Contents

From the Dialogue of Cultures to the Alliance

of Civilizations: Today’s Difficult Issues

and the Future Visions

Dr. Moungi Bousnina(*)

Introduction

“A wall has fallen. Now we have to avoid that hatred and incomprehension erect another wall”. Thus Mr José Louis Zapatero, the Spanish Prime Minister, introduced his proposal, from the rostrum of the UN General Assembly, in September 2004, to build “an alliance of civilizations between the Western world and the Arab Islamic world, drawing on the spirit that reigned in Andalusia, where different cultures and religions once lived side by side.”

By putting forth his practical proposal, Mr Zapatero adds a new concept to the political, intellectual international scene in the beginning of this century, after it has teemed with new concepts in the like of “the clash of civilizations”, “ the dialogue among cultures and civilizations”, “globalization”, “the new world order”, and so forth.

For some, the term “alliance of civilizations” is complement to that of “the dialogue among cultures and civilizations”. And for others, the two terms do, rather, compete each other. The result is that, in many times, even the well-versed experts in the international law and interaction among cultures and civilizations find themselves with a tricky situation.

There is no doubt that one of the advantages of the present symposium is that it will enable us to elucidate opinions, enlighten ways to reflection, and bring closer the different views to ultimately reach a consensus over a new concept.

Through this paper, we deem it relevant to contribute our part, as an Arab Organization concerned with the issue of dialogue and positive interaction among cultures and civilizations, to define the two concepts of “alliance of civilizations” and “dialogue of cultures”, to reveal the aspects of complementarity and distinct features, and to present our theoretical and practical perceptions on the project of “alliance of civilizations” that has been proposed by Mr Zapatero.

At the outset, we give a linguistic definition of the term “alliance”, before moving to propound a set of difficulties raised by the expression “alliance of civilization”. Then we will explore the commonalities and the dividing lines between this expression and that of “dialogue among cultures and civilizations”.

After the theoretical framework, we will present a future Arab vision on the alliance of civilizations, in terms of its principles, objectives and working mechanisms, as well as the role the parties to alliance are expected to play. In that respect, we will capitalize on the Organization’s long experience in the field of cultures and civilizations.

First: Alliance of civilizations: theoretical difficulties

1/1 Term and concept

To consider the difficulties posed by the “alliance of civilizations” as a novel term in the political and intellectual scene, we will need first to consider the concept of “alliance” in its absolute meaning.

We find that the term “alliance” linguistically refers to a broad semantic field. For the purposes of our paper, we will content ourselves with only some of its relevant constituents:

- Generally speaking, alliance means that two or more parties engage in an alliance or a covenant by virtue of which each party supports the other party(ies). This applies to the field of politics, be it domestic politics (coalition of political parties) or foreign policy (military alliances among states).

- Alliance, especially in its political and military dimensions, means, implicitly-or explicitly in some times-, that it is directed towards fending off an enemy, a rival or a particular danger.

- The premise of alliance being that the allied parties have the same enemy, an agreement among them on the least principles, objectives and interests, is therefore necessary. And may be these elements are those which often define a common enemy.

- Therefore, in alliance parties should obviously meet the least degree of homogeneity, which is defined according to the nature of the concluded alliance and its underlying objectives and interests.

- Likewise alliance requires the parties to have an agreement on the means for action as well as the mechanisms for implementing such an alliance.

- Alliance in politics, as in the military field, may be temporary when the parties share interests or face the same enemy for a given period of time. It may be an alliance in the long term when its underlying objective reasons continue to exist or are governed by a prior agreement between the allies; such is the case in military alliances.

Based on the general concept of alliance, its contents and ramifications, we will attempt in the first part of this chapter to apply some of these contents to the concept of “alliance of civilizations”, then we will tackle some of the difficult issues posed by this new concept, in order to further elucidate it and to reach a common consensus over the alliance of civilizations. We will try to tackle some of these difficulties through providing answers to the following questions:

- Is the alliance of civilizations basically directed against terrorism?

- Does the alliance of civilizations only imply an alliance between the western world and the Arab Islamic world?

- Is the alliance of civilizations temporary?

- What is the difference between “dialogue of cultures and civilizations” and “alliance of civilizations”?

2/1 Alliance of civilizations:an alliance against terrorism?

The first difficult issue we propound in this context concerns the enemy against whom alliance is supposedly directed, considering that any alliance necessarily implies the existence of an enemy or a rival targeted by alliance, as we have mentioned before.

The obvious answer that comes first to the mind is that the enemy targeted in the case of “alliance of civilizations” is terrorism. That Mr Zapatero launched his call for “alliance of civilizations”, just after the tragic events witnessed by Spain on 11 March 2004, points to a close correlation between his initiative and the issue of terrorism, and makes of terrorism the central issue of alliance, at least at the early stages of the idea of alliance.

Following the announcement of this initiative, there have been many echoes in that sense. Of which, suffice it to mention the statement made by the Spanish Government’s Spokesman to the Egyptian weekly, Al-Ahram, in French, in July 2005, when he defined “alliance” as “a strategic response to the Jihadi movement in the medium and long terms”, which complements the security response. The security perception has dominated many an activity related to issue of alliance of civilizations. For instance, the symposium held in Madrid on 6-7 June 2005, on the theme “the alliance of civilizations: international security and global democracy”, points to the priority of addressing terrorism through the alliance of civilizations.

Yet terrorism was the springhead to the call for alliance, Mr Zapatero was clear enough when he tackled this phenomenon, in the UN General Assembly on 21 September 2004, and stressed the need to “combat the root-causes of this scourge, especially in a rational way”, explaining that “political and economic grievances should be removed to prevent terrorists from gaining popular support. The more people live in dignity, the safer we will be.”

That Mr Zapatero excluded rough-and-ready judgements suggesting the existence of a backward culture that produces violence is a good mark on his record. The Spanish Government’s Spokesman followed the same pattern when he pointed out, in the press interview mentioned earlier, that the present conflict is one between all civilized people, be they Muslims, Jews, Christians, Buddhists, agnostics and atheists; on the one hand, and “barbarians who kill innocents in Sharm-el-Sheikh, London and Madrid”, on the other. Thus the concept of “alliance of civilizations” started to evolve gradually, in terms of definition of the party, or the danger targeted by that alliance.

The declaration by the UN General Secretary on the adoption of the initiative of “alliance of civilizations” by the United Nations on 14 July 2005 states that the alliance of civilizations “seeks to forge collective political will and to mobilize concerted action at the institutional and civil society levels to overcome the prejudice, misperceptions and polarization that militate against such a consensus. And it hopes to contribute to a coalescing global movement which, reflecting the will of the vast majority of people, rejects extremism in any society, especially that the events of recent years have exacerbated mutual suspicion, fear and misunderstanding between Islamic and Western societies. This environment has been exploited by extremists throughout the world. The Alliance seeks to counter this trend by establishing a paradigm of mutual respect between civilizations and cultures.”

The concept of “alliance of civilizations” gained more scope and moved from an alliance against terrorism to an alliance against misunderstanding and misconceptions among cultures, in a bid to foster mutual respect. The concept expanded to reach the aspects of economic and social development, as well as their importance in relations among cultures. This only confirms the necessity to combat the root-causes and sources of terrorism, in the light of what has been said by Mr. Zapatero in the UN General Assembly.

Yet the block of enemies targeted by alliance is large enough, we deem it convenient to add to its ranks all those ill-intentioned in the West who harbour hatred against the Arab Islamic civilization and Islam, as part of their Islam-phobia campaign, which turns out, sometimes, to be quasi-systematic.

Worse still is the fact that these hostile, aggressive stands against the Arab Islamic culture come from many research centres and from weighty intellectuals exerting strong influence on the decision-making circles in some West countries.

Suffice it to mention here the thesis of “clash of civilizations” and the corollary analyses and arguments that specially underline the fatalistic confrontation between the Arab Islamic civilization and the Western civilization, and that such a conception would be a strategic determinant in the future of the way how powers should deal with the Arab Islamic Ummah.

However, the situation went beyond mere theoretical analyses in the centres of research and studies -though they play a dangerous part in western decision-making spheres- to reach popular, artistic and media levels. Now there is an increase in the number of books attacking the Arab Islamic Ummah, its civilization and its identity. These books are widely spread within western societies, and millions of copies are distributed in many languages. Disdain of the symbols of the Arab Islamic civilization continues unabated in the media. The recent case in point is the slanderous campaign waged by some Danish newspapers, under the pretext of freedom of speech, with scant regard, by the local authorities, to the outrage felt among Muslims.

3/1 Alliance of civilizations: an alliance against poverty and illiteracy?

If the alliance of civilizations is meant to be more comprehensive and to go beyond tackling terrorism, from results to causes, it should, first and foremost, be an alliance against poverty, against exclusion and marginalization, and against the yawing gap between the parties to the alliance at the economic, social and cultural levels.

In the Arab Islamic party of the alliance, many a situation deserve a special treatment, if alliance is to be balanced and to achieve its goals.

Here it would be sufficient to cite some indicators concerning the Arab world, to show the seriousness of the current situation, based on some researches, studies and statistics conducted by some Arab and international institutions:

-The seriousness of illiteracy in Arab countries is closely associated to population growth: illiteracy rates in Arab countries reached about 35.6% in 2005, compared with 18.3% worldwide.

-Poor schooling: millions of Arab children in the age of schooling do not go to school.

-Concerning illiteracy and the situation of schooling, women are mostly affected; which has a negative impact on the evolution of the Arab society both in the present and in the future.

- Poor access to higher education (less than 13%). This is a poor percentage as compared with the advanced countries (42%).

- Poor relation between the Arab citizen and culture in general, especially with the writing, reading and translation of books. A study conducted jointly by the League of the Arab States and the UN Development Programme showed that Arabs together produced less than 100 000 translations since the era of the Abbasid Khalif Mamoun until the end of the 20th century; which is the equivalent of what Israel produced in less than 25 years, or Brazil in 4 years, or Spain in just one year. An average of 100 books for every million persons in the world is translated every year. Spain, for instance, translates 250 titles for every million of persons.

On another side, the total number of written items represented in UNESCO includes 1300 titles in thirty languages, and only 35 titles in Arabic.

The UNESCO references show also that only 6881 books have been translated into Arabic since 1970 until the end of the 20th century. This is the equivalent of the number of books translated into Lithuanian over the same period, knowing that the number of Arabic-speaking people is more than 300 million persons, whereas the Lithuanian-speaking people do not exceed 4 million persons.

In the list of the languages into which most books have translated since the 1970, we see that Arabic comes at the 27th position just after the Modern Greek (spoken by 12 million persons), and the Estonian (spoken by only 1.1 million persons).

Languages that came first in the list are:

- German (spoken by about 128 million persons): 205 918 titles.

- Spanish (spoken by about 417 million persons): 150 312 titles.

-French (spoken by about 128 million persons): 132 270 titles.

The Arabic presence in the internet is weak, as it does not exceed 0.4% of the total languages used in the net, compared with 47% for English, 9% for Chinese, 8% for Japanese, 6% for German, 4% for Spanish and French, 3% for Italian, and 2% for Portuguese and Russian.

4/1 Alliance of civilizations: an alliance between the Western world and the Arab Islamic world?

If we clearly define our enemy under this alliance, we still face a second difficult issue, which is to define the parties to the proposed alliance.

It is clear that the idea of “alliance” as proclaimed by Mr Zapatero, on the rostrum of the United Nations (September 2004), then in the Arab Summit of Algiers (March 2005), suggests an alliance between the civilizations of the Western world and the Arab Islamic world, only.

That exclusive choice was justified by the fact that “events of recent years have exacerbated mutual suspicion, fear and misunderstanding between Islamic and Western societies. This environment has been exploited by extremists throughout the world. The Alliance seeks to counter this trend by establishing a paradigm of mutual respect between civilizations and cultures” (excerpt of the UN Secretary General’s announcement of the establishment of a High Level Group for Alliance of Civilizations).

Though there is a clear focus on the Western and Arab Islamic worlds in some preliminary approaches of the theme of “alliance among civilizations”, some indicators that emerged during the development of the project, especially since its adoption by the United Nations, call upon us today to look into a broader alliance of parties.

At the level of written texts, we find that the sentence “alliance of civilizations of the western and the Arab Islamic world”, contained in the speech made by Mr Zapatero in the UN General Assembly, has been reduced to “alliance of civilizations” in the UN documentation, which apparently gives to alliance further scope to cover more than two cultural spaces.

On another side, the communiqué of the UN Secretary General on the formation of a High Level Group for Alliance of Civilizations does not specify that the mission and objectives should involve proposals and working programmes exclusively destined to the Western world and the Arab Islamic world. Rather, it leaves room for interaction among all cultures and civilizations.

In addition, the Members of the High Level Group for Alliance of Civilizations who have been recommended by the United Nations cover almost every part of the world and more than one cultural sphere: this is another indicator that the parties to alliance implicitly go beyond the Arab and Islamic spheres.

Overall, the expansion of the parties to the alliance is very likely, and it turns out gradually to become a reality.

5/1 Alliance of civilizations: is it a temporary alliance?

If we suppose that the proposed alliance has resulted particularly from terrorism, and concerned two particular parties directly related to the issue of terrorism, it might be understood that such an alliance would be temporary and would disappear once its causes disappear.

But considering that “alliance of civilizations” has moved from an alliance against terrorism to a larger one against misunderstanding among cultures, poverty, illiteracy, exclusion and marginalization, as we have seen earlier, must strip this alliance of its temporary character and include it in a long term context, considering the enormous efforts that need to be deployed. That is, in fact, what sustain alliance.

6/1 from dialogue of cultures to alliance of civilizations: Is there an added value? Or what are the commonalities and dividing lines?

The last difficult issue I would like you to examine concerns the added value supposed to be brought by the concept of “alliance of civilizations and cultures”, compared with that of “dialogue among civilizations”, which becomes common place in the world, following the proclamation by the United Nations of the year 2001 as an international year for dialogue among cultures and civilizations.

In fact, the writings concerning alliance of civilizations are not that abundant to allow us today to make comparison with the concept of “dialogue”, which gathered over the last five years a variety of writings looking to the subject from different angles. Therefore it would be convenient to wait the report of the “UN High Level Group for Alliance of Civilizations”, formed by the UN Secretary General in September 2005. The report is due to be submitted to the United Nations in December 2006.

However, the few indicators provided by some statements made in the circle of Zapatero, following the announcement of his initiative, or through the relevant UN documents, especially the resolution to set up a high level group, allow us to draw some conclusions; of which mention should be made of the following:

1-Attaching special importance to the security issue in “alliance of civilizations”, and considering it as the main groundwork and ultimate goal of alliance; the first goal of the High Level Group for Alliance of Civilizations is “to provide an assessment of new and emerging threats to international peace and security; in particular the political, social and religious forces that foment extremism”. A second goal was added to the first one and stipulates “To identify collective actions, at both the institutional and civil society levels, to address these threats.”

The security concerns are present both in the start and the final destination of goals. The report of the High Level Group for Alliance of Civilizations due to be presented to the UN Secretary General late in 2006, will contain, among the proposals listed in the working document prepared by the UN General Secretariat, aspects concerning the ways “to foster awareness in all societies that security is indivisible and is a vital need for all, and that global cooperation is an indispensable prerequisite for security, stability and development.”

2- Focus on the practical aspect of the project of “alliance” and on the necessity that it leads to concrete actions. Chief among the goals set for UN High Level Group are: “(to recommend) a practicable program of action for states (at national, regional, and local levels), international organizations, and civil society which it hopes will assist in diminishing hostility and in promoting harmony among the nations and societies.”

In this context, the Group was requested to draw up a report for the second half of the year 2006 that includes practical measures, such as proposing special mechanisms to improve understanding among societies, or proposing measures that would both help the educational systems to encourage knowledge and understanding of other cultures and religions, and present workable proposals to advance mutual security.

Focus on concrete actions in the “alliance of civilizations” was probably meant to avert the theoretical and utopian aspect that has dominated the project of “alliance of cultures and civilizations” during the first years of its launching. Fortunately, this aspect has been overcome during the last years, especially through the international symposium held in Rabat in June 2005, in which ALECSO took part side by side with other international, regional and national organizations, with the aim of reaching concrete actions that materialize dialogue among cultures on the ground.

If we move beyond these peculiarities that set “the alliance of civilizations” apart from “the dialogue of cultures and civilizations”, we still find many common points between “alliance” and “dialogue”, especially at the level of principles underlying both of them. Chief among these principles that have translated into the many symposia held on that subject as well as the abundant writings they came with, are competitiveness, acceptance of others’ specificities, the respect for others’ ethics, and the rejection of rough-and-ready judgements and the supremacy of one culture over another.

Second: alliance of civilizations and visions for the future

Having propounded the difficult issues related to “the alliance of civilizations”, we come to admit that such an alliance, though it is based on aspects basically associated with security and with the Western and Arab-Islamic worlds, is after all an alliance of mankind at large towards shaping a better future for all, in an atmosphere that makes for understanding among cultures and civilizations, and provides opportunities for all to live a descent life.

Before dwelling on the theoretical and practical perceptions of that alliance, it is necessary to call each and every party of alliance to initiate a dialogue with the self, so that it can be fully ready to contribute to alliance with the other party.

1/2 Arabs and dialogue with the self

We have to recognize that the Arab party needs more than ever before to engage in a dialogue with its self. This is exactly the same call issued by the experts’ meeting that was recently held by ALECSO (January 2006) in Abu Dhabi, to formulate an Arab-Islamic stand towards dialogue among cultures and civilizations.

Most salient of the conclusions of the said meeting is that “dialogue of Arabs and Muslims with the self should precede dialogue with others or should go hand in hand with it. These two kinds of dialogue should also rest on a deep belief in cultural multiplicity, knowledge and accountability of the self, development of reference frameworks for constructive dialogue with others, rejection of despotism and all forms of ethnic and religious discrimination, and the adoption of civil governance able to bring about social justice and sustainable human development. Dialogue with the self aims to preserve cultural diversity in the Arab world within unity, openness onto world culture, rejection of all forms of fanaticism, self-confinement, haughtiness and racism; the acceptance of others; the fostering of the spirit of tolerance and the respect for spiritual and cultural heritage of all peoples.

Dialogue with the self requires, first and foremost, a self-criticism of the current economic, political, social and cultural situation of Arabs. No Arab or Muslim can portrait himself in dialogue with others as having a complete image free from any negative traits. Therefore, it is necessary to make a positive, deep criticism of the prevailing Arab Islamic culture, and to return to the Arab Islamic heritage, to read it critically and to find its shining aspects, consisting in rationalism, openness and tolerance which can be used as ingredients for shaping a new civilizational project, and building a balanced, constructive dialogue with others.

This requires Arab and Muslim intellectuals to dive in their heritage and to read it with a critical mind building on the modern scientific methods, tools and theses. In that way, they would grasp the evolution witnessed by their heritage and appreciate their Arab Islamic culture that contributed to the West culture and its great scientific achievements.

Dialogue with the self also requires us to look at the shining pointers in our Arab-Islamic culture so that we recognize that we are part and parcel of the modern human civilization which benefited many peoples of the world more than Arabs and Muslims themselves. Arab and Muslim intellectuals are invited to engage in a positive dialogue with a scientific and rational mind, which is a prerequisite for dialogue on equal footage with modern universal cultures.

2/2 What does the Arab Islamic world expect from the Western world?

If the Arab-Islamic world needs to prepare for the expected alliance through a dialogue with the self, the other parties to alliance, including the Western world, should equally launch a self-criticism and revision.

It is worth mentioning in that respect that the Western culture involves two contradictory trends. One believes in the Western culture as being the centre stage of the world, which means that this culture is the basis for the progress witnessed by humanity and that its intellectual and doctrinal values constitute the solid foundations for that progress. This implies that the values of other civilizations, including the Arab-Islamic civilization, are backward and do only hinder progress and evolution.

The proponents of that trend believe that it would be logical that the Arab-Islamic world get rid of its cultural and civilizational specificities and adopt western values, if it is to catch up with progress.

It is a well-known fact that such an individualistic, dominant perception set the intellectual basis for colonialism, and still provides a framework for action of the major powers in today’s world.

The endless evolution witnessed in the fields of communication, media, the internet, and the sweeping phenomenon of globalization with its corollary, especially the concept of “culture merchandizing”, do only entrench and spread this perception.

The second trend that the Western culture involves is the humanist trend, which contradicts the previous trend.

The advocates of this trend believe in the importance of other cultures and civilizations and in the rich contribution of Arab and Islamic civilization to human civilization, in many fields.

Though weight of the humanist trend is important in Western civilization, the first trend is most dominant under the current circumstances of the today’s world.

Suffice it to scrutinize the publications of the neo-conservative movement, including researches, analyses and statements of its leaders in the United States, as well as the publications of what has come to be known as the “néo-réacs” movement, which makes recurrent mention of the concept of Islam-phobia. One Western strategic analyst has even written a book on “the Fourth World War”.

When we study all these works, analyses and the growing rightist extremist trends in the West, we come to believe in the need for an awakening in the Western world at the hands of “the humanist trend”, so that “alliance of civilizations” becomes a reality, and not merely an expression of good faith. This requires us, we Arabs and Muslims, to encourage all Western initiatives supporting the establishment of solid relations among the Arab-Islamic and Western civilizations.

3/2 Alliance of civilizations: from theory to practice

When the parties to alliance display readiness to work together, they should then agree on the principles, objectives and working mechanisms for alliance.

Principles of alliance:

Most important of the foundations for alliance is finding common ground for understanding. This requires commitment to the rules and principles of rational dialogue. These include:

- A critical, deep grasp of others’ cultures based on original sources. Dialogue, not to say alliance, requires thorough and rational knowledge of others’ present, history and heritage. It requires developing institutional frameworks building on the experiences of dialogue meetings where Arabs and Muslims took part in the last years. The conclusions and documents of these meetings should serve as a guide to future action.

- Getting rid of the inferiority complex, the guilt complex, the apologetic attitudes and defensiveness. With a balanced dialogue associated with intellectual and ethical integrity, the common ground for positive interaction becomes more consolidated and leads towards the intended alliance. The principles of alliance involve finding human values among the parties to dialogue, the acceptance of difference, the respect for multiplicity, commitment to human freedom and fending off all attempts to impose values and principles on others.

- Adopting scientific methods in a dialogue conducive to alliance, and commitment to objectivity as a way to know others with a view to positively interacting with them and contributing together to shaping a better future through the development of education system, scientific and academic research, and activation of cultural and knowledge exchange among peoples.

Proposed objectives of alliance:

At the current stage, some of the most salient objectives sought by Arabs and Muslims in their alliance with others are:

- Establishing foundations for peace, security and justice in the world; contributing to a genuine prosperity of all peoples; and adopting a development policy to face up all forms of religious extremism, racial discrimination and political hegemony.

- Fending off all forms of racism, and finding human common denominators with others.

- Finding a climate of détente and stability for the human kind, and rejecting bloody conflicts and all forms of violence.

- Respecting local cultures and the right to develop them, to preserve their specificities and their traditional heritage.

- Building a solid basis for a renewable dialogue resting on the acceptance of others’ difference; the promotion of the culture of openness, tolerance and peace; the setting up of new world bodies to serve humanity and achieve prosperity; developing the existing bodies to ensure the settlement of long-standing conflicts through diplomatic means and safeguarding the peoples’ rights according to the UN laws and the international law.

- Consolidating new forms of fruitful cooperation and rejecting recourse to force, hegemony and occupation.

- Setting up joint Arab-Islamic and Western scientific institutions dedicated to constructive dialogue and made up of intellectuals specialized in politics, economics, history, sociology, theology, philosophy and other human sciences.

- Launching permanent media campaigns through media, with the participation of well-known journalists and researchers in order to publicize the best ways to conduct a balanced, fruitful dialogue with others.

Ingredients for the success of alliance

For the alliance of civilizations to succeed, the parties thereto should commit themselves to a set of ethics, particularly:

- The respect for cultural multiplicity of all peoples, starting from the recognition of the fact that peoples are different in colour, race and culture, and that human diversity is the source for enriching the human existence and culture.

- Avoiding pre-conceived ideas; seeking to know others as they are; finding common ground; accepting others’ specificities and rejecting divisive factors.

- Adopting rationalism as a principle in dialogue and alliance; favouring scientific method over outburst of reactions and emotions; and practicing self-criticism.

- Finding and highlighting the positive aspects in cultures; developing the sense of self-criticism to avert haughtiness and disdain of others; formulating an image of the self and of the other within a framework of deep and mutual understanding; and consolidating the common desire for defending the human values that ensure creative, positive interaction among peoples and cultures.

- Ensuring that the dialogue conducive to alliance is calm and free from all forms of fanaticism and nervousness; opting for intellectual probity; rejecting bias, selectiveness in the application of international laws and instruments; avoiding the use of alliance to achieve immediate goals, tight regional or international policies, temporary international balances or hegemony over others.

- Reconsidering the prevailing concepts of progress and backhandedness; rejecting any attempt to link them to a specific religion or culture; transcending stereotypical images; adopting a scientific, methodological and documented reading of the political and social situation.

Conclusion:

This is indeed how the Arab League Educational, Cultural and Scientific Organization perceive the requirements of the “alliance of civilizations”, and some of its objectives, mechanisms and conditions. To present this perception, we have drawn on the long experience we have accumulated in the field of dialogue among cultures and civilizations. This experience has enabled us to build bridges between the Arab world and various cultural spheres, from Europe, to Latin America, Russia, Germany, China and Africa.

In the light of the perceptions gathered so far, I believe that this important symposium will successfully contribute to the action led by the UN High Level Group towards calling for the convening of a world summit to propound the project of “alliance of civilizations”, so that Mr Zapatero’s call does not remain a cry in the desert, and so that other “walls of hatred and misunderstanding” can replace the Berlin Was that has collapsed.

Thank you for your attention.

(*) Director General of the Arab League Educational, Cultural and Scientific Organization –ALECSO

Publications of the Islamic Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

-ISESCO- 1428H/2007 A.D