UNGA HIGH LEVEL DIALOGUE ON INTERRELIGIOUS AND

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 04 USUN NEW YORK 000851 SIPDIS SIPDIS IO/PCC FOR PAUL DENIG E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PHUM KIRF AORC UNGA XF XC XD NU CU SUBJECT: UNGA HIGH LEVEL DIALOGUE ON INTERRELIGIOUS AND INTERCULTURAL UNDERSTANDING ¶1. (U) Summary: Speakers at a UN General Assembly High-Level Dialogue on Interreligious and Intercultural Understanding and Cooperation for Peace, Oct. 4-8, stressed the value of dialogue and education in overcoming misunderstanding and the importance of respecting basic freedoms, particularly freedom of religion and expression. Addressing the issue of stereotypes and misunderstanding, many focused on the misinterpretation of Islam and in several instances this discussion led to criticism of the West, the media and freedom of expression. While many delegations cited examples of actions taken within their own countries to increase understanding between religions and cultures, few made specific recommendations for international action. Two panel discussions focused on the importance of dialogue, respect for human rights and the importance of local leadership and grassroots action. U.S. Ambassador Christopher Ross highlighted the need for dialogue between moderates and extremists within each faith in parallel with interfaith dialogue. U.S. Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs Karen Hughes stressed the importance of dialogue, education and exchanges to promote intercultural and interreligious understanding and to reduce misperceptions between groups. End Summary -------------- Dialogue Between and Within Religions -------------- ¶2. (U) Most countries welcomed the High Level Dialogue and supported international, regional, national and local dialogue as the key to creating a tolerant, secure and peaceful world. Nearly all provided examples of successful cultural and religious dialogue within their own regions and nations. While most argued that interreligious dialogue is important to avoid the clash of civilizations, very few countries called for dialogue within religious traditions as a means to address extremism. ¶3. (U) Indonesia, Pakistan and Finland were the only speakers that addressed dialogue within religious groups. Indonesia, recognizing that conflict and tension also rise between factions of the same religion, called for intra-faith dialogue. Pakistan called for an initiation of "dialogue among our own people to build further understanding of the true spirit and values of their own and other major religions." Finland called for self-reflection and discussion of beliefs and freedoms within religious communities. -------------- "Islamophobia": Where does it come from? -------------- ¶3. (U) Nearly all delegations argued that lack of understanding and stereotypes create division between religions and cultures, specifically between the Western and Islamic world. Most delegations called for increased religious and cultural education and dialogue to reduce stereotyping and blamed current conflicts on lack of mutual understanding, as well as underlying socio-economic and political factors. However, several countries pointed the blame at the West for what they described as growing discrimination and attacks on Islam and on Muslim people around the world. ¶4. (U) Algeria argued that this tension comes from an incorrect association of Islam with violence, intolerance and extremism. Pakistan stated that in the post-9/11 world, Islam is perceived by the West as propagating terrorism, extremism and bent on striking at Western values. Syria and the OIC also focused on the Western role in creating anti-Islamic sentiment. The OIC pointed to campaigns of hate speech to denigrate and attack Islam, noting, "Islamophobia is on the rise." ¶5. (U) The Pakistani representative stated that in the Islamic world, the West is seen as suppressing Muslims in places like Palestine, Iraq and Kashmir. Malaysia stated that "oppression and ill treatment" of certain groups, such as the Palestinians and Muslim minorities, contribute to the conflict between the West and the Islamic world. The UAE argued that violence, occupation, cultural and economic domination by developed states increases feelings of injustice, inequality and marginalization in developing nations and leads to "a breeding ground for new security USUN NEW Y 00000851 002 OF 004 threats that include extremism, violence and revenge." ¶6. (U) Western media were often accused of creating a negative image of Islam. The Pakistani representative argued that Western media exploit freedom of expression to propagate insults against Islam and its sacred symbols. Kuwait also argued that fear of Islam leads to discrimination and that the media have a large role connecting Islam with terrorism. Senegal pointed to the abuse of freedom of expression to attack Islam. Cuba also criticized the Western media for their negative portrayal of Islam as a religion associated with terrorism and violence. ¶7. (U) Jordan noted an attempt to portray Islam as a religion of violence, but also mentioned the need to combat extremism within Islam, specifically citing the need to define who is authorized to issue a Fatwa. -------------- Role of the Media -------------- ¶8. (U) Most countries agreed that the media play an important role in promoting understanding between religions and cultures and cited ways to include the media in this dialogue. However, some sharply criticized the media's role and called for measures against media abuse, particularly in their portrayal of Islam. ¶9. (U) Saudi Arabia called for international laws regarding respect for religion and attacks on religious symbols. The OIC also called for legal provisions to prohibit defamation of religions and their sacred symbols to avoid "provocative attempts that poison relations between the adherents of different religions, under the guise of freedom of expression." Pakistan called for prohibition of hate literature and the "defamation of religious personalities under the pretext of freedom of expression." Malaysia, Kuwait, Cuba and Lebanon also noted the media's sometimes negative role, but stopped short of calling for restrictive legislation. -------------- Practical Solutions -------------- ¶10. (U) Most speakers called for continued dialogue and education in general terms. Nearly all speakers cited examples of interreligious and intercultural dialogue and harmony within their own nations and steps already taken nationally and regionally to achieve cooperation. Education was almost unanimously recognized as key to a solution. The majority expressed support for the work of The Alliance of Civilizations, an initiative of the UN Secretary-General, co-sponsored by Spain and Turkey, to urge governments and civil society to work to overcome prejudice and misperceptions. ¶11. (U) Several nations praised regional action plans, such as the Asia-Pacific Regional Interfaith Dialogue, which seek to increase connections, foster tolerance and improve media coverage. European countries expressed support for the EUROMED Barcelona process. ¶12. (U) Several countries, including the Philipines, Belarus, Vietnam and Syria, called for establishment and strengthening of a focal unit on interreligious and intercultural dialogue within the UN Secretariat. Belarus also suggested broader involvement of the UN Secretariat's ICT mechanism. Pakistan called for the establishment of a common school training diplomats and officials from nations representing different faiths to teach greater understanding of other religions and cultures. -------------- Dialogue as a Platform for Criticism -------------- ¶13. (U) Several speakers used the opportunity of the High Level Dialogue to criticize other nations. Nicaragua criticized powerful UN members for their "addiction to warfare", the UN for its inability to curb the "insane concept of preventive war in which the potential aggressor looks into his crystal ball to decide who will be the next USUN NEW Y 00000851 003 OF 004 target of its occupations and aggressions", and the Security Council for its failure to criticize powerful nations, even in cases of flagrant violations of the UN charter. ¶14. (U) Cuba accused global power elites of imposing their culture as part of a neo-colonial policy. Its representative stated that "today's world bears witness to genocidal wars that the powers of the North wage in their voracious pursuit of hegemonic dominance." Cuba alleged human rights violations committed "in the name of the so-called "war on terror." ¶15. (U) Azerbaijan used the platform to accuse Armenia of ethnic cleansing and genocide and to call for international cooperation for restoring the rights of Azerbaijani refugees. Serbia criticized the government of Kosovo. ¶16. (U) Syria used the platform to criticize current world trends. Its representative called the twentieth century the most violent, despite globalization and advances in science and communication. He pointed to colonial injustices against Afro-Asian and Latin American cultures and the first use of nuclear weapons. He called for an end to using religion for expansionism and settlement and for an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. UAE also called for a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. -------------- Panel Discussion with Civil Society -------------- 17.(U) Along with the plenary speeches, two panels comprised of members of civil society discussed interreligious and intercultural dialogue and current best practices. Many panel members called for turning dialogue into action and the need to respect human rights around the world. They stressed the need to use local leaders for successful dialogue and peace building. Several examples of local initiatives were presented. 18.(U) Many speakers addressed the role of the media. A Nigerian Imam criticized the media for lack of sensitivity to religion and culture. A speaker from a Spanish NGO called the clash of civilizations a "clash of ignorance" and argued that the media have an important role in changing misperceptions. A Sri Lankan journalist cited erroneous reports, such as initial attribution of the Oklahoma City bombing to Middle Eastern terrorist groups, as evidence that the media often report based on stereotypes. Although these reports are later proven false, he asserted that the damage is already done. 19.(U) Several speakers addressed the need for self-reflection within religions. A U.S. professor called for religions to examine extremism within their own communities. He argued that religions cannot deny that extremists are a part of their community, since they use their same text and teachings to preach extremism. Egypt's representative disagreed, arguing that he is Muslim, but has "nothing in common with those who kill in the name of God." Speaking for the U.S., Ambassador Christopher Ross called for two parallel dialogues: one between different religions and another, equally important, between moderates and extremists within a religion to seek a return to non-violence. 20.(U) The Philippines recommended the creation of a UN body organized for interfaith dialogue whose membership would include members of civil society. -------------- U.S.Statement: -------------- 21.(U) Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs Karen Hughes delivered a well-received statement focusing on the positive impact of religion. She stressed the importance of dialogue, education and exchanges to promote intercultural and interreligious understanding and to reduce misperceptions between groups. The full text is available at http://www.un.int/usa/press releases/20071004 225.html. 22.(SBU) Comment: While uplifting, this high-level dialogue is not likely to lead to a measurable improvement in USUN NEW Y 00000851 004 OF 004 interfaith or intercultural understanding. KHALILZAD