Post Breakfast
Inter-cultural dialogue and South Asia
In the post 9/11 era, 'Inter-Cultural Dialogue (ICD)' has slowly assumed a functional status. It has gradually become a symbol of the fight against terrorism and radicalisation. It is also now seen by some as an attempt to establish a positive relationship with disparate groups through mutual exchange of views on different issues marked by an inclination to listen.
In other words, ICD has gradually transformed itself into a realisation where there is emphasis not only on moving beyond narrow views and fundamentalism through positive dialogue between different cultures but also on issues related to regeneration within societies.
ICD has probably been most consistent in the European Union. It has moved forward steadily and gradually. What started in the form of the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership in 1995 has slowly evolved, thanks to the great interest taken in this regard particularly during the Prodi Presidency of the European Commission. In December 2001 and March 2002, the Prodi Commission took the initiative to bring together religious leaders, intellectuals and practitioners in the socio-economic and cultural sectors from different parts of Europe. In 2003, during the Italian Presidency of the EU, the EU Interior Ministers took another step. They agreed on a Declaration that recognised the potential for contribution by different communities towards social cohesion and the establishment of a more stable prospect towards better governance.
The latest efforts in pushing this idea further forward (in an expanded, diverse Europe) came with the European Council and the European Parliament adopting in December 2006 a decision on ICD. In May 2007, the European Commission also launched the first-ever European strategy for culture, with the aim of promoting strategic awareness of diversity and values.
It is important for us in Bangladesh to analyse these steps. Today, Europe consists of members who have differing backgrounds -- political and economic and ICD is being seen as an important means towards broader integration amongst the membership. The same applies for our expanded SAARC region.
I really do not know if ICD as conceived in the EU will provide the desired results within the planned time frame for South Asia. However, numerous recent seminars and workshops have clarified two aspects. Firstly, ICD is worth giving a try despite the recognition that there is vagueness about the implementation of agreed decisions. Secondly, shortcomings might be due to failure to agree about the purpose and implications of ICD.
The rest of the world has been watching Europe's efforts with care. Some among them, particularly in India and South East Asia, have raised the question as to the required nature of actors and stakeholders. There are also some who wonder whether culture can be a channel or the object of dialogue. Another panel in the Middle East, discussing ICD as a tool, has raised a different fundamental point. They have speculated as to whether secular institutions that do not 'do religion' can engage in inter-faith work through ICD.
These are all valid areas of anxiety. Nevertheless, I think that it would be wrong to restrict the concept of ICD to narrow definitions. We have to look at the wider potential.
ICD opens many metaphysical windows. The issues it raises are complex but ICD has to be seen against the broader canvas. ICD should not be construed as just dialogue between Muslims and those of other faith. We have to overcome any rigidity that might exist within our mind-set, particularly within our region.
This scenario brings us to two important factors. Is ICD about global integration, understanding and discovering common denominators, or is it specifically just linked to concerns about the integration of those who have immigrant status (legal or illegal)? The latter aspect particularly focuses on disconnectivity arising out of inherited traditions -- cultural, ethnic, or religious as opposed to the acquired socio-cultural matrix.
I believe that ambivalence exists in this context both with regard to definition as well as framework. This lack of clarity is enhancing misinterpretation of rights -- both secular as well as religious. It is also holding back understanding and stability.
Sara Silvestri has described ICD as 'an over-arching framework that brings together and balances' the many concerns and different priorities. From that point of view ICD may be considered as a viable political tool for wielding a form of soft power. In the prevailing scenario, ICD could then become in South Asia, a basis for a wider participation where the civil society as well as the political leaderships can engage themselves towards greater connectivity and understanding.
ICD, can also assist in the creation of a pluralistic society in South Asia. In such a situation, different perceptions can become inter-active but still retain their separate identities within the sphere of self-containment. This could facilitate unity in diversity and also promote ideas of peace and solidarity. In this context it could be a means for preventing 'clash of civilizations' within South Asia. It could also act as a subtle link for establishing stronger bonds between peoples by dealing with 'real' issues (jobs, education and social opportunities) and avoiding fuzziness.
South Asia till today has not given ICD the importance it deserves. It has been relegated to the background in inter-state relations because of the implicit and persistent demands pertaining to certain factors associated with 'security' -- prevention, protection, pursuit and response. This has resulted in South Asian countries being unable to rise over the challenge of mental barriers. We have also failed to create social cohesion among our different communities.
Time has come for the South Asian political leadership to give special consideration to ICD. We talk of a South Asian ethos. We even have a central, formal association to embody this image. Unfortunately, our connectivity is confined to speeches only. If one scratches the surface, one will only find suspicion, mistrust and lack of understanding.
ICD to me is probably the sole tool that can transport us out of this mire of latent instability that characterises our region. Let us through ICD identify, discover and develop strategies for a productive interaction within the South Asian fabric that will over-ride narrow national and religious interests.
Such inter-active activity could be initiated through the joint publication of periodicals on art, poetry, short stories, sculpture, adages, traditions, herbal medicine, through the preparation of joint documentaries for the TV in areas of architecture and archeology and through the arranging of CDs on folk-music and folk-art. The recent visit to Dhaka of the legendary cinema actor Saumitra Chatterjee was a boon for thespians to re-discover the finer aspects of their craft. During his visit Chatterjee shared his experiences of working with the famous film Director Satyajit Ray. The discussions on acting and cinema that took place during his short trip will be invaluable for our own film industry.
These are common denominators that bind us all together as South Asians. ICD will, and can act as a catalyst in the positive areas of bonding and changing our mindset.
Muhammad Zamir is a former Secretary and Ambassador.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments