Breaking invisible walls: American Corners' programmes and strategies for strengthening interreligious dialogue and inclusive peace

Abstract

The main agenda of this study is to explore the various programmes and strategies of American Corners in Mindanao to amplify interreligious dialogue and peacebuilding within their communities. The researchers utilized the virtual focus group discussion approach, and the data collected was analysed using Braun and Clarke’s six-phase reflexive thematic analysis model. The researchers uncovered the creative efforts of each American Corner, integrating themes of interreligious dialogue, peace, mental health and animal welfare. The communities’ evolving needs greatly influence programming, with strong partnerships and immersive learning sessions cited as key programme highlights among the American Corners. However, poor infrastructure – particularly poor Internet access and power interruptions – poses significant challenges, prompting a focus on in-person over hybrid and virtual events. The recommendations include improving information accessibility and dissemination, fostering strategic partnerships, and deepening community engagement to sustain peace efforts in Mindanao.

Keywords

Interreligious dialogue peacebuilding sustainable development American Corners Mindanao

Introduction

Mindanao, one of the most significant islands in the Philippines, has a rich and diverse cultural heritage. Long before the establishment of the country and the Spanish colonization, Mindanao was already a sovereign nation, with a sultan serving as its head of state. The region was organized and established by missionaries from Arabia and Brunei, who founded three major sultanates: the Sultanate of Sulu, the Sultanate of Maguindanao and the Sultanate of Buayan. Due to its fierce resistance during the Spanish colonization, some parts of Mindanao are known as the ‘Unconquered Kingdom’, a testament to the island’s strength and resilience.

Many Filipinos see the second-largest island as a frontier – not only a dangerous place but also a land of promise (Guiam and Muslim, 1999). It has been the site of conflict for many years, with different tribes, cultures, religions and beliefs clashing. It has gained a reputation as a nationally and internationally hazardous location due to numerous incidents of terrorism, such as bombings, kidnappings and other man-made disasters. The region is home to a group of bandits whose actions have caused inhumane suffering. At the same time, religion is used as a front to incite community division and signify political agendas. As a result, many neighbouring towns and cities are hesitant to visit the area.

The origins of the Mindanao conflicts can be traced back to the 16th century when the native Moros of the island resisted invading Spanish forces (Adriano and Parks, 2013). Muwahidah (2012) describes the Mindanao conflict as a conflict

between those who were colonized and those who resisted conquest; between those who have the power to claim the land and those who lost their homelands; between those who were baptized in Christianity and those who adhered to Islam, which had arrived earlier (Muwahidah, 2010: 39).

The Muslims, who prefer to be called Moros rather than Filipinos, believe that they have never been part of the Philippines and that their present struggle is a continuation of their ancestors’ war for independence, first launched against Spanish and American rule, and now under the post-colonial ‘Filipino-run Philippine state’ (Buendia, 2005). This location has been a frequent site of conflict between the Philippine government and the Moro National Liberation Front, which represents the Moros, the indigenous people of the islands.

Furthermore, the government of the Republic of the Philippines has been steadfastly committed to achieving peace in the Mindanao region. To accomplish this objective, policymakers have devised several plans and programmes to foster sustainable and attainable progress in the area. These efforts aim to promote long-term peace and stability in the region, which is essential for the nation’s overall development.

Media versus reality in Mindanao

Over the years, mass media has resulted in the portrayal of Muslims as barbaric people and equated the word ‘Muslim’ with ‘bandit’, ‘kidnapper’, ‘terrorist’ and ‘murderer’ (Gaerlan, n.d.). This kind of prejudice brainwashes other citizens in the Philippines into believing that most Muslims in Mindanao are terrorists and can cause them harm. Reports from biased or unfair media personnel may negatively affect the people of Mindanao by promoting discrimination and passing judgement. The same observation is evident in a study by Karis (2023, cited in Klinkhammer, 2020: 339), where Karis found that there is unbalanced coverage of Islam on German television news, characterized by ambiguous narratives.

Press journalism is paramount in transmitting crucial and up-to-date information about the latest occurrences to the masses. It is essential to consider whether the media provides a fair and balanced view of current events.

Interreligious dialogue as an instrument for the progress of peace in Mindanao

Interreligious dialogue (IRD) has a long and complex history, and it drew more attention in the 1970s amidst the ongoing conflict between the government and separatist groups such as the Moro National Liberation Front and, later, the Moro Islamic Liberation Front. During the 1970s, several stakeholders, including religious leaders and non-profit organizations, began to recognize the significance of dialogue and peaceful resolution to address the grievances and conflicts in Mindanao. With these initiatives, IRD played a crucial role in fostering understanding and promoting peaceful coexistence among the diverse religions, beliefs, traditions and ethnic communities in Mindanao. IRD plays a crucial role in promoting understanding, respect and harmony among different faith communities (Chaudhari, 2016), and allows people of different religious traditions to come together, live cooperatively, and build bridges of friendship and cooperation (Khambali et al., 2013). In the context of Mindanao, there is a need for IRD to address the challenges posed by religious exclusivism, religious diversity and the contradictory beliefs in major religions (Sahu, 2019).

One of the most significant events involving IRD in Mindanao was the establishment of the Bishop-Ulama Conference in 1996. This non-profit organization is a collaboration between the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines and the Ulama League of the Philippines, representing Muslim religious leaders. The organization mediates between diverse communities, such as Muslims and Christians, working towards peace development and understanding. Sustaining IRD in Mindanao is an immense challenge, but with the stakeholders’ full support, this medium of peace progress is attainable. In Mindanao, IRD is being sustained in several ways:

Institutional support from government agencies, non-profit organizations and private sectors by providing resources and platforms for different religious groups to gather together and engage in constructive conversation;

Involvement of various representatives from diverse communities to hear their voices in the dialogue process;

Community involvement;

Promotion of education and awareness about the differences in religions and cultures to help dispel misconceptions and stereotypes;

Establishment of a conflict resolution mechanism to strengthen the approach to addressing the emerging issues before they escalate into conflicts – that is, establishing the Bangsamoro Region in a predominantly Muslim area in Mindanao;

Accurate communication in the media, avoiding miscommunication, disinformation and malinformation;

As a complement to broader peacebuilding initiatives in different activities and programmes implemented by various organizations and agencies.

Over the years, this once dangerous place has been transformed step by step into a region that fosters peace and progress through collaborative peace activities, such as IRD, which has proven to be a highly effective tool in achieving peace in the area. Most people believe that an interfaith encounter is one way of bringing about peace. Through such encounters, the participants are motivated to learn about other religions and cultures, and will hopefully work on breaking down the barriers between them (Muwahidah, 2012).

IRD has become an increasingly significant dimension in present-day societies over the last two decades (Lehmann, 2020). This kind of instrument for peace progress in Mindanao has evolved in many ways and helped unite different cultures, traditions and religions amidst diversity. Interfaith approaches in different programmes are becoming a trend in peace progress in Mindanao by rebuilding relationships in conflict areas. For example, the interfaith programme allows Muslims and Christians to engage in dialogue, exchange ideas, and gain knowledge about each other’s faith and customs. This significant initiative fosters better relations between the two communities and eliminates any preconceived biases or stereotypes they may hold. Interreligious efforts are expanding up to this day, and more religious groups, civil society organizations and government agencies are engaging in this programme. They include the American Corners in Mindanao, which spearhead different programmes involving such activities.

American Corners in Mindanao as interreligious dialogue and peace advocates

Among the active key players in Mindanao that advocate peace through dialogue are the American Corners. These Corners are situated in seven academic libraries in Mindanao (see Figure 1):

American Corner Cagayan de Oro – Ateneo de Cagayan de Oro Xavier University

American Corner Cotabato – Notre Dame University

American Corner Davao – Ateneo de Davao University

American Corner Marawi – Mindanao State University, Marawi Campus

American Corner Jolo – Notre Dame of Jolo College

American Corner Tawi-Tawi – Mindanao State University, Tawi-Tawi Campus

American Corner Zamboanga – Ateneo de Zamboanga University

Figure 1.

American Corners in Mindanao.

The American Corners in Mindanao are part of the broader American Spaces Philippines network, comprising 16 American Corners strategically located across the country. These Corners are situated in academic libraries nationwide, supported by the US Department of State and overseen by the American Center Manila at the US Embassy in the Philippines. Aside from promoting friendship, allyship and partnership between the USA and the host country, these cultural and information centres collaborate to advocate open dialogue, access to information resources and skills-building at no cost. American Corners are crucial in delivering knowledge and skills-building training to young people and the community. Many of the American Corners in Mindanao incorporate IRD in their programmes, such as active participation in the virtual Kapihan sa Mindanao (Coffee Time in Mindanao) – a peace forum and talk series focused on peace held during the Mindanao Week of Peace.

Despite these efforts, some inhibitions remain. In an area where violent extremism and conflicts persist, how are American Corner librarians continuing to rise to the challenge? This is where this article gets its motivation. The main agenda of the study is to explore the various programmes and strategies of the American Corners in Mindanao to amplify IRD and peacebuilding. Specifically, this research intends to (1) identify active programmes focusing on IRD in the region; (2) examine the programmes’ highlights, challenges encountered and resolutions made; and, from the challenges identified, (3) propose community-centred programme recommendations.

This study will benefit libraries and organizations with similar goals of advocating peace through IRD, as they will be able to learn from the scenarios outlined in this article. The findings of the study will help programme implementers improve their programming strategies and overall decision-making. Learning from previous players will help other organizations avoid making the same mistakes and thus maximize their time and efforts for other purposes.

Methodology

The researchers employed an exploratory approach, utilizing mainly virtual focus group discussions. The virtual focus group discussions were held from 11 to 12 July 2023 on Zoom to accommodate the two clusters of study participants. The first cluster comprised American Corner directors and coordinators in Mindanao, while the second was IRD programme recipients identified from the community of each American Corner. The American Corner directors and coordinators nominated IRD programme recipients who met the following criteria: (1) they were aged 18 or older and (2) they had attended, volunteered at or were one of the resource speakers at an American Corner IRD programme, regardless of the time period. The reason for obtaining two clusters of respondents was to explore and analyse IRD programmes from the perspective of both the programme organizers and the programme participants/volunteers.

Two structured and expert-validated focus group discussion interview modules were prepared and used as the main instrument to capture the perspectives of the two clusters of study participants on their engagement with IRD programmes and initiatives. The respondents had the opportunity to review the Participant Information Profile and complete an online informed consent form before continuing with the data collection process. Guide questions were sent out a few days before the discussion to allow each participant to reflect on and make a note of the crucial points in their IRD engagement. The two focus group discussions lasted 3 hours, 51 minutes and 43 seconds in total. The researchers transcribed the discussions to facilitate recollection, assist in code formulation and identify recurring themes.

The data collected was analysed using Braun and Clarke’s (2021) six-phase reflexive thematic analysis model, observing the following steps: (1) data familiarization and note-taking; (2) systematic data coding; (3) generating/conceptualization of the initial themes; (4) developing and reviewing the themes; (5) refining, defining and naming the themes; and (6) producing the report.

Results and analysis

Six out of the seven American Corners in the region joined the first set of discussions. Most of the study participants from Cluster 1 are directors from private higher education institutions with more than five years of affiliation with American Corners and involvement in IRD programmes as participants, and one to two years as IRD programme organizers (Table 1). As there has been a recent transition in American Corner 6, the researchers invited two representatives from this American Corner – the present director and the ex-director – to avoid missing out on information.

Table 1.

Profile of the study participants (Cluster 1).

American Corners in Mindanao	Institution type	Pseudonym	Designation in American Corner	Years of involvement in American Corner	Years of involvement in IRD and peacebuilding programmes (as a participant)	Years of involvement in IRD and peacebuilding programmes (as an organizer)
American Corner 1	Private higher education institution	Arabella	Coordinator	More than five years	More than five years	One to two years
American Corner 2	Private higher education institution	Betty	Coordinator	More than five years	More than five years	One to two years
American Corner 3	Private higher education institution	Chelsea	Director	More than five years	More than five years	More than five years
American Corner 4	Private higher education institution	Dylan	Director	More than five years	More than five years	Three to four years
American Corner 5	Private higher education institution	Erika	Coordinator	One to two years	One to two years	One to two years
American Corner 6	State universities and colleges	Faith	Director	Less than a year	Less than a year	Less than a year
American Corner 6	State universities and colleges	Grace	Ex-director	More than five years	More than five years	More than five years

Conversely, of the nine invited participants to represent Cluster 2, only five took part in the focus group discussion. Table 2 illustrates the diversity of the study participants in Cluster 2. Some have experienced what it is like to be an IRD programme recipient/participant, facilitator, volunteer or resource speaker. Most are from the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (BARMM) and have been involved in IRD programmes for many years. Note that pseudonyms have been used for privacy and confidentiality purposes for both clusters.

Table 2.

Profile of the study participants (Cluster 2).

IRD programme recipient/volunteer (pseudonym)	Description	Role in American Corners’ IRD programmes	Region of origin	Years of involvement in IRD programmes
Avery	Campus minister at one of the universities in Mindanao	Facilitator and participant	Region IX – Zamboanga Peninsula	Three to four years
Billy	Sports enthusiast, peace advocate and founder of an initiative in Mindanao that focuses on using sports for peacebuilding and leadership	Resource speaker	BARMM	More than five years
Carl	University President and priest	Resource speaker and participant	Region XI – Davao Region	More than five years
Diana	Programme officer of a Peace Institute	Participant	BARMM	More than five years
Emerson^a	Freelance writer focusing on Mindanao	Volunteer	BARMM	Three to four years

^a Present only in the first part of the discussion and was disconnected because of a power outage.

Interreligious dialogue programmes and initiatives of the American Corners in Mindanao

The American Corners in Mindanao are active key players in amplifying IRD and peace, as conflicts, harassment and other man-made calamities are present in the region. Many of the respondents from both clusters have first-hand experience of sieges, bombings and murders. For instance, Dylan, one of the American Corner directors, shared:

Interreligious dialogue and peacebuilding mean to us a lot [in the region], most especially because I experienced the terrorist attack way back in January 2019 [when] twin bombing of the cathedral happened. I can still remember how it impacted my life. I got scared of Mindanao and thought of getting out of the region. However, I realized, despite that experience…What should I do to help the young generation, the out-of-school youth who are exposed to an environment where other organizations behind the violence can negatively influence them?

Respondents from Cluster 2 narrated:

I also just want to share my specific experience during the Zamboanga Siege in 2013. At that time, I was 13 years old. The aftermath of that siege [created] division between Christians and Muslims. There emerged an unconscious prejudice and discrimination towards Muslims as they were seen as the reason why the siege happened in Zamboanga. (Diana)

I witnessed someone being killed. I was driving my car, and there was a van moving slowly, and I honked at it. It was a traumatic experience…I saw a long firearm come out of the van, and the driver of the motorcycle [beside it] was shot to death. When I got to the venue, I still could not talk properly. I remember finishing three bottles of San Mig Light [beer] before being able to speak about it. Then, in the evening, I was surprised to hear a knock on my door. I was in a small drive-thru inn back then, as there was no big establishment at that place. When I opened the door, I saw a small group of elders – imams and worship leaders of [College X]. I saw the concern on their faces and they asked if they could talk to me. I agreed, and they apologized. Of all the many occasions that the incident could happen, it happened on my first visit to their place. They hope that the incident will not be the reason why I will not come back to their place, as the Coaches Forum in Mindanao and what we do in the organization, in general, is important to them. You know what? Since 2016, I have gone back and forth from their place. Debriefing is important, but I wanted to highlight the significance of finding common ground more. IRD and peacebuilding are paramount in providing common ground. But common ground should not just be a common ground; you have to sprinkle it intentionally with good faith, trust and mutual respect. (Billy)

Such scenarios have led more individuals and groups, as well as public and private institutions, to work towards achieving peace and understanding through IRD. The discussions revealed that the American Corners in Mindanao acknowledge the critical need for IRD programmes and initiatives for the following reasons:

Mindanao is seen as a conflict-affected area in the country. However, regardless of this, there are other things that it can offer, such as rich histories, cultures and traditions.

They correct false information or false impressions about Mindanao and Muslims.

IRD has been embedded in the curriculum, and the cultures, visions and missions of the organizations with which the American Corners are affiliated. The goal is to lead in social transformation through peace education and promoting the integration of Muslims and other cultural minorities into mainstream society.

They are safe spaces where dialogue is rooted in mutual respect, understanding and communication.

The heterogeneity of community members – Mindanao is a melting pot of different religions, cultures and traditions, and a common ground for understanding and respect for people’s similarities and differences must be maintained.

The expected IRD audience must be aware of the availability of IRD programmes, initiatives and events.

The IRD programmes and initiatives of the American Corners in Mindanao come in different shapes and sizes. Grace even emphasized that ‘[t]he very existence and creation of [University X] is indeed in itself a peacebuilding effort by the national government’. From the discussions, the researchers deduced that several different types of IRD programmes and initiatives are offered by the American Corners. First is the implementation of creative learning sessions in the form of webinars, seminars, peace narrative workshops, podcasts with an IRD and peace expert, chat shows, poetry readings, Eid celebrations, round-table discussions, community engagement, capacity-building, university-led programmes and initiatives, peace forums, leadership training and the virtual Kapihan sa Mindanao. The first Kapihan sa Mindanao was hosted by the American Center Manila in the US Embassy in the Philippines in 2021, in close partnership with the American Corners in Mindanao and the Lady Sharia Counsellors-at-Law of the Philippines. The virtual discussion focused on rido and its impact on the community and the election. This programme aims to champion an open and safe platform to foster sustainable peace in the region (American Spaces Philippines, 2021).

Apart from learning sessions, the provision of physical space for dialogue and prayer rooms was acknowledged by the IRD programme players. Grace recounted their experience conducting an open American Corner 3D (discourse, discuss, debate), where there is a specific day when they allow any student organization to book their American Corner to talk about whatever topic they want to for free. There are three spaces available for community members to book: the Washington DC Room, which has a smart board; the New York Room, which has a whiteboard; and the San Francisco Room, which is an intimately designed room for smaller groups. According to the representative of Grace, it is one of the ways they help community members participate in meaningful discussions, as there is a deficit of leisure spaces in the area. If there are any available spots, there are a handful of restaurants where payment is required before gaining access.

The provision of prayer rooms was also seen as a very positive peace effort for Muslims, as they can feel that they are included, even in a Christian-dominated university. As one respondent pointed out, part of the disenfranchisement lies in the fact that they feel that they have not been included from the start. The American Corner directors and coordinators collectively shared the same idea that there is no need to identify and label a specific programme as an IRD programme, as IRD is presumably ingrained in our everyday lives, manifests in different ways and can happen at any moment.

Interreligious dialogue programming highlights

The American Corner directors and coordinators recognized that one of the critical game-changers for the success of any IRD programmes and initiatives is the influence of internal and external stakeholders. The identified internal stakeholders include university peace institutes, campus ministries, and other university departments and offices. The respondents also acknowledged a handful of trusted external partners. Specifically, they pointed out the United States Government Alumni, including those who participate in the Young Southeast Asian Leaders Initiative and the Philippine Youth Leadership Program, as their key allies in not only creating IRD programs but also in organizing all other American Corner activities. Moreover, the respondents mentioned that their partnerships and collaborations with local government units, non-governmental organizations, Sanguniang Kabataan (a youth council) and even other American Corners in the region have been beneficial for the realization of the goal of IRD.

Another critical point that was repeatedly mentioned in the focus group discussions was explicitly deterring the labelling of IRD and peacebuilding programmes as such. Chelsea recounted:

When we conduct IRD and peacebuilding programmes at the American Corners, we do not usually label it as an IRD or a peacebuilding programme. Because we have priority areas we need to focus on, like [for example] most of our programmes are in science, technology, engineering and mathematics [STEM], environment or education. But IRD and peacebuilding initiatives are embedded in all those programmes. Why? Because when we invite participants to join our programmes, we see to it that there are various representations, like we invite our students who are members of indigenous peoples – i.e. the Lumads. We also invite our students and faculty members who belong to the Muslim community. Moreover, we also invite interested Christians…all of them…We do not discriminate [against] our participants; instead, we encourage and motivate them to join the programmes at the American Corner, so they will be well represented in those programmes.

Erika, the coordinator of American Corner 5, added that they are able to invite participants and resource speakers for their IRD efforts as their community members are actively volunteering and participating in the process. Dylan, the director of American Corner 4, affirmed that once the target audience learn that it is American Corner 4 spearheading the programme and that certificates will be provided, they will join the programme voluntarily and without hesitation.

The feeling of being included in the community as a minority was also mentioned as one of the key highlights of an American Corner’s IRD thrust. One respondent remarked that American Corner 6 provides a safe space for all students, regardless of their religion or status in life. The American Corner 6 representatives added that they offer students a safe space to come together and enjoy the activities and amenities, which is a form of IRD and peacebuilding.

Challenges and lessons learned

Every successful programme comes with its share of challenges, which can either help improve or break the existing programme framework. Table 3 lists the challenges that have been encountered in managing IRD efforts, together with the resolutions made to counter the issues, as expressed by the American Corner directors and coordinators.

Table 3.

Challenges and solutions noted by the American Corner directors and coordinators.

Challenges	Solutions
Unreliable electricity supply in Mindanao	Purchased an electric generator
Lack of designated space for discussion	Identified an area or areas in the American Corner that could be transformed into discussion rooms – for example, the Washington DC Room in American Corner 6
Fluctuating Internet connection	Proceeded with the programme but in face-to-face mode
Lack of opportunities to be involved in IRD efforts	Improved marketing strategies
Financial constraints	Decided on the minimum and maximum number of participants and sought partnership
Increasing participation of community members and participant unavailability due to academic workload and conflict of schedules	Improved communication channels and strategically scheduled programmes on dates when students were free

Another important theme, which was raised by Dylan, the director of American Corner 4, was concerns about sustainability and the mechanisms for monitoring the progress of programmes or initiatives after their implementation. The matter of sustainability was also recognized by the respondents in Cluster 2, stressing that the challenge will always be sustainability. For them, organizations and institutions championing IRD and peacebuilding should put a premium on the endurance and achievability of their programmes and initiatives.

From the point of view of Cluster 2, one of the respondents mentioned the need to conduct in-depth research and consult experts before embarking on sensitive topics to prevent offending people with different backgrounds and beliefs. While IRD and peacebuilding efforts have been part and parcel of the everyday lives of people in Mindanao, some inhibitions and hesitations still exist, coupled with a lack of mutual understanding. In order to counter the latter, Chelsea, the director of American Corner 3, pointed out that before they start on an IRD programme, the team sees to it that there is a brief orientation on the topic and clear house rules are drawn up to guide the attendees. This orientation paves the way for a common understanding between the participants.

Recommendations for community-centred programmes

One way of making IRD and peacebuilding efforts more effective is to allow the target community members to engage and participate in both the planning and implementation stages. This will ensure that the efforts are tailored to what the community needs rather than what the organizers think the community needs. Knowing the community is critical to the success of any programming endeavour. The discussions of both clusters centred on the following recommendations.

Accessibility of information and its dissemination

The majority of the IRD programme recipients and key players from the communities of the American Corners were of the view that there is the need for accessible information about the availability of IRD programmes, activities and initiatives in their area and the region in general. According to the respondents, community members are not aware that programmes are being offered and that they can join them for free. The study participants in Cluster 2 collectively agreed that information dissemination must be improved to reach the target audience:

I was struck when I asked, during a talk, one of the leaders in Bangsamoro to share his thoughts about programmes. What they want to achieve…He said that there are many programmes that they were not able to attend, not because they can’t afford to be there but because they are not aware that they can join such programmes. So, I think if you really have good, beautiful programmes, create a network that works in terms of information dissemination. (Billy)

With this concern lies the need for American Corners to improve their marketing strategies and take advantage of the current network of people with whom they are collaborating. The respondents suggested continuing to expand networks and connections to different sectors of society. There was mention of information dissemination through parishes and organizations advocating for IRD and peace, such as Silsilah, a foundation located in Zamboanga City, and the Catholic Educational Association of the Philippines. Furthermore, they generally emphasized the option of utilizing social media platforms, email campaigns and instant messaging applications to disseminate information about upcoming programmes:

I think, for me, the number-one vehicle for promoting IRD will still be social media. Second, we do need to have some data regarding the impact of email. Well, there are advantages, but there can be certain limitations [too]. However, social networking is generally very friendly. Third is the personal witnessing of the values of love and compassion in our own families, communities and institutions. It is important to emphasize the impact of social media in order to exponentially promote IRD, especially the best practices. Because in just one click, as Billy pointed out, the good news spreads throughout the world. And when people speak, people from all walks of life – children, aged, professionals, farmers…then it impacts the whole world. (Carl)

I think the best way, really, is social media engagement because there are many youths using social media. I think it’s important to win the hearts and minds of the youth as they will eventually assume leadership roles. They will act as agents of social change. (Diana)

Networking and collaborating with the right people

As previously mentioned, one of the key features of the American Corners’ IRD and peacebuilding efforts is their connection to the vast network of civil society organizations, United States Government Alumni and government agencies, to name a few. Both clusters affirmed the importance of continuing to strengthen relationships and constant communication with different stakeholders, both internally and externally. Close contact and collaboration with these players will improve current programmes, reach target audiences, impact more lives and, most importantly, help avoid the redundancy of projects. Finding the right programme partner will make the work easier and mean that programme initiators are not alone in advocating IRD and peace.

Knowing your community

Piquing the interest of the target audience, and accommodating their various levels of intelligence and topic preferences, must be well planned. Grace stressed the importance of providing different forms of programming activities that can cater to everyone:

If you are always offering seminars, you will not be able to tap the shy type. You will most likely tap the same students with leadership capabilities. But what about those silent types, whom we also need to reach out to because we may never know if he or she is already dreaming up all the anger in the world? We also need to reach those kinds of students to provide a safe space for everyone.

Chelsea added: ‘Know your community. Take note of the programmes that have been implemented already and make them an anchor. Offer variations to prevent the programmes from being redundant. It is a come-on to the community’.

Interactive and creative activities where IRD is embedded but that are not explicitly labelled as such appeared to be a reverberating theme during the discussion with the Cluster 1 respondents. For instance, Grace commented:

IRD and peacebuilding programmes are also anti-terrorism programmes. Of course, we will not say, ‘For you to not become a terrorist, attend our programme’. We do not have to say that. But it is really providing them with a different glimpse of a world of opportunities and possibilities. That, in itself, is already a come-on to them. We are emphasizing that they do not need to become extremists because there is still a world with opportunities for them that could solve their and our problems.

Conclusion

IRD and peacebuilding efforts are expected to increase understanding and respect, fostering harmonious relationships. IRD should create a ripple effect and be life-giving for a community. Whether it is in terms of relationships between and among classmates, workers or members of different communities, regardless of their culture and religion, IRD provides life, whereas when there is tension, confusion, violence and terrorism, this results in destruction as well as suffering. IRD programmes are a vehicle to attain unity, unconditional love and mutual understanding among people with both similar and different beliefs and traditions.

This research has successfully identified the creative ways in which the American Corners in Mindanao are advancing their IRD and peace efforts in their respective communities. Aside from the usual lecture-type sessions in the form of seminars and webinars, the American Corners are embarking on collaborative events and interesting activities such as podcasts, workshops and chat shows, where the issues of IRD, peace, mental health and animal welfare are embedded. It is also necessary to underline the impact of communities’ evolving needs, as this can greatly affect programming. The programme highlights that were mentioned most among the American Corner representatives were: (1) strong partnerships with internal and external stakeholders coupled with a vast network of connections and (2) the opportunity to immerse the target audience in an engaging experience through interactive and fun learning sessions. In terms of setbacks, the American Corner directors and coordinators testified to the poor infrastructure system in Mindanao, which they deemed disadvantageous to providing programmes. The main concerns were poor Internet access and regular interruptions in the power supply. Instead, they focus on implementing in-person programmes over hybrid and virtual events to avoid these issues. With regard to the concern over power outages, one American Corner respondent explicitly shared that they have their own electric generator, so they can still proceed with their programmes in the event of power failure. The discussion with the IRD programme recipients, volunteers and invited resource speakers reiterated the importance of advocating and implementing IRD and peace efforts in Mindanao to attain step-by-step sustainable peace in the area. Three recommendations for the American Corners and other organizations with similar goals of promoting peace through IRD were identified: improving information accessibility and dissemination; strengthening partnerships with the right people; and the significance of knowing one’s community.

IRD and peacebuilding efforts do not become successful overnight, and their success cannot be measured immediately. IRD and peacebuilding go beyond the programmes themselves. The true measurement of the success of these initiatives is when the audience applies what they have learned in real-life situations.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the American Spaces Philippines network, particularly in Mindanao, and the rest of the study participants for supporting this research endeavour by actively sharing their time to contribute to the data-gathering process.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Roana Marie Flores

References

Adriano

Parks

(2013) The Contested Corners of Asia: The Case of Mindanao, Philippines. San Francisco: The Asia Foundation. Available at: https://asiafoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/The-Contested-Corners-of-Asia_The-Case-of-Mindanao.pdf (accessed 23 July 2023).

American Spaces Philippines (2021) 2021 gallery. Available at: https://americanspacesph.org/2021-gallery/ (accessed 23 July 2023).

Braun

Clarke

(2021) One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qualitative Research in Psychology 18(3): 328–352.

Buendia

(2005) The State-Moro armed conflict in the Philippines: Unresolved national question or question of governance? Asian Journal of Political Science 13(1): 109–138.

Chaudhari

(2016) Inter-religious dialogue as a way to peace building. International Education and Research Journal 2(1): 22–24.

Gaerlan

Jr (n.d.) The role of media: The Mindanao War and the Moro peoples/internal refugees. Available at: https://kalilintad.tripod.com/role_of_media.htm (accessed 23 July 2023).

Guiam

Muslim

(1999) Mindanao: Land of promise. Accord 6: 10–19.

Khambali

Sintang

Senin

, et al. (2013) Interfaith dialogue in the context of comparative religion. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research 14(12): 1599–1612.

Klinkhammer

(2020) Interreligious dialogue groups and the mass media. Religion 50(3): 336–352.

10.

Lehmann

(2020) Interreligious dialogue in context. Interdisciplinary Journal for Religion and Transformation in Contemporary Society 6(2): 237–254.

11.

Muwahidah

(2012) Interfaith dialogue in Mindanao: Sharing a common hope and mutual fears. Understanding confluences and contestations, continuities and changes: Towards transforming society and empowering people (The Work of the 2009/2010 Asian Public Intellectual Fellow). Bangkok, Thailand: API Regional Coordinating Institution Institute of Asian Studies, Chulalongkorn University, pp. 39–50.

12.

Sahu

(2019) Religious pluralism and interreligious dialogue. IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science 24(7): 57–62.