THE ART OF PEACEBUILDING
Design, Improvisation & Healing
Design, Improvisation & Healing
Lisa Schirch is Director of 3P Human Security, a
partnership of organizations connecting policymakers with global civil society
networks, facilitating civil-military dialogue and providing a peacebuilding
lens on current policy issues. 3P Human Security is a program of the Alliance
for Peacebuilding. She is also a Research Professor at the Center for Justice
and Peacebuilding at Eastern Mennonite University, and Policy Advisor for the
Alliance for Peacebuilding. A former Fulbright Fellow in East and West Africa,
Schirch has worked in over 20 countries in conflict prevention and
peacebuilding. Schirch has written four books and numerous articles on conflict
prevention and strategic peacebuilding. Her current research interests include
civil-military dialogue, the design and structure of a comprehensive peace
process in Afghanistan, conflict assessment and program design, and the role of
the media in peacebuilding. Schirch is a frequent public speaker and has TV and
radio experience discussing U.S. foreign policy. Schirch holds a B.A. in
International Relations from the University of Waterloo, Canada, and a M.S. and
Ph.D. in Conflict Analysis and Resolution from George Mason University.
Yago: Lisa, you are welcome to this
blog that aims at breathing forgiveness as we deconstruct and embrace the
energies of enslavement that keeps in conflict many parts of the world. I am
very much interested to incorporate your understanding of ritual and symbol on
the field of peacebuilding. I believe that one of the most powerful strategies
of the energies that enslave us is linked with the underdevelopment of our imagination,
our symbolic selves.
Recently you have had an art show call “Pax Bellissima”
where you have shared with us your own processing of painful life experiences
linked to the field of peacebuilding. But before we go into details on this
regard could you share with us briefly the outstanding moments of your life
story as a peacebuilder?
 |
| Pax Bellissima. Artist: Lisa Schirch |
Lisa: I grew up in a family that was
very international. So, we lived abroad when I was young, in Italy, in England…
In the US I lived in a Mennonite community where there were many people from
around the world travelling through. And so, I was exposed to a lot of people
from a lot of different countries and a lot of different cultures from a very
young age. And along with that exposure, there was the Mennonite theology which
really emphasises the humanity of all people, that there are not some people
that are better than others in the world… that everybody is a child of God and
is worthy of being alive, and has rights.
So it was a religious version of human rights, I think, that I was
taught from a very young age. I think that’s what Mennonite theology is. It’s
about the rights that human beings have to live, to have dignity, to have
respect. And part of that philosophy is pacifism. For me, pacifism is a
commitment to peace and a belief that the use of violence to achieve peace is
inherently problematic. Violence is like a virus: it leads to more violence. The
use of violence to attempt to stop other people’s violence creates unintended
second and third order problems. So Mennonites are sceptical of the utility of
violence; and that scepticism is both theological and practical.
There were people who had lived in different war zones coming through my community in Ohio, telling histories of violence in their countries. I think as a child I wasn’t conscious of absorbing this, but as I became older and I went to a Mennonite university and took classes in political science, I started realizing that I was very conscientious that life is not fair and that I wanted my life to support justice and fairness. (I don’t personally use the word “slavery” to refer to justice issues outside of the enslavement of African American peoples. But I think in terms of justice and injustice, and I was very keenly aware of many injustices in the world.) After college, I worked on Indigenous rights in Canada. My brother was living in Central America documenting human rights violations. I also was working on stopping US arms traffic to Central America and working in support of democracy movements. So I had a lot going on that refined my consciousness.
There were people who had lived in different war zones coming through my community in Ohio, telling histories of violence in their countries. I think as a child I wasn’t conscious of absorbing this, but as I became older and I went to a Mennonite university and took classes in political science, I started realizing that I was very conscientious that life is not fair and that I wanted my life to support justice and fairness. (I don’t personally use the word “slavery” to refer to justice issues outside of the enslavement of African American peoples. But I think in terms of justice and injustice, and I was very keenly aware of many injustices in the world.) After college, I worked on Indigenous rights in Canada. My brother was living in Central America documenting human rights violations. I also was working on stopping US arms traffic to Central America and working in support of democracy movements. So I had a lot going on that refined my consciousness.
During a college semester abroad program, I lived and worked in a refugee camp in Costa Rica, full of upper class Nicaraguan refugees who had fled the Nicaraguan revolution. While living with refugees that once were wealthy in Nicaragua, I realized for the first time the humanity of all people. These wealthy landowners had resisted democracy efforts in Nicaragua. They had supported a repressive dictator. But in finding a solution for Nicaragua’s future, their dignity also mattered. I heard them talk about how the democratic revolution was problematic from their point of view, as it, didn’t take into consideration everybody’s interest and needs, and it didn’t lead to a social transformation where everyone else feels respected. I think that that experience planted the seeds for me of wanting a different form of social change, where we begin to engage with the powerful as well as those who are not powerful. To find ways of transforming society where it is not just another group becomes the group on top, and somebody else is being trampled underneath. But you create a society where people are around the table and expressing their interest and perceptions. Transformation is much more like a dialogue, where you find your way to go forward together. And so the field of conflict resolution, as it was called then, became conflict transformation and now is peacebuilding. For me that’s when I started realizing that I need to find this other way that brings people together. Human rights activism and the resistance movements I had seen in the US and Central America are important. I supported the values that they represented. But people in those movements tend to demonize the other side and they rarely seek to engage with people who have a different point of view.
Eventually
I ended up in a Masters program and a PhD program in conflict resolution and
starting studying how do you bring people together to talk: people who are really
different, who see the world in a different way, who have different levels of
power, forms of power, and different beliefs systems. And I think for me this
is where I belong. There really are not easy answers to any of these questions.
It is not just about power (the power of the gun, or the power of the vote, to
push forward one agenda over another). The real question for me is how you
build a society where people actually respect and listen to each other. Those
values are the ones that are the most important. I still feel like a lot of the
world is less interested in dialogue and more interested in imposing their
views on others, even when they are really different. We all, I think, as human
beings tend to think that we all know best, what is good for our society.
For me, that experience in Nicaragua planted the seeds for the work that I am doing now engaging with people who are very different. The work that I do today is trying to build the bridge between civil society, the grassroots, and those who works for justice and name injustices.
For me, that experience in Nicaragua planted the seeds for the work that I am doing now engaging with people who are very different. The work that I do today is trying to build the bridge between civil society, the grassroots, and those who works for justice and name injustices.
Yago: Yes, you have been working in
Washington for the last 6 years as Director of 3P Human Security and now at the
Alliance for Peacebuilding, out of the call of the “Center for Justice and Peacebuilding" or “CJP community" that we somehow translate all these ideas into “Washington”
policy making together with peacebuilding done at grassroot levels around the
world. You said the “CJP community” needed to go and to talk with US military,
to talk to the State Department, and to the Congress about the foreign policy
and to engage people. I know that this has been paradoxically wonderful and
exhausting. Traveling to Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Sri Lanka, you faced all
kind of things and many of them dramatic. As you said “your work has been mentally
and physically stressful.” Lisa, could you share with us your role and your
vision as a peacebuilder working in the context of the military?
Lisa: In the field of peacebuilding we
try to build bridges between people who see the world in a different way. Between
Muslims and Christians, Jews and Muslims, Palestinians and Israelis, Hutus and Tutsis,
all around the world these small peacebuilding programs try to bring people
together who are different, who see the world differently, and find solutions
that takes into consideration everyone’s point of view, and to try to find
mutually satisfying ways of addressing different people’s interests. So, for me
the work in Washington is about bringing those principles of thinking about
change to a large systemic level. Too much of peacebuilding has just been
grassroots to grassroots, and not enough about engaging systems and
institutions, structures, nations, states, infrastructures with the ideas of
peacebuilding. Government need to dialogue with civil society. States don’t
tend to think about peacebuilding, they usually think about security, so they
come at the whole issue of peace through a different door, but they are
basically asking the same question. When
the Hutus and the Tutsis start to hurt or threaten each other, what do you do? Do
you send them peacekeeping troops, do you send in diplomats or what do you
do?
Peacebuilding includes a wide range
of options and I discuss the options and strategy of peaceubilding in my Little Book of Strategic Peacebuilding. With
my background these issues are very difficult because I bring such scepticism
of the utility of violence. I think for many Mennonites they have rejected
being part of that conversation at all, because they reject even talking with
those who believe in violence and use violence.
Peacebuilding includes a wide range
of options and I discuss the options and strategy of peaceubilding in my Little Book of Strategic Peacebuilding. With
my background these issues are very difficult because I bring such scepticism
of the utility of violence. I think for many Mennonites they have rejected
being part of that conversation at all, because they reject even talking with
those who believe in violence and use violence.
I
feel very humble when it comes to thinking about this. I don’t know what the
answer is to Syria, Rwanda, South Sudan, or Darfur. I bring the scepticism that
says violence is not a simple solution to these problems. But on the other
hand I don’t know what the solution is. So I am not ready to judge that there should
not be peacekeeping when civilians are being slaughtered. I am a little bit
slower to put all the blame out there on those planning a military
intervention. I think human beings lack knowledge of ways to address situations
of mass atrocity. I think, John Paul Lederach calls this the “human crudeness.”
I do feel we are quite crude, none of us have all the answers.
So, for me
pacifism means I am very sceptical of violence. I think people don’t think
through the implications of it. They have a fantasy of fire power. They long
for a quick solution, and it seems that the guy with the biggest gun can win
but that is not the case in most situations. It is much more messy and there are
many consequences to the use of violence.
So in Washington I feel that I am a voice of scepticism of violence. I try to raise the implications, the unintended consequences. The military calls it the second and third order effects; the effects that you haven’t plan for. Because I think that’s easier for them to hear than my Mennonite theology that is immoral to kill. Certainly I do believe that is immoral to kill, and that even the act of killing causes great scars in the people that have to kill. I think the recent news that more US soldiers died from suicide than in battle in the last year is evidence that there is a lot of internal wrestling going on with people in the military. And they have been asked to do things that go against the human nature and what people are taught; and when you are asked to do something that goes against your human nature it is very hard to live with yourself. I feel great compassion for soldiers who have been asked to torture, to participate in killings, and for those who have killed civilians. I know from listening to them, it is hard for them to live with themselves. And then I have also a lot of compassion with the soldiers that I meet in my work that don’t believe in what they are doing; they don’t feel that the war in Iraq or Afghanistan is legitimate or it is achieving anything.
I think it is this compassion and humility that is really essential to peacebuilding. I don’t have all the answers. All I can do is to raise the questions that I have experienced, and to have compassion for people who are in positions of power. To try to listen to them and their interests and sort out the legitimate concerns, the legitimate interest from those who are more centered on greed, and elite power, and elite economic interests. But even when there are elite, economic interests at stake, it is important to find a way of engaging with that – a way that is a listening engagement, and not just a condemnation. I think too often peace activists just openly condemn and push people away with their “name, blame, shame” approach. There is definitely a place and a time for that. But I don’t know whether that approach is really transformative. What does it achieve. The group blaming maybe feels better about themselves. And sometimes it can deter violent actions. But I don’t think it is redemptive or transformative. There has to be something more than blaming and shaming, there has to be a way of listening and engaging and dialogue.
So in Washington I feel that I am a voice of scepticism of violence. I try to raise the implications, the unintended consequences. The military calls it the second and third order effects; the effects that you haven’t plan for. Because I think that’s easier for them to hear than my Mennonite theology that is immoral to kill. Certainly I do believe that is immoral to kill, and that even the act of killing causes great scars in the people that have to kill. I think the recent news that more US soldiers died from suicide than in battle in the last year is evidence that there is a lot of internal wrestling going on with people in the military. And they have been asked to do things that go against the human nature and what people are taught; and when you are asked to do something that goes against your human nature it is very hard to live with yourself. I feel great compassion for soldiers who have been asked to torture, to participate in killings, and for those who have killed civilians. I know from listening to them, it is hard for them to live with themselves. And then I have also a lot of compassion with the soldiers that I meet in my work that don’t believe in what they are doing; they don’t feel that the war in Iraq or Afghanistan is legitimate or it is achieving anything.
I think it is this compassion and humility that is really essential to peacebuilding. I don’t have all the answers. All I can do is to raise the questions that I have experienced, and to have compassion for people who are in positions of power. To try to listen to them and their interests and sort out the legitimate concerns, the legitimate interest from those who are more centered on greed, and elite power, and elite economic interests. But even when there are elite, economic interests at stake, it is important to find a way of engaging with that – a way that is a listening engagement, and not just a condemnation. I think too often peace activists just openly condemn and push people away with their “name, blame, shame” approach. There is definitely a place and a time for that. But I don’t know whether that approach is really transformative. What does it achieve. The group blaming maybe feels better about themselves. And sometimes it can deter violent actions. But I don’t think it is redemptive or transformative. There has to be something more than blaming and shaming, there has to be a way of listening and engaging and dialogue.
Yago: Yes! Lisa, I agree very much with
what you are highlighting. This is one of the areas of exploration in this
blog: the need of incorporating a paradoxical mind in the peacebuilding field;
in other words, to develop a reconciling heart with the oppressors as we still
fearlessly name the injustices committed by them.
Yago: In fact peacebuilding is about
balancing. You are talking about the importance of integrating the eastern mind
with our western mind. I believe that this can be linked very much to the left
and right sides of our brains. We are called to bridge holistically both sides.
Lisa: That’s
interesting, that resonates, that makes sense to me.
Do
you have any meaningful example during your last six years working with the
military of integrating ritual and symbol in your service? Was it easy for you
to implement your vision in the “structures” of Washington?
Lisa: Absolutely, I am so glad that I
wrote that book first and I did the research on the brain, and how the brain
works, because I think that too many people in Washington think that everything
is rational where people make a cost-benefit analysis rather than on identity
or relationships. What I saw in my research for ritual and symbol and
peacebuilding is that often in negotiations between stark enemies who hate each
other, it was not the moments of negotiating that were transformative to them.
It was the moments of relationship, dinners together, eating together, dancing
together, walking together, fishing together in South Africa, sharing photos of
grandchildren in Camp David. The most pivotal moments in negotiations are when
people are actually not talking about the conflict but are relating to each
other as human beings.
In my
relationships with people in the military, there has been a lot of
opportunities for eating together when we talk about our children or when we
are relating to each other as human beings. We also talk about the hard issues. I feel like I have been able to do
the amount of work that I have done because I brought my whole self to those relationships,
and so did others. I mean, yes, as years progress you have a lot of hard
conversations that have to be sprinkled with questions like “how are your
children and where have you gone for vacation”. All these little conversations
build a fuller sense of the relationship. The hardest relationships I have had
in Washington are with people who were unable to do that. You know when there
has not been a time to eat together, or to have coffee, or share about our
family, and there is not a basis of trust in relationship, it is very hard to
make any progress on difficult negotiations or issues. So I absolutely believe
and look for opportunities for engaging with people as whole human beings, whether
they are Ambassadors or Colonels in the military, or whoever. For me it is the
ritual that allows the relationship. It is the drinking of coffee, it is the
social scenario that goes around eating together. You end up talking about
different things because, you are not just in your rational mode, you are going
for a walk to a forest, you are in a context where is allowing you to talk
about things other that work.
Yago: You
say that conflict is dramatic. All theatre, literature, and good storytelling
revolve around some form of conflict. Peacebuilding can and needs to be equally dramatic to capture people’s
imagination and interest. Could you expand on this?
Lisa: This also relates to my work on
the media. I am working on another book on the media and peacebuilding. And the
media, you know, they say “if it bleeds, it leads” because news stories that cover
blood, and violence, and war help them sell more newspapers. Violence is very
dramatic. I think the most dramatic parts of peacebuilding are emotional and
gripping to people’s attention. I think about the Greeks and the Turkish Cypriots
dancing together, I see the beauty of seeing two people sharing a meal together
while their countries hate each other.
 |
| Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial |
Yago: Lisa, in the context of looking
at conflict through the lenses of drama, how would you explain the worldview of
a person in the context of deep-rooted conflict?
Lisa: I think people who are suffering
from conflict are frozen. I think a peaceful worldview is one that is
transforming and open and not locked. And so, a person, a community, can
experience different ideas, different people, and all kinds of diversity
without becoming allergic to it, and automatically resisting it. In conflict,
what happens is that there is an autoimmune response that rejects new ideas or
people as foreign. Anything different,
any person, any idea, is perceived as threat, and once it is perceived as
threat there cannot be a dialogue, there cannot be engagement, there cannot be
transformation, there cannot be a moving forward together. In conflict, too often people believe it is
either you or me, win or lose. So I think the worldview of conflict is stuck,
locked; unable to accept openness and change.
Yago: I believe that conflict is very
much rooted in identity issues. In your book you talk about
ritual re-humanizing, transforming identity. How ritual forms and transforms identity?
In the context of peacebuilding organizations, also healing efforts of women groups where domestic violence survivors were using rituals and creating rituals for transformation. And so the women who have being sexually abused when they were young, one of them would have a funeral with her own child dress, and a funeral for the child on her who has been sexually abused, so that she might moved from the identity of the victim to the identity of the survivor. In peacebuilding there are examples of communities of people where there has been conflict and having a ritual of almost reuniting tribes. In Kenya for example, tribes that have conflicts with each other will have a celebration, will sacrifice an animal, and they will use that ritual as a transformation of their relationships. So they sign an agreement, they sacrifice a cow, they move from being at war with each other, to being at peace with each other. It is a ritual, reconciliation, a transforming ritual. Many cultures around the world have those kinds of transforming peace-making rituals.
Yago: You say that rituals play the
function of forming and transforming people. Can we say that rituals have the
potential of also deforming the real nature (deepest identity) of a human
being?
Lisa: Yes, we can talk about that, in the
apartheid in South Africa, white community
enforced an apartheid mind-set onto black South African children. Children
would not be allowed to speak their language. They were taught that they were
not as good as white children. You know those were forming rituals that were
very oppressive. So, it is important to see that ritual has the power to form
and transform and they can be used very destructively.
Yago: Also to indoctrinate people?
Lisa: Yes, to indoctrinate, and to be
slaves. There is nothing inherently good about ritual, but it is a very, very
powerful tool. Hitler was a brilliant expert in ritual. I think too often as
peacebuilders we try to be too rational, and not recognize the incredible power
that ritual and the arts have. The most powerful people, and the most
oppressive people throughout history have known very well the power ritual of
the arts.
Yago: And it is very
much linked to the subconscious…
Yago: We have been living in patriarchal societies
for thousands of years. This has brought a lot of suffering to humanity. The
gender unbalance has created enslavement towards the real identity and
potential of the woman and also men’s behavior has been shaped by oppressive
energies. In your book you say that in
the middle of patriarchal societies, women’s ritual is a patriarchy-free zone
for experiencing gender equality and empowerment? Could you elucidate more on
this?
 |
| Widow's meeting at Tandale, Tanzania |
Yago: As I said before, I believe in
the importance of developing a paradoxical mind in the very middle of conflict.
This is the only way that things can be meaningfully transform. Thomas Merton
said that to live is to travel in the belly of a paradox. In your book you talk
about the ritual paradox. You say that nonviolent activism often uses paradox
by doing the opposite of what is expected; by receiving violence without
resisting. Could you expand on it?
Lisa: Yes, there is a whole set of
theories about paradox. Most people, when they have a person they don’t like
they stay away from them. But in peacebuilding you walk towards conflict, you
walk towards the person you disagree with. That’s paradox. Loving your enemy is
also a paradox. Probably again, because our brain is so ancient; the intuition
is often based on fight or flight response, that when we don’t flee, run away
from our enemy, or fight, we choose some other third way of engaging with
somebody we disagree with. It opens all kind of doors for change, because the
other person doesn’t know how to respond to, either somebody running away from
them or fighting them. It has been interesting to watch many of the people in
the military I have worked with, because first they just assume that I think just
like them; and then when they realize I don’t think like, some of them push me
away. But a lot of them stay for the conversation over the years, and that is
still going on. That’s a paradox, to engage with the very people you disagree
with.
 |
| Theory Class at CJP (Spring Semester 2013) |
Lisa: That’s a really good question, it makes me think that there are just a few key ideas that are really important: love and respect, acceptance, dialogue, paradox… I think that if people really understand these values and can experience and know a lot of examples and case studies of them, that’s the most important thing for students. I still think we spend too much time with tools and theories, because if you have in your gut what the direction is, more like a compass, so you have your magnet pointing in the right direction of paradox, compassion, listening, respect, dialogue, you are going to do interesting stuff. So, for me that’s almost more important. First of all, study people throughout history who live their life with those values and then be inspired by that and improvise. I think improvisation, just like paradox, is one of those key values. Peacebuilding is improvisation. There are no manuals. You are not going to be able to walk on somebody else’s path. You are going to have to go out and to figure out what your unique place in the universe is and what you have been called to do. What doors are going to be opened for you; given who you are, what you can do and how will you follow that call? Would you listen for it and go through the doors, even when they are difficult? I think what I was taught, the rational skills, were very important, but the inspirational case studies and these core ideas of paradox and compassion, empathy, those are the foundation of everything. Many of the tools would not make any sense if I did not have those values.
 |
| Engaged Pedagogy (Arts and Peacebuilding. Fall Semester 2012) |
Yago: In CJP the importance of being
reflective practitioners is very much stressed. I am currently following a very
interesting course with Howard Zehr called “Contemplative Photography.” It is
through the art of doing photography that we become aware of the importance of
being mindful in our practice. This is a very creative and practical approach
in the integration of arts and peacebuilding. It is an invitation towards
living in the now, towards becoming aware of our interaction with reality,
towards our worldviews. What can you say on the importance of mindfulness in
peacebuilding?
Lisa: Mindfulness and reflection are
very important. Being in a world where we have so much information is the
modern crisis actually – we all have too much information coming into us each
day and not enough quietness, still spaces, not enough long walks, not enough
time to digest. It is like being forced fed; it is like too much food. We have
too much information in our minds. We can’t function. So, I think more like
mindfulness, stillness and quietness, - digestion of what is happening around us.
Yago: In your book you explore the liminality of time, location, architecture, symbolic objects, smells, tastes, sounds… When we live in the now we live
in a constant liminal space. Imagination and creativity happens in the now. Could
you elaborate on ritual as a liminal space?
 |
| Candlelight |
Yago: Liminality
also happens in silent moments. You talk about sensing and feeling the world,
about speaking as doing… How can we negotiate without words?
Lisa: When I was living and working in Indigenous
communities in northern Canada, there was very little talk. If people would be
angry with each other, there would be a lot of drinking tea, sitting silently
with each other. I guess I still don’t know what was going on, but I always
felt like something had changed just by sitting and drinking tea together. And I
guess I could say the same happens in Washington sometimes. I guess it is not
negotiation but transformation happens without words. Change happens; the
relationship has changed, even though you don’t agree on something, or you
didn’t hammer things out with rational discussion.
 |
| Pottery Lament |
Lisa: I am still learning about this. I
don’t know if I have the words to talk about that. Peacebuilding is hard. Obviously,
there are dilemmas, dilemmas about Syria, and the war happening in Syria, and
the number of civilians being killed. But then, there is also the personal pain
that comes with losing a friend, somebody on the ground, who is working in
these places.
 |
| Lisa Schrich working at the pottery wheel |
So I
think we need to find ways of lamenting the challenges of doing very hard work
in very hard places, and losing people that we love.
Yago: In your introductory words at “Pax
Bellisima” art show, you shared about the importance of integrating the left
and right side of the brain. In your book you also talk about ritual and the
brain. What is the contribution of neurobiology on the field of peacebuilding? How
do the arts help us activate dormant parts of our brain?
Lisa: For me the arts, and my art show
in “Pax Bellissima” was a way of using a different part of my brain that
processes information in a way that is not verbal. And so, I think that the
study of the brain is very important to understanding the relationship between
the arts and peacebuilding too -whether we have experience a great trauma, a
lost of friends in war situations, or we are facing dilemmas in our peacebuilding
and don’t know how to move forward. Finding ways to engage the brain that are
not verbal can help us maybe eventually articulate what we want to say. So the
art show that I did was a lot about processing information that I didn’t know
how to speak about, I didn’t know how to articulate yet. And the painting, and
the pottery, and the other ways of thinking about the arts were helpful to me.
 |
| Pax Bellissima. Artist: Lisa Schrich |
Lisa: It comes back to what I said earlier
in the interview about some of the basic values of respect and dignity, another
religious way of saying that everything is sacred, that there is Spirit in the people
we meet, to interact in a world in a way where things are sacred and spiritual…
It’s a different way of interacting then when you don’t see the healer in the
person you are talking to, or the environment that we live in. The beauty that
we live in. It is part of the mindfulness of seeing that human being, and
saying I am going to respect and honour the dignity of other people and how I
relate to them - whether they are somebody I really disagree with or who does
things I really disagree with. It is everybody. It is not for some people; it’s
everybody.
Yago: Lisa, thanks a lot for this
wonderful witness and for the time granted to this interview.
Lisa: It is good to have chance to
reflect on this. Thanks to you, Yago!
