Western and Islamist Leaders Consider “Dialogues of Cultures and Civilizations”

by Antony T. Sullivan

Organized by Muhammad Elhachmi Hamdi and sponsored by The Diplomat, a new quarterly journal published in England which Hamdi edits, an international conference focusing on the topic of conflict or cooperation among civilizations was held in London June 14-16. More than 30 scholars, journalists and governmental officials participated from England, Egypt, France, Syria, Pakistan, Yemen, Turkey, Sudan, Morocco, Indonesia and the United States. All Muslim conferees were either Islamists or closely identified with the contemporary Islamic revival.

Special presentations were made by Kurshid Ahmad (vice-president, Jamaat Islami, Pakistan), Muhammad al-Afandi (executive committee, Yemeni Assembly for Reform), Temel Koeramollaoglu (member, executive committee, Turkish Refah Party), and Umar Barido (ambassador of Sudan to the United Kingdom). Each of their presentations focused on the accomplishments and difficulties of the Islamic revival in the countries involved.

Other participants included the Right Reverend Kenneth Cragg (Oxford), Ahmad Bassam Saeh (dean, Oxford Academy for Advanced Studies), Laith Kubba (director, International Forum for Islamic Dialogue, London), Derek Hopwood (director, Middle East Center, St. Antony’s College, Oxford), Fahmi Huwaidi (deputy editor-in-chief, Al Ahram newspaper), Eric Rouleau (French ambassador-at-large and journalist), Burhan Ghalioun (Sorbonne), Ali Okla Arsan (secretary-general, Arab Writers Union), Imaduddin Abdul Rahim (Foundation for the Development and Management of Human Resources, Indonesia), Abdurrahim Hamdi (chairman, Khartoum Stock Exchange and former minister of finance, Sudan), Graham Fuller (RAND Corporation), Diane Singerman (The American University, Washington, DC), Scott Hibbard (U.S. Institute of Peace), Louis Cantori (University of Maryland), and the writer.

Throughout the conference, participants addressed large questions of significance to the West, the Muslim world, and indeed humankind as a whole. Particular attention was given to the concept of “civilization” and the nature of “modernity,” the relative validity of notions of a “clash” or “collaboration” among civilizations, obstacles to meaningful dialogue occasioned by the gross imbalance of power between the Euro-American and Islamic worlds, and the common problems facing both Westerners and Muslims as a new century approaches. Throughout the proceedings, the thesis of Prof. Samuel Huntington of Harvard that the 21st century will likely be characterized by conflict between the West and an Islamic-Confucian coalition received both careful scrutiny and intense criticism.

To be useful, dialogue must be conducted on a basis of equality.

In his opening remarks, Muhammad Hamdi observed that Muslims tend to think that Westerners are “not likely to be fair-minded or just” when dealing with the concerns of Muslims. “As the famous Egyptian writer Fahmi Huwaidi [who was a participant in the conference] puts it,” Hamdi noted, “the hearts of Westerners, though easily moved by the plight of suffering animals, seem like stone when it comes to the suffering of Muslims.” Nevertheless Hamdi, himself an Islamist from Tunisia, suggested that history has not ended, and that opportunities for meaningful inter-civilizational dialogue do exist. He aptly quoted Thomas Mann: “Speech is civilization itself. The word, even the most contradictory word, preserves contact—it is silence which isolates.” Hamdi charged the conferees to “put truths and myths to debate and cross-examination,” keeping always in mind that the “world is for all of us, and all must be invited to take their place in the discussion and make their views known.” To a remarkable degree, conferees responded in precisely the spirit and with the candor which Hamdi invited.

All participants agreed that any sort of “new beginning” in Western-Muslim relations will be difficult to accomplish given the weight of history and contemporary political and geostrategic polarization. Fahmi Huwaidi confessed that he was “pessimistic” concerning the outcome of dialogue between Euro-America and the Islamic world because “the West sees no need for it and Muslims are not ready for it.” In Huwaidi’s opinion, the West’s only concerns in the Middle East and elsewhere are geostrategic and commercial, the West being either uninterested in or opposed to the spiritual, cultural and political issues of primary concern to Muslims. Attempts to initiate dialogue which originate in the West are frequently seen by Muslims as an effort to impose Western values, he observed, and inevitably encounter resistance from Muslims cynical about what are perceived as radically different Western attitudes to Jews on the one hand and Muslims on the other. Despite these difficulties, Huwaidi argued that new efforts to initiate dialogue should be encouraged and should feature both intellectuals and members of the religious community. Dialogue with or through Arab governments should be avoided, he maintained, since most such governments have no popular mandate and are not interested in participating in more than a “monologue.”

Communication vs. Dialogue

For his part, Eric Rouleau expressed optimism concerning both the possibility and potential impact of inter-civilizational dialogue. Indeed, he suggested that a “golden era" for dialogue may be at hand given the tools which modern technology has provided. However, he emphasized that “communication” is not necessarily dialogue. Rather, communication today flows largely from North to South and has become its own monologue, permitting few real opportunities for the South to respond in meaningful fashion. In both Europe and the United States, he suggested, the media is guilty of a lack of objectivity. The great question, Rouleau admitted, is how most effectively to correct such imbalance. Rouleau, like many other participants, emphasized that to be useful dialogue must be conducted on a basis of equality.

General discussion ranged broadly, touching on the work of such thinkers as Edmund Burke, Francis Fukuyama, Charles Le Gai Eaton, Eric Voegelin, Russell Kirk and Grace Goodell. The “New World Order” was criticized. Several conferees suggested that it rests on double standards and inevitably implies demonization of those who reject the establishment internationally of Western secular modernity. There was a consensus that today there are no such things as homogeneous and self-contained civilizations, Islam having become very much a part of the West, just as the West is now part of Islam. Notions that Islam is somehow a static or frozen belief system were rejected, and the point made that in Islam, as in other religions, understanding and faith are processes which extend over a lifetime.

Lively exchanges occurred, especially among the American participants. Louis Cantori and Antony T. Sullivan argued that Western traditionalist and culturally conservative thought is congruent with much that is best in the philosophy which informs the Islamic revival. Indeed, they maintained that conservative thinking may offer a way for paleoconservative intellectuals in Europe and America to make common cause with Muslim thinkers to resist the ravages of late modernity.

Cantori described the impact of the present age in both East and West as “pathological,” adducing in particular its destruction of community, faith and family. Both he and Sullivan criticized the agenda of liberal developmentalism now and for some time since being imposed on the Islamic world, and emphasized that conservatism and Islamism do share both mutual concerns and a common vocabulary.

All of this was energetically contested by Diane Singerman, who argued to the contrary from the perspective of contemporary American secular liberalism. The exchanges among the American conferees may have done more than anything else to demonstrate to Muslims that opinion in the West as a whole and America in particular is in no way monolithic, and that in fact disagreements are fundamental and on-going.

Among the most interesting presentations by the political figures present was that of Temel Koeramollaoglu. Rejecting recent media reports, he asserted that a Refah government in Turkey would demand Turkish withdrawal neither from NATO nor from the European Community. Rather, Refah would simply insist that Turkey be treated as an equal within those organizations. Koeramollaoglu stated that the Refah party is aware that “Turkey and the West need each other.” Koeramollaoglu denied any intention by Refah to impose the veil were it to come to power, and observed that the cutting off of hands would never be implemented under a Refah government. Concerning economics, he expressed support for a “free market” system, while noting that the state should play a role in addressing problems unsolved by economic liberalism.

Sudanese Ambassador Umar Barido also endorsed private property and a free market economy, and asserted that the current Sudanese government supports political power-sharing. Islamic law is being implemented only in areas of the Sudan where a majority of the population is Muslim, he stated, and even there the Christian minority is being exempted from its provisions. On this score, federalism is the country’s guiding principle. Barido remarked that the Sudanese government condemns terrorism in all its forms, is currently involved in peace negotiations with Christian leader John Garang, and has formally recognized the possibility of southern secession from the Sudan in the context of a peace settlement.

The dialogue launched at this conference will be continued in The Diplomat and in other initiatives which it may undertake. Those interested in closely following these discussions may do so most easily by subscribing to The Diplomat. A year’s subscription is the equivalent of 25 English pounds. The mailing address is The Diplomat, Alperton House, Bridgewater Road Wembley, Middlesex HAO HH United Kingdom (tel. 011 181 903 7899, fax 011 44 181 795 1493).