Why does this page look this way?
It appears that you are using either an older, classic Web browser or a hand-held device that allows you to view our content but may not work with every feature of our site. If you are using an older browser, please upgrade for the best experience.
Home |
Site Index |
FAQs |
Contact |
RSS
|
Podcast
home > by publication type > transcripts > The Nexus of Religion and Foreign Policy toward an Alliance of Civilizations [Rush Transcript; Federal News Service]
Email
| Speaker: | Jorge Sampaio, High Representative, United Nations Alliance of Civilizations; Former President, Republic Of Portugal (1999-2006) |
|---|---|
| Presider: | Chris Seiple, President, Institute for Global Engagement |
October 16, 2007
Council on Foreign Relations
Washington, DC
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 16, 2007
CHRIS SEIPLE: Good afternoon, or good evening, I should say. Welcome to the Council on Foreign Relations, and thank you for coming to this meeting.
My name is Chris Seiple. I'm the president of the Institute for Global Engagement. We're a religious freedom organization here in town. And it is my great honor and privilege to engage President Sampaio from -- former President Sampaio from Portugal in a conversation today about the new initiative from the UN on the Alliance of Civilizations.
I want to note that, contrary to most CFR meetings, this meeting is on-the-record, and there are press here in the back of the room. And I would also ask that you turn off your cell phones and crack berries and things like that such that we can focus on the conversation at hand.
What I would like to do is ask the president three sort of basic questions to give you a context for where he's coming from and what this alliance looks like. And then we will open the floor for questions and answers. And we will, as usual, close promptly at the appointed time, which is 7:30 this evening.
So with that let me ask the first question of the good president, and that is this: Mr. President, could you give us some background about how you came to this point and your affiliation prior to in the UN and what are your thoughts as you take on this new post?
The second question that we're going to go to after that is, what is the -- what is his vision for the alliance. This is a brand new initiative. It's been talked about for a number of years since the high level group was convened two years ago under the co-sponsorship of Spain and Turkey. And what is this actually going to look like? There is a new implementation plan that has just been published. How does that take form? And what is his vision for how the different players around the world come together, state and nonstate actors.
And then the third question is going to be a question that we Americans have trouble dealing with, but is a part and function of the alliance, And that is the issue of religion. Religion is a part of the problem and a part of the solution these days. And Americas in particular have a tough time talking about it. And we'd like to hear how the UN is beginning to address religion, not as a -- the sole problem, not as the sole answer, but something that necessarily plays into the discussions and solution sets that we must wrestle with in this new century.
So those are the three questions. And with that I will turn it over to President Sampaio.
JORGE SAMPAIO: Good afternoon to everyone. May I thank the council for having this possibility, and of course to Professor Seiple for being here with me on this side of the table.
The only thing I can say to soften the eventual criticism is I'm a subscriber to your review. That's the only thing to give a positive note. And I have taken a lot of inspiration from that.
My background is somewhere in the CV attached to the paper about this meeting. I won't develop that. I'm a lawyer by background, and now a retired politician with two United Nations hats. The first one is really not actually have to do with this was the -- Mr. Kofi Annan's demands and requests so that I could be a special representative or envoy for the fight against TB, because it was considered that this deadly pandemic really had no political clout or was more or less forgotten. We leave that aside.
Then this year, following the process that Professor Seiple was mentioning, I was confronted with the alliance and the secretary general, and Mr. Ban Ki-moon asked me to be the high representative who is the personal reference of the high level report as you mentioned. And this is why I'm here now.
First of all, why this initiative? It was started by two speeches in 2005 by the prime minister of Spain and the prime minister of Turkey after some events we all remember. And since -- then there was this -- Mr. Kofi Annan picked it up and transformed it into a United Nations initiative. He nominated this high level group which issued a report in November 2006. This is at the Internet. I think it's an interesting report, but I will not go back to that now. You have it available everywhere; I'm sure it's here.
And ever since then -- and this is the only kind of chronology I will mention 00 we had to start a secretariat, which is a small secretariat in New York, and I still continue in Lisbon. We had a ministerial meeting with all the foreign ministers and the countries who are the sole members, apart from organizations. The membership is countries plus organizations. We have a very interesting development there, because it has increased recently to a very important number of 70-something countries apart from all the other organizations, UNESCO, Council of Europe, Arab League, OIC, et cetera, et cetera.
And now we're preparing the annual forum which will take place in Madrid in January. An of course meanwhile the implementation plan was put forward, and I will not go into that. I will answer questions on that if necessary because you have all that in the Internet, and the implementation plans are not -- it doesn't mean that we do that. We hope we will do that. And of course reports at the end of the day are better than to -- simply talking about the implementation plan.
Since we live in a very complex world, and -- where polarized perceptions often lead to violence and conflicts, and there are lots of divides in the world, whether cultural, religious, ethnic, political, economic, social. And of course all these are very often, increasingly -- and that's the point -- perceived as religious and cultural fault lines opposing to begin with West and the Islam, and this divide, so to say, does cover lots of intricate situations. But it does threaten international stability, and of course it affects human security.
Although human security is something that means very different things to different people, I think that everyone would accept that conflicts, interpersonal and inter-community violence, international terrorism, poverty, growing inequalities, cultural and religious divides, tensions of all sorts, in fact have posed before us a new human security agenda.
And the alliance in fact looks to all of this, and concentrates on the needs to in fact address the cross-cultural tensions, address the religious tensions, and at the same time think that borders are no longer isolation kinds of walls, because these things travel inside the same territory, outside the same territory, regionally, et cetera. And this is why the alliance in a way, after it has been launched, has -- you are all familiar with dozens of initiatives of this type. But this is a United Nations initiative. It was embraced by the United Nations. And it's getting a lot of interest. And it's just beginning. And therefore this interest is parallel to what it means.
So it intends to be, the background here is to address the divides I've mentioned, and to find answers to the fears that affect our societies. And in fact how can governments, how can civil society, how can entities like the Council of Europe or UNESCO, help in trying to meet this challenge of living together in a globalizing world?
I would say that this is a generic phrase, but this is what we pretend to do. And of course there is, we have to face it, for -- at the present time you have a new anxiety about -- towards Islam and the Muslim cultures which has developed. And we are now confronted also at the same time with the fact that Islamophobia is a normal feature of our societies, particularly in America, particularly in Europe. And I direct my attention now to Europe in a way.
And of course at the same time anti-Americanism, anti-European, anti-Western criticism, is increasing. So we have to understand that our complex societies are in fact divided, inside each country, regionally. And there are many conflicts which have their roots in these examples I've been doing.
First of all when we speak about, for example -- or the West or Muslim or Islam -- we are not referring to a monolith. We are referring to a huge and complex mosaic of communities, as your compatriot, Mr. Grigorian, who has something to do with this building, would necessarily tell you.
And I think this is specially very interesting to note in the migration that has taken place in Europe. We do have 13 million Muslims, and all this is different, from France to Britain, from Britain to Germany, from Germany to Portugal, from Portugal to Spain. There are tendencies which push things in the same direction, but they have different origins, and not necessarily a reference to where their parents came from. But I will not develop this at this moment.
So the basic -- one of the basic things is that intolerance and discrimination exist everywhere. And it does -- they do also exist in Muslim societies of course, and let alone between different Islamic communities. But we can see that for example in some of the countries we know very well. And why should I detail more on this.
So the starting point of the alliance initiative, AOC initiative, is this crisis of -- and polarization of perceptions and behavior. So you could ask me, I've been asked this, but what on earth are you going to do more than others? And I think this is a very correct question.
The hat is different in the sense that we are inside the United Nations system, and I think the system is important. And I don't think this is the object of the debate. But we must have an activity which is results-oriented. I mean, the approach has to be results-oriented, and of course focused on deliverables.
And this is -- and this in fact was perceived by the high level group in the sense that they, trying to address this divide, and apart from conferences that address it, they propose to concentrate their attention on the aspects of education, media, youth and migrations, as a process, a middle term, a long term process that if we have the right options in these directions then of course we're doing something to make this divide less important.
So results oriented, focus on deliverables, and therefore practical action if possible. So we think that the alliance can play an important role in those four fields I have mentioned.
The second point is, we have to build partnerships. I mean, the idea that someone comes in, discovers powder in terms of the first time -- many things exist of this type. There are hundreds of organizations throughout the world who address this type of thing. So therefore we have to build partnerships with international agencies, civil society, private sector, and of course officials also at the same time.
And we have to work in close collaboration with all the partners I've mentioned, both within and outside the United Nations system. I have been going around since April speaking with institutes, people at large, professors, scholars, entities, and I see without exaggeration, I mean, a scientific council, and -- a certain interest, in the sense that what kind of new products can you help selling in relation to this difficult divide?
So the third point I wanted to mention is that we do have to incorporate a fundamental political dimension. And trying to see that we, by means of proposing practical ideas, or, let's repeat, practical proposals, to promote intercultural dialogue and better understanding between people, we are helping to a certain extent the political environment where in fact many of these questions have, at least for the short term and the middle term, they will find their -- the necessary solutions.
But here comes an important distinction, because we are not here to substitute the existing multilateral or bilateral mechanisms of political solutions to the problem. We can help in presenting some of them with the cultural and religious divides attenuated, or we can, after a solution has been found by the proper institutions, whatever you think about, conferences like those proposed or in the framework of the Quartet, or those proposed by United Nations in general, we can help in consolidating some of the solutions that meanwhile have been found.
Why do I mention now the ministerial meeting of the last, the 26th of September meeting in New York, where many were present. And as I said before, there are, the members are more than 70 countries now at this moment, and several institutions. I will not go back to that. You can find that in the AOC Internet web site.
I propose to the ministers this, because I thought it was too simple to come in and say, now I'm a member of the alliance. Well, it's pretty nice, states through their presidents or prime ministers or foreign ministers write letters. I like to receive those letters because it means that the membership is increasing. But I really want commitment. And from now, from the September meeting in New York, until the forum in January, I want some answers, in the sense that that means that countries as members feel that they have a responsibility because if they don't feel that they have a responsibility, then we have to look somewhere else. And then we will have a problem.
So at least my requests were as follows. The first one is I think the more important one, with all that it represents. I want to create or the member states create or strengthen national strategies for cross-cultural dialogue. In other words, if we have countries or states as members, what on earth are they going to do to make cross-cultural dialogue better? What are your commitments? Tell us what are the commitments?
And then of course we hope that we can collaboration with you. And we then see that the alliance decentralizes, and it's not just a high representative and his secretariat which fortunately -- fortunately in terms of expenditure -- is a small one. But there are initiatives related to the alliance assumed by the states themselves. And therefore this would mean leadership of the member states in addressing the fundamental problems I have mentioned before in a very summarized way. That was the first challenge.
The second one is, the challenge I addressed to international organizations, I've mentioned those who were there, and those who I hope will also be there in the future. And this is instead of watching over the shoulder, and feel that we might be rivals or vice versa, we need charts for partnering with the alliance, and vice versa, too, in other words. So from here until the forum I hope that we find -- and I think that there are positive steps taking place -- find alliances or find partnerships to work towards results, and of course to have roles and programs in relation to the need to bridge these divides I mentioned, and to promote cross-cultural dialogue.
Some of the relevant partners who are well established organizations in fact see that instead of being afraid, and this is I say a very positive development in recent months, instead of being afraid, I would be saying that we have another competitor. My work was to say, we have no competition here whatsoever. What I think would be as a good development is to bridge our capacities and see what we can do to multiply instead of to do the other way around. So I hope that this will at least start a few programs. I will refer to the two programs that we have. But we have to add, and not to subtract.
The third point is, we honestly need a coordinator or a focal point of the alliance in the countries who are members of this alliance. We need to have a Mr. So and So, or Mrs. So and So or Madame So and So. She or he is our focal point. And so in fact -- alternatively the focal point coordinates activities of the alliance in this respective country, and of course is the so-called -- delivers the capacity to develop initiatives at the national level or even at the regional level and in contact with the secretariat.
Now to -- to give you two ideas without -- two facts. What are the projects we are developing at the moment? All this is starting at great rhythm because we have the forum in January, where many, many people of different capacities -- entities, foundations, civil society, ONGs will be invited. We have two initiatives which were referred before. One is what we call the clearinghouse of knowledge and materials, about regional networks cooperation networks, and successful cross-cultural projects that have taken place.
And of course this -- this can be used as a practical tool for government; can be used as -- for those who want to launch projects. Don't repeat that, because that's done over there, but why don't you merge your activities with this one and benefit from their experience, and not to -- to provide knowledge, to provide the best practices, try to go around some of the things that have not worked well. But in any case, to -- which is important, and we pretended to be user friendly -- links to organizations, examples, et cetera.
What are the themes to be included in this clearinghouse? Well, regional fora for interfaith and intercultural dialogue and cooperation; media literacy programs; training programs for journalists in cross-cultural news coverage; and curricula for teaching about religions; and human rights education programs.
The other program we are developing starting, and I think it can be very interesting, we need a rapid response media mechanism. What is the rapid response media mechanism? It is a network of high profile personalities and -- who will -- or can be mobilized in terms, in moments of great difficulty to address the issues in a way in which in fact dialogue and cross-cultural attitudes can be developed.
I give you the example which in Europe was very striking. And here too the so-called episodes of the Danish cartoons. If we have -- if we have the capacity to answer that, in all sorts of televisions, open ads, et cetera, then we would develop a new understanding on that subject with all the diversified opinions and problems. And I think that issues like this can appear at any moment.
So we need this network of personalities. We need to mobilize people in this respect. And of course we also will -- I won't, for lack of time, and to provoke, or to allow discussion, I will just now mention the annual forum -- I have mentioned it before -- is very important moment to -- in fact apart from overall discussions with well known speakers, we love that, that is very important. But we have to, in the two days meeting, we have to develop that meeting and finish that meeting with the commitment I have mentioned before, because otherwise it's just another episode of talk, small talk. What are you going to do? What programs are you willing to promote? And benefit from experiences, those who have been conducting this kind of attitude. For example, what is this -- this review doing? I mean that's an example. And what are the results of this attempt?
So we hope that this will be not just another conference -- everyone hopes that, of course, before the conference at every conference -- but nevertheless, I think that if we have a results-oriented meeting, then we can -- then we can help develop a spirit of mobilizing different structures and different people from different places and different ideologies to in fact address this basic and fundamental problem. I mean, we need to live in peace. This is a very banal statement. And of course we are members -- all members with different opinions of the same kind of personality, I mean, when it comes down to the basics, the right to life, the right to live in the proper framework.
Then I just wanted to mention, stimulated by Professor Seiple, one point, and very quickly, I shall not go beyond, yeah, three minutes, here being that we have to find, address, the complex issues of religion, politics, the alliance and peace. And the fact that if religion is a factor in many contemporary crises, this -- I'm quoting from an article I wrote about peace a few days ago, or a few weeks ago -- the fact that religion is a factor does not necessarily mean that it is the trigger that initiating -- initiated some of these crises -- and therefore I think that we, if we get into the trap of concentrating everything in religion, on religion, and it's a very divisive subject now, because one century ago everyone thought it would develop in Westernization or whatever, religion was an individual kind of issue. Now it for many is a way of life, and we have to understand this change that has -- how it has occurred.
And the complexity of this in fact is that many times this covers and obscures and diverts attention from some of the political roots of many, of most, conflicts. And I think that's the combination of addressing these topics as addressing the divides. And we also have to, in the proper frameworks, address the fundamental political issues and the need for conflict resolution, which is not exactly what the alliance is pretending. But we have to help and to worry about and to see how this can go in the proper direction.
Mr. Chairman, I think that although the -- and of course we -- and this is my last point; I'm going beyond the three minutes -- but my last point is that what in fact really touches me for the last years, and now specifically is the subject I'm directly dealing with, it's not only one subject, there are many subjects at the same time, it's diversity; it's complexity; it's the impossibility of in fact pushing up a piece of card and saying, this is this, and that's the end of it. It's not like that. It's not a clearcut theme. Themes are not clearcut in these areas of culture or religion, of the overlapping of all this. They are very very complex. And -- and -- and the interesting thing about it is that not only the overlap as I said before, the political topics, or vice versa, but they sometimes make it impossible to understand that we need different kinds of medicine for the various and different crises. And the tempo is looming with difficulties. But I think if we address things properly, and try to see who are those in different countries professing different faiths, who are those interested in making advancements in the language of peace, in the practice of peace, in the practice of -- in the practice of intracultural and intrareligious developments. Those are those with whom we have to work, and separate -- don't put everyone in the same basket. We have to separate, we have to understand what are the inner workings of society which have become more and more complex.
Sorry, Mr. Chairman, but I think I left many things behind, but I tried to -- Portuguese are not very respectful of timetables, as everyone knows. And as a politician I was definitely not. But now I'm in -- at the Council so I have to be more careful.
Thank you.
SEIPLE: Thank you, Mr. President. There is as much sense as inspiration in those words. And I want to open the floor up right now. If the microphones -- are on both sides. We have a question in the back. And if you would speak directly into the microphone, and please identify yourself and affiliation. And I ask -- we only have a half hour, so I ask that you keep your question just that, a question, and keep it short.
SAMPAIO: Do you want me to answer every question? Or do you want three questions and then answer it? How do you do it?
SEIPLE: I like that idea. We'll do every question. Then towards -- as we get to the end, we'll take three and wrap up.
QUESTIONER: Thank you for your remarks. I'm Welby Lehman (sp). I work at the Treasury Department. It's common in the press to read, to take Muslims in particular, of fundamentalist Muslims and moderate Muslims, and it's often unclear whether that reference is to differences in their strategies for interaction with the rest of the world or how fervently they hold their -- hold to their religious beliefs. My question is whether you believe that fervent religious belief, including maybe the -- in particular the belief that you are right and that others who don't subscribe to your ideas are wrong, undermines or does not undermine this Alliance of Civilizations?
SAMPAIO: There's a basic -- in my view -- a basic distinction between fundamentalism and extremism. We can find in religious terms, we can find many fundamentalists in many religions. So this is the first difficulty. Fundamentalism in my view -- and I'm sure there are better experts in the room on that but -- is not just a concept which we apply like that to the world. I mean there are -- how did it start? In fact in a way it's a Western term which was coined by some not long ago, and it is in fact used to describe movements which are disturbed by the marginalization of religion in secular society. And therefore they seek to reinstate the central role of religion, and they obviously sometimes go back and return to the roots of a religious tradition, or a literal adherence to basic texts, irrespective of all historical factors.
And I think that these kinds of movements exist in many -- in many faith traditions. They are not many times not inherently violent, but they can be violent. But they -- they in fact fear secular modernity, and they feel it as immoral and invasive.
But a different thing, totally different thing, is extremism, because there you have radical attitudes and measures in pursuit of typical political goals. And it's not necessarily by nature religious. It can be found -- extremism can be found in secular movements or in secular societies. But of course sometimes they bridge together, and they -- they act to justify acts of violence and terrorist attacks on civilians. And we have to be very clear on that.
So I want -- I pretend to be with this answer, which in fact has occupied me a great deal of time I must say. I was not expecting it, but it's -- and this is a minefield which in relation to what I said at the end of my initial talk, it needs careful understanding in the sense that you have many fundamentalists who are not violent, and who are in fact just traditionalists as an opposition to Western development in terms of society, although they sometimes incorporate Western elements in their society, and the extremists and the combination is even worse.
So if we want to fight terrorism, if you want to have a world of security, I think that each case is a case, and we have to really carefully build on what distinguished these cases, and have different, as I said before, different methods. But the question is outstandingly interesting. We could be here, and we can be, the whole of the evening.
QUESTIONER: I'm Dick Thornburgh. I'm a lawyer here in Washington. You spoke of the work done by the ministerial meetings, and the attraction of NGOs and various other organizations. I'm curious as to how successful you have been in attracting prominent religious leaders to the alliance's work?
SAMPAIO: Well, sir, thank you very much. The -- I have addressed religious leaders in Turkey, all faiths were there. That was the first time I did it really. That was about July of this year. And it was interesting. I have been with important members of different religions, and I hope that the forum we will be inviting all sorts of leaders of this -- of these faiths to see how they can work together.
I see that something that happened in -- very recently. I think I -- I brought this. I pay a great importance to what was -- what came out yesterday. This declaration which was released on October 12th, a global Muslim leadership makes unprecedented call for accord -- I don't know how you pronounce it -- with Christian world, 138 senior Muslim clerics in fact came forward with -- with -- with a platform, a very basic platform. And this is the kind of thing that can develop.
What I'm saying is that perhaps -- and this is what I hope -- perhaps the existing and prevailing dangers are becoming so evident and so self-evident that all sorts of initiatives come forward. And therefore, although I don't intend the alliance to be a specialist on religion, because those are the religious responsible person, people, I would like to attract this dialogue, and see how this is possible, not precisely on religion, although this example I quoted is directed to that, but a little bit further on in the sense that how can we work to have a cultural framework of more openness? How can we work to fight extremism and the concept about the totality of religion as a way of life?
And I think that there are holes in this which allow us to work, although I'm being perhaps too optimistic. But I don't think we can quit and just go away. We have to insist.
QUESTIONER: Hi, I'm Reba Carruth, and I'm probably the only sociologist here. But -- (laughter) -- a first, okay. Listen, I'm very impressed with this initiative. I do have a couple of reservations, and I'd like to just put them out on the table very quickly because I think it's important that we now work on the hard problems.
I think the issue is an issue of moral power. Political power is a contest between actors to see who wins. We need a structure where we can have an authentic discussion of the good and the bad aspects of cultural conflict, racial and ethnic and religious hatred, so on and so forth.
Now why do I say that? I say that because for all the problems of the West, the Judeo-Christian structure has been more successful in many ways in addressing head on the problems that divide people and mobilizing within the societies and across societies for collective action; and also being able to use institutional market mechanisms to address problems that confront all human beings.
Now in order to do that you have to strengthen the oneness of humanity. You have to make sure that regardless of whether people are seen as coming from a great civilization or whether they're seen as having a less developed civilization, it doesn't matter. And the reason I'm saying that is because I feel like if we're going to engage Muslim societies about what they perceive as their misunderstanding, their lack of integration into the West, we have to require that they engage on the issue of civil rights within their countries. If Turkey is a member we're going to have to address the issue of Kurds. We're going to have to address the situation in Darfur. This is the 200th year anniversary of Wilberforce, and the Moslem countries never ended their slave trade.
So how are we going to move forward if we don't reestablish this moral principle that religion gives to society? Thank you.
SAMPAIO: That's a very -- thanks to sociology, it's a -- it's a very interesting and challenging question. I always have the idea that first of all we have the time in which our civilization has -- I'm placing myself here in the Western -- the time we don't even remember what we did in the 18th century, or the 30-years war, or how religion was seen. So the tempo here is totally different now.
So I have always said, and I said it here I think, there is a lot of discrimination in the -- (inaudible). That's absolutely clear. And the only -- the only connecting string that we have is precisely what you said before because I don't think that we have any -- any -- we hope to have success in discussing and trying to have someone agree with my theology for example, because he has another one. It's similar, because -- just one God faith, then, of course they are similar. But there are many differences. So how can we work together? That's the big challenge.
And so this implies not only one direction, it implies both directions. In other words I also have to find, I also have to find that there is discrimination everywhere. And if we deal with Muslim minorities in Europe, for example, we have to understand what is going on. It's not the same thing as some of the ONGs movement in countries with which we have in general good diplomatic relations but are absolutely autocratic political organizations. This is the difficulty here. Because the alliance comprises initiatives coming from entities. We would like to have ONGs in this also at the same time. But we have states, and we know that in some of these states the capacity to understand what is going on is not necessarily seen by everyone as a positive thing because stability -- and if we talk about oil producing countries, then it is I think quite clear.
So we have to go on moving with those sectors of society who are prepared to understand that by having this oneness of personality perspective that you mentioned we can go further. But because I understand that we have these inner contradictions, and I am absolutely clear on this, we have to say, what are your commitments? And this is why I told the ministerial meeting what I said. What are you prepared to do after all? Nothing? Well, therefore, why are you a member of this?
But you have to have a commitment in relation -- and this in fact causes some problems in some societies in general. This is how I see it at this stage.
SEIPLE: In the corner, ma'am.
QUESTIONER: Thank you. Judith Kipper (sp). I'm having a little problem that our discussion is focusing on the West versus Islam. And I -- I'm a Middle East specialist, so I'm very familiar with all of the Islamophobia. And I hope that this alliance is not going to turn out to be the Western expression of Islamophobia because there is no such thing as the Islamic world. There is no such thing as the Christian world. There is no such thing as the Jewish world, the Hindu world, the Buddhist world. There is the West; there is Africa; there is the Arab world; there is -- et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. And to make this thing, Islamic world, we are digging a grave for ourselves. These issues have to do with identity much more than they have to do with religion or anything else. And our fight is not against Islam, it's against extremism, whether it's the Christian Right in America blowing up clinics, or it's a Muslim kid who puts on a belt because he has no hope for his future.
And for me, as you were speaking, with some very, very good ideas, I couldn't get Darfur out of my mind. Because it's Muslims killing Muslims. The Organization of African Unity, the Arab League, the West have been hopeless, just simply completely absolutely hopeless. So in this alliance as you deal with the regional organizations that are supposed to take responsibility for at least death, destruction, disease and the killing and raping of women and children, that has nothing -- it has nothing to do with religion, Darfur. Nothing. How are you going to manage that? Because you know the UN is a very polite organization, and I wish you all the luck, and, you know, this is the most important issue we face in the world today that you're tackling with.
SEIPLE: Thank you.
QUESTIONER: How do you make it bold enough so that they don't come back to you -- the Arab League hasn't given one bag of rice to Darfur. How long did it take to get the African Union to put troops in there?
SEIPLE: Let's give the president a chance to respond. Thank you.
SAMPAIO: First of all, madam, I think that you noted -- I saw your head nodding when I was speaking -- on the need to understand the differences and the complexities, that this is definitely not addressing itself to the West-Islam divide in terms of the Middle East, or there is only one Islam. We know that, and there is not only one Christianity, et cetera, et cetera. So I entirely agree with that. And I come back to this example. If you go to some of the places where Muslim minorities live in Europe, it is clearly a question of identity that we are confronted with, clearly, there is no doubt about it, especially as far as second generations and third generation when they exist.
And I -- I'm sure that by answering the first question which was presented, the distinction between fundamentalism and extremism, is I think a very important distinction with which we have to permanently work. So I think that on that first part of your question was more a declaration. I totally subscribe, I had subscribed before, we're in agreement on that.
Well, I mean, the challenge you put in front of us is devastating. So let's be pragmatic in the sense that if other well known institutional bodies of multilateralism and capacity to solve or pretend to solve some of these conflicts are not acting as we should like to, I think that the moral aspects in terms of what is happening can be developed. And when I said that people have to assume -- people, entities, countries, states -- they have to assume that inside their own frontiers they have insufficiencies in this regard. Because if we don't, then we've lost -- I mean we'll get worse and worse.
And this kind of attitude that is I think very important. I would not expect to see some of these international institutions to have results, because after all, madam, some international organizations depend, are formed by states. States are states, and this one is also formed by states.
So in the sense that we can -- but it's not just on the political tempo. It's -- it has a broader perspective, although a global one. So if we can progress in this direction, I do hope that we can address some of the most definite and serious problems of our time. And that one is obviously in my head all the time. But I hope that we, generally speaking, can fulfill promises that have been delivered. I'm not that optimistic, I must say.
SEIPLE: Gentleman in the back.
QUESTIONER: Hi, I'm Austin Ruse. I run the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute. We work on international policy, mostly at the UN. I wanted to give you a little bit of good news, and that is that there's an ongoing -- I wrote down one of your -- successful cross-cultural project, and that's the alliance between conservative Christian NGOs and Muslim states at the United Nations on social policy.
A couple of years ago Christian NGOs initiated a meeting in Doha that brought together most of the Muslim world; 126 countries participated in the conference. There's a biannual meeting called the World Congress of Families which brings in 4 (thousand) or 5,000 people to the meeting every couple of years around the world.
The motivating factor of this coalition is people of strong faith -- that is to say, very orthodox believers in their faith who put aside their theological differences to work on common projects. And this exact template I think has been one of the great unifiers between conservative Christians -- that is to say, evangelicals, Pentecostalists and fundamentalists here in the United States and conservative Catholics. And it's the template that we're using at the United Nations and elsewhere.
I just give you this as a point of information.
SAMPAIO: Thank you very much. If we can have your coordinates, that would help. Because here is the example that that kind of initiative and movement has to come within the clearinghouse I spoke before, and we have to interact and see, because we can't repeat that. That is already there. So how can the general -- the problem is getting from the local or institutional building up of initiatives to a broader -- to a broader horizon, so to say.
And this I think is a big challenge. How can we transform this kinds of work in something which is offered, through the diminishing conflicts or diminishing difficulties that we are experiencing now? That is the challenge. And not -- we -- I always have the sensation that we have immense initiatives, immense talent. But to inform that in compulsory capacities to solve some of the -- compulsory in good term -- in the good sense of the word -- in something that can be used everywhere, that is I think one of the challenges that we are confronted with.
And so how to transform one initiative into an overall practice that can be used.
SEIPLE: Let me add something to that. In our work at the Institute for Global Engagement we work in a lot of difficult places to include the Northwest Frontier Province in Pakistan. And there are a number of trend lines. One is that there's a youth bulge; second is that there is a return to the ancient among the Abrahamic traditions -- Christian, Muslim and Jewish -- return to orthodoxy -- lowercase "o"; and that wherever you go in the world there's increasing anti-Americanism. That is a very bad confluence. It's a perfect storm of some sort.
So the question is how do you overcome that, and what we have found when we have worked particularly in Northwest Frontier Province, which is very conservative, Pashtun Muslim culture, the way that you overcome some of these things is that you acknowledge deep and authentic differences -- in our case about the divinity of Christ -- but then you find things that you have in common. And what do Christians and Muslims and Jews have in common? The sovereignty of God, peace, justice, mercy. They are starting points.
And that's in fact how we started working with the freely elected Islamic -- Islamist political party. It's a fascinating story, but you are spot on. And I think that is one of the key ingredients to how we address these issues that are threatening to overwhelm us.
We have time for a couple more questions. Ma'am.
QUESTIONER: Elizabeth Becker, I'm now with the German Marshall Fund. I'd like to move to your media point, having been in the media for many decades. Often this training idea which comes -- which is posed as intercultural understanding or education -- comes off as political correctness and -- as an editor and as a journalist going to these workshop and things. How are -- do you have a practical plan to convince the journalists by people who, you know, are respected authorities or whatever? And how are you going to break through a barrier that is very old and no matter what term you use you're going to get somebody else saying you're complete whacko, that that's wrong, and it's a very -- as you said in an earlier answer, it's a minefield. It's -- what's your practical answer to that?
SAMPAIO: I must say, I should come here if I'm alive in two years time, saying what have we developed since our first meeting, because we're just starting. And let me say an example to -- during my life as a politician and as president. And I, as you can understand, in our constitutional system, being directly elected by the people and not by Parliament, you have a voice, and then you have to use it carefully. And they kept on saying all the time, why on earth are you repeating this? I mean, you said this 15 days ago, and everyone is doing the same.
And my answer was, always, so I repeat it here today: Yes, the pope asks for peace everyday. There are lots of wars going on, but he asks for peace tomorrow. And this apparently calmed down the Portuguese journalists. Eventually they are more calm than others. And this is the same thing I would say here -- in other words, that I have no doubt there are a lot of difficulties here. Can we find a proper framework in which some of these elements that members here today were addressing, yourself, can be at least seen that are workable distinctions, and there are therefore platforms in which we can work together so that there at least are responsible people, not with -- not concealing diversity, because that is killing the freedom of press, but in fact trying to interact diversity as an element of understanding.
And without having these permanent headlines trying to extract from a practical case a total condemnation of a faith is, I can't do myself, I mean because I've seen enough in life from personal experience that this is totally impossible.
But it is very hard working, and I do hope that from here in the next year we at least start with seeing what is going on in this area, and trying to produce something. And I do hope that not only the two projects I spoke about, and projects with others, can help in at least delivering the approaches that were developed here.
I mean, if we knew -- I mean, there are many people who know what you're doing, but there are many others who don't. How can we make this experience cross and see that there are possibilities of progressing this without the permanent rubber stamping that we have in relation to these themes. And this, I think, is a big challenge. And there's no solution in sight. I mean, there's work. That's a different thing.
SEIPLE: We're going to end it there. Will you join me in thanking President Sampaio. (Applause.)
####
(C) COPYRIGHT 2007, FEDERAL NEWS SERVICE, INC., 1000 VERMONT AVE.
NW; 5TH FLOOR; WASHINGTON, DC - 20005, USA. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. ANY REPRODUCTION, REDISTRIBUTION OR RETRANSMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.
UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION, REDISTRIBUTION OR RETRANSMISSION CONSTITUTES A MISAPPROPRIATION UNDER APPLICABLE UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW, AND FEDERAL NEWS SERVICE, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO PURSUE ALL REMEDIES AVAILABLE TO IT IN RESPECT TO SUCH MISAPPROPRIATION.
FEDERAL NEWS SERVICE, INC. IS A PRIVATE FIRM AND IS NOT AFFILIATED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. NO COPYRIGHT IS CLAIMED AS TO ANY PART OF THE ORIGINAL WORK PREPARED BY A UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE AS PART OF THAT PERSON'S OFFICIAL DUTIES.
FOR INFORMATION ON SUBSCRIBING TO FNS, PLEASE CALL JACK GRAEME AT 202-347-1400.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT.
In Termites in the Trading System, Jagdish Bhagwati reveals how the rapid spread of preferential trade agreements endangers the world trading system.
America Between the Wars explores how the decisions and debates of the years between the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the Twin Towers shaped the events, arguments, and politics of the world we live in today.
In The Fall and Rise of the Islamic State, Noah Feldman tells the story behind the increasingly popular call for the establishment of the sharia—the law of the traditional Islamic state—in the modern Muslim world.
Complete list of CFR Books.
This report argues that the United States must lead with domestic action on climate change and proposes a U.S. negotiating strategy for a global UN climate agreement that includes commitments from all major economies, while also promoting a less formal Partnership for Climate Cooperation that would focus the world's largest emitters on implementing aggressive emissions reductions.
This Task Force report examines changes in Latin America and in U.S. influence there, while taking account of the region's enduring importance to the United States. The Task Force offers an agenda for U.S. policy toward Latin America and identifies four critical areas that should provide the basis of a new U.S. approach.
About Independent Task Forces at the Council.
After two decades of liberalization, many countries around the world are adopting new restrictions on foreign direct investment (FDI) that could retard continued progress. The authors make recommendations for correcting this protectionist drift by proposing guidelines for how countries can better regulate FDI yet still reap its economic benefits.
In this Council Special Report, the authors make a strong case that the Bush administration’s policy of diplomatic isolation of Syria is not serving U.S. interests, and offer informed history and thoughtful analysis of the country and its external behavior.
Complete list of Council Special Reports.
To order Task Force reports, Council Special Reports, and Critical Policy Choices, please call, fax, or order online from our distributor, the Brookings Institution Press: phone +1-800-537-5487, fax +1-410-516-6998.
For information on other reports that are not for sale, or for general publications information, please call +1-212-434-9516 or email publications@cfr.org.
To request permission to reuse Council materials, please email publications@cfr.org or fax +1-212-434-9859.
Please include the complete information of the requested work—author, title, sections/pages to be copied or reprinted, and number of copies to be made—along with a brief description of where and how you would like to reuse the work.
You may also request permission for Council material through Copyright Clearance Center. For more information, please click on the logo below.
By Region | By Issue | By Publication Type | The Think Tank | For The Media | For Educators | About CFR
Home | Site Index | FAQ | Contact | RSS | Podcast
Copyright 2008 by the Council on Foreign Relations. All Rights Reserved.
