: It’s not that difficult. Fear, anger, pain, loss – these feelings are there on both sides right now. These can be recognized without any geopolitical context. You don’t have to be a Middle East expert to show compassion.

Can we remain silent about this conflict?
Salamat: Silence is not the same as indifference or ignorance. For example, it can be a sign of respect for the complexity of a conflict. Silence should not be sanctioned.
Wyler: Silence can also mean being overwhelmed. And that’s a completely legitimate feeling in this situation. I think we’re all overwhelmed. I only find silence problematic when you witness anti-Muslim racism or anti-Semitism. We all have a responsibility to name and condemn this.

Source: Blick