They spotlight the strength of collaboration and the ability to read between the lines of political and media narratives. Communities facing atrocity crimes can reclaim ownership of their futures and resist the political decisions imposed on their existence. Bright spots of resilience show that authentic peace is possible — and that justice can be sustained.

This third conversation leaves us with a pressing question: If accountability begins with the smallest truths, how can they be amplified into the building blocks of enduring peace?

[Podcast begins]

Lynn Zovighian: “Peace is going to take a lot more than a page and a half.” I’m Lynn Zovighian, and welcome to Smallest truths, a podcast by the Zovighian Public Office. In this third and closing episode with Nadine Maenza, we examine how peace agreements are too often imposed, unauthentic, and rarely endure. We also explore how collaboration, resilience, and the smallest truths hold power to account.

This is Episode 3: Authentic peace: When collaboration and truth outlast power.

Nadine Maenza: I think the word “religious freedom” can be complicated, and we don't have to always use that. We can use “peace building.” We can use “social cohesion.” We can use whatever word works best [for] the kind of work we're doing to bring peace, long-term peace, and stability, and prosperity, hopefully. I mean that would even be better, where people could stay in their homeland, where they don't have to flee for better economic conditions. 

So, I think religious freedom means having that framework where people could practice [their] faith and follow Article 18 [of] the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. But we don't have to use that word everywhere. 

The goal isn't the word. The goal is it [religious freeom] in practice.

Lynn Zovighian: And I also have found from practice and experience between our work with the Yazidis in Sinjar, our work with the Artsakhi Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh, and the work with the Lebanese here in Lebanon, that one powerful way to break down this over-reductionist falsified narrative that our region is a place of problems, and actually there are no solutions for our region that can be long-term… is to really spotlight and amplify the brilliance and the success stories that often, actually, we take for granted. 

Because I think one of the things that we have, and we do here a lot – the same way we don't have time to respond because we're always in emergency mode – we also don't have time to celebrate what's working. We don't have time to take what's working and see the strategic value of amplifying it. And so, our successful practices here, we take them for granted. 

There's one particular practice that I really believe needs to be spotlighted in our conversation, Nadine, and that is the authentic and tenacious collaboration of some of our Yazidi friends.

Nadine Maenza: Yes, it's been a wonderful development in the Yazidi community and really in this region.

Lynn: And so, speaking to Natia Navrouzov at Yazda, with Pari Ibrahim at Free Yazidi Foundation and Murad Ismael at Sinjar Academy, we went from each organization dividing and conquering. And there was a time when that was of the essence. But today, they operate at a stage, at an advancement of their genocide – and the very effective policy of global inaction – they now recognize the value of combining to conquer. And they are doing that in a way that, really, I feel, I must salute. 

And I know how inspired you have been by that collaboration. 

It is so such a brilliant idea to just collaborate and be one frontline in front of Washington D.C., in front of the UN, in front of the EU, that one front line makes it easier for Washington D.C. to want to step up, because they don't have to mediate between the different diverse voices. The diversity comes together with consensus and compromise, as required, but puts forward a stronghold. And then, Washington engages Exactly. What do you think?

Nadine: Exactly. I think sometimes there's a zero-sum approach. They have a sense of: "This is the way forward, and I will only do it this way." In a community – so, we found this with the Christians in the Nineveh Plains – for a while, you know, there was a lot of support for a province there, but there were some that were against the province idea. And we couldn't get that unity that would have been really helpful. 

And of course, we see this in Syria, even now, in the different [communities]. We're seeing – obviously the Druze community is probably the most visible – that there are different ideas of what Syria should look like based on different members in the community. 

So, you know, there is no monolith, and even these three Yazidi leaders all have different ideas of what may be the best way forward, but they've chosen to come together and move the needle for their communities, and we should salute them. And because of that, they've been able to do a lot more successful initiatives in the last year with this kind of immunity and really encourage other communities to do their best to try to partner with others. 

And that's in the IRF Roundtable, that's really our goal: to bring communities together that have very different opinions. 

And we do an opt-in approach, which is different than consensus. So, what we say is, anyone from our community comes up with an idea: “We want to do this multi faith letter.” We don't argue about their letter. Instead, what we say is, you can sign their letter if you want, and if you don't, don't. But we don't argue about the letter. And so, we don't have an argument kind of situation at the Roundtable. You just don't join. It's not your advocacy. You join in the next one. And it gives people that freedom. 

Now, of course, we do have rules about how we treat one another, and all of that. Best part of it is to allow there to be a safe space for everyone to be able to come and to share their stories of persecution, their ideas for advocacy. 

But it has worked so well, and only a few times has anyone had to be removed from the community, because most of the time, people want to work together in this positive way. And it really is the best way to communicate a way forward for certain communities against religious persecution – is to unify with other groups.

Lynn: And we just hosted between the Zovighian Public Office and the Syriac League, and you, welcoming you to Beirut, we co-hosted yesterday evening [at the time of the podcast recording] a roundtable of experts from many of Lebanon's communities and groups. 

We had different religions present. We had different world views and national views on Lebanon present. And what really struck me was how thoughtful, and how meaningful, and how intelligent so much of that thinking and the contributions were. They were just immensely valuable into understanding how to think through Lebanon in one of our most complex times.  

Because here, in Lebanon, we do also feel like our future is being taken away from us. We are not the decision-makers on either our present or our future. 

And you mentioned something which I'd like to build upon, which is the opt-in approach. There were moments in our conversations yesterday where not everybody agreed, but I just loved those disagreements, because they were formulated with respect, with sharpness, with empathy and with acknowledgement, and it was so safe to disagree. 

And by the end, the roundtable was supposed to be 75 minutes, it lasted two hours. People didn't want to leave the table. I invited them as the Chair of the session multiple times: "If you need to go, we completely understand. We don't wish to extract from your precious time more than we had initially asked for.” Nobody wanted to leave their seat at the table. It became their table. There was a deep sense of ownership. 

And so that, for me, is such a powerful example of how we can bring this local ownership back to D.C., but also what I loved about yesterday was we brought D.C. closer to Beirut, and I know that you've now been equipped with so much raw data. A very clear sense, not of priorities as: This is step one, this is step two, this is step three, but the intersectionality between the priorities. How they weave in together. How we cannot have one without the other. And really removing chances for reductionist, oversimplified, prerequisites and co-requisites… but really, Lebanon's complexity requires a multi-dimensional understanding and capacity for solutions and peace-building. 

What did you think about yesterday and what struck you the most as not only something powerful for Lebanon, but also as a tool or a perspective that could be also powerful or relevant for Syria and for Sinjar and Nagorno-Karabakh?

Nadine: I think one of the special things about Lebanon is that equal citizenship model. 

While, you know, Lebanon is a country of minorities, and in a country of a confessional system where political power is shared and among confessional religious communities. And some people may love the system, some people may not, but it doesn't change the fact that you will find a Muslim sitting next to a Christian, sitting next to a Druze, and they all have equal citizenship, with a Sunni, and they all have a sense of [48:15 recording 2] as members of society. 

You're not going to get a nice seat at a restaurant because you're in this religious community. You're not going to face some of the things that some of the other people in the region face that are parts of different communities. 

And you've shown us how people can live together peacefully. 

Of course, you've also endured horrific wars where you didn't [live peacefully]. So, you've also learned from that, and I was able to go and see that for myself; a remembrance of the Druze-Christian violence and how, decades later, now, they're still apologizing to each other and seeing how they don't want the future generations to repeat those moments. 

So, there's so much people can learn from here in Lebanon, and I think as us in the international religious freedom world, it's so much easier for us to focus on all the countries that are violators, because that's where, you know, most of the momentum is. What's China doing? What's Russia doing? What’s North Korea doing? What's Iran doing? And kind of go through all the countries that are violators of religious freedom. But I also try to focus on those bright spots.

We talked about what's happening in Northeast Syria. Of course, imperfect as all governments are, but they have created a space for people to practice their faith in the social cohesion that is very unique where people have long dialogues with each other – [where] different religious communities sit together and solve their own problems. 

They don't do that in the rest of Syria. They don't dialog together, yet. We're hoping that that will be a normal part of society. You know, we have places like Taiwan, also. How [is] this island with these spectacular religious freedom conditions, in a Mandarin-speaking island, in the middle of all of these countries that don't have those freedoms? And of course, Lebanon, right here in the Levant, how on earth do you have this beautiful country with all these communities that do live side by side with each other? And, of course, Syria has this history. 

So how do we go back to that history? 

So, I think it's important, of course, for us to document those atrocities, and for us to advocate for those being persecuted. And, of course, that's always kind of the urgency of the day, but also to say where are there places that are those bright spots? Armenia, where, again, they live together peacefully. How do we preserve these places? Make sure that people can stay in their homeland? Make sure that there isn't any more violations in these places? Make sure that the situation is set up so that China doesn't go in and take Taiwan and ruin those religious freedom conditions with forcing Communism upon them and that animosity against all religious communities, as they do in China. 

So, I think [what] we do need to think more about the positive places in the world and how we could also empower those to be able to stay and to survive and to thrive, and Lebanon certainly is one of those.

Lynn: And Nadine, whether it is an indigenous Christian community in Syria, or indigenous Armenian community in Nagorno-Karabakh, or a historic Muslim community here in Lebanon, or Druze community at the border between Syria and Israel, no one is going to want to care for their homeland more than them. No one will ever care more for their future and their ability to stay in their homes than them. 

And so here, I also feel there is a need for more small truths to come out and be empowered. Because while we continue to be a region that receives the incoming peace deals, the peace deals, “the peace agreements,” quote, unquote – they're always incoming. 

They come at us. They don't come from us. 

Be it any conversation that might be happening between Syria and Israel, Lebanon and Israel, Armenia and Azerbaijan, these are quote, unquote, “peace agreements” that a lot of the people whom we know feel are just so far away from who they are and what they want. 

####

However, we've spent a lot of time now talking about how do we make it easy for Washington and the rest of the world to engage with us? What would it look like? What could it look like if we took these peace deals as starting frameworks and then seized the moment, and then sought ownership? And we might have the high-level headlines in the one page and a half agreement co-signed between Armenian Prime Minister Pashinyan and Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev, but peace is going to take a lot more than a page and a half. 

And so, what I see is the opportunity to step up as Armenians, as Artsakhi Armenians, and as Azerbaijani citizens, and everyone else that is a part of that environment and ecosystem, because it's not just limited to those two countries. There's Türkiye, there's Georgia, there's Russia, and there's everything in between. And globally, there's the U.S., and there is France, and there's everything in between. 

How do we seize those moments? And we start to put in the fine print, and we start to put in for clause one: A, B, C, D… D1, D2, D3?

Is there an opportunity in Washington to take ownership of these pivotal moments in history? Because when there is such a quote, unquote “Agreement” like this, the world starts to pay attention. All of a sudden, that crisis that has been forgotten gets remembered. And so, how can we take advantage of that momentum, no matter how non-authentic it is, how imposed it is, how even colonial it is, and we add a lot more signatures to it than just the three signatures of Aliev, Pashinyan, and United States President Donald Trump?

Nadine: Well, those are big questions. And I think that involving the local communities is so key. 

I mean, I believe the people of Armenia and the people of Azerbaijan want peace. Obviously, the governments sometimes make different choices that [have] not led to peace. But with people wanting peace, how can we build bridges between these communities so that there will be an enduring peace? 

Another thing, as we saw in Syria, is after there was a cease fire with Türkiye in the Northeast, they continue to shell these Assyrian villages. And yet, the narrative in the press was: “the peace, the ceasefire is held.” No one has ever said the ceasefire did not hold. And yet, the Wilson Center would do a report saying these are all the violations to the ceasefire, and yet, the narrative, in most of the media, was: “a ceasefire held.” The U.S. government would say: “the ceasefire held.” Türkiye would say: “the ceasefire held.” And we're like: “Yeah, but they bomb all the time, sometimes endlessly.” How can we keep saying “the ceasefire held”? 

And so, I do think that these key moments – that they've made these agreements – is… it's so important that we watch: Is Azerbaijan firing still across the border into Armenia? And if they are, then that is not normalized. Because I think what happened in Syria, they're like: "Yeah, that's just Türkiye. Türkiye just does that. But the ceasefire is still there. At least they're not at war." And I think it's easy to be like: "Oh, that's just Azerbaijan. They just shoot across the border." No, no, no, no. They have a peace agreement that was signed at the White House, you cannot shoot across the border. 

So, I do think that it's crucial that the local residents [and] civil society hold accountable… that the media, and that ultimately the governments that signed this agreement, hold accountable true violations. And don't just look away like: "Ah, it's just that country being that country." Because then the people lose trust in each other and they're not able to continue that peace, and at some point, it will break down. 

And so, I think we need “authentic peace,” not “pretend peace.” So, let's not just sign an agreement and pretend they're at peace and then look away when they're not. Let's hold them to what they signed. And this was such a high-profile peace agreement – and I'm hopeful that that [peace] will be the case – but I still think we all need to be on guard to make sure that is true.

Lynn: And it is the smallest truths that will hold those clauses to account. 

It is the 23 Armenian prisoners still being held in Azerbaijani prisons. It is the unknown number of missing and forced disappeared Armenians still in Azerbaijan, unaccounted for. And importantly, it is being able to bring in the rights and the liberties, the universal liberties, of all of the communities in that area. If we want to care so much about the rights of the Azerbaijanis that faced violence and hatred during the First Nagorno Karabakh war, we're going to have to apply the same on the other side. 

Accountability transcends borders. “Might is right,” but only for a certain period of time. “Might is right” does not transcend the power and the authority of the perpetrators in charge. “Might is right” is a system until that perpetrator is no longer in power. 

Yes, it is a loss to humanity that justice and accountability should take so long, and sometimes it does require the end of one perpetrator's political life for an opportunity at peace, beginning, most importantly, with reconciliation, and then [for] peace to be long-lasting. 

But therefore, what we strongly believe here, at the Zovighian Public Office, and I know that has always been your mantra: the smallest truths, not only must not be ignored and forgotten, but eventually accountability will need to be ascertained to every single one of them. And that is an incredibly heavy repository and archive of evidence of suffering, of lived experiences in our region, but that is why our work will never fail to be so important, and our work might never really ever get to expire. 

But these are life missions that we are on, and that we are committed to, and that our families and our friends and our colleagues are so committed to as well. And I know this won't be the last time that we have you in Beirut, because we are already thinking about that next trip here in the region, and I know that with allies like you, our communities and survivors will always stand a better chance in Washington D.C..

And that's why, Nadine, I also want to take this moment to express my profound gratitude to you as a partner, as an ally, as a champion of all of this immensely indispensable work. And we are always so happy to see you here in Beirut. 

We know that all your work comes with immense sacrifice, but like we always say to our survivors, [our] communities, and their allies like yourself: “We see you, we feel you, we hear you.” And I know that that also goes out to the survivors and the communities we care so much for. We do really see you. 

And as hard as it is to say this out loud, as much as we would like to always be there for you, we also hope that the time will come when that will no longer be necessary, because you will no longer be survivors of atrocities of today – and certainly not atrocities of tomorrow – but you will be leaders, champions, or very simply, ordinary citizens of this world that we live in… and [that you] not live anywhere [else], but live in your homeland, back home, wherever home is. 

Thank you so much for joining us for our inaugural edition [series] and thank you so much to our very special guest for being with us, and we will be seeing you soon. 

Have a great day here from Beirut.

And that’s a wrap on the first three episodes of Smallest truths — conversations between Lynn Zovighian and Nadine Maenza, brought to you by the Zovighian Public Office.

Thank you for listening. Until next time, may we carry the smallest truths that shift power toward justice.

[Podcast ends]