Retrospect: Neighbourhood Dialogues in Wedding and Moabit

At the end of November, three evening events took place as part of the “Neighbourhood Dialogues in Wedding and Moabit” project. These events aimed to promote peaceful and effective coexistence within the neighbourhoods of these two districts through dialogue. The project was organised by our alumna, Nuriani Hamdan.

Impressions and insights from the workshop:

As part of our project Neighbourhood Dialogues in Wedding and Moabit, we organised three evening events, held in mid- and late November in Wedding and Moabit. The central focus was on fostering peaceful and impactful coexistence within the neighbourhoods of the two districts through dialogue.

To kick off our series of events, we hosted a film evening at Zukunftshaus Wedding, where we watched the documentary Reunion – Ten Years After the War by Jon Haukeland, which focuses on the Kosovo conflict. The film depicts the dialogue process of a group of students shortly before the war broke out and several years afterwards. It provided an interesting perspective on the process and impact of dialogues during a period of intense political and military tension.

We were fortunate to have Dr Steinar Bryn, a peacebuilder and dialogue researcher who worked for many years at the Norwegian Nansen Centre for Peace and Dialogue and who facilitated the dialogues depicted in the film, join us live via Zoom. Dr Bryn gave us a brief introduction and answered questions after the screening. Participants asked questions such as: When is the right time for dialogue during a conflict – before, during, or after events like a war? Is it ever too late for dialogue? In what situations is dialogue not appropriate? How should we critically assess the fact that Dr Bryn, as a Norwegian, conducted the dialogues in Kosovo? How did he come to do so? What role do facts play in dialogue? Dr Bryn’s answers, rooted in his personal experiences and observations, enriched and inspired further reflection on the film and the possibilities and limitations of dialogue.

A week later, we hosted a self-led dialogue on reconciliation at Zukunftshaus Wedding. In an intimate setting, we engaged in a lively discussion with many personal insights, centred on the opening question: What does reconciliation mean to you? As facilitators, our role was to pose questions that built on participants’ contributions, keeping the conversation flowing and delving deeper.

Using a speaking list, each person was given the space to speak and was responsible for choosing to share or remain silent. Two fundamental rules guided our dialogue: speaking from one’s own perspective and refraining from commenting on or invalidating others’ realities. Participants increasingly engaged in conversation with one another, asking questions to understand others’ perspectives and experiences.

Building on the theme and opening question, the dialogue touched on the personal need for connection and relationships, the relevance of reconciliation in various situations, conflicts so profound they necessitate severing ties, and relationships resilient enough to endure conflict and thrive long-term. Concerns and fears about global and political conflicts were also shared, along with mutual encouragement.

The dialogue had a clear, time-defined conclusion and ended without judgement or evaluation of what was said. We are grateful to everyone who participated and embraced this unique conversation.

The final event of our series was a dialogue at the Neighbourhood Centre Stephans in Moabit. People of different backgrounds, motivations, and ages, from both nearby and further afield, came together for what we perceived to be a meaningful and enriching discussion on reconciliation.

We opened the evening with the same question: What does reconciliation mean to you? This sparked a moving dialogue about personal approaches to conflict, individual limits of forgiveness or reconciliation, the importance of communication, individual and societal responsibility regarding resources and climate, personal privileges, and experiences of conflict within families, social settings, workplaces, and as migrants, among other topics.

Following the dialogue, further private conversations emerged among participants who had been strangers before. These interactions appeared to arise with ease, suggesting that the earlier dialogue had likely fostered a fundamental sense of connection, facilitating subsequent exchanges.

Text by Nuriani Hamdan