The Importance of Intelligent Empathy

By Jonathan Prentice

The lesson we might try to take from Sergio's life (note he is a passive actor in this; we each extract from him, and magnify, that which we want), is the paramount importance of empathy, of attempting truly to understand how others might feel in a given situation. As important as this capacity is individually, I am talking about professional empathy – empathy as intrinsic to engaging in "smarter foreign policy".

This is not necessarily the most apparent quality to draw from a man who could appear quite patrician. But is there any more stark counterpoint to the rose-strewn-streets-of-Baghdad-naivety than Sergio's quietly visceral comment that he would hate – elementally so – to see foreign tanks on the streets of his hometown, Rio, irrespective of how they came to be there? In that comment there is a subtle understanding of others – of appreciating that how certain people feel might be in stark contrast to the "logical" assumptions drawn by others – that merits more than a little reflection.

In other words, we need to think afresh of ways to get serious about our rhetorical commitment to victims and marginalised groups – to empathise with them in a way that is meaningful and to hold ourselves accountable before their judgement.

One of the less appealing aspects of work in the international arena is that, still too often, it can give the appearance of dismissing the ideal in favour of the "pragmatic" (in a manner sufficiently loaded to highlight the wisdom of the latter as against the recklessly ungrounded Pollyanna-ness of the former). International relations is, in many ways, one of the more unaccountable professions. It spends public money (alot of it) and it is imbued with a great deal of importance, sometimes self-declared. It can – I am generalising – have the air of a cosy club.

Let's be clear: traditional diplomacy's vital importance is beyond question. But it would be wrong to conflate importance with intelligence sufficient to supplant the need to consult with those most affected by decisions being taken (or not taken).

Intelligent empathy will mean finding effective ways to hear the views of those most affected and bring them into dialogues from which they are typically excluded - and to do this at the outset of a policy initiative, not as an afterthought. It will mean recognising that these individuals must own a process as much as those in power or the international community do. It will require patience and the imagination to find, and find ways of reaching out, to new partners; it will require a willingness to deal with messy assymmetry; and it will require a conviction that the end goal of a just and sustainable outcome rather than a quick victory really is worth striving for – that the pragmatic and the ideal can be united.

I very much hope that this new initiative being launched today might look to see how it could lead the way in this regard.

Jonathan Prentice is the Human Rights Advisor to the United Nations in Indonesia. He worked with Sergio Vieira de Mello in East Timor, Geneva and Baghdad.

Comments

[Yael Swerdlow]

Bravo!

Crafting the policies that do not create "unforeseen" Blowback requires understanding people's primal responses to what happens right in front of their eyes, and intuiting their unspoken fears.

The United States has had the good fortune not to have been invaded, or occupied, or bombed into rubble. Only by striving to understand what those experiences do to the psyche can we begin to create a smarter, effective long-term, foreign policy.

[Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich]

Although Samantha Powers opposition to the Iraq war was LAST MINUTE, she had championed military humanism in the 1990's decade. Let us hope that the loss of so many lives will be a future lesson.

[Susan]

Intelligent empathy will mean finding effective ways to hear the views of those most affected and bring them into dialogues from which they are typically excluded - and to do this at the outset of a policy initiative, not as an afterthought. It will mean recognizing that these individuals must own a process as much as those in power or the international community do. It will require patience and the imagination to find, and find ways of reaching out, to new partners; it will require a willingness to deal with messy asymmetry; and it will require a conviction that the end goal of a just and sustainable outcome rather than a quick victory really is worth striving for – that the pragmatic and the ideal can be united.

For me, this is the crux of the recent post on intelligent empathy. Fear is the staggering and universal barrier to empathy. From my perspective, the human psyche must let go of fear if the dialogue described above can take place. We exclude people out of fear. We dominate people out of fear. We control people out of fear. We destroy the opportunity for fresh perspectives out of fear. Somehow it seems that what is required is nothing short of a re-programming of the human brain...and for many, fear is programmed in at an early age. The quick victory is all about fear. The messy asymmetry is abhorrent in fearful thinking.

From my years as an educator and early childhood consultant,I find young children who do not have fear instilled early in life can deal with this "messy asymmetry." They are hardwired for empathy...until someone or some situation says "watch out!" This is where the expansion of this initiative or campaign is critically important. We have to come at things differently. The question is...how?

In my experience with organizations such as Heifer International and the Global Fund for Women...it is just this...the idea that "individuals must own a process as much as those in power or the international community" that makes these initiatives work. These programs are not about what we need...they are about what the receiver needs. It is through dialogue and the donors trust that change occurs.I am reminded of a conference call with the Global Fund for Women in which a woman from Afghanistan spoke of the dangerous yet critically important work she was doing to educate young women. I left our enlivening conversation wondering who we are to invoke our myopic behavior upon a country in turmoil. When dialogue occurs, empathy occurs.When we listen instead of demand, change is possible.

These are just a few responses to the recent post. I am excited about regularly visiting this blog...and in discovering how it spreads. I am bold enough to believe De Mello's death was not in vain... and idealistic enough to believe we can find new ways of living together on this planet.

[Sparkle]

A very well written post. As a public diplomacy practitioner I am easily convinced in the need for an empathic foreign policy. But what seems key here is the link back to the pragmatic - the idea that the most sustainable outcome is the one achieved in consideration of those most affected. Hopefully such a perspective would get more of the traditional thinkers on board with the idea of engagement at the popular level.

[Dave Tilley]

I think the key in developing empathy is to reduce the separation between peoples. When we separate ourselves from suffering then we tolerate suffering. Consider the wall in Germany during the cold war, the wall in Israel today, and the wall that we propose on our own southern border.