Address of H.E. Seyed Mohammad Khatami at La Trobe University
Mar 26, 2009   In the name of God
“Cruelty of remoteness” and “downfall of distances” are two expressions commonly used in the modern communications technology. Both expressions have been made in reference to the relationship between this land – Australia – and the rest of the world. When masterminds and technologists of communications realized how significantly the information technology could effect changes in the lives of humans and the modern society, they used this very example of Australia’s remoteness from other continents and came to the conclusion that unlike old times, no longer does the issue of distance prevent communication. “Cruelty of remoteness” which had once isolated this land, causing so much distress and hardship in life, has transformed in the interest of “downfall of distances” – which has opened windows to new opportunities.
I would look into this example as a suitable opening gambit to address a number of issues about “Dialog of Cultures and Civilizations”.
The pattern of information and communications technology, which lays the very physical foundation of the networking society – aiming to “reduce distances” and “modify borders of difference” on various arenas – can be analogous to the pattern of “Dialog of Cultures and Civilizations”, which lays the spiritual foundation of the world and is focused on understanding.
Generation of the networking society is regarded to have been an opening to major developments, while information and communications networks are believed to have prompted social, cultural and political activity in our age – a phenomenon that is in the process of generating a new epistemological geometry. Power, speed and intensity of the exchange of information form the basis of the networking society, and flexibility and convergence are its results. The networking society can be referred to as the hardware of the information age, while the dialog society can be referred to as the software of this age. One can come to the conclusion that the communications revolution, whatever its definition is, will alter distances.
The “networking society” and “world of dialog” will function as two new phenomena that stand against obstruction and blockage in today’s society and world.
The “dialog of cultures and civilizations” as a pattern seeks to replace wisdom for force in the area of international relations and is therefore a paradigm that works to stop human and social relations from being blocked. Elaboration on and clarification of this very concept, can open new horizons in areas inside and outside civilization. The pattern of “dialog of civilizations” would identify cultures and civilizations rather than separate individuals or even governments as its units. According to this very pattern, the criterion of evaluation is not the individual or closed societies but collective and understanding personalities. In other words, since dialog is hinged on openness, listening and empathy, it stresses the acceptance of variety and plurality and independence of identity and character of parties to a dialog.
In this process, the rule that governs any human encounter is in dialog. Therefore, any interaction between individuals, groups of thinkers, intellectuals and artists, interaction between civil and international organizations, and contacts between politicians will be based on the rule of dialog. What form the basis of such dialog are independent units, i.e. pluralistic cultural and civilizational sections. In the light of such process, parties to such dialog not only are recognized as independent individuals, but also use language and dialog at a communicational process to create a product, which is by far greater than what cultural and civilizational units can produce. No one can speak more about the capacities hidden in each culture and civilization than thinkers, scientists and artists. Thinkers, scientists and artists are therefore the heroes in the dialog ground. They can prompt dialog and an exchange of culture and thought at every area of civilization, and the ones who can attend to this significant subject in the framework of scientific, cultural and civil networks.
Genuinely speaking, nothing can create a world on the basis of dialog than the religious interpretations expressed by tolerant and realistic believers and religious leaders, the open-minded structures introduced by thinkers and theoreticians, cultural products generated in the hands of artists and scientific breakthroughs made by scientists. The messages created in each area of civilization are in the first place received and expressed by thinkers and open-minded leaders in that specific area. The next group of people who would understand and absorb such messages are philosophers, artists and intellectuals from other areas. These messages will then prompt appropriate reactions in other fields too. On the basis of such reasoning, we should accept that in the global approach to dialog of cultures and civilizations, thinkers, intellectuals and artists will be the first people who activate such dialog. These people themselves will be empowered in this paradigm and will be able to close the gap between the two languages of politics and thinking in effective international areas. Such kind of dialog will begin with acceptance of differences and end up in reduction of distances. An acceptance of the fact that the two sides are different, independent and equal is a prerequisite to dialog. Being respectful of the other side not as a tool but as a concern for “the other” being free, respectful and credible is the condition under which dialog will materialize. Doors of dialog will be closed as and when the rights of “the other” or “the others” will be overlooked.
Resorting to force, violence and intimidation, which are the most important threats in our era, is the product of non-dialog situations in which the viewpoints of “the other” and the essentiality and tools of dialog with “them” will be ignored. Terrorism, which is the outcome of an inauspicious marriage between blind prejudice and power to serve an organized delusion, is a clear example of such closed and self-centered situations.
Is terrorism anything other than using intimidating methods to reach political goals that will alienate others? So, it’s not important under which name it comes; it might even be (perpetrated) in the name of religion, art or science.
In spite of being worrisome, such menaces are not all the reality is about in our world. Chances of resorting to dialog and transitioning from an atmosphere of conflict into an environment of understanding are not few. Let us not have doubts that scientific and technical developments or in other words, the development of new software and hardware in our age, has opened doors of communication and dialog among cultures and civilizations. Attention to the new concept of dialog and its connection to the rapidly developing information and networking society has helped generate a new atmosphere in practice and theory. An opportunity for such dialogs to take place is not solely dependent on the exchange of information. The outcome of such dialogs will be a change in presumptions, creation of new procedures and generation of new opportunities and realities. Recognition of “the other” and promotion of other parties to equal standing in dialog is resulted from new epistemological balances and new horizons taking shape in theory and practice.
However, the dialog among cultures and civilizations, as a pattern in a new world in which humans will not only be secure but also feel satisfied and respected spiritually and physically must be agreed to by well wishers and thinkers as an approach. In order to set such an approach in motion, we will need to expurgate philosophical foundations and clarify the mental principles of dialog at academic levels. We will also need to make practical plans at the level of national, civil and international organizations. At these two areas, we are faced with significant questions, which we should present to experienced thinkers and intellectuals so that we can open clearer theoretical and practical horizons for the dialog among cultures and civilizations.
We should demonstrate why and how our world, despite its hard, intimidating and violence-stricken crust, is directed toward dialog deep in its cultural and intellectuals layers and identify the pioneers and frontrunners of such an approach. We should be able to shed more light on appropriate strategies that will lead to organizing and progressing such dialog. We should come to a better understanding of the roles and functions of organizations and groups at the national and international level that can effectively facilitate and advance dialog, and take leaps forward by composing the must do’s and don’t do’s of dialog in theory and practice.
I will open the discussion, to the best of my knowledge, and your viewpoints will provide a better opportunity to clarify and discuss in depth about such type of issues.
1- Why does the world have to pay attention to dialog inevitably? The first area that should be attended to is politics. The vast technological developments and emergence of the complicated processes of globalization have led to international threats being reflected in more complex forms. Global security has become vulnerable in non-dialog areas. Looking at the issue from this angle, we can point to the bitter incident that happened on 11 September 2001 as a turning point. That the country that had been safe from immense threats during the World War II was attacked by the most marginalized centers of today’s world draws an ambiguous image of our world. The threats and menaces that have appeared today are not preventable by resorting to old methods of using force or preemptive or even nuclear weapons. Under such circumstances, the world needs to surrender to the common sense view that the force relying on weapons and money will not lay the foundations of a secure life. Now all communities should join hands and stay committed to ethics and values of democracy and equality globally. Another fact that signifies dialog as a requirement is the widespread attention by social philosophies and sciences to dialog in recent decades. The dialog-oriented philosophers, sociologists, linguists and communications experts have developed the contemporary intellectual attitudes on the basis of the necessity and possibility of dialog.
2- Who are the frontrunners and pioneers of dialog at our age?
Developments in communications and cultural technologies in today’s world, whether we want or not, have opened doors of civilizations to one another. Under such circumstances, it’s the intellectuals and even the general public rather than politicians who hold a central role in global communications. Politics, in the traditional view, is regarded as contractionary, which more than anything causes a closing among areas of culture and civilization. With the opening and expansion of tools and means of communication both qualitatively and quantitatively, the cultural and civilizational areas have opened up and been submissive to dialog more than political areas. The expansion of such communication channels have led to the emergence of civil networks and societies in the world. These areas are the ones where predominant powers of the world can hardly use force or have any impact on because they are public areas where the public opinion has a central role. Therefore, it seems that with the thinkers, artists, intellectuals and civil organizations playing a role in intra- and extra-civilization layers, our world faces a much better opportunity to resort to dialog to accept the sovereignty of wisdom and ethics rather than force and domination.
3- Which approaches are more realistic in advancing dialog in today’s world?
Endorsement in 1999 by the United Nations of the proposal of “Dialog of Civilizations” as a global strategy has obliged not only the governments but also the international civil organizations to advance the cause at various levels. With the foundations laid, we should not let the threats of encounters cross the borders of governments and reach a civilizational level. The dialog of civilizations, therefore, should be advanced with all its requirements and clauses. I still believe that a global coalition for a peace based on justice and anti-terrorism campaign rather than coalition for war and violence, which has immersed the world into terror in recent years, is a practical way for materialization and deepening of dialog of civilizations.
4- What are the “must do’s” and “don’t do’s” in theory and practice that will help build dialog?
In order for dialog to take place, we are in dire need of general and inclusive philosophical, ethical and social rules. We will also need to prompt organizational and structural requirements.
Accomplishment of dialog of civilizations, in theory, is in contrast with positivistic dogmatic rules and modernistic certainties. It is also foreign to limitless skepticism shown by post modernists. For this very reason, one of the duties of thinkers supporting the theory of dialog of cultures and civilizations is to expurgate philosophical and social bases and clarify the intellectual principles of this very theory.
The dialog of civilizations is based on “permissibility” and “acceptance of differences”. Permissibility is a concept beyond negative toleration, which is a proposal in the modern age. We should not only tolerate others but also work with them. No nation or people can be marginalized under any philosophical, political or economic justification. In order to build and develop the world ahead of us, all humans and communities should be demanded to collaborate.
This approach, either at a national or international level, makes necessity of a review in realization of “the other” and rejection of common alienation of others a must. In order for the dialog to take place among civilizations, East and West, Islam and West and all parties involved in the dialog are required to become partners and parties to a conversation rather than being treated as subjects of a dialog. We should let go of the broken image of “the other” anywhere it be – in myths or tales, in literature and poetry or in economy and politics – giving a new power and language to cultures and civilizations by engaging in real dialog over real issues.
5- Forgetting the soul and being soaked in body and sticking to earth and overlooking the heavens, have not only made humans face innumerable problems, but have also made life tedious and void of sense and tenderness. Fortunately, attention by today’s humans to such a spiritual vacuum has made eras ready to hear spiritual messages of great religions and Divine teachings. This very fact has prepared the ground for dialog of cultures, civilizations and religions more than any time. Followers of great Divine religions are therefore advised to listen to this Verse of Qoran:
say: o people of the scripture! come to an agreement between us and you: that we shall worship none but Allah, and that we shall ascribe no partner unto him, and that none of us shall take others for lords beside Allah. and if they turn away, then say: bear witness that we are they who have surrendered (unto him). (Ale (Family of) Imran, Verse 64)
Monotheism, which is the spirit of all Divine religions and worshipping none but God, Who is the absolute beauty and wellness in religious interpretations, and rejection of human’s dominance over human, and emphasis on the intrinsic freedom and human’s respect before God are all issues that can not only become the subject of our dialog but also help us move toward building a better world.
Of course, having dialog to find a way for our world out of the very many issues it is faced with is something like a miracle; let us believe in this miracle