{ "schema_version": "uw.editorial_geo.v1", "representation_profile": "lossless_source_sections", "local_stage_only": true, "catalog_id": "WAR-215", "article_index": "WAR-215", "language": "en", "headline": "Living near people perceived as belonging to the other side", "description": "Living near people perceived as belonging to the other side", "short_answer": "After any war, people may share a corridor, shift, transport or queue with someone associated with the other side. Avoiding all contact is not always possible. Forced proximity does not itself establish trust, reconciliation or agreement to discuss experience.\n\nThis article distinguishes a practical task, personal conversation, membership, specific conduct and present threat. It assesses no real conflict, verifies no person and proposes no dangerous closeness as help. Housing, employment and services depend on circumstances; no universal legal route is established.\n\nImmediate danger, serious deterioration or inability to maintain safety requires appropriate available local urgent help. Do not await a completed war dispute, shared handshake or another meeting.", "short_answer_source": { "kind": "explicit_about_h2", "role": "lead", "start_utf16": 338, "end_utf16": 1107, "sha256_utf8": "ebde317ee2eb831c467b7ae6f86d56e3e4da9876fc74bfa58bc448ee21307522" }, "headline_source": { "role": "h1_heading", "start_utf16": 2, "end_utf16": 61, "sha256_utf8": "e79d5360a1e88418cbf9146c73532113e91c725f760551fe2f23a428f8cfa2e7" }, "entities": [], "questions": [ { "q": "Epigraph", "a": "> “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.”\n\nUniversal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1, complete first sentence. Dignity establishes neither identical acts and closeness nor safety actually secured.", "source_spans": [ { "role": "h2_heading", "start_utf16": 66, "end_utf16": 74, "sha256_utf8": "506164fa91d3fcc7e667c9b8789d7d1c30ae76c81c248df15c5c18c1cddf9826" }, { "role": "h2_answer", "start_utf16": 76, "end_utf16": 305, "sha256_utf8": "b5751ef6ce3fae7e13eaee00f6b936e62e1a752869a8db4048eda4f70831f543" } ], "block_ids": [ "p0003", "p0004" ], "source_segment_index": 1 }, { "q": "What this article is about", "a": "After any war, people may share a corridor, shift, transport or queue with someone associated with the other side. Avoiding all contact is not always possible. Forced proximity does not itself establish trust, reconciliation or agreement to discuss experience.\n\nThis article distinguishes a practical task, personal conversation, membership, specific conduct and present threat. It assesses no real conflict, verifies no person and proposes no dangerous closeness as help. Housing, employment and services depend on circumstances; no universal legal route is established.\n\nImmediate danger, serious deterioration or inability to maintain safety requires appropriate available local urgent help. Do not await a completed war dispute, shared handshake or another meeting.", "source_spans": [ { "role": "h2_heading", "start_utf16": 310, "end_utf16": 336, "sha256_utf8": "a53bdb09d3d545eddde325393d7fae0fb8be199cef905ef433da14435f905db9" }, { "role": "h2_answer", "start_utf16": 338, "end_utf16": 1107, "sha256_utf8": "ebde317ee2eb831c467b7ae6f86d56e3e4da9876fc74bfa58bc448ee21307522" } ], "block_ids": [ "p0006", "p0007", "p0008" ], "source_segment_index": 2 }, { "q": "I. One corridor does not mean one history", "a": "Darya is a fictional adult. She has temporary accommodation and works where she encounters people she considers part of the other side of a war. She knows some a little; others she associates with a side through speech or a heard story. Their origin, participation and views are not confirmed. The situation shows a practical difficulty: an everyday task already exists while Darya may lack answers to every question about another person.\n\nNeighbourhood, a colleague's role and close relationships have different grounds. Sharing an address creates no friendship; a shift creates no shared memory. Darya may understand a work task without wanting family discussion. This does not determine formal duties: information needed for a service or job requires separate understanding. A practical role should not silently expand into explaining a whole life, endorsing another person's position or representing everyone harmed. Understanding what is actually required matters without every expectation voiced confidently becoming a formal obligation.\n\nPerceiving another side is not complete knowledge. Membership may matter, but language and surname establish no specific act. Known threats and verified information need not be ignored. A shared feature, personal impression, another person's report and known conduct differ. This distinction promises no immediate relief. It prevents one feature answering every question about responsibility, intentions and present conditions automatically. It also does not require pretending that a person knows nothing when relevant particular information is in fact available.\n\nDarya need not instantly love neighbours or feel grateful for conversation. Nor does she gain permission to humiliate by origin. A limited practical role remains between required friendship and hostility. Its subject needs understanding: what agreement is needed, who is responsible and what is available? An answer can remain small without declaring all life nearby safe, reconciled or equally voluntary. A defined task does not have to carry the meaning of everyone's relationship with the whole history of war.\n\nThe scale of choice matters. Avoiding evening conversation differs from changing jobs or accommodation. One proves no other. “Simply avoid these people” creates no income, transport, documents or available care. Contact need not continue at any price. The article chooses neither departure nor continuation for someone. Actual constraints cannot be explained only through insufficient determination, a wrong attitude or unwillingness to move on. What can be done in a particular situation needs more than an observer's preferred account of personal choice.", "source_spans": [ { "role": "h2_heading", "start_utf16": 1112, "end_utf16": 1153, "sha256_utf8": "fbaa01fe8117d6a4ba0c426b4c36531cf5969190c30d286d338d58f52283849b" }, { "role": "h2_answer", "start_utf16": 1155, "end_utf16": 3837, "sha256_utf8": "40b995cfc2523305d6633fde056d29d5bca0f2f05a37d8dc240cfd0d516a87e9" } ], "block_ids": [ "p0010", "p0011", "p0012", "p0013", "p0014" ], "source_segment_index": 3 }, { "q": "II. A practical agreement can have a narrow subject", "a": "Opening a shared door, receiving work information, arranging room use and resolving a service question are different tasks. Agreement to one establishes no trust in all. Darya may answer a work question without agreeing to discuss war. Actual employer and service requirements are unverified. Personal limits do not automatically cancel deadlines, procedures and obligations. Their actual content differs from added expectations given a confident or official tone.\n\nA narrow subject helps identify the result. “We learned when a document is issued” is not “We resolved the conflict.” “No politics in this conversation” is not “Everyone abandoned convictions.” An agreement need become neither final reconciliation nor meaningless because history remains unresolved. It may concern one conversation, time and role. Within that scope, proposal, agreement, observed condition and one participant's wish can be distinguished. A limited result can be understood without being asked to settle the entire public relationship between sides.\n\nNeutral task language does not make people politically neutral. Schedules can be discussed with different judgments of the past. Temporarily leaving a public dispute outside a format proves neither identical facts nor their lost importance. Every conversation need not contain the whole war. That limit cannot authorise denied experience or silence everywhere else. A condition retains meaning with its actual subject rather than permanent power over another's voice. Respect for a practical boundary should not be expanded into authority over everything the person may later say elsewhere.\n\nA clear role guarantees no compliance. A confident promise proves no completed act. When an agreement fails, intention should not replace result or safety be declared out of respect for organisers' efforts. No suitable individual response is determined here. Dangerous confrontation and vulnerability tests are not proposed. An actual breach, available help and further conditions need attention to what occurred rather than only the original attractive design. A good aim can retain significance without being made evidence that every condition was delivered.\n\nWriting, an intermediary, translation or a different arrangement may sometimes be considered. Availability, competence and privacy are unverified. Another participant gains no automatic authority over all Darya's decisions; a document guarantees no safety. The understood task, participants and actual possibilities matter. An unavailable option remains a constraint rather than proof of insufficient effort or a duty to accept any contact. Merely naming an alternative does not establish that someone has the resources, permission and support needed to use it.", "source_spans": [ { "role": "h2_heading", "start_utf16": 3842, "end_utf16": 3893, "sha256_utf8": "e77e5326b95d292d937e8ad8c43c632bd3b45f19843a4f2edb3054a723a40b87" }, { "role": "h2_answer", "start_utf16": 3895, "end_utf16": 6644, "sha256_utf8": "df3fe858de4ce5af4f2457c763c1a613d6fbaf288ee90fdfad31827b27f2d399" } ], "block_ids": [ "p0016", "p0017", "p0018", "p0019", "p0020" ], "source_segment_index": 4 }, { "q": "III. Symbols do not verify distance and safety", "a": "“Respect each other” has limited value as a safety description. It says nothing about actual threats, pressure or declining added contact. An attractive room, photograph and polite address do not verify these conditions. Discomfort alone establishes no individual's guilt either. No home risk method is selected. Experience, conduct information and conditions differ; one good statement from an organiser cannot verify them. A general rule may be important while the actual interaction still requires understanding of what is happening and what choices exist.\n\nKnown harm does not vanish for coexistence. Threats and coercion need appropriate attention regardless of origin. Resemblance does not automatically describe that behaviour either. Rejecting collective guilt does not require abandoned protection or trust tested by personal risk. Dignity can be respected without access to private life, body and home. A respect rule neither replaces actual threat understanding nor makes every meeting necessary. Someone should not have to provide vulnerability as evidence that they have understood an ethical principle correctly.\n\nDistance can be limited and revisable. Avoiding personal discussion, not staying after a task and declining an added role illustrate differences between contacts rather than individual prescriptions. Each option depends on circumstances. Nobody is told to conceal information required by an actual procedure or breach unknown formal terms. Presence nearby should not automatically mean agreement to everything another person adds to the original interaction.\n\nAgreement alone does not establish safety. Dependency, missing alternatives or misunderstood conditions may influence it. What occurred cannot be decided remotely. “Voluntary” should not become a completed review of every circumstance. Declining can be difficult; consequences need actual understanding. No service's consequence-free response or legal right to refuse every formal duty is established. Place, role and procedure need concrete information. The person's spoken agreement can matter without being made the only evidence considered about the conditions in which it was given.\n\nImmediate danger requires appropriate available local urgent help. Do not await symbolic reconciliation, established origin or another general meeting. Investigating biographies, covert testing and staying in danger for a correct impression are not proposed. Memory and attitudes to another side may remain unresolved. They should not delay attention to present condition and safety or turn urgency into a peacefulness examination. Necessary action need not supply an agreed interpretation of everyone's past before it can address today's concern.", "source_spans": [ { "role": "h2_heading", "start_utf16": 6649, "end_utf16": 6695, "sha256_utf8": "61eddbb2911eb9e1f951de566f17db73d98bde708fefdef6211e03831e18a4ee" }, { "role": "h2_answer", "start_utf16": 6697, "end_utf16": 9421, "sha256_utf8": "a2a96cba52ab3a417689a48b4d1ad0262ad24751ba1054baf56812313fba4ac5" } ], "block_ids": [ "p0022", "p0023", "p0024", "p0025", "p0026" ], "source_segment_index": 5 }, { "q": "IV. Private history is not payment for an ordinary task", "a": "“Where are you from?” may be an introduction when living nearby, but can open a large conversation someone does not want. One phrase establishes no universal intention. Darya may understand what she wants to share without supplying an entire war biography. Official information and voluntary narrative have different terms. These should be distinguished without promising every question can safely be declined or all information is optional. A person's present wish and the actual requirements of a particular procedure need their own subjects understood.\n\nComplete confidentiality is not guaranteed in every conversation. Shared language, a friendly intermediary and a familiar organisation name establish neither recipients nor use. Documents, platforms and particular service rules are unverified. Understanding purpose and recipient matters without concealing necessary data. Disclosure should not become a universal trust test; declining personal discussion does not itself establish dishonesty, hostility or absent need. An actual question about information should not be expanded into a complete judgment about the person's character and attitude towards help.\n\nAttendance, story, recording, photography, editing and publication also differ. ICRC ethical content material concerns dignity and informed consent in its work. It verifies no universal organiser behaviour or complete deletion of circulated copies. Mutual understanding does not make private history common property. Terms for particular use are separate even after someone agreed to speak or supported a meeting's aim. A valuable purpose can remain valuable without automatically granting its organisers every future use of another person's account.\n\nNobody must conveniently represent a whole side. Darya may speak only about what she knows and her chosen role. Her experience confirms no arbitrary claims by others; one encounter does not by itself make her responsible for their later acts. A counterpart is not automatically everyone's representative either. Possible actual participation is not cancelled. It needs grounds about the relevant role rather than appointment for others' convenience. A person's limited statement should not be enlarged into proof of agreement with everything associated with a group.\n\nLimiting a story is not controlling every consequence. Repetition, recording and later audiences may not depend on one wish. A correctly stated boundary guarantees no compliance. Limited control nevertheless gives others no moral permission to use someone as a witness agreeing with all. Actual agreement and known scope matter, rather than only an organiser's belief that a useful story needs no further questions.", "source_spans": [ { "role": "h2_heading", "start_utf16": 9426, "end_utf16": 9481, "sha256_utf8": "1058ea72779e69f1708134610a4722473947faf39f501a02d1d49f46816a71c8" }, { "role": "h2_answer", "start_utf16": 9483, "end_utf16": 12187, "sha256_utf8": "3b992a05c1b61f993a6172b39d21b4985aeb1e85249b658beee8d27c290ded13" } ], "block_ids": [ "p0028", "p0029", "p0030", "p0031", "p0032" ], "source_segment_index": 6 }, { "q": "V. Work and services need not become reconciliation", "a": "A colleague, neighbour, interpreter and service worker can have different authority. Competence in one role gives no automatic right to discuss feelings, judge war experience or propose treatment. Darya may need an understood task answer rather than why she should move on. Human involvement is not prohibited. Good intentions do not replace a suitable role, understood request and actual capacities.\n\nOne successful shift proves no vanished war consequences. It can matter without completely recovered status. A poor conversation also establishes no universal impossibility of help. A particular experience differs from a conclusion about every service or person. No safe or automatic repeat approach is prescribed. Actual need cannot be closed by one success or final generalisation. The value of what happened and the limits of what remains can both be retained without requiring either complete gratitude or dismissal of all assistance.\n\nShared rules may concern the task, but “identical” alone assesses neither fairness nor compliance. Language, physical and everyday capacities may differ. WHO describes varied circumstances and access barriers for refugees and migrants; not everyone affected by war belongs to these categories. This is no verdict about an employer or service. A rule, resource, delivered help and actual access need their own information. A general formula does not verify that each person can use the same arrangement in the same conditions.\n\nWhen need is unmet, causes may differ. Missing resources, unclear conditions and humiliating treatment can overlap without being one result. No institution is audited or universal complaint route supplied. A criterion question can remain practical without immediate political dispute or an entire history disclosed publicly. A clear explanation nevertheless creates no missing service. Politeness matters without replacing delivery of the necessary task. Understanding why something has not happened and actually receiving what is needed should not be reported as the same outcome.\n\nA professional role requires no unified answer about the past when it is irrelevant to the task; actual formal requirements are unverified. Dignity does not make all sides' acts identical. Limited interaction can retain memory and judgment of established harm. A received service should not automatically become evidence of political agreement or a duty gratefully to present completed reconciliation for a report, photograph and convenient public account. A practical result need not carry those additional meanings to be acknowledged within its scope.", "source_spans": [ { "role": "h2_heading", "start_utf16": 12192, "end_utf16": 12243, "sha256_utf8": "c22281ec9d9858efa71abfd169f7c18c5077feb596dada6431c1997662093e62" }, { "role": "h2_answer", "start_utf16": 12245, "end_utf16": 14850, "sha256_utf8": "dbcf91c820c7ba30575ff42299331d0131b3222adc707a81c4575c293683df0b" } ], "block_ids": [ "p0034", "p0035", "p0036", "p0037", "p0038" ], "source_segment_index": 7 }, { "q": "VI. Intermediaries and shared events have limits", "a": "Talking together may suit some circumstances and not others. Mediation, joint therapy and particular intermediaries are not prescribed. Their role, competence, authority and safety are unverified. A third participant removes no pressure automatically and guarantees no equal possibilities. Two chairs do not establish equal responsibility for harm; a shared table verifies no universal voluntary participation. An attractive format does not establish actual conditions. Its proposed purpose and what the participants understood and experienced need to remain distinguishable.\n\nAgreement to limited conversation is not agreement to a surprise meeting with someone who caused harm. Peace grants no universal permission for that surprise. No real event or individual contact recommendation is assessed. An understood role differs from one added without the person's understanding. Declining more need not prove hostility to all; participation should not mean abandoned facts, protection or distance afterwards. A meeting's symbolic importance cannot itself establish the person's consent to every role someone hopes it will fulfil.\n\nUNESCO's tolerance declaration requires neither tolerated social injustice nor abandoned convictions. The normative document distinguishes respect from compulsory agreement. It proves no therapeutic meeting benefit or local legal conclusion. Different judgments may remain; established facts do not become equally true and false out of respect. A shared format should not require convenient symmetry where circumstances and participation differed. The opportunity for more than one voice and the factual grounds of different statements are not identical questions, even when they arise in the same room.\n\nThe International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement's impartiality concerns assistance by need and urgency. It does not make a harmed person a politically neutral observer or verify compliance by every service. Attention to another's need neither necessarily excuses their acts nor confirms their statements. Assistance, agreement, responsibility and closeness can remain separate rather than one compulsory symbolic gesture. A reader's private attitude is not assigned an organisational humanitarian role simply because that role's distinction is useful for understanding the comparison.\n\nA shared event may end without relief or new friendship. That alone establishes no wrong participation. Relief need not be invented for another's successful report. Vanished tension and individual effect are not determined. What happened, the chosen role, result and unknowns can retain factual descriptions. These are more precise than an attractive ending requiring real limits and continued need to disappear from view.", "source_spans": [ { "role": "h2_heading", "start_utf16": 14855, "end_utf16": 14903, "sha256_utf8": "b95a2ff69ba5020ecfef33c7a8fcdf286c50b80b9e24897c9f436f183c0f090b" }, { "role": "h2_answer", "start_utf16": 14905, "end_utf16": 17654, "sha256_utf8": "43960d61601260670bee8f630540febe6bc3c134894b27e717ade58c3ca6fb8a" } ], "block_ids": [ "p0040", "p0041", "p0042", "p0043", "p0044" ], "source_segment_index": 8 }, { "q": "VII. Support does not await exemplary neighbourly relations", "a": "Persistent substantial everyday difficulties may warrant suitable professional understanding. A strong response to proximity establishes no diagnosis; calm appearance proves no absent need. NIMH information attends to functioning and discussing help. Darya need not first repair every relationship, prepare a persuasive reconciliation story or test herself through more contact. Current difficulty can receive attention while public questions and further interaction remain unresolved.\n\nGoals, approach, roles and review may be clarified in suitable conditions. No practitioner is verified. Every self-directed and spiritual method need not come first; discomfort alone determines neither benefit nor harm. Stopping prescribed care, changing medication and dangerous meetings for recovery are not proposed. General text selects no individual method. Actual needs and an offer should not be replaced by a promise that closeness will fix everything. An understood plan and a hopeful statement about the power of contact do not supply the same information.\n\nWHO considers basic, social and clinical needs in emergencies. Material conditions do not arise through correct attitudes to neighbours. Missing housing, translation, care or time remains a constraint. One person or service need not solve everything. Help can be recognised within its limits without becoming complete or worthless because need remains. Gratitude and inner change cannot replace understanding of what is still needed. A particular action may matter while another task remains unfulfilled, without that remaining task being explained as the recipient's moral failure.\n\nRelatives can help without constant mediation and guaranteed safety. Their capacities and needs matter. A child should not organise adult reconciliation, interpret every conflict or maintain family hope. No family is assessed or child treatment supplied. Missing help remains a need even when nobody nearby can assume it all. Affection and availability establish neither expertise, authority nor unlimited energy. A relative's inability to take on everything need not be turned into an accusation, and acknowledging the need does not create the missing resources.\n\nImmediate danger, serious deterioration or inability to maintain safety requires appropriate available local urgent help. Do not await another intermediary discussion or proven wishes to live amicably. National numbers and an individual route are unverified. Memory and neighbourhood can remain open questions while current need receives attention. This does not cancel later understanding or require an urgent response to resolve the whole history between people and sides. The immediate action can have its own purpose without becoming a complete interpretation of war's continuing consequences.", "source_spans": [ { "role": "h2_heading", "start_utf16": 17659, "end_utf16": 17718, "sha256_utf8": "b327819415a3671064a49e699807cb16ea37d6e8f6474a535411f41b7fa01b48" }, { "role": "h2_answer", "start_utf16": 17720, "end_utf16": 20521, "sha256_utf8": "6e9d849d34701ea980a6747e4c9b449c300f488231ac42c622e652a70b459ee5" } ], "block_ids": [ "p0046", "p0047", "p0048", "p0049", "p0050" ], "source_segment_index": 9 }, { "q": "VIII. Ordinary life needs no exemplary ending", "a": "Darya may keep working and retain distance, notice more individual differences or want no new conversations yet. None alone establishes recovery, betrayal or a final relationship prognosis. Actual acts and conditions matter rather than a correct image for others. Living nearby need not model universal reconciliation for a limited completed task to matter and further needs to remain worth understanding. A particular outcome can stay particular without everyone agreeing on the public meaning it should carry.\n\nMemory needs no continuous loyalty proved through hostility. Revising a conclusion about one person neither justifies war nor cancels another's responsibility. Distance does not deny dignity to everyone similar. Emotional ease or immediate love is not promised. These distinctions keep an everyday decision from gaining a meaning it did not have: lunch in a shared room is not automatically a political statement, forgiveness and agreement to a public story. A limited act need not represent a complete change in a person's beliefs and relationships.\n\nEstablished acts, unequal consequences and unknowns matter. Respect does not make every statement equally true; a joint task does not close facts. Origin cannot replace facts, and one person should not be made to answer for all. Conclusions about participation need relevant grounds. No legal judgment or complete history is supplied. Responsibility retains its subject where a shared category might otherwise explain any person and present act conveniently. A practical arrangement should not be made the evidence that resolves these larger questions simply because its participants are present together.\n\nThe future can stay open without promised continuous improvement. Conditions, roles and limits may change; one agreement does not open everything forever. A partial result need become neither complete nor worthless. What happened, remains missing and matters today can be understood. Coexistence need not perform gratitude, growth and forgiveness. Dignity, actual safety and real need matter without this ending or war becoming a necessary source of benefit.\n\nA condition understood today may need clarification after changed schedules, residents or work roles. This establishes neither deception nor a pointless earlier agreement. What changed and is possible now matters. Wanting a calm account should not prevent a new difficulty being noticed. Wanting certainty creates no promise for every future. Interaction can remain bounded in time and subject without finally settling trust, memory and all sides' relations. A task is no less real because its conditions need understanding again.", "source_spans": [ { "role": "h2_heading", "start_utf16": 20526, "end_utf16": 20571, "sha256_utf8": "9388380922fd78893f850864060ecf106db6793e7d70f73688349886744830de" }, { "role": "h2_answer", "start_utf16": 20573, "end_utf16": 23235, "sha256_utf8": "c70c3a2ddbabe1931b6a9a1b9bd63661ac602b1f982cda4db23ae21a01fe5f38" } ], "block_ids": [ "p0052", "p0053", "p0054", "p0055", "p0056" ], "source_segment_index": 10 }, { "q": "What this means in practice", "a": "Distinguish a shared task, closeness, public role and attitude to war. Agreeing a time or receiving a service establishes neither reconciliation and trust in all nor permission to use a history.\n\nThe boundary requires neither collective guilt nor universal trust. Origin replaces no conduct information; actual threats do not vanish for coexistence. Distance depends on real possibilities. Writing and intermediaries guarantee neither safety nor privacy.\n\nSubstantial everyday difficulties may warrant suitable help before exemplary relations with all. Immediate danger, serious deterioration or inability to maintain safety requires appropriate available local urgent help. Public questions may remain open while a particular present need receives attention.", "source_spans": [ { "role": "h2_heading", "start_utf16": 23240, "end_utf16": 23267, "sha256_utf8": "cac0025fb51e434450b9925cf9a4977d85e79dc5ce2542d61d4355abea0cdd54" }, { "role": "h2_answer", "start_utf16": 23269, "end_utf16": 24028, "sha256_utf8": "255f0f5ab41e9334e0d38d188de9b30ad4c3aa1dc8e32ae0f3341e392864ec55" } ], "block_ids": [ "p0058", "p0059", "p0060" ], "source_segment_index": 11 }, { "q": "Key quotation", "a": "> “He who lightly promises is sure to keep but little faith;…”\n\nTao Te King, 63.3, James Legge. Opening clause with the source semicolon retained and continuation omitted. A historical caution about easy promises, without judging a particular person's or side's reliability.", "source_spans": [ { "role": "h2_heading", "start_utf16": 24033, "end_utf16": 24046, "sha256_utf8": "b118466bf32094406f875582a1606883eea0c734aab123a1fe6f5352d863995a" }, { "role": "h2_answer", "start_utf16": 24048, "end_utf16": 24322, "sha256_utf8": "e3f6407cdf48294434245552deb10b9795142c882e5d2003bf529449671615c5" } ], "block_ids": [ "p0062", "p0063" ], "source_segment_index": 12 }, { "q": "Connections between traditions", "a": "| Area | Useful distinction | Limit |\n|---|---|---|\n| Universal dignity | Respect without equal closeness | Does not verify an interaction's safety |\n| Taoist caution | Promise differs from performance | Judges no reliability by origin |\n| UNESCO tolerance | Respect without required agreement | Requires no tolerated injustice |\n| Humanitarian impartiality | Need and urgency in assistance | Assigns no political neutrality to someone harmed |\n| Practical agreement | A narrow subject and known role | Establishes neither reconciliation nor general trust |\n| Public narrative | Separately chosen participation | Makes no biography common property |\n| Support | Actual conditions and present need | Is no reward for exemplary neighbourhood |\n\nAn editorial comparison without one doctrine, clinical method or equivalent effectiveness.", "source_spans": [ { "role": "h2_heading", "start_utf16": 24327, "end_utf16": 24357, "sha256_utf8": "dfc0387d996bf1ade440e38a114e456de1bcae05b8a3c016d2a665a9d38fbc05" }, { "role": "h2_answer", "start_utf16": 24359, "end_utf16": 25192, "sha256_utf8": "d1df3ba3ab499742010aebffa13e6edf0bacccae2632e703a661f88db07ff654" } ], "block_ids": [ "p0065", "p0066" ], "source_segment_index": 13 }, { "q": "Primary sources and research", "a": "1. [Universal Declaration of Human Rights](https://www.coe.int/en/web/compass/the-universal-declaration-of-human-rights-full-version-), official Council of Europe reproduction. The complete normative text was read; Article 1 supplies the epigraph.\n2. [Tao Te King, Chapter 63](https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Tao_Te_King/Chapter_63), James Legge. The complete chapter was read; the opening clause of 63.3 supplies the key quotation.\n3. UNESCO. [Declaration of Principles on Tolerance](https://www.unesco.org/en/legal-affairs/declaration-principles-tolerance), 16 November 1995. The preamble and six articles were read.\n4. ICRC. [Our Fundamental Principles](https://www.icrc.org/en/our-fundamental-principles). The main seven-principle text and FAQ were read; the norm concerns the International Movement.\n5. ICRC. [Ethical content-gathering for public communications](https://www.icrc.org/en/article/ethical-content-gathering-public-communications), 3 September 2024. Dignity and consent sections were read, without verification of every service and platform.\n6. WHO. [Mental health in emergencies](https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/mental-health-in-emergencies), 6 May 2025; [Refugee and migrant mental health](https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/refugee-and-migrant-mental-health), 1 September 2025. Main texts were read; diverse needs, conditions and access barriers.\n7. NIMH. [Coping With Traumatic Events](https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/coping-with-traumatic-events), reviewed May 2024; [Psychotherapies](https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/psychotherapies), reviewed February 2024. Everyday functioning and understanding suitable help.\n8. NHS. [Where to get urgent help for mental health](https://www.nhs.uk/nhs-services/mental-health-services/where-to-get-urgent-help-for-mental-health/). The main text was read; general urgency without national numbers or an individual route.\n\nInternational editorial material for adults. Primary material actually read in this batch through 18 October 2026 UTC is reused within recorded limits. This is no diagnosis, individual risk assessment, housing, employment or service legal opinion, or verification of a particular intermediary. Provenance and limits are saved separately.", "source_spans": [ { "role": "h2_heading", "start_utf16": 25197, "end_utf16": 25225, "sha256_utf8": "a2c96cce349e6e757134c2d066d18d0b105cc58fe8678cac01d1e42deff11158" }, { "role": "h2_answer", "start_utf16": 25227, "end_utf16": 27488, "sha256_utf8": "fae0bb5f40091aa0eb4075d3900c043b0a396e6f124f2da46067cfea7955119c" } ], "block_ids": [ "p0068", "p0069" ], "source_segment_index": 14 }, { "q": "Tags", "a": "consequences of war, coexistence, forced proximity, other side, housing, work, services, particular task, agreement, distance, safety, current threats, membership, responsibility, dignity, memory, trust, personal history, privacy, public participation, consent, intermediary, translation, accessibility, actual conditions, professional help, relatives, absence of coercion, international context, United Wisdom", "source_spans": [ { "role": "h2_heading", "start_utf16": 27493, "end_utf16": 27497, "sha256_utf8": "1331275bc537b4c2bf1e46f7275677967515342e30b572e6852fa6f51b831fe8" }, { "role": "h2_answer", "start_utf16": 27499, "end_utf16": 27909, "sha256_utf8": "665eb7c30f15c82c5e99696ede4ac9b53068a48f91b8490f82640d5f07119925" } ], "block_ids": [ "p0071" ], "source_segment_index": 15 }, { "q": "About the authors", "a": "Andrey Zarinsh is the author and founder of United Wisdom. He explores inner transformation, the unity of traditions, intercultural dialogue, and contemporary spiritual discipline. Instagram: @andrey.zarinsh.\n\nMaria Evilkut is a co-author of United Wisdom. Alongside her research, she seeks to test these ideas in practice and observe how principles of unity and mutual understanding work in real life between people and cultures. Instagram: @ilkutki.", "source_spans": [ { "role": "h2_heading", "start_utf16": 27914, "end_utf16": 27931, "sha256_utf8": "e120452a2b9952200310f55df00e52d0bbd068d32bba8a322511ed65e3d4967d" }, { "role": "h2_answer", "start_utf16": 27933, "end_utf16": 28384, "sha256_utf8": "78d206398e486d8c46c49f0cab5c88212598ae201edb176b63289c446c3117f2" } ], "block_ids": [ "p0073", "p0074" ], "source_segment_index": 16 } ], "claims": [], "claims_policy": "no_reclassified_claims", "sources": [ { "id": "src_ecdac2de081e0dc8", "title": "Universal Declaration of Human Rights", "url": "https://www.coe.int/en/web/compass/the-universal-declaration-of-human-rights-full-version-", "source_spans": [ { "role": "markdown_link", "start_utf16": 25230, "end_utf16": 25361, "sha256_utf8": "5799dfaafed42800903fea09951be2a48ad4d5777c9fd5ab3a6547dbc97e819b" } ], "read_scope": "1. [Universal Declaration of Human Rights](https://www.coe.int/en/web/compass/the-universal-declaration-of-human-rights-full-version-), official Council of Europe reproduction. The complete normative text was read; Article 1 supplies the epigraph.", "read_scope_kind": "verbatim_bibliography_entry", "read_scope_span": { "role": "bibliography_entry", "start_utf16": 25227, "end_utf16": 25474, "sha256_utf8": "342380eba6e67e316e73bba5cb9f4a083ccbef34cec664267bb191304da7f306" }, "shared_entry_urls": [] }, { "id": "src_3e79bac24be93cdd", "title": "Tao Te King, Chapter 63", "url": "https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Tao_Te_King/Chapter_63", "source_spans": [ { "role": "markdown_link", "start_utf16": 25478, "end_utf16": 25558, "sha256_utf8": "b5933c0bf49dd91b1724fde82896d10e75fdc88ece9855b935f301e2562cf6a3" } ], "read_scope": "2. [Tao Te King, Chapter 63](https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Tao_Te_King/Chapter_63), James Legge. The complete chapter was read; the opening clause of 63.3 supplies the key quotation.", "read_scope_kind": "verbatim_bibliography_entry", "read_scope_span": { "role": "bibliography_entry", "start_utf16": 25475, "end_utf16": 25658, "sha256_utf8": "5e58c2b9323423e901dea36ee0ceb6e738d1d19ede4cd82d28c59aabce0ce49e" }, "shared_entry_urls": [] }, { "id": "src_21d8140d16fcba3f", "title": "Declaration of Principles on Tolerance", "url": "https://www.unesco.org/en/legal-affairs/declaration-principles-tolerance", "source_spans": [ { "role": "markdown_link", "start_utf16": 25670, "end_utf16": 25784, "sha256_utf8": "fdcb49ddcb5a0b9cf1fec2a3a1af2e0d73472cb303fc47bd53a9f43bd6bf5c1a" } ], "read_scope": "3. UNESCO. [Declaration of Principles on Tolerance](https://www.unesco.org/en/legal-affairs/declaration-principles-tolerance), 16 November 1995. The preamble and six articles were read.", "read_scope_kind": "verbatim_bibliography_entry", "read_scope_span": { "role": "bibliography_entry", "start_utf16": 25659, "end_utf16": 25844, "sha256_utf8": "73357b35f5a74b3ba85654fc442ce26ec1ea8720997ec9e19bff18d16d1bf814" }, "shared_entry_urls": [] }, { "id": "src_195de54e96338e97", "title": "Our Fundamental Principles", "url": "https://www.icrc.org/en/our-fundamental-principles", "source_spans": [ { "role": "markdown_link", "start_utf16": 25854, "end_utf16": 25934, "sha256_utf8": "0732cd4a1cea3768a765944b73c5426647d338c7a30f4d2fe6d81eab3420500f" } ], "read_scope": "4. ICRC. [Our Fundamental Principles](https://www.icrc.org/en/our-fundamental-principles). The main seven-principle text and FAQ were read; the norm concerns the International Movement.", "read_scope_kind": "verbatim_bibliography_entry", "read_scope_span": { "role": "bibliography_entry", "start_utf16": 25845, "end_utf16": 26030, "sha256_utf8": "856fe5f3b4930d3dbc2211975d3ad5976d9b84ad6f803d125c3e36c3438e6189" }, "shared_entry_urls": [] }, { "id": "src_a236a4dba1060a0a", "title": "Ethical content-gathering for public communications", "url": "https://www.icrc.org/en/article/ethical-content-gathering-public-communications", "source_spans": [ { "role": "markdown_link", "start_utf16": 26040, "end_utf16": 26174, "sha256_utf8": "66d84bea2d73a77589166018ac53b927071a534edd09dc147b1da04042d9f3c7" } ], "read_scope": "5. ICRC. [Ethical content-gathering for public communications](https://www.icrc.org/en/article/ethical-content-gathering-public-communications), 3 September 2024. Dignity and consent sections were read, without verification of every service and platform.", "read_scope_kind": "verbatim_bibliography_entry", "read_scope_span": { "role": "bibliography_entry", "start_utf16": 26031, "end_utf16": 26285, "sha256_utf8": "6dbc879f8e4b2ec6b3c3989296accacccbac6dbf1efc87cca764214e4ecd65a9" }, "shared_entry_urls": [] }, { "id": "src_8319317939b1f674", "title": "Mental health in emergencies", "url": "https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/mental-health-in-emergencies", "source_spans": [ { "role": "markdown_link", "start_utf16": 26294, "end_utf16": 26403, "sha256_utf8": "b1abd8350103a91ed7dcbc40550d66878bb1d3d432c7cb9ba40b5b8f8e8c699c" } ], "read_scope": "6. WHO. [Mental health in emergencies](https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/mental-health-in-emergencies), 6 May 2025; [Refugee and migrant mental health](https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/refugee-and-migrant-mental-health), 1 September 2025. Main texts were read; diverse needs, conditions and access barriers.", "read_scope_kind": "verbatim_shared_bibliography_entry", "read_scope_span": { "role": "bibliography_entry", "start_utf16": 26286, "end_utf16": 26624, "sha256_utf8": "5c71bf7e709ca2a88848956a442670a453e3406014b30c0e1f9ecb26c25bc799" }, "shared_entry_urls": [ "https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/mental-health-in-emergencies", "https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/refugee-and-migrant-mental-health" ] }, { "id": "src_c92d3eeb3bf514d5", "title": "Refugee and migrant mental health", "url": "https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/refugee-and-migrant-mental-health", "source_spans": [ { "role": "markdown_link", "start_utf16": 26417, "end_utf16": 26536, "sha256_utf8": "7049aad122cb73c29e31d6810f94583ec62e318f98de8d16c843f3af4c3820ec" } ], "read_scope": "6. WHO. [Mental health in emergencies](https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/mental-health-in-emergencies), 6 May 2025; [Refugee and migrant mental health](https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/refugee-and-migrant-mental-health), 1 September 2025. Main texts were read; diverse needs, conditions and access barriers.", "read_scope_kind": "verbatim_shared_bibliography_entry", "read_scope_span": { "role": "bibliography_entry", "start_utf16": 26286, "end_utf16": 26624, "sha256_utf8": "5c71bf7e709ca2a88848956a442670a453e3406014b30c0e1f9ecb26c25bc799" }, "shared_entry_urls": [ "https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/mental-health-in-emergencies", "https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/refugee-and-migrant-mental-health" ] }, { "id": "src_54d92a5fea0042f0", "title": "Coping With Traumatic Events", "url": "https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/coping-with-traumatic-events", "source_spans": [ { "role": "markdown_link", "start_utf16": 26634, "end_utf16": 26733, "sha256_utf8": "ed7eb21c9c655f87f4a273044747f92d4296ded0c3ace63b93fade817a654b59" } ], "read_scope": "7. NIMH. [Coping With Traumatic Events](https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/coping-with-traumatic-events), reviewed May 2024; [Psychotherapies](https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/psychotherapies), reviewed February 2024. Everyday functioning and understanding suitable help.", "read_scope_kind": "verbatim_shared_bibliography_entry", "read_scope_span": { "role": "bibliography_entry", "start_utf16": 26625, "end_utf16": 26906, "sha256_utf8": "b04ef18c70fd289faa9152f32e072c11a881182ccfc6982ad33fb8eb79507eb7" }, "shared_entry_urls": [ "https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/coping-with-traumatic-events", "https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/psychotherapies" ] }, { "id": "src_5db90531fc7f46b8", "title": "Psychotherapies", "url": "https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/psychotherapies", "source_spans": [ { "role": "markdown_link", "start_utf16": 26754, "end_utf16": 26827, "sha256_utf8": "6d46164abd43e06ac094f7bec045f7efb8ba6d1305944d2efaa112f808821c1d" } ], "read_scope": "7. NIMH. [Coping With Traumatic Events](https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/coping-with-traumatic-events), reviewed May 2024; [Psychotherapies](https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/psychotherapies), reviewed February 2024. Everyday functioning and understanding suitable help.", "read_scope_kind": "verbatim_shared_bibliography_entry", "read_scope_span": { "role": "bibliography_entry", "start_utf16": 26625, "end_utf16": 26906, "sha256_utf8": "b04ef18c70fd289faa9152f32e072c11a881182ccfc6982ad33fb8eb79507eb7" }, "shared_entry_urls": [ "https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/coping-with-traumatic-events", "https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/psychotherapies" ] }, { "id": "src_c5af852ae6d16e8a", "title": "Where to get urgent help for mental health", "url": "https://www.nhs.uk/nhs-services/mental-health-services/where-to-get-urgent-help-for-mental-health/", "source_spans": [ { "role": "markdown_link", "start_utf16": 26915, "end_utf16": 27059, "sha256_utf8": "cc4aef488c539c3fdf0b361914f360263167d487a6c08f1ef3f21b54b410c6a3" } ], "read_scope": "8. NHS. [Where to get urgent help for mental health](https://www.nhs.uk/nhs-services/mental-health-services/where-to-get-urgent-help-for-mental-health/). The main text was read; general urgency without national numbers or an individual route.", "read_scope_kind": "verbatim_bibliography_entry", "read_scope_span": { "role": "bibliography_entry", "start_utf16": 26907, "end_utf16": 27149, "sha256_utf8": "13627194df9fa5c83343f055160026e1ce27630ac06467382bb76dd9b6eac0be" }, "shared_entry_urls": [] } ], "retrieval_limits": [ "This local GEO representation applies only to the specified source article version and its SHA-256.", "Qualifications, sources and attributions remain in the full sections and byte-identical Markdown copy.", "No new source research was conducted in this GEO stage." ], "master_sha256": "b027a5b864a2930918d4fe88fedc039d6f5687788b7bd0663581a4051938c537", "provenance": { "raw_reader_sha256": "b027a5b864a2930918d4fe88fedc039d6f5687788b7bd0663581a4051938c537", "ru_master_sha256": "dc84e2a2ac699bea531aa2912fcfeb3dba4f3682b5b45ce310da33ab226eb6f7", "reader_path": "outputs/uw-war-corpus-20261018/branch-d/articles/WAR-215/ARTICLE_EN.md", "review_pointer": "outputs/uw-war-corpus-20261018/branch-d/articles/WAR-215/AUTHOR_QA.json", "review_sha256": "0535cd38bd1b632b753cbe7faab6f6d045c8d50fceabca7d1b4a92f141ee8512", "clean_md_relative_filename": "GEO.en.md", "body_length_utf16": 28385, "source_segments": [ { "kind": "opening", "index": 0, "heading": null, "start_utf16": 0, "end_utf16": 63, "sha256_utf8_raw_slice": "ef69059772eb7c0ae3e0d0d1c4224639c18ca956c2d6567e353fd4558b0ec3c1" }, { "kind": "h2_section", "index": 1, "heading": "Epigraph", "start_utf16": 63, "end_utf16": 307, "sha256_utf8_raw_slice": "47612fdf6bc208baf933a0ab4bd89792b6f8448ecc9d908aea5a1898a606578b" }, { "kind": "h2_section", "index": 2, "heading": "What this article is about", "start_utf16": 307, "end_utf16": 1109, "sha256_utf8_raw_slice": "35ba56ffd7688d7c14e07f48cba41d4f4359ffde1de77fcefafaf5259de38da5" }, { "kind": "h2_section", "index": 3, "heading": "I. One corridor does not mean one history", "start_utf16": 1109, "end_utf16": 3839, "sha256_utf8_raw_slice": "3ac5ffc9a1ae013db6689441fd651c9b2c78eeb71e267b2b53aa11567b28ec3c" }, { "kind": "h2_section", "index": 4, "heading": "II. A practical agreement can have a narrow subject", "start_utf16": 3839, "end_utf16": 6646, "sha256_utf8_raw_slice": "dbf24419ad507df7f1a7743d31662637d120667a6dd997726cbd56c5fc991d52" }, { "kind": "h2_section", "index": 5, "heading": "III. Symbols do not verify distance and safety", "start_utf16": 6646, "end_utf16": 9423, "sha256_utf8_raw_slice": "84cc723f2a2e6535a78bbb33f3bbccf5ece393587a512b622e6ff7118231a86f" }, { "kind": "h2_section", "index": 6, "heading": "IV. Private history is not payment for an ordinary task", "start_utf16": 9423, "end_utf16": 12189, "sha256_utf8_raw_slice": "40fc82f3e036208437823154bcef59cfec6f9e2de4182c4be04074fee145795f" }, { "kind": "h2_section", "index": 7, "heading": "V. Work and services need not become reconciliation", "start_utf16": 12189, "end_utf16": 14852, "sha256_utf8_raw_slice": "7a82bbc7e96ece932c8b26756022747b1c51cf215de4c98c71a42c06a805d84e" }, { "kind": "h2_section", "index": 8, "heading": "VI. Intermediaries and shared events have limits", "start_utf16": 14852, "end_utf16": 17656, "sha256_utf8_raw_slice": "2f0e54c3e78c69534ef213354a06537b79d9f504e7861d1525294861f913d603" }, { "kind": "h2_section", "index": 9, "heading": "VII. Support does not await exemplary neighbourly relations", "start_utf16": 17656, "end_utf16": 20523, "sha256_utf8_raw_slice": "d4dfa318f833429f1d7da297b0073f57ea5dc589c8674eb09847e602501f8302" }, { "kind": "h2_section", "index": 10, "heading": "VIII. Ordinary life needs no exemplary ending", "start_utf16": 20523, "end_utf16": 23237, "sha256_utf8_raw_slice": "6b39667a42f9df7858e4cf2f8d323b16ea91d10ec4131e2aba6e5b472941d4c6" }, { "kind": "h2_section", "index": 11, "heading": "What this means in practice", "start_utf16": 23237, "end_utf16": 24030, "sha256_utf8_raw_slice": "7c1c920879f642e6c700a82cf3ed4ec45677002ef88bffbdb5ce69468f7c3604" }, { "kind": "h2_section", "index": 12, "heading": "Key quotation", "start_utf16": 24030, "end_utf16": 24324, "sha256_utf8_raw_slice": "c4a645e667152cab0ac0389ae22b159a9e200e7df31e6b79c64a74888a47c0e7" }, { "kind": "h2_section", "index": 13, "heading": "Connections between traditions", "start_utf16": 24324, "end_utf16": 25194, "sha256_utf8_raw_slice": "51a963beb138e3188d640cb7e03d18c9d43609c42ccdd5874af00cb9ec182232" }, { "kind": "h2_section", "index": 14, "heading": "Primary sources and research", "start_utf16": 25194, "end_utf16": 27490, "sha256_utf8_raw_slice": "036c81db548c03cb894418153a2c643400cefd846786c486dccdc054966153b1" }, { "kind": "h2_section", "index": 15, "heading": "Tags", "start_utf16": 27490, "end_utf16": 27911, "sha256_utf8_raw_slice": "e1858af3d328bfd9ca733a49ed53f529c4a767c7b1439b168357319787af15af" }, { "kind": "h2_section", "index": 16, "heading": "About the authors", "start_utf16": 27911, "end_utf16": 28385, "sha256_utf8_raw_slice": "4685d02f4c3cb7bfed3148c4d5ab392e8d89fe5dc3d6e9cbfb61ab06db34c48a" } ], "common_blocks_module_sha256": "6cf638661a819f960c39d08058bf6d0d0696e8b816f677d95b389f5f1d11e4d2" } }