Dialogue of Cultures:
The Future of Relations between Western and Islamic
International Conference at Bellevue
Palace, 22-23 April 1999 in Berlin
Dr. Heiner Bielefeldt
political matter of concern
The crisis scenario that
Samuel Huntington described as a "clash of civilizations" is by no means
inevitable. Following from intercultural ignorance, indifference and mutual
misunderstandings, however, it could well become reality. What is therefore
required is united efforts in the area of intercultural conflict
prevention. This was the key point in the message of greeting with which
the Head of the Presidential Office, State Secretary Wilhelm Staudacher, opened
the conference on "Dialogue of Cultures" at Bellevue Palace, a conference
which had been initiated by Roman Herzog, Federal President of Germany(1).
Staudacher added that the conference was not just of academic interest
but of immediate political significance too. The idea was to develop an
"early warning system" for intercultural conflict by which tensions could
be reduced and open escalations of conflict be avoided. The high political
status accorded to the conference was reflected in the fact that eleven
heads of state - those of Austria, Egypt, Finland, Germany, Indonesia,
Italy, Jordan, Malaysia, Morocco, Norway and Spain - had taken over the
Responsibility for the organisation
of the conference was assumed by the German Institute for Middle East Studies
in Hamburg under the directorship of Udo Steinbach. In his introduction
Steinbach also underlined the political character of the event. He made
it clear that the conference had no intention of setting up an exclusive
"club" made up of those institutes that had participated thus far, but
was open as well for other contributors. As important as he considered
the dialogue to be, Steinbach appealed for a pragmatic modesty in the setting
of goals. The aim was not to design a comprehensive world ethic but rather
to take first steps towards the development of a forum for intercultural
dialogue. To that end a further conference was already being planned.
The programme of the conference
was compact and consisted of five major themes, about which twenty papers
were presented. The central topics were:
1 Common values
and progressive currents of thought: conceptual dimensions in the relationship
between Muslim and Western societies,
2 Practical implementation
of intercultural dialogue: the role of education and science,
3 The role of the
media in intercultural relations,
4 Conditions of tolerance
in Muslim and Western societies: minority situations and intercultural
5 Common struggle for a just
and viable world order: social economy, sustainable development and concern
for the environment.
The conference closed with the
adoption of the "Berlin
Declaration - Agenda for Future Action"(2) (see infra),
in which some concrete aims of intercultural dialogue - arranged around
the main thematic points of the conference - were documented. The aims
include among others: Improvements in intercultural education, intercultural
exchange programmes for scholars and journalists, the introduction of an
observatory for media reporting, the promotion of respect for religious
and cultural minorities, common scientific projects in different disciplines.
The following summary is
not arranged chronologically but attempts to reflect the multiplicity of
positions In their main lines of thought, as they were presented at the
confèrence, and to organise them according to some systematic aspects.
I do not claim that the summary is exhaustive. The author alone is responsible
for the systematisation of the contents. It is self-evident that this systematisation
reflects personal interpretation and emphasis.
normative demands and reality: structural conditions for dialogue
Intercultural dialogue is
a complicated business. It is not only burdened by the kind of reservations,
stereotypes and historical experiences out of which mutual mistrust often
grows. Perhaps even more difficult than these are the numerous structural
asymmetries which, despite the best intentions of the participants, cannot
easily be removed and which may endanger the objectives of the dialogue
in general. It is therefore necessary to reflect and discuss the normative
and structural conditions of dialogue. What are the normative premises
of dialogue? Who defines these premises? Are there any rules concerning
the procedures that can be agreed upon? What should happen if normative
demands and social reality diverge extremely?
for Intercultural Education at the University of Osnabrück, began
with a description of the framework for a successful dialogue. Referring
to Martin ßuber's philosophy of dialogue he emphasised the importance
of the readiness to listen which itself presupposes the ability to remain
silent. Graf stressed that dialogue is a "way", i.e. a process of learning,
that requires the willingness for change of all involved. In religions
and cultures the idea of such a "way" exists. In Islamic areas it is called
"tariqa". Graf quoted an Asian saying: "If the winds of change are blowing,
some build up walls, whilst others set up windmills."
The theologian and Professor
for Religious Pedagogy Reijo E. Heinonen (University of Joensuu
in Finland) made a list of normative principles for interreligious and
- analogous to this - intercultural dialogue. He included among these principles
the renunciation of abstract generalisations about other religions, sensitivity
for interreligious pluralism on all sides as well as fairness in interreligious
comparisons in which diferent levels of comparison, especially normative
and empirical aspects, should be clearly kept apart conceptually. The most
important aim of the dialogue, according to Heinonen, is a deepening of
the consciousness of the common elements of the different religions.
By contrast, Thierry Fabre from
the Maison Méditeranéenne des Sciences de I'Homme in Aix-en-Provence
gave more room for open conflict. He pleaded for a concept of "intercultural
interaction" based on the principles of equality and reciprocity. Such
a concept, he argued, could help to overcome tendencies of cultural essentialism
by which "cultural identities" are fixed and reified in a problematic way.
To illuminate the open structure of intercultural dialogue, Fabre invoked
the metaphor of a "polyphony" in which the pitch and volume of the
individual voices must be negotiated by the participants themselves. That
such an open polyphony cannot always proceed harmoniously is indeed obvious.
Although there seemed to
be a broad consensus about the normative preconditions of dialogue, a longer
controversy developed as to whether intercultural dialogue makes sense
given the economic and political inequality between the West and most of
the Islamic countries. This debate was set in motion by lsmail bin Haji Ibrahim, Director
General of the Institute of Islamic Understanding in Kuala Lumpur, who,
with reference to the current financial crisis in South-East Asia, complained
about the one-sided dependency of Islamic countries on the over mighty
West. He insisted that it was not possible to enter into a serious intercultural
dialogue before the problem of economic inequality and dependency had been
discussed. Other speakers also repeatedly referred to tile enormous economic
and political inequalities in power between Western and Islamic countries
and how they burden and endanger the dialogue, or even make it impossible.
Ahmad Ramzi, scientific
director of the Academy of the Kingdom of Morocco, pointed out that the
so-called process of globalisation was nothing more than another name for
dominance by the U.S.A. whose overwhelming power threatens cultural pluralism
thus undermining the very precondition of an intercultural dialogue. Peter
Graf added that situations of inequality, e.g. those that result from the
precarious legal status of Muslim immigrants living in Europe, constitute
serious obstacles to a fruitful intercultural dialogue within the individual
states too. These problems were not disputed by anyone. Different views,
however, came to the fore about how to deal with the problems stemming
Mohammed Arkoun, Professor
emeritus for the History of Islamic Thought at the Sorbonne in Paris, appealed
to his fellow Muslims to break out of the fruitless "discourse of victimization".
Instead of making the overcoming of one-sided economic and political dependency
a condition for intercultural discourse, he said, it was more important
to discover the emancipating powers of culture and to use them effectively
in concrete political criticism. Ahmed Ramzi, in turn, expressed fears
that intercultural dialogue without discussion of the inequality in power
would only lead to a reinforcement of the tendency, already to be seen
in Islamic countries, of blindly copying the Western model.
concerning tire concept of Western-Islamic cultural dialogue
The title of the conference
was at the same time the agenda: "Dialogue of Cultures". This title,
however, gave rise to a number of conceptual questions and challenges:
Who represents the cultures? How can the internal pluralism within the
cultures be given due consideration? Is there sufficient room for minorities,
dissidents, borderliners and converts on all sides? Likewise the sub-title
of the conference - "The Future of Relations between Western and Islamic
Societies" - triggered critical questions. Not all of the participants
agreed with the conceptual juxtaposition of "Western" and "Islamic" countries. Andrea
Pacini, specialist in the History of Religions working at the Giovanni
Agnelli Foundation in Turin, wondered whether one could legitimately compare
the term "Western" - which is a geographical category that carries also
a cultural meaning - with what is obviously a religious term, "Islamic".
Pacini admitted, however, that this asymmetrical constellation cannot easily
be avoided since it arises from the nature of the matter itself. Whereas
Christian societies no longer develop their normative order and institutions
directly out of religious sources, religion in Islamic countries apparently
continues to determine the normative and institutional structures of the
whole society to a much greater degree.
Taking up Pacini's argument, Samir
Khalil Samir, lecturer in the History of Arab Culture at the University
of Saint-Joseph in Beirut, complained that, as an Arab Christian from Egypt,
he had serious problems with the title of the conference. Since he was
neither Western nor Muslim he and others like him were not covered by the
Thierry Fabre intervened
from a somewhat different angle. He criticised the "myth" of the West as
well as the widespread perception of an antagonism between the Occident
and the Orient. This stereotype, he complained, has torn apart the Mediterranean
cultural area. Against abstract conceptions of "the West", Fabre also set
great store in stating "I am French and not just, Western." In similar
fashion Mohammed Arkoun said that he did not want to see Europe disappear
into an anonymous and featureless "Western world".
for Arabic Studies at the Higher Council for Scientific Research in Madrid
pointed out that it was not so long ago that there were doubts as to whether
Spain belongs to the West. That Spain now without question is seen as a
part of the West and that the Secretary General of the NATO is Spanish,
she said, gives an example of how rapidly cultural classifications can
The critical questions raised
by some participants about the concept of "Western-Islamic cultural dialogue"
did not lead to positive alternatives. These would probably have also led
to problems of conceptual integration and exclusion. For instance, if Fabre's
concept of Mediterranean neighbourhood had been taken as the basis for
intercultural dialogue, then participants from South-East Asia would have
been excluded from the conference. It seems to be difficult therefore,
to formulate a plausible alternative to the concept of "Western-Islamic"
dialogue, even though one has to admit that it can give rise to serious
At any rate, the debate showed
once again how important it is to break open cultural essentialistic categorisations
by which the participants of a discussion are either taken as representatives
of predetermined cultural or religious orientation or are conceptually
excluded from the discourse. In the words of Ziauddin Sardar, a
cultural critic of Indian origin who lives in London: The main idea should
be to free the "dialogue" from its conceptual bipolarity and to expand
it to an open "polylogue", in which people are not, from the outset, perceived
merely as representatives of some predefined cultures and religions but,
instead, have the opportunity to challenge and change existing cultural
patterns as well as to cross historical boundaries.
and overcoming stereotypes
One of the main concerns
of the conference consisted in overcoming prejudice, stereotypes and images
of the enemy which, if they remain unresolved, could lead to a "clash
of civilizations". This is not an easy task, because complicated and
important questions have to be clarified: Where is the borderline between
a legitimate judgment and a problematic prejudice? Does such a division
even exist? Is it not true that every judgment by necessity contains an
aspect of generalisation, without which conceptualization would be from
the outset impossible? How is it then possible to prevent unavoidable generalisations
from hardening into stereotypes that are resistant to criticism and change?
Moreover, concerning tile relationship between "Western" and "Islamic"
societies, the following questions arise: What is the factual basis for
the reservations expressed on both sides? For example, the anxiety of many
Muslims about a collapse of morals and faith resulting from Western secularism,
and the complementary anxiety in the West about Islamic authoritarianism
and fundamentalism. Are these anxieties merely projections? Are they the
result of particular (perhaps one-sided) experiences or a lack of any real
experience? Are there enemy images that have been deliberately constructed
for political purposes? What role does the media play in constructing and
reinforcing or overcoming mutual stereotypes?
Mohammed Arkoun diagnosed
one important cause of the problem as being the lack of sophisticated cultural
studies. The mutual enrichment of the monotheistic religions in the Middle
Ages, he said, has almost been completely forgotten and plays no real part
in either academic debate or in general public consciousness today. In
this context Thierry Fabre expressed a wish to overcome the one-sided apportioning
of blame. In his view, not only is the contribution that Islam made to
the development of European philosophy being ignored but on the Muslim
side the influence of Greek philosophy on Islamic thinking has likewise
often been denied. Maribel Fierro argued from a somewhat different standpoint.
Without denying the importance of tile cultural studies in general, she
warned that the impact of academic studies as a medium for political reconciliation
should not be exaggerated. An example she cited the myth of "al-Andalus",
currently popular in Spain, which has not prevented Spanish Christians
and Muslims from viewing each other with a great deal of suspicion, since
they fail to identify each other with the glorified era of Christian-Jewish-Islamic
The ignorance with which
people encounter (or rather do not encounter) each other today is certainly
not less problematic as the neglect of the common cultural heritage. Pointing
to the widespread cultural ignorance, Paolo Magri, Secretary General
of' the Institute for International Political Studies in Milan, warned
against a careless use of the tern multicultural society. "There are
very few multicultural societies" was his pessimistic diagnosis. Nadhir
al-Ansari of the Al al-Bayt University in Jordan expressed his regret
that hardly any Western scholars find their.way to universities in Islamic
countries whereas numerous Muslims study and work at European and American
How hurtful it can be to
experience ignorance was described by Ahmed Kamal Abulmagd, former
Minister in the Egyptian cabinet and Professor emeritus for Legal Sciences
at the University of Cairo. He has repeatedly experienced that he was allowed
to speak at Western universities but without his statements ever being
taken seriously. "You can read the faces of the people in the audience",
he said. And then you often realize that those attending are only listening
out of politeness but without any real interest. It was his impression.
that this ignorance was the result of the power gap between Western and
Muslim countries that other speakers had already mentioned several times.
In the age of globalisation, he argued, this inequality in power was not
being removed but rather intensified. Accordingly, Abulmagd was somewhat
sceptical about ambitious dialogue projects. The first step, he said, would
be to acknowledge the very fact that different cultures exist. Only then
could file search for shared values and common projects take place.
Ahmed Ramzi's complaint about
the negative image of Islam in the West was much harsher than that of
Abulmagd. He blamed Western Orientalism and European colonialism for the
misunderstandings. In addition, he saw the influence of the pro-Israeli
lobby in politics and in the Western media as being responsible. ' The
freedom of the media, he said, was often abused in order to propagate stereotypes.
Ramzi's diagnosis was countered by Khalil Samir who insisted that orientalists
did not only cause misunderstandings but also contributed to intercultural
understanding. Moreover he stressed that Arabic media too tend to portray
Islam in a negative light. To some extent, he said, their reporting is
even more drastic than anti-Islamic clichés in tile West.
The other side of the coin,
i.e. the image of the West in Islamic countries, was discussed much less.
Nevertheless, Ziauddin Sardar pointed out that stereotypes also play an
important role in Islamic contexts. On the one hand, the West is seen as
the source of general moral decadence, especially by Islamist theoretics
and writers like Abul-A'la Mawdudi and Sayyid Qutb. This demonisation,
on the other hand, is paradoxically complemented by the simultaneous existence
of a completely uncritical admiration of the West, whose culture and lifestyle
many Muslims want to adopt without any reservation.
The controversial subject
of religious fundamentalism, which sometimes is taken nearly as synonymous
for Islam in general, was hardly discussed at the conference. Several Muslim
participants at the conference expressed their unease at the use of the
term "fundamentalism", which by necessity must lead to misunderstandings,
especially since this term has a positive connotation in Arabic language. Alwi
Shihab of the University of Paramadina Mulya in Jakarta pleaded for
the term "Islamic extremism" to be used instead of "fundamentalism". That
such a, in part violent, extremism exists and that it has a very burdening
effect on intercultural and interreligious dialogue was not questioned
by anyone in the conference. According to the estimation of Oddbjorn
Leirvik, lecturer at the Faculty of Theology at the University of Oslo,
Christian and Islamic "revivalism" has worsened the opportunities for interreligious
dialogue in the last twenty years.
What is to be done? The need
for self-criticism was repeatedly mentioned. "We need windows and mirrors",
stressed Kamal Abulmagd more than once. Thierry Fabre promoted his concept
of intercultural "neighbourhood" as the basis for a common culture of peaceful
conflict and debate. Mohammed Arkoun, on the other hand, demanded an improved
"intellectual equipment", especially in the field of cultural studies.
Nadhir al-Ansari wished for more co-operation and exchange between universities.
School books and other teaching materials were also named as being an important
factor. Paolo Magri pleaded for projects of youth exchange between Western
and Islamic countries analogous to the successful Erasmus Programme of
the European Union. Finally, it was recognised that the media bear a large
responsibility in overcoming the silence on both sides.
role of the media.
The importance of the media
is often mentioned at intercultural conferences. Comments often remain
very generalised, however. The major influence that is ascribed to the
media frequently turns into a general chiding of journalism or even a demonisation
of the mass media, i.e. attacks which in turn can nourish the temptation
to adopt authoritarian solutions. It is one of the merits of the Berlin
Conference that it has specifically made the role of the media one of its
central themes in order to gain a more differentiated estimation of the
possibilities and limits of journalistic work within intercultural dialogue.
Kai Hafez from the
German Institute for Middle East Studies in Hamburg presented the media
not only as an instrument but also as an active participant in politics.
It has particular influence in issues of foreign politics in which most
people have hardly experience of their own. Hafez pointed out that freedom
of the press, a precondition of accurate reporting, is also jeopardized
in the West by economic and political dependency. Particularly in situations
of war and crisis the truth is typically the first victim. Hafez called
it a paradox that in the age of globalisation the number of foreign correspondents
is decreasing while the dependency on a few news agencies is growing correspondingly.
He closed his presentation with a number of concrete suggestions, such
as, the introduction of exchange programmes for journalists of different
Ziauddin Sardar, who
himself has gained experience as a journalist in both Muslim and European
countries, demanded greater participation of Muslims in the mass media,
since it is the mass media which sets and defines the political agenda
in modern societies. The fact that many Islamic countries, even after fifty
years of independence, have failed to develop an independent media culture,
he said, is shameful and should give rise to serious self-criticism among
Muslims. Sardar further pointed out that Muslims are also massively underrepresented
in the Western media. Several Muslim participants expressed their agreement
with his critical diagnosis. Kaman Abulmagd appealed to the responsibility
of Muslim scholars to publicly participate in efforts to overcome anti-Islamic
stereotypes. Mahmoud Farghal of the Institute for Diplomatic Studies
at the Egyptian Foreign Ministry took the opportunity to point once more
to the economic disparity between Western and Islamic countries and to
the way in which this inequality of power effects the mass media too.
Jacques Waardenburg, Professor
emeritus for Religious Studies at the University of Lausanne, demanded
a closer co-operation between scholars and journalists as this could only
benefit both sides. That the technical training of a journalist can actually
lead to an increase in quality was also confirmed by Thomas Hartmann, cultural
manager at the "House of the World Cultures" in Berlin. In his estimation
there has already been considerable progress made in background reporting
in Islamic countries. It is the sensationalist short reports and "headlines"
that have remained problematic.
There is hardly any other
term which suffers more contradictory interpretations than that of secularism.
This is true of the inner-Western discourse and even more so within intercultural
debates. Does secularism describe a "neutral" standpoint beyond differences
in religion and world-view, or does it veil its own bias in claims of universal
validity? Does the process of societal secularisation lead to a collapse
in moral values, or does it simply amount to a transformation of moral
values? Does the secularism of the state imply the privatisation and disempowerment
of religion, or does it open up new opportunities for religious communities
to participate actively in the public realm?
One important facet of secularism
which came to the fore in the debate is the relationship between scientific
reason and religious belief. Mohammed Arkoun pleaded for a new mediation
between the two. He rejected both the uncritical religious orthodoxies
and the presumptions of modern enlightenment in religious affairs. "Is
it enlightenment", he asked rhetorically, "if religion is completely
banned from French universities?" Arkoun stressed the need to study
religion as a fundamental anthropological dimension which the sciences
cannot simply ignore.
Khalijah Mohamad Salleh, Professor
of Physics at the University of Kebangsaan in Malaysia, criticised the
"abstractness" of Western scientific understanding, in which no room is
accorded to moral and spiritual values. She pleaded for a "holistic" approach
in which methods and insights of the sciences are consistently related
to ethical and religious dimensions. While Ismail bin Ibrahim supported
this initiative, Khalil Samir objected that different levels of scientific,
normative and religious validity should be kept distinct. "We Arabs",
he said, "tend to mix everything with everything". In his opinion,
it is exactly this lack of differentiation that has caused the backwardness
in many countries. Ziauddin Sardar in turn rejected Samir's view by declaring
that the purportedly "neutral" and "universal" sciences actually always
express particular (i.e., "Western") world views and ideologies whose dominance
should be critically exposed.
of Economics at the University of Bochum, explained that the social sciences
too operate on the basis of normative premises. This, in principle, old
insight, he said, has been largely forgotten, especially in Anglo-Saxon
countries, following Max Weber's postulate of a "value-free science". Since
scientific ralionality, which as a procedure is transculturally valid,
has nevertheless its intrinsic limits, space must be left for genuinely
ethical, religious and ideological perspectives also within the social
sciences. In the light of these general epistemological clarifications,
Nienhaus assessed projects of "Islamic banking". In his view, Islamic banking
has had some successes although it has not reached its self-declared high
purposes. Economic studies, Nienhaus concluded, could also provide opportunities
for intercultural dialogue.
The term secularism was most
thoroughly discussed in the areas of politics, law and the state. Andrea
Pacini demanded a clear differentiation between the general process of
societal secularisation (which is understood to be a loss of public significance
of religion) on the one hand and the specific political concept of an institutional
separation between the religious communities and the state on the other.
The two phenomena are not necessarily coupled with one another. There are
examples where a strict secularism of the state has not led to religions
losing their significance within society, e.g. in the U.S.A. In contrast,
secularisation of society can be accelerated by state secularisation being
rejected. One example of the latter possibility was given by Maribel Fierro,
who pointed out that the political instrumentalisation of Catholic Christianity
in the Franco era had released a strongly anti-clerical current in contemporary
Khalil Samir was very
outspoken in supporting the secularisation of state and law. The stipulation
included in nearly all Arabic constitutions that the Islamic Shari'a provides
the basis for legislation implies, he stated, a discrimination against
non-Islamic minorities. Moreover, whereas members of the non-Islamic monotheistic
religions of revelation can at least count on tolerance, so-called "non-believers"
do not enjoy any legal status and recognition in a Shari'a based constitution.
Kamal Abulmagd opposed this interpretation. He saw the Shari'a clause in
the Arabic constitutions as merely a general reference to the legal tradition,
comparable to the role of common law as "the law of the land" in England.
Abulmagd rejected conceptions ofan authoritarian "Theo-Democracy", as propagated
by Mawdudi and other Islamists. Opposition to Samir was also voiced by
Ziauddin Sardar. He accused Samir of propagating a political ideology by
demanding a universal "conversion to secularism".
Heiner Bielefeldt of
the University of Bielefeld, however, supported Samir by pointing out that
secularism as a political concept (in contrast to the ideological secularism
of Auguste Comte, for example) makes no claims to an all-inclusive worldview.
He declared that political secularism is the necessary consequence of the
universal human rights of religious liberty. According to Bielefeldt, the
political secularism ofthe democratic constitutional states provides the
basis for a critical rejection not only of theocratic dominance but also
of political presumptions of an ideologicalized secularism.
The debate on the relationship
of religion and state also considered the established religions of England
and Norway. Ataullah Siddiqui from the Islamic Foundation in Leicester
analysed the role of the Anglican church with the multireligious society
of Great Britain without voicing a criticism of the established state church
system. ln contrast the paper given by Oddbjorn Leirvik and Kari
Vogt (both of the University of Oslo) clearly criticised the official
identification of the Norwegian state with the Lutheran church. Leirvik
and Vogt expressed their fear that the existing system could cause an unfortunate
politicisation of religion and an exclusion or forced integration of minorities.
They therefore strongly favoured a clear institutional separation of state
and church in Norway, as was enacted in Sweden a few years ago.
The detailed discussions
of the English and even more so the Norwegian systems of an established
religion helped to overcome widespread clichés according to which
religion and the state are always separated in Europe. Subsequently, it
became also clear that the relationship between the state, law and religion
in Islamic countries is likewise very complex and open for changes. According
to Mohammed Arkoun, the widely held view that state and religion form an
inseparable unity in Islam ("din wa dawla") is nothing other than
a prejudice that needs to be corrected by critical examination.
situation of religious minorities
That religious minorities
have rights which must be respected and protected is an almost universally
recognized normative postulate. Controversies arise, however, when it comes
to spelling out these rights concretely. Should religious minorities have
the right to run their own schools? Should they be entitled to provide
for religious education within the public school system? If so, who is
in charge of selecting and educating the teachers and deciding on
the curricula? To what extent should minority languages be promoted by
the state? To what degree can the state accept that religious minorities
follow their owns laws? Other questions concern the normative basis of
minority rights: Are these rights based in the universal ("secular") human
right of religious liberty or do they follow from the tolerance postulate
of a religious ruling?
With regard to religious
minorities in Islamic countries a controversy developed concerning the
significance of the traditional Islamic dhimma system. The protected
religious groups in Islam (dhimmis), stressed Kamal Abulmagd, are accorded
equal legal status as citizens. He quoted the Qur'anic verse: "There
is no compulsion in religion" (Sura 2,256). Abulmagd admitted that
inadequacies might exist here and there in the practical implementation
of this postulate. In principle, however, he insisted there could be no
talk of a discrimination against the dhimmis.
Once again, Khalil Samir
made a very different assessment. As an Arabic Christian, he said, he would
by no means be satisfied with a status awarded mercifully from above, even
if that status were, hypothetically speaking, a privileged one. Instead
of merely being "granted" a legal position within a given religious framework
he demanded the recognition of the principle of equality already in the
setting up of the legal system, which accordingly has to be secular.
Samir acknowledged the Islamic dhimma system as a historical achievement
(for which, incidentally, Islam could claim no monopoly) but rejected it as
inadequate fur modern life.
Immediately after Samir's
explanation Jacques Waardenhurg underlined the importance of universal citizenship
which in his opinion is a "key concept" or modern integration. He cited
the different legal regulations in the awarding of rights of citizenship
to migrants in Europe and criticised Germany because of its restrictive
naturalization policy. .
in Philosophy and Islamic studies at the University of Freiburg (Switzerland),
expressed his optimism about the long-term opportunities of Islamic minorities
in Europe. He admitted that Muslims still have to struggle for influence
because of their origins as "guest workers". Moreover, they often suffer
from what he called the "Afghanistan-Syndrome", i. a the negative effect
of international politics on the general debates about Islam. Since the
normative principles of European constitutions and the religious and ethical
norms of Islam arc compatible with one another, however, Ramadan saw possibilities
for a more active role of Muslim minorities in Europe. These opportunities
should now be used and expanded. The Islamic Shari'a, he emphasized, is
no obstacle to this since - if the central principles were maintained -
they are open for a dynamic adaptation to their new cultural environment.
argued that there is no inherent contradiction between compliance with
the Shari'a and obedience to European laws - provided, however, the Shari'a
is regarded analogous to Canon Law as an inner-communal legal system without
coercive implementation. Just as catholics are free to follow the marriage
regulations of Canon Law and thus to exclude any right of divorce, despite
the possibility of divorce under state rules, so Muslims could likewise
organise their families according to the norms of the Shari'a without this
having consequences for the state system of law.
in his presentation on the relationship between the Muslim minority and
other religions in Great Britain. He noted that it was the Christian churches
(and not the state) that had first taken care of Muslim immigrants. For
that reason interreligious relations in Britain have developed in a positive
way right from the beginning. In the meantime, he explained, an
interreligious network has come about which even includes post-Islamic
religions like the Baha'is. Siddiqui named the "Islamophobia Report", published
in 1997, as a particular achievement of Muslims in Great Britain.
Very contradictory views
were expressed about the topic of independent Islamic schools. Some participants,
for example, Peter Graf and Ziauddin Sardar, expressed strong reluctance
towards separate schools in which they saw an alarming symbol of disintegration
or ghettoism. Anne Sofie Roald, specialist for the History of Religions
at the University of Lund in Sweden, likewise admitted that she was sceptical.
Being a Muslim herself, she claimed to know about the importance of an
Islamic religious education for which there seems to be no place in the
Swedish public education system. Her empirical field studies of Islamic
schools, however, indicate that most of the schools that she had researched
(not all of them) fail to adequately prepare their pupils for the needs
and problems of Swedish society. Contrary to this critical evaluation Ataullah
Siddiqui could provide positive results for Islamic education in Great
Britain. Nowadays, he said, even some Christians attend these schools.
Tariq Ramadan spoke in favour of Islamic schools as well. He argued
that it was not acceptable that the state should neglect the ethical education
of children and adolescents on the one hand and on the other put obstacles
in the way of Muslims building their own religious and ethical educational
Just as the question of indepedent
Islamic schools, the topic of Islamic education within the public school
system, also prompted a controversy. While Peter Graf regarded every denominational
separation of pupils as being problematic and pleaded for an integrated
cross-denominational teaching, Ismail bin Ibrahim from Malaysia declared
that it was absolutely impossible for Muslims and non-Muslims to be given
religious education together. Oddbjorn Leirvik criticised the recently
established obligatory general religious education in Norway which, he
thinks, amounts to a discrimination against non-Christian minorities. Such
suspicion finds evidence in the title of this education which is "Knowledge of
Christianity and Information about other Religions and World Views".
Constitutional objections, Leirvik explained, have been raised to this
compulsory discipline in a remarkable co-operation of the Islamic minority,
the Jewish minority, and the organisation of secular humanists in Norway.
Udo Steinbach mentioned that
the question of religious education has recently become a controversial
issue in Germany too. He cited the November 1998 decision of the Upper Administrative
Court of Berlin which has given the Islamic Federation the right to teach
Islamic religious instruction in Berlin schools. Steinbach expressed his
fear that this court decision could give momentum to the spread of a Turkish
form of Islamic fundamentalism in Germany.
inevitability of intercultural co-operation
The last lecture of the conference
appeared at first glance to fit only on the fringes of the real themes
of the conference: Nadhir al-Ansari, water resources specialist
from Jordan, reminded everyone of the dramatic ecological problems that,
if they were not solved, would seriously threaten the very survival of
humanity. Central to his talk were the problems of water shortage that
were becoming a political crisis factor and probably not only in the Middle
East. Al-Ansari also spoke about the impending climatic catastrophe that
could lead to the melting of the polar ice and the flooding of many regions.
In the face of such a threat
to humanity as a whole, any questions about whether or not intercultural
dialogue could be meaningful could prove to be of a quite abstract academic
nature. It seems indeed obvious that we cannot afford to refuse political
co-operation across national and cultural boundaries and that hence there
is no acceptable alternative to dialogue. Intercultural and interreligious
dialogue, it became clear once again, may not just fulfil sell-serving
academic purposes, but ought to face up to the problems that needed solving
urgently. To quote a remark of Jacques Waardenburg: "Religion is not
only sun and clouds; it is also earth and dust."
Dr. Heiner BIELEFELDT
of Cultures - The Future of Relations between Western and Islamic Societies
AGENDA FOR FUTURE ACTION
Palace, Berlin, 23 April 1999
initiative of the President of the Federal Republic of Germany, Roman Herzog,
and under the patronage of the Heads of State or of Government of Austria,
Egypt, Finland, Germany, Indonesia, Italy, Jordan, Malaysia, Morocco, Norway
and Spain we the undersigned representatives of research institutions of
these and other countries have convened a conference on intercultural dialogue
between Western and Islamic societies at Bellevue Palace on April 22 and
end of a wide-ranging, open and constructive discussion we have reached
agreement on the following declaration:
that contact between different cultures has become as much a basic feature
of modern societies throughout the world as the inter-weaving of nations;
establish a strategy of intercultural dialogue that encompasses education,
research, communication and cultural expression as well as politics, economics
and other fields relevant for the future of societies;
to develop a long-term concept for conflict prevention and management;
values common to both Islamic and Western cultures;
that the "Golden Rule: Do not do unto others what you would not like
them to do unto you" which is part of a core of ethical values common
to all great cultures and religions should inspire ways in which members
of Western and Islamic societies behave towards each other;
that space for intercultural dialogue be created and that intercultural
cooperation between the respective countries should be intensified in the
following areas of application.
and Scholarly Research
world moves closer together one of the most important techniques to be
learnt will be the ability to deal positively with otherness. The aim is
a global intercultural community of learning which offers cross-cultural
education as a chance for future societies.
to achieve practical realization we recommend the following measures in
and secondary education:
intercultural concepts c f curricula for schools;
of early bilingualism and possibilities for intercultural exchange between
of a differentiated view of the other culture and elimination of stereotypes
from school books: By referring to already gained experiences
bilateral or multilateral model-projects in the monitoring of school books
should be developed.
of comparative studies of models for interreligious and ethical education in
public and private schools;
education and scholarly cooperation:
of a thorough and differentiated teaching and research in those
cultural and social sciences dealing with the respective societies which
uses the latest forms of methodological innovation;
of an intercultural Masters foundation course of teacher training:The
course aimed at teaching of a global ethic should be offered by universities
of the participating countries in close cooperation with one another.
or expansion of problem related intercultural research or graduate colleges in
universities or institutes of further education;
of bilaterally or multilaterally staffed committees of experts dealing
with future technologies, e.g. environment, genetics, communication;
of a Foundation for Intercultural Studies, which shall specifically
promote intercultural and interdisciplinary projects in academic fields,
award scholarships, and arrange an international exchange of students.
of regular platforms fir encounter and exchange for the younger academically
educated generation of Muslim and Western countries;
to encourage the perception of the "foreigner" as a partner the free media
should voluntarily initiate processes of intercultural understanding and
introduce differentiation where up to now mass prejudice has dominated.
have the responsibility to encounter a differentiated reality with differentiated
linguistic and terminological means.
a re-orientation of the media towards intercultural dialogue we recommend
the following measures:
an ethical code of conduct for journalists as a basis for international
reporting (establishment of a working group comprised of journalists to
prepare such a code);
of multinational inter-media dialogues:
of multinationally organized media studies centres for research, documentation
and professional training (one in Europe and one in the Islamic world);
of programmes on radio and television which creatively and in a differentiated
way allow individual access to the "other";
Use of new,
electronic media for multicultural communication, e.g. by setting-up
websites and points of exchange between scholars participating in the network
and the conditions of tolerance
and industrial centres throughout the world the encounter with "foreigners"
is beginning to achieve a level of normality that increasingly imposes
upon societies the responsibility to convey mutual respect and tolerance
through learning processes and rules on how to treat minorities.
to encourage new forms of coexistence and tolerance in and between Europe
and the Islamic world we propose to design a contractual Declaration
on the treatment of cultural and ethnic minorities, which by referring
to resolutions and agreements of the United Nations and the Council of
Europe on minority affairs does not level out differences and controversies
but encounters them rationally.
economy and concern for the environment
and Western economists will agree that a socially and ecologically responsable
market economy can reconcile religious and ethical values with the need
to efficiently utilize scarce resources.
is a rich heritage of discussions on norms and values in economic science
and policy in the West which has not received due attention by Muslim scholars.
On the other hand, costs and benefit of specific designs of economic systems
based on Islamic values have rarely been evaluated in a fair and unbiased
manner by Western economists.
in a complex world it is no longer possible to put religious and moral
values into practice in a straightforward manner, both sides can learn
from each outer in a systematic, sustainable and critical dialogue.
more than another isolated international conference to give momentum to
the process of broad-based understanding and recognition and to reach a
we suggest that
and a Western institution each with a high academic standing and reputation
in both worlds should jointly take the lead and develop the structure
for academic conferences, expert workshops, meetings of business people
and representatives of the public sector as well as joint research projects over
a period of three to five years to assess the implementation and application
of Islamic teachings in business and economic policy.
should be given to social and ecological issues as well as energy problems
and development strategies: As an institution for solving common problems
in a joint action a European - Middle Eastern Institute for Environmental
Studies with financial support from both Western and Muslim sources
should be designed.
these recommendations cannot be put into practice at once, we suggest the
following steps of implementation:
in Berlin will be the point of departure for concrete strategies of cooperation
and multilateral research in the above-mentioned fields of application.
body for implementing the working programme and establishing structures
of cooperation will be a steering committee consisting of at least
four representatives of the participating institutes and including specialists
for the different areas (education, media, minorities, economy).
as a focal point for the coordination of future projects the German
Institute for Middle East Studies, Hamburg.
It is of
particular importance to use and complement trans-governmental programmesa nd
projects of cooperation such as of the UNESCO, the European Union and the
Council of Europe. In addition, non-governmental organizations and networks
should be tied in.
creation of the planned international network an early warning system
against potential conflicts should emerge step-by-step, which can develop
new forms of trust and intercultural cooperation in and between nations.
from the implementation of the agenda and the establishment of the network
a second conference scheduled for the year 2000 will be prepared.
Ahmed Kamal Abulmagd, Cairo; Egypt
Nadhir AI-Ansari, AI al-Bayt University, Mafraq, Jordan
Mohammed Arkoun, Paris, France
Bielefeldt, Universität Bielefeld, Germany
Fabre, Maison Méditerranéenne des Sciences de I'Homme, Aix-en-Provence,
Farghal, Institute of Diplomatic Studies, Cairo, Egypt
Paz Fernandez, Centro Espanol de Relaciones Internationales, Madrid, Spain
Fierro, Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas, Madrid, Spain
Peter Graf, Universität Osnabrück, Germany
Hafez, Deutsches Orient- Institut, Hamburg, Germany
Reijo E. I Heinonen, University of Joensuu, Finland
bin I Haji Ibrahim, Institute of Islamic Understanding, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Leirvik, University of Oslo, Norway
Magri, Istituto per gli Studi di Politica Internazionale, Milan, Italy
Volker Nienhaus, Universität Bochum, Germany
Pacini, Fondazione Giovanni Agnelli, Turin, Italy
Rahmat, Motahari Foundation, Bandung. Indonesia
Ramadan, University of Freiburg, Switzerland
Ramzi, Académie du Royaume du Maroc, Rabat, Morocco
Sofie Roald, University of Lund, Sweden
Rudolph, Deutsches Orient-Institut, Hamburg, Germany
Khalijah Mohd. Salleh, National University, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Samir Khalil Samir, SJ, Université St. Joseph, Beirut, Lebanon
Ziauddin Sardar, London, England
Alwi Shihab, University of Paramadina Mulya, Jakarta, Indonesia
Siddiqui, The Islamic Foundation, Leicester, England
Udo Steinbach, Deutsches Orient- Institut, Hamburg, Germany
Kari Vogt, University of Oslo, Norway
Jacques Waardenburg, Lausanne, Switzerland
See also: Roman HERZOG, Preventing
the Clash of Civilizations. A Peace Strategy for the Twenty-First Century.
With comments by Amitai Etzioni, Hans Küng, Bassam Tibi, and Masakazu
Yamazaki. Edited by Henrik SCHMIEGELOW. St.Martin's Press, New York,
1999, 136 pp.
This contribution was published earlier
in: Orient, 40 (1999) 1, pp. 38-51.