Agree to Differ

[

] 94

the clash of civilizations by enthusiastically adopting the May

1999 Tehran Declaration of Dialogue among Civilizations that

categorically rejected the thesis. The OIC Tehran Declaration

was itself a speedy follow-up to the General Assembly of the

United Nations’ proclamation of 2001 as the United Nations

Year of Dialogue among Civilizations.

The need for such an event had been proposed by the

Islamic Republic of Iran under President Khatami, in the

wake of the controversy surrounding Huntington’s thesis

and the various international seminars on ‘civilizational

dialogue’ organized by the University of Malaya’s Centre

for Civilizational Dialogue organized in 1995 and 1996.

The first seminar, on dialogue of civilizations between

Islam and Confucianism, had a lasting impact on Muslim-

Confucianist relations. It inspired similar dialogues in

Malaysia, Indonesia and China and the formation of study

circles aimed at deepening the subject of the dialogue.

The second seminar, on civilizational dialogue between

Japan, Islam and the West, was notable for the presence of

Huntington as an invited speaker, and for the participation

of several Japanese scholars.

The Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought

in Amman, Jordan, was internationally prominent in

its interfaith activities in the 1990s, creating the Royal

Institute for Interfaith Studies in 1994. But it was in the

first decade of the twenty-first century, under its Director,

Prince Ghazi, that it attracted global attention, especially

through its 2007 high profile ‘Common Word between

Us and You’ initiative that declares the common ground

between Christianity and Islam and calls for peace between

their respective followers. At the dawn of the new century

many new Muslim intercultural dialogue outfits, both

governmental and non-governmental, appeared on the

national and international scenes. Among the prominent

non-governmental ones are the International Institute of

Dialogue among Civilizations founded by Khatami (2006)

based in Tehran and the Gulen-inspired intercultural

dialogue outfits, namely the Istanbul-based Journalists and

Writers Foundation, the Washington-based Rumi Forum

and the New Delhi based Indialogue Foundation. Notable

government-funded interreligious dialogue outfits include

the Doha International Centre for Interfaith Dialogue in

Qatar (2008), the International Institute of Advanced

Islamic Studies, Malaysia (2008) patronized by Malaysia’s

former Prime Minister, Tun Abdullah Badawi, and the

King Abdullah Bin Abdulaziz International Centre for

Interreligious and Intercultural Dialogue (2011) in Vienna,

founded by Saudi Arabia.

At the global level, Muslim governments took fresh

initiatives to advance the cause of world peace through

interreligious and cross-cultural dialogue. In 2005 the

Prime Ministers of Turkey and Spain launched the Alliance

of Civilizations which was later adopted as a United

Nations initiative. Mainly in response to the atmosphere

of mutual distrust, fear and polarization that characterized

the global community in the post-11 September era, the

initiative was aimed at reversing this trend “by garnering

a broad coalition to foster greater cross-cultural toler-

ance and understanding.” Muslims generally welcome the

United Nations initiative, with many governmental organi-

zations and NGOs devising programmes and establishing

educational institutions to pursue its aims and objectives.

The European scene

Every contemporary society faces the challenge of how to

deal with ethnic and religious diversity and pluralism so that

citizens belonging to different ethnic and religious groups

can live in peace and dignity. Basically, in every society

we see two different responses to this diversity and plural-

ism: to reject it or behave as if it could somehow be erased

(a response that usually comes from within the majority

community); or to accept the fact and confront its reality.

Muslims in Europe have to face the challenge of dealing with

both responses. The former response has manifested itself in

many different guises collectively referred to as Islamophobia,

the phobia of Islam’s danger to European society from within.

The other response, which implies acceptance of living in a

pluralistic society by both indigenous and immigrant commu-

The way Muslims conduct their intrafaith and intercultural relations can have great bearings on the future

Image: SOASCIS

gree

iffer