Statue of Genghis Khan (Photo Credit: Francois Philipp via Flickr)

The rise of great civilizations requires a foundation of universal principles and shared values that form the foundation of an ethic that holds the people to a shared identity and destiny. A civilizations’ rise is attributed to the people’s resonance to enduring principles and their demise results from the people’s dissonance with their core values.

In Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World, Jack Weatherford presents an intimate retelling of the life of Genghis Khan, from his tragic youth to his pursuit of a vision to unite the whole world under the Eternal Blue Sky.

The story recounts the rise of one of the largest civilizations in history, stretching from Europe to China and the Middle East that began with one individual inspired by a vision. Genghis Khan was then able to give substance to that vision through the promulgation of laws and a system that upheld the principles and values of that vision.

The Yassa, or Great Law of the Mongol Empire, “recognized the ultimate supreme law of the Eternal Blue Sky over all people.” It allowed for freedom of worship, acknowledging individual merit and more, all expressed in the laws and culture of the Empire, which created social cohesion in a wide-ranging and hugely diverse population.

Weatherford observes that Genghis Khan held himself to these laws. “At a time when most rulers considered themselves to be above the law, Genghis Khan insisted on laws holding rulers as equally accountable as the lower herder.”

As Genghis Khan detailed in a letter he sent to a monk in China, he strove to treat his subjects “like his children” and treat talented men “as his brothers”, despite their differences. He worked with his officials closely, and although he differed in culture and even religion, he wrote, “We always agree in our principles and we are always united in mutual affection.” In this way, Genghis Khan was able to expand the notion of kinship to go beyond blood ties based on loyalty to principles with the warmth and care of mutual respect.

At the end of his life, Genghis Khan warned his sons to continue to follow the Great Laws or face ruin. His warning ominously speaking to the breakdown over the next three generations who grew farther and farther from the origins of their legacy, as they became preoccupied by protecting their power and assets rather than pursuing their father’s dream.

From this example of the Mongol empire, one can conclude that there are certain core principles and values which form the natural bedrock of strong civilizations. These principles and values are vitally instrumental in articulating a vision that can inspire ancient founders of civilizations as well as continue to inspire succeeding generations.

The post Principles and Values – the Bedrock of Civilizations appeared first on Hyun Jin Preston Moon.

A closeup of the Mallorquín Atlas depicting Marco Polo traveling to the East during the Pax Mongolica (Photo Credit: Abraham Cresques, Atlas catalan)

Tribalism describes the way human societies have operated for nearly the whole of human history. As an organizing principle based on the notion of shared kinship ties, tribalism makes distinctions between those of the tribe and those who are not.

The danger of this kind of thinking is that it implicitly creates an “us versus them” mentality. With such a worldview, peace, cooperation and prosperity becomes limited to the accepted boundaries of the tribe. If there was cooperation between tribes, even this might  be only temporary or very limited in scope.

War then becomes a natural outcome of this type of thinking and many of the worst examples of human behavior emerge when one tribe has effectively “de-humanized” those who stand outside of the tribe. Moreover, tribalism and the conflicts that arise with it limit the exchange of information, ideas and, subsequently, any kind of development or advance beyond a single group.

A look back into history shows how civilizational progress was made possible, when the notion of identity expanded rather than retracted. One example is the era dubbed “Pax Mongolica” in the 13th and 14th centuries during the rule of the Mongols. This period is all the more remarkable when considering the constant warfare and subsistence-level living standards common among the various Mongol tribes before the rise of Genghis Khan.

A largely nomadic people, looked down upon as “barbarians” by even those they conquered, the Mongols were nonetheless able to establish an empire that spanned across Southeast Asia, and as far as Eastern Europe at its peak. More notable still was the fact that the Mongols were able to extend the notion of kinship to include even those of the captured population. Jack Weatherford notes in his book Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World:

“Genghis Khan was not merely making alliances between his family and their ruling families. He was accepting the entire tribe or nation into his empire as familial members, since, in the political idiom of the tribes, granting kinship to the khan was tantamount to recognizing family ties with the whole nation. In this way, the idiom of kinship has expanded into a type of citizenship.”

In order to substantially maintain these ties, Genghis Khan turned to principles and values as instituted in the Great Yasa, the Mongol code of law:

“As he smashed the feudal system of aristocratic privilege and birth, he built new and unique systems based on individual merit, loyalty and achievement […] He created an international law and recognized the ultimate supreme law of the Eternal Blue Sky over all people.”

This change was significant in a time when the concept of rule of law was unimaginable. And this was only possible because the Great Khan himself believed himself to be but an instrument of the universal order and subject to failure if he were to deviate from it, insisting “on laws holding rulers as equally accountable as the lower herder.”

Global Peace Festival featured performers at Wreath Laying Ceremony at Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia in 2011.

As the empire expanded, a hugely diverse population became an asset. The relatively free exchange of ideas and information helped to develop innovations and developments in everything from trade, agriculture, medicine, the arts and beyond.

The empire eventually declined after Genghis Khan’s death as his descendants created new lines of identity, and the notion of a greater empire collapsed into the incipient factionalism and tribalism that had come before it.

It is instructive today to revisit the lessons from Pax Mongolica as a pattern of new kinds of “tribalisms” is now observed around the world in the 21st century. This alarming trend of negative values poses a threat to the many social, technological, scientific advances that we have made as a global community.

We are called now to remember again that great things are possible when we transcend parochial interests and work for something bigger.

The post Going Beyond Tribalism appeared first on Hyun Jin Preston Moon.

As Korea prepared to celebrate the 70th year of the end of WWII, there was much speculation over the content of Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s August 15th message.

Shinzo Abe bows in front of the Peace Prayer statue in Nagasaki. It is expected he will include the word ‘apology’ in an anniversary statement later this week. Photograph: Kimimasa Mayama/EPA

China’s foreign ministry released a statement that it expected a “clear and correct message about the nature of the war and its responsibility for it.” The avid interest in Abe’s remarks indicates an opening out of decades of mutual disregard and, at times, open hostility between Japan and both China and Korea.

70 years after the end of WWII, Japan, South Korea and China have prospered as well as endured economic stagnation, usually attempting to exist independent of the others, cooperating only when it was of clear benefit to national interests.

Yet, cooperation among the three countries has economic, social, technological, cultural, scientific and especially regional security benefits. Even beyond the threat of a nuclear North Korea, China’s growing military might and Japan’s move towards “collective self-defense” speaks to the real and present dangers in Northeast Asia.

In an effort to move beyond and away from this pattern, Japan can take the lead into easing tensions for the region as a whole by focusing on larger regional interests. The foreword to the Japanese edition of the Korean Dream encourages the Japanese government and people to support and pursue Korean unification:

It is hoped that the nations of Japan and Korea and their people can bring closure to those issues that still tie us to the past and work together for the future peace and prosperity for the entire Northeast region. For a Korea unified on the basis of universal principles and shared values would free Japan from the current nuclear and missile threat and open the door for greater trade and investment as well.

There is a large population of Koreans from the two Koreas living in Japan and there are numerous opportunities to engage in talks on the vision, principles and values that can contribute to reunification of Korea.

Japanese business, political, social and even humanitarian interactions with both North and South Korea can have a bigger impact when guided by a larger vision of supporting Korean unification and Northeast Asia cooperation. Efforts to help Korea and the region will undoubtedly help both countries move beyond past resentments.

Moderator Victor Cha, Korea Chair of CSIS with forum panelists.

On July 7th in Washington DC, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) and the Global Peace Foundation hosted the last of a five-part series examining key themes presented in Dr. Moon’s book, “Korean Dream: A Vision for a Unified Korea.” The final forum focused on Japan-Korea relations and the need for Japan to actively engage in Korean reunification.

The Chosun Times reported that:

A majority also [feels] that Japan does not contribute significantly to peace on the Korean Peninsula and promoting reunification. Some 53.9 percent said Japan actually hinders stability on the peninsula, even more than North Korea’s staunch ally China, which 42.1 percent see as an obstacle, and Russia at 37.9 percent.”

Sheila Smith of the Council of Foreign Relations proposed that Japan is undergoing “Korea fatigue,” due to ongoing demonstrations over resentments over Japan’s colonization. Michael Auslin of the American Enterprise Institute said that Japan would likely be positive about Korean unification, but cautious, clearly endorsing a unified Korea that sustains democratic values.

Clearly, the best way to ensure that this happens is to be a part of the process.

The experts at the forum were hopeful, emphasizing that cooperation based on mutual concerns such as regional security, health and economic development could serve as the foundation for improved relations, as well as grassroots civil engagement and education.

Smith referred to Kim Dae-jung’s appeal to view Korea-Japan relations from a wider lens, observing that the 20th century was just a small moment in the long history of Japan and Korean relations. “No leader since has done that,” said Smith, stressing the need for serious political leadership in both countries to establish a forward-looking vision of their relationship.

Korean reunification is one that reaches well beyond the scope of Korea and the Korean people. The global community – from Japan, China, Russia and beyond – would do well to recognize this and actively support the process.

The post Japan-Korea Relations and Korean Unification appeared first on Hyun Jin Preston Moon.

Credit: Anonymous court painter

For centuries since his passing, Genghis Khan has taken on mythic proportions as a blood-thirsty barbarian who destroyed and plundered his helpless and hapless victims during a horrific reign of terror. Yet, in what is only recently being discovered, is what Mongolians – the direct descendants of the great Khan himself – have long recognized: Genghis Khan was a man before his time.

In Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World, Jack Weatherford chronicles the life of Genghis Khan, an illiterate son of nomadic origins, and his legacy. His ability to organize and administer a diverse population spread across thousands of miles, cultures and languages has long been obscured by his more infamous renown as a tactical military genius.

In modern terms, Genghis Khan created a meritocratic rule of law and consolidated huge territories into a secure zone of free trade that spanned continents. Weatherford suggests that Genghis Khan was driven to create this system through the hardship and despair he had personally experienced as a young boy on the Steppes. In his rise, he strove to realize a world without internecine conflict between tribes and nations and for greater prosperity for all. This, and the system that he created sparked innovations and informational exchange that molded the modern world through advances in trade, technology, communication, economics, governance, medicine, education and more. This exchange set the stage for civilizational progress on countless levels and in a myriad of ways.

Credit: Bkkbrad

And yet what remains more notable than all of these accomplishments is that his efforts to unite the people under the rule of the “Eternal Blue Sky” was not an autocratic, tyrannical rule imposing his own particular beliefs but an effort to align with the principles of the universe. While Genghis Khan had his own spiritual beliefs and practices, he recognized and respected the rights of others to their own beliefs, becoming a defender of religious freedom for many persecuted minority religious groups.

While he was unable to fully pass down the principles and values that he had learned through his lifetime onto his sons and grandsons, there are valuable lessons we can learn from this oft-misunderstood man of incredible will, ability and destiny.

The post The Legacy of Genghis Khan appeared first on Hyun Jin Preston Moon.

The rational-choice theory that has been so popular up until now suggests that, given the right incentives and punishments, human beings and thus human societies will make rational choices. And yet, clearly, that has not been the case. War is not rational; violence is not rational; exploitative business practices are not rational; corruption is not rational.

Programs like Global Peace Volunteers, run by the Global Peace Foundation, engage youth in discovering shared values that span cultural and religious differences through workshops and volunteer work.

These are all limited, short-sided practices that result from a fundamental misperception of who we are and the ways of the universe. With this understanding, we seek a more holistic way of addressing the problems of human society through first establishing the common aspiration by which we can live, work, and organize society and its multiple sectors as One Family Under God.

The shootings at Garissa University in Kenya by a highly educated, privileged person suggest that it is not access to power, jobs or poverty that drive some to act in largely incomprehensible ways. Many – if not most – leaders of radical groups come from educated, privileged backgrounds. The many volunteers who travel at great risk to join the Islamic State from the developed nations are not simply underprivileged youth looking for jobs.

Certainly, poverty-stricken populations are very vulnerable to radicalization but perhaps it has more to do with its appeal as a way to achieve meaning and purpose in life, an inflated sense of power and a way to express one’s rage and frustration; humiliation of the human spirit. The proper response to this sort of spiritual violence is not found in political or economic solutions but spiritual ones. Perhaps understanding the spiritual principles involved allows us to create better political and economic policies and practices, but it does not work the other way around.

In short, political and economic incentives may affect human behavior on one level, but at the deepest level, we are driven by our most deeply held values. Values that are rooted in our spiritual faith, values that are rooted in the family, drive us in our choices, attitudes and behaviors at a level that goes much deeper than rational thought. It is the core of who we are; knowing this, the vision of One Family Under God “cuts to the core” by asserting our immutable, spiritual identity as the framework from which we can reform our social, political, economic cultures.

This approach seeks to change our perception of each other and ourselves as the first and most fundamental basis for change. It becomes the touchstone for all our other endeavors. It creates the basis for changing the way we do business, how political parties function, the way we educate our children, engage in service; the way we live our lives. This vision and approach are at the core of the vision of One Family Under God, and therefore is the basis for engaging multisectoral partners.

The vision, principles and values put forth in One Family Under God have been preserved and passed down through the ages of human history. People of faith resonate with the vision because it’s already familiar to them; its part of what they study and teach and communicate to their communities.  The unique value-add of we must take in an interfaith approach is to bring focus to the universal principles espoused by faith traditions and implicit in the vision, and stressing the vital common mission of faith leaders to promote the greater good in civil society.

Dr. Hyun Jin Moon at the Global Peace Festival Kenya in 2010 addressing members of 1% for Change, a student leadership organization that encourages students to contribute their time, skills and resources to address community issues.

As a central aspect of our initiatives in East Africa, we are proposing a focused engagement between spiritual leaders and the youth organizations, because youth are looking for “meaning and motivation” and grappling with fundamental questions about life and reality.  We need to provide opportunities to learn from, question and connect with those whose life work is rooted in these issues.  Ultimately our approach maintains that identity based conflict must be addressed at its roots, through recognition of our shared identity as part of the human family under God.

In shaping a new future in the era of globalization, youth of today can embrace our common human heritage, and can build cohesion in our diverse and pluralistic world through shared values as one family under God.  But they also need to connect with the wisdom of the past to make good choices for the future; the current trend of encouraging youth to “be who they want to be” or “take the lead” may lead to very dangerous consequences if they are not rooted in principles and values or the sense of a greater good!

Fundamentally, spiritual leaders have moral authority, distinct from power in that it is recognized from without rather than imposed by the person himself/herself. And rather than imposing desired behaviors through force or incentives, sparking the truth in others and helping them see a bigger picture and a greater dream of the future creates owners who will develop that vision in ways we could never imagine.

The world is now coming to recognize the problems caused by the poverty of the human spirit in the wake of secularization and globalization, but still struggles to reconcile the competing truth claims by the world’s religions. The One Family Under God vision and approach to interfaith balances these by working to articulate universal principles to create an ethical framework and create a consensus on shared values from which we can live and work together beyond perceived identities.

The post Countering Radicalization of Youth through One Family Under God appeared first on Hyun Jin Preston Moon.

GPF Chairman say a clear vision of a unified Korea should be based upon the principles and values that have shaped Korean identity.  

Dr. Hyun Jin Moon greets Dr. Edwin J. Feulner, founder of The Heritage Foundation and Chairman of the Asian Studies Center at the 2014 Global Peace Leadership Conference in Seoul.

30-Sep-2014 |“In the three years since the Global Peace Foundation (GPF) held its annual convention here in Seoul, the landscape regarding Korean unification has changed dramatically,” GPF Chairman Dr. Hyun Jin Moon told an assembly of Korean political and religious leaders and international scholars in Seoul on September 30, 2014. “South Korean government policy is now to actively pursue peaceful unification by seeking to engage the North through a number of channels, [including] proposed infrastructure projects, as well as cultural exchanges with the North Korean people. In policy discussions within South Korea there is now much greater focus on the potential benefits that will flow from peaceful unification.” The GPF Chairman was addressing the 2014 Global Peace Leadership Conference (GPLC), “Vision, Principles, and Values of a Unified Korea,” the latest of several GPF-supported initiatives, including conferences, public education and humanitarian campaigns, and civil society partnerships, to elevate awareness and support for Korean unification. Dr. Victor Cha, Senior Adviser and Korea Chair at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, DC, gave an overview of the changing perspectives of unification since the division of the peninsula and the end of the Korean War and what he called “an important sea-change” in recent attitudes about unification.

Dr. Victor Cha, Senior Adviser and Korea Chair at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, outlines the changing perspectives about Korean unification since the division at the conclusion of the Korean War.

Cha cited five distinct perspectives in the post-war era, beginning with a stark, Cold War-dominated view that saw unification only based on the eradication of the competing, irreconcilable political system. This ideological stance migrated, with the lessons of the integration of East and West Germany, into a “hard-landing” view of unification that dwelt on the enormous costs to the South of integrating the impoverished North. With the election of Kim Dae jung to the presidency and elevation of his Sunshine policy, a strategy of unconditional engagement with the North to moderate tensions and encourage economic development, the prospect of unification came to be viewed as remote and unrealistic, and relegated into the distant future. With the election of conservative Lee Myung-bak a more pragmatic view of unification emerged, with the government acknowledging that factors could precipitate a much more sudden change for which preparations should be made. South Korea’s current President, Park Geun-hye, has presented yet another view of unification, seeing it as an opportunity for growth, investment, and a “bonanza” or jackpot for Korea and her neighbors. Cha acknowledged that shifting attitudes are related to politics, but recent focus on the issue “is also motivated by a sober realization that the stability of the regime in the North is far from certain.” He also noted growing ties between South Korea and China. “South Korea is try to take advantage of this window and bring China more to its side. It wants to create greater equities for Beijing in its relations with Seoul than its relations with Pyongyang. And they believe the moment is now.” Heritage Foundation founder and Asian Studies Center Chairman Dr. Edwin J. Feulner presented a sobering assessment of any peaceful or gradual integration of the two Koreas. “Korean unification would require, quite simply, either fundamental political and economic reform by North Korea or the collapse of the regime,” he said. “Unfortunately, Kim Jong-un has clearly demonstrated that he will be as resistant to reform as his predecessors were.”

Heritage Foundation founder and Asian Studies Center Chairman Dr. Edwin J. Feulner: “Korean unification would require, quite simply, either fundamental political and economic reform by North Korea or the collapse of the regime.”

He also said that Pyongyang has displayed remarkable resilience to external pressure. “Regime change in the foreseeable future is unlikely due to the pervasiveness of North Korean security services, the lack of a viable opposition party or movement, and the state’s absolute control over information sources,” Feulner told the conference. Emphasizing the ongoing U.S. strategic commitment and Beijing’s complex balance of interests in avoiding a collapse of the North Korea regime, Feulner outlined steps the U.S. could take to assist the process of eventual unification, including:

• Giving support for South Korea’s current, conditional efforts for engagement;
• Taking action against North Korea’s illegal activities, including its nuclear and missile programs, and any complicit foreign individual, bank, business, or government agency;
• Pressing China to exert greater influence over Pyongyang and join international efforts to sanction the regime
• Maintaining robust military deterrence.

Feulner also said that South Korea should reach out to North Korea through both bilateral and multilateral negotiations, but not acquiesce to North Korean pressure tactics. “Being excessively eager to compromise, as demonstrated by previous progressive administrations, not only rewards abhorrent behavior, but also undermines negotiating leverage. “President Park Geun-hye has provided a realistic blueprint for engaging North Korea,” he concluded. “In following these policies, Seoul should be resolute in its requirements of conditionality, reciprocity, and transparency from Pyongyang.”

“The principles of living for the benefit of all humanity and governing with morality and truth, and the spiritual consciousness they produced, became embedded in the Korean psyche and a part of our cultural heritage through the extended family tradition.”

In his keynote address, GPF Chairman Dr. Moon said that the focus of the conference—the vision, principles and values that can guide a unified Korea—“is an essential part of the preparation for unification, yet it has not been sufficiently discussed. “Unification will create a new nation, rich with new possibilities. What sort of nation should it be? What principles and what values should guide and sustain it? To grasp this opportunity we need to move forward with a clear vision of the future based upon the principles and values that have shaped Korean identity and defined Korea’s destiny.” Moon said the roots of Korean identity can be traced to Korea’s founding and the core principle of Hongik-Ingan with its exhortation to live for the “benefit of all humanity.” This ideal was to be implemented by governing the world with “morality and truth” (Ido-yeochi), thereby “enlightening the world with truth” (Kwangmyung-ise) and thus “creating a world of truth” (Jaesae-ihwa).

GPF Chairman Dr. Moon said that the focus of the conference was vision, principles and values that can guide a unified Korea.

“These principles and the spiritual consciousness they produced became embedded in the Korean psyche and a part of our cultural heritage through the extended family tradition,” the GPF Chairman said. “This is the foundation of an ethical society through which virtue is nurtured and passed on through the generations.” He added that the Korean Dream does not end with the unification of the Korean peninsula but is a vision that reaches out from the nation to the world. “One of the leaders of Korea’s independence movement, Baekbom Kim Gu, whom I mention in my book, captured the sentiment of the patriots of that time when he wrote, “I wish my nation would be a nation that doesn’t just imitate others, but rather it be a nation that is the source of a new and higher culture, that it can become the goal and an example [for others]. And thus true world peace could come from our nation.” The GPLC was organized by a coalition including the Ministry of Unification, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Action for Korea United, the Global Peace Foundation, and other faith-based and civil society supporters. A day earlier, a banquet and ceremony marked the formal launch of The Korean Dream: A Vision for a Unified Korea, a new book by Dr. Moon which examines Korean history and heritage as a source of shared values for a unified Korean people.

The original article appears on www.globalpeace.org.

The post Korean Unification ‘Sea-Change’ Cited At 2014 Global Peace Leadership Conference appeared first on Hyun Jin Preston Moon.

Religious leaders participate in the water ceremony during the Global Peace Festival in Nepal.

Interreligious cooperation is one of the three pillars of the Global Peace Foundation’s work. Dr. Moon has emphasized that real inter-religious cooperation is based on common principles and values.

Religious leaders hold the key to resolving the root problems of humanity.  However, as 9/11 and other religious based conflict around the world show, without interreligious cooperation, this key cannot be manifested.

The following is an excerpt from an interview with DongA Daily Newspaper in Korea on Dr. Moon’s perspective on interreligious cooperation.

In my interfaith work, I have found that there is a lot in common with what what people of faith affirm, whether you are Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, Shinto, Hindu, etc.,  because it is inspired by God. What deals with theology, doctrine and dogma, may be different. However, values and principles: what we aspire for, how we strive to live our lives, how we define spiritual maturity, much of this is shared.

The major transformations and changes in society started with a vision, a principle or value that resonated universally with people. That vision, principle or value tapped into the spiritual dimension, because that is our common thread.

The best way to explain it is through delineating the difference between spiritual leaders and religious leaders. For spiritual leaders, universal aspirations, principles and values are important.

Mahatma Gandhi and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. were people of deep faith. But they came out of their religious boxes to do the type of work that they did.

Mahatma Gandhi led a national movement to liberate India from the British Commonwealth because he did not just represent the Hindus. The movement was made of many religious traditions: Hindus, Sheiks, Jains, Buddhists and Muslims. Gandhi aspired for something that transcended his religion.

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. led the Civil Rights Movement, because he did not just speak on behalf of the Southern Baptists.  His faith and his convictions  drove him to do go beyond his denomination.

What allowed those movements to form were basically universal values and principles.

The problem is that there have always been religious leaders who stay in their box and promote their own particular faith. They can’t make any civic impact. I’m challenging them to come out of their box to live for some greater purpose.

The post Dr. Moon Calls for Interreligious Cooperation Based on Shared Principles and Values appeared first on Hyun Jin Preston Moon.