2.
A slow retreat, both at the level of the intelligencia and that
of the politicians and the ruling leadership from the old
paradigm that prevailed during the last century. Said paradigm
was based on almost total non-recognition of the other, a policy
of exclusion, and a readiness for confrontation. The concept of
the "enemy" and the categorization of the "other" as a potential
threat was central in that old paradigm. It is in fact that
paradigm that led a renowned scholar like Samuel Huntington to
predict a "clash of civilization" in the coming century
resulting from globalization and the end of cold war which
dominated the second half of the last century. Many politicians
and religious leader in the west and in the Arab and Muslim
world began to preach for a new paradigm based on the growing
awareness of many new dangers facing all nations regardless of
their ethnic, cultural or political background. Central in the
new paradigm are the concepts of diversity and pluralism,
keenness to discover and recognize the common elements shared by
the major cultures of the world, and the dire need for utilizing
said common elements to reach a "modus vivendi" based on mutual
respect and full cooperation in promoting a culture of peace,
based on tolerance, equality, the preservation of basic human
rights, and the injection of "responsibility" as the other side
of the concept of "rights and benefits". Moving from the old
paradigm to the new one requires modesty and genuine belief in
the fact that no single individual, and no single civilizations
has monopoly of wisdom and knowledge and that "dialogue" among
people belonging to difference cultures is the only alternative
to the language of conflict and confrontation.
3.
A most serious impediment to bringing about sustainable peace to
the whole world and particularly to those regions plagued with
serious conflicts is the absence of fairness and justice. The
conflict in the Middle East is a living example of such
impediment. A peace imposed on one party to the conflict with
disregard of the requirements of elemental justice would never
bring about genuine and permanent peace. The most it can achieve
is a true or cease fire between the parties only delaying the
settlement of the conflict without removing its cause.
It is through discussions like the ones in which we are engaged
in this conference that people would better understand each
other, recognizing existing differences and realizing existing
commonalities.
It is to be noted, however, that people like the participants in
this conference are not the only players in the arena of
international and intercultural relations. There are those who
are still committed to the old paradigm, and whose selfish
interests would push them to defend the old paradigm and to
resist the prevalence of the culture of peace and cooperation
motivating the membership of our conference. A firm commitment
of peace, to diversity and to a code of universal human rights
and responsibilities would certainly be the most solid
foundation on which peace, justice and cooperation can be
established.
|
