134 The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 27:4

A Review of Inter-Civilizational
Dialogue: Governmental and

Private Initiatives
Iyad A. Madani

Abstract
Is interfaith dialogue full of challenges or opportunities? Does it
lead somewhere, or is it a never ending circular road? When we
dialogue, do we still harbor the notion of converting our dialogue
partners? Analyzing some of the actual work done by govern-
ments and non-governmental organizations (NGOs), as well as
academics and individuals, may answer these questions. In this
short article, I will focus on several efforts’ goals, success rate,
and what we can learn from their experiences.

The Asia-Europe Foundation
In March 1996 the leaders of twenty-five European and Asian countries,
together with the European Commission, met in Bangkok for the inaugural
Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM). This paved the way for establishing the
Asia-Europe Foundation (ASEF) in 1997, which promotes greater mutual
understanding between Asians and Europeans through intellectual, cultural,
and people-to-people exchanges. In addition to interfacing between civil
society groups and governments, ASEF facilitates interactions among non-
officials and transmits their recommendations to policymakers; brings civil
society representatives together with bureaucrats, diplomats, and other gov-
ernment officials for direct and open dialogue; and elevates civil society
concerns to be included as a vital component of official deliberations at
ASEM.

The foundation has been tasked with organizing projects closely linked
with ASEM activities in collaboration with relevant Asian institutions of the
ASEM countries; implementing projects assigned by future meetings of
ASEM leaders or ministers and the relevant European Commission (EC)
member; acting as a clearing house, catalyst and facilitator; organizing a few
flagship projects of its own; conducting public relations activities to profile

Iyad A. Madani is the former Minister of Culture and Information and former Minister of
Hajj, Saudi Arabia.



and publicize itself, as well as meetings, seminars, and other activities; and
giving grants.

As the centerpiece of many of its activities is intercultural dialogue,
ASEF focuses on interfaith dialogue, cultural diversity, and solutions for
multicultural societies. Some programs bring together small groups of high-
level personalities; others consist of seminars and conferences, while yet
others provide a public platform for regional opinion leaders. All program
are designed to establish new interactions and strengthen existing communi-
cations worldwide.

Presently, its most viable inter-cultural effort at a governmental level is
the bi-annual Asia-Europe Young Parliamentarians Meetings (AEYPM),
which enables younger members of national legislatures to develop a greater
awareness and understanding of external issues affecting their country’s polit-
ical and cultural development. For example, they are urged to foster close ties
with their counterparts from the other regions, learn from the insights of
experts in their field, gain knowledge of the different national perspectives
and experiences to better understand various issues, and discuss their region’s
various faiths and religions and how they affecs national policy.

ASEF’s stated goal is to establish permanent bi-regional networks
focused on areas and issues that help strengthen Asia-Europe relations.
ASEF, the civil society outreach of ASEM and interface between civil soci-
ety and ASEM governments, contributes to the ASEM process by generat-
ing unique recommendations for official consideration. As ASEM’s only
physical institution, it runs a high number of projects with the support of
governments. Of these, three projects in particular emphasize inter-cultural
relationships: Culture Dialogues, Culture 360, and the Asia-Europe Young
Parliamentarians Meeting.

Cultural Dialogue encourages discussion and the sharing of experi-
ences among Asian and European cultural policymakers in order to develop
appropriate public policies and measures as regards cultural diversity and
the growth of vibrant contemporary cultural scenes. Thus, ASEF seeks to
strengthen and further its role as interface between cultural policymakers
and autonomous cultural center or artists’ initiatives while advocating, on
the ASEM level, policies that favor creativity, artistic innovation, and cul-
tural diversity via organizing workshops, meetings, and conferences for cul-
tural policymakers, artists, and cultural practitioners.

Culture 360, the only multi-disciplinary arts and cultural online tool
focused specifically on Asia and Europe, is designed to stimulate cultural
engagement and enhance greater understanding between the two regions by

Madani: A Review of Inter-Civlizational Dialogue 135



136 The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 27:4

serving as a platform to inform, collaborate, interact, and exchange ideas.
Fuelled by artistic communities, it is the culmination of efforts from the gov-
ernmental level as well as from civil societies. The project’s portal was
launched at the 2008 ASEM meeting in Kuala Lumpur and has received
great attention by both regions’ civil society groups.

The AEYPM, as explained above, exposes the younger members of
national legislatures to experts, peers, and new ideas in their fields of con-
cern. Participants usually represent both the government and the opposition
from each ASEM member country and the European Parliament.

ASEF, which is well funded through its members’ contributions, runs its
projects effectively and continuously. Given this dependence, however, its
work is often diplomatically sensitive and members often lack the political
will to recommend policies that do not agree with specific national policies
or the government’s position. On the government-to-government level, how-
ever, ASEF seems to work well and has engendered the fruition of diplo-
matic ideas, although the actual impact these ideas have in complimenting
non-governmental interfaith work remains minimal.

The Asia-Pacific Interfaith Dialogue
Launched in 2004 and cosponsored by New Zealand, Australia, Indonesia,
and the Philippines, the Asia-Pacific Regional Interfaith Dialogue brings
together representatives of the major faith and community groups from fif-
teen Southeast Asian and South Pacific countries. Its stated goal is to promote
cooperation through effective communication among religious communities
and to build understanding, tolerance, and respect for each other’s beliefs. Its
basic principle is that no religion should be used to justify intolerance,
fanaticism, and terrorism. The crux of the agreements signed during its four
meetings seems to be multifaith dialogue and cooperation; peace as a sacred
priority; increased participation by women and youth in interfaith dialogue;
sharing with our communities successful examples of multifaith dialogue and
cooperation and urging others to participate; and interfaith cooperation that
addresses issues of the region’s critical community concerns (e.g., poverty,
HIV, human rights, environmental issues, and natural disasters).

This head-of-government initiated dialogue has seen four high level
forums, the objectives of which are to promote understanding and foster har-
mony between faith communities across the Asia Pacific region and to
ensure direct and frequent communication between regional faith leaders in
problem resolution and building a more harmonious and peaceful future.



The dialogues have seen strong Muslim and Christian participation, with
Indonesia’s Muhammadiyah and the Philippines’ Christians playing a lead-
ing content and administrative role together with the official governmental
support of New Zealand, Australia, Indonesia, and the Philippines.

The dialogue has encouraged governments to establish a mechanism for
institutional policies and all relevant enabling guidelines to promote and pro-
tect human life, dignity, social justice, and the integrity of all creation; called
on role-players to acknowledge and support the goals and objectives of the
Universal Declaration on Human Rights and the United Nations Millennium
Development Goals; emphasizes the development and provision of training
for media managers, journalists, and journalism students on religious and cul-
tural diversity, in partnership with interfaith experts and national and interna-
tional media organizations; encourages the development and review of codes
of conduct and standards for the exercise of media freedom with responsibil-
ity; and supports the establishment and strengthening of dialogue among
media executives, journalism, trainers and religious and interfaith leaders.
Conflict management via this dialogue, especially in regards to Philippine’s
decades-long religious and ethnic conflict, is also stressed. It recommends
that high-standing spiritual leaders participate in peace negotiations.

Australia, which started to play a larger role after the Bali bombings of
2002, is trying a hands-on approach in understanding the Muslim commu-
nities’ reservation about their political and social differences. This dialogue,
however, has failed to attract other ASEAN nations and Australia’s and New
Zealand’s true goals in these dialogues are of concern to the region’s NGOs.

The ASEAN-Canada Dialogue on Interfaith Initiatives
Canada became a dialogue partner with ASEAN in 1977. Canada-ASEAN
relations are guided by a Joint Cooperation Work Plan that deals with coun-
terterrorism, health security, interfaith dialogue, disaster management, coop-
eration in multilateral fora, and trade and investment facilitation. At the first
formal ASEAN-Canada meeting in February 1977, Canada’s Secretary of
State for External Affairs informed the Chair of the ASEAN Standing
Committee of her proposal to extend a program of development assistance to
ASEAN. This was formalized in 1981 by the signing of the ASEAN-Canada
Economic Cooperation Agreement (ACECA), which came into force on 1
June 1982. At the end of 2008, Canadian foreign investment was worth some
$8.2 billion. Canada has strong people-to-people links with ASEAN: nearly
1 million ASEAN immigrants now call Canada home, some 450,000

Madani: A Review of Inter-Civlizational Dialogue 137



138 The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 27:4

Canadians travel to the region annually, and over 2,000 Southeast Asian stu-
dents come to study at Canadian universities each year.

In December 2008, a jointly organized interfaith workshop held in
Surabaya, Indonesia, focused on practical ways for education and the media
to foster interfaith and intercultural understanding, with a view to discourag-
ing violent discourse. As the main goal of this relationship is economic and
political issues, interfaith work is actually a secondary objective. Although
concrete interfaith-related steps were taken after 9/11, such undertakings
often pale in comparison to improving economic ties. In fact there have been
only two interfaith initiatives put forward, both of them in 2008.

The interfaith forums organized are a case in point. Billed as a case
study in best practices, they include non-governmental representatives and
government officials from the ten ASEAN states and Canada. But these
appear to be mere formalities, for there was no follow-up work and no action
plan. In fact, judging by the content that was skewered more on human
rights issues in ASEAN, it appears that Canada is playing a more supervi-
sory role. As a result, NGOs have stayed away and are unwilling to work on
ideas that they feel are plain lip service. On a positive note however, there
seems to be potential in this partnership. Unlike Australia, China, and India,
all of which are big players on the economic stage with ASEAN, Canada
seems content to play a second tier role. The fact that interfaith relations are
being put forward at all indicates that they believe this angle could be their
niche in the ASEAN platform.

The UNGA High Level Dialogue on Interreligious and
Intercultural Understanding and Cooperation for Peace 
In its resolution 61/221 of 20 December 2006 (OP. 14), the UN General
Assembly decided “to convene in 2007 a high-level dialogue on interreli-
gious and intercultural cooperation for the promotion of tolerance, under-
standing and universal respect on matters of freedom of religion or belief
and cultural diversity, in coordination with other similar initiatives in this
area.” It also determined to convene a high-level dialogue on interreligious
and intercultural cooperation in 2007 to promote tolerance, understanding,
and universal respect on matters of freedom of religion or belief and cul-
tural diversity, in coordination with similar initiatives and to consider declar-
ing an upcoming yeas as the “Year of Dialogue among Religions and
Cultures.” The secretary-general was (1) asked to ensure the systematic and
organizational follow-up of all interreligious, intercultural, and interciviliza-



tional matters within the UN system and overall coordination and coherence
in its interreligious, intercultural, and intercivilizational dialogue and coop-
eration efforts by designating a focal unit in the Secretariat to handle these
matters and (2) to report to it at its sixty-second session on Resolution
61/221’s implementation.

At the same session, the General Assembly announced that it would
hold a “High Level Dialogue on Interreligious and Intercultural Under-
standing and Cooperation for Peace” on 4-5 October 2007 at the ministerial
or highest possible level (Resolution 61/269). The objective here was to pro-
vide an opportunity for member states to dialogue with experts from civil
society, including NGOs and the private sector, to strengthen efforts to pro-
mote interreligious and intercultural understanding and cooperation. In
December 2007, it “declare[d] 2010 as the International Year for Rapproche-
ment of Cultures” and recommended that “appropriate events be organized
on interreligious and intercultural dialogue, understanding and cooperation
for peace.” 

The chance to build on these UN actions, in conjunction with mobilizing
the vast spiritual, human, and organizational resources of the world’s reli-
gious communities, spiritual traditions, interfaith organizations, and values-
based movements, led the General Assembly to call for a United Nations
Decade of Interreligious Dialogue and Cooperation for Peace. The plan of
action was to raise the international community’s awareness of the virtues of
diversity and intercultural dialogue via specific examples if how all cultures
and civilizations derive from and feed into each other, and to fight for human
rights and oppose new forms of racism and discrimination. UNESCO has
proposed that this “decade” be launched on 21 September 2010 (the Inter-
national Day of Peace) and cover the period 2011-2020. Choosing this par-
ticular date would enable the International Day of Peace to be used as an
annual occasion to promote this initiative’s objectives, assess the progress
made, and strengthen interreligious partnership and commitment. 

The real impact of these projects is questionable, especially since most
are performed on a diplomatic lip-service level. It is important that NGOs
are included to ensure that there will be some sort of follow-up that does not
require UN support.

The UN Alliance of Civilizations (AoC)
Spainish prime minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero called for the creation
of the Alliance of Civilizations (AoC) during the UN General Assembly’s

Madani: A Review of Inter-Civlizational Dialogue 139



140 The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 27:4

fifty-ninth session in September 2004. Its 2008-09 implementation plan
called for the continued development of online clearinghouses in its main
areas of implementation: youth, education, media and migration. As a global
organization explicitly involved in building bridges, trust, and understand-
ing among cultures, this prominent platform and resource is working to
enable the widest possible dissemination of information and materials that
resonate with its objectives. Its main goal is to help expand existing efforts.
At the political level, mainly through its high representative, former Portu-
guese president Jorge Fernando Branco de Sampaio, the AoC works to
establish platforms for dialogue among political, religious, media, and civil
society personalities interested in advancing its objectives.

Two major forums have taken place, in Madrid in 2008, in Istanbul in
2009. These action-driven events provide participants with a unique inter-
national platform to develop joint initiatives and forge partnerships. In addi-
tion to high-level debates about emerging trends in relations between diverse
cultures and religions, these forums announce new initiatives and project-
specific working sessions and provide a convening space for government
agencies, international organizations, and civil society bodies working in the
area of intercultural and interreligious engagement to share lessons on best
practices and develop joint work platforms. By far, this initiative has been
the most active governmental-level interfaith project.

One idea currently being worked on is a multi-million dollar media fund
to be run independently of the UN and set up by private philanthropists and
media agencies. It will finance major film productions that promote cross-
cultural understanding and combat stereotypes. Another project is the Rapid
Response Media Mechanism, which seeks to reduce tensions in times of
cross-cultural crises (e.g., the Danish cartoon incident [2005] and ensuing
violent demonstrations, and Iran’s Holocaust conference [2006]). This
serves as online resource (globalexpertfinder.org) of experts and analysts
who can make a positive contribution to debates on sensitive cross-cultural
issues. 

The AoC also works with this network of experts to develop materials
that help frame contentious issues in less polarizing terms and offer insight-
ful and nuanced perspectives on complex debates. Content is provided in
key languages and disseminated via international and regional media outlets.
To prepare the ground for these activities, it is building a “community of
interest” among journalists, editors, commentators, and opinion formers.

Given its focus on young people, the AoC Secretariat is actively trying to
involve them directly in its work by collaborating with broad networks of



youth organizations. Their goal is to have a youth perspective in the media
debate, on cross-cultural and interreligious issues and in all AoC projects. The
AoC works with the AoC Youth Advisory Committee to implement some of
these initiatives and develop key messages on AoC-related themes. The
Youth Advisory Committee comprises seven full members (one per world
region) nominated by AoC’s key youth partners. An observer from an inter-
national NGO identified by and reporting to the International Coordination
Meeting of Youth Organizations (ICMYO) is also part of this committee.
Strategic partners can also be invited as guest observers for two years. 

AoC critics note that it is yet another governmental-level project that
peddles ineffective strategies by restricting its focus to the West-Muslim
world rift, thus creating cultural divisions by defining people solely by reli-
gion. Although this is true to an extent, the AoC is a well-funded idea that
has the potential to work well with entities in both Europe and Asia.

NGO-initiated Interfaith Initiatives
This part lists several interfaith initiatives undertaken by Religion for Peace,
the Royal Institute for Inter-Faith Studies, and Soka Gakkai International. 

Religion for Peace (RP). Headquartered in New York, this NGO was
launched in 1970 with the stated goals of respecting religious differences
while celebrating our common humanity. It is active on every continent and
in some very dangerous areas of the world, trying to create multi-religious
partnerships to stop war, end poverty, and protect the planet; to enable com-
munities to unleash their enormous potential for common action; and to
bring together hundreds of key religious leaders every five years to discuss
the great issues of our time.

Although the World Confer-ence of Religions for Peace convened for
the first time in Kyoto on 16-21 October 1970, it began in 1961, when sev-
eral senior leaders from the world’s major faith traditions discussed organiz-
ing a “religious summit” to call upon believers worldwide to work for peace.
Religions for Peace is now organized on several levels: the International
Secretariat in New York, Regional Conferences in Europe and Asia, more
than seventy-five national-level affiliates, and various local units. It enjoys
consultative status with the UN’s Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC),
UNESCO, and UNICEF.

RP’s recent successes include building a new climate of reconciliation in
Iraq and mediating dialogue among warring factions in Sierra Leone; setting

Madani: A Review of Inter-Civlizational Dialogue 141



142 The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 27:4

up a network of religious women’s organizations; establishing the Hope for
African Children Initiative to help the millions of children affected by the
continent’s Africa’s AIDS pandemic; bringing together hundreds of key reli-
gious leaders every five years to discuss the great issues of our time; launch-
ing ten new Interreligious Councils (IRCs) in Botswana, the Democratic
Republic of Congo, Bolivia, Chile, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El
Salvador, Guyana, Panama, Puerto Rico, Surinam, and Trinidad and Tobago;
and launching the subregional Latin American Council of Religious Leaders.
The African Council of Religious Leaders forged action plans and played a
key role in preparing for the Eighth World Assembly.

It is supported by numerous foundations, governments, NGOs, and inter-
national organizations. 

The Royal Institute for Inter-Faith Studies (RIIFS). Sponsored by the
Kingdom of Jordan and private parties, this research center was launched in
1964. Patronized by Prince El-Hassan Bin Talal and based in Amman, it
works to provide an Arab venue for the interdisciplinary study and rational
discussion of religion and religious issues, with particular reference to
Christianity in Arab and Muslim societies. The institution was established in
1994 in Amman, a time when the region saw an aggressive Israeli regime
and an increasing American military presence, under the prince’s patronage.
Its original focus was the civilizational commonalities and shared values
between Islam and Christianity in West Asia. 

Later on it broadened its focus to include all issues related to regional and
well as global religious, cultural, and civilizational diversity. For this pur-
pose, it maintains relations with similarly concerned academic institutions
throughout the world. RIIFS’ projects include research and publication, as
well as organizing lectures, conferences, and workshops. So far, it has organ-
ized conferences on Christian-Muslim relations; founded and published Al-
Nashra quarterly and the bi-annual Bulletin of the Royal Institute for Inter-
Faith Studies, an academic journal refereed by internationally known schol-
ars; and held major conferences with renowned partners (e.g., the Sudanese
government, Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung, the Royal Scientific Society, and
Temple University). It has also published a series of bibliographies on
Christianity in East Africa.

The institute’s public outreach remains limited because it is a research
institute and high in protocol due to its royal patronage. Therefore, its topics
of deliberation and research must respect the government’s various posi-
tions. Nevertheless, it can be useful platform for academics and policymak-



ers to meet and deliberate interfaith from a policy perspective. That said, it
has produced publications and hosted talks on comparative studies; compar-
ing Muslim societies with others. It is also interested in building bridges
with Christian communities, which can be read as an initiative to foster good
relations with the West. Their interest is to study historical instances of pos-
itive contact between Muslim and non-Muslim communities, and there
seems to be a tendency to use Muslim historical references. 

Soka Gakkai International (SGI). Also known as the Society for the Creation
of Value, Soka Gakkai International was created as a study group by reformist
educators. Founder Tsunesaburo Makiguchi (1871-1944), an author and edu-
cator, was inspired by Nichiren Buddhism and dedicated to reforming the
Japanese educational system. His theory of value-creating education, which
he published as a book in 1930, is centered on a belief in the unlimited poten-
tial of every individual and regards education as the lifelong pursuit of self-
awareness, wisdom, and development. In its early years, SGI emphasized
independent thinking (over rote learning) and self-motivation (over blind
obedience), a direct challenge to the Japanese authorities of the time, who
believed that education should mold docile state subjects. As a result, the SGI
has always been an independent and well-organized organization at the local,
national, and international levels.

In addition to earning worldwide respect, its members independently
raise funds and provide relief and humanitarian aid to victims of natural dis-
asters by mobilizing their local chapters and allow their members and dis-
placed people to use their community centers. From 2004-07, it was the main
funder of the Boston Research Center for the 21st Century, which carries out
the organization’s agenda for humanitarianism and non-violence. This deci-
sion by the current president, who is extremely tolerant of other religions,
came at the price of losing some support from the traditional priesthood. This
center brings together scholars and activists in dialogue on common values
across cultures and religions to support an evolving global ethic for a peace-
ful twenty-first century. It functions as a meeting center and a publisher,
working to foster dialogue concerning peace and other social issues. Under
those auspices, it has initiated a series of conferences on such topics as abol-
ishing war, religion and ecology, and a women’s leadership forum.

Institutionally, the Boston Research Centre is largely funded by SGI but
is not under its direct control. Thus, sitting outside the conventional ideas of
a religious organization, it furthers the ethical goals outlined by Ikeda but is
non-sectarian in its focus. In that sense it represents a humanistic outreach

Madani: A Review of Inter-Civlizational Dialogue 143



144 The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 27:4

as understood within a Buddhist context. SGI also owns the Soka University
of America, which has two campuses in California: one in Calabasis and the
other in Aliso Viejo. 

King Abdullah’s “Invitation to Dialogue”
In his December 2007 speech to hajjis from all over the world, Saudi
Arabia’s King Abdullah stressed his conviction that all great religions and
the righteous creed of Abraham have similar moral principles and ethics that
define humanity and distinguish it from other species. Values like truthful-
ness, honesty, tolerance, social responsibility, equality, human dignity, and
the family (the basic building block of all societies).

While receiving participants of the sixth forum for the “Dialogue of
Civilizations between Japan and the Islamic World” in Riyadh during March
2008, the king emphasized the necessity of agreeing on how to preserve
humanity and protect it against irresponsible practices and, after alluding to
family disintegration and the spread of atheism, he declared that he was
resolved to hold several conferences, listen to Muslim scholars and activists
from around the world and, at a later stage, to the adherents of all divine reli-
gions and to those who serve humanity and its ethical principles. In his opin-
ion, such conferences should seek to stress the ethical principles that bind
people together as well as truthfulness, gratefulness, serving humanity, and
the values that stress the unity of the family. After agreement on these val-
ues and principles, he will propose them in a declaration to be presented at
the United Nations.

The International Conference on Dialogue, held under King Abdullah’s
patronage in Makkah in early 2008, was followed in Madrid during of June
by the International Conference on Dialogue, under the joint patronage of
King Abdullah and King Juan Carlos of Spain.

Basic Principles: The Madrid Conference affirmed King Abdullah’s
“Invitation to Dialogue” principles: The unity of humankind has existed since
its creation; there is equality among human beings regardless of color, ethnic-
ity, race, religion or culture; religions strive to call forth humanity’s obedience
to the Creator and promote happiness, justice, security, and peace; seek to
enhance understanding, coexistence, and cooperation among all people; call
for spreading human moral values, wisdom, and respect and rejecting all
forms of extremism and terrorism; and call for respecting all religions, their
places of worship and symbols, and human dignity, as well as promoting
human rights, fostering peace, honoring agreements; and respecting people’s
traditions and right to security, freedom and self-determination.



Religions also oppose crime, terrorism, corruption, and drug addiction
and seek to preserve the institution of the family and protect society from
deviant behavior. As the family is considered the basic unit and nucleus of
society, it must be protected against any threat of disintegration. Dialogue,
one of the essentials of life, is also one of the most important means for peo-
ple to become acquainted with each other, foster cooperation and mutual
benefit, and search for truth – all of which contribute to human happiness.
In addition, all religions and cultures seek to protect and preserve the envi-
ronment from pollution and other dangers.

Mindful of the need to implement these principles through dialogue, the
conference reviewed the process of dialogue and its impediments, noted that
terrorism is one of the most serious obstacles to dialogue and peaceful coex-
istence, and called it a global phenomenon that must be confronted in a seri-
ous, responsible, and just way through a unified international effort. This
calls for international agreement on defining terrorism, addressing its root
causes, and promoting justice, security and stability in the world.

Conference participants recommended rejecting all “clash of civiliza-
tions and cultures” theories, for such campaigns destabilizing peace and secu-
rity; enhancing and promoting common moral values within societies, as well
as address problems that hinder this; disseminating the culture of mutual
respect and understanding through dialogue via conferences, symposia, and
relevant cultural, educational, and media programs; agreeing on interna-
tional guidelines for dialogue so that those moral values and ethical princi-
ples common to all religions are confirmed and supported; and working on a
document that promote respect for all religions and their symbols.

To fulfill these objectives, participants agreed to form a working group
to study the problems related to this undertaking and how they might be
solved; promote cooperation among religious, cultural, educational, and
media institutions to deepen and consolidate ethical values; encourage con-
structive social practices and confront immoral behavior, family disinte-
gration, and other problems; organize inter-religious and inter-cultural meet-
ings, conduct research, execute media programs, and use the Internet and
other media to disseminate a culture of peace, understanding, and har-
monious coexistence; promote dialogue among religions, civilizations, and
cultures through educational, cultural, and media activities, taking into con-
sideration particularly younger generations; and inform the UN General
Assembly of the conference’s results.

On 12-13 November 2008 and at the initiative of King Abdullah, the
UN General Assembly convened a plenary high-level meeting during its

Madani: A Review of Inter-Civlizational Dialogue 145



146 The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 27:4

sixty-third session under item 45: Culture of Peace. The meeting adopted the
following statement: 

Taking note of the initiative of the King of Saudi Arabia and the World
Conference on Dialogue held in Madrid between 16 and 18 July 2008
under his patronage and graciously hosted by the King and Government of
Spain, the General Assembly reiterated its call for promoting a culture of
tolerance and mutual understanding through dialogue, and supporting the
initiatives of religious leaders, civil society, and states seeking to entrench
the culture of peace, understanding, tolerance, and respect for human
rights among the proponents of various faiths, cultures, and civilizations.

Participating states expressed their commitment to strengthening and sup-
porting existing mechanisms within the United Nations for promoting tol-
erance and human, preserving the institution of the family, protecting the
environment, spreading education, eradicating poverty, and fighting drug
abuse, crime and terrorism, noting the positive role of religions, beliefs
and moral humanitarian principles in tackling these challenges. 

Conclusion
In this review, one must have a sense of hope that sincere and fruitful efforts
have been and are being made in the pursuit of dialogue between faiths, cul-
tures, and the adherents of different convictions. As to be expected different
objectives and agendas enter such a diverse efforts in the pursuit of inter-
faith civilizational and intellectual dialogue. In some cases, we see that
regional politics and economic cooperation are the engines that move the
dialogue, or use the dialogue as a way to influence and shape political issues.
Other efforts are motivated by this fairly recent need to understand the social
make-up of Muslim societies. Yet others are launched to push for certain
principles, mostly related to education, women and the young. All such
efforts are worthwhile ones, even those with a political agenda. If we have a
dialogue, then this will help us determine more accurately what such agen-
das are.

At a different level, since the end of the cold war and more so after 9/11,
Islam has been the subject of numerous studies, interpretations, and politics
that categorize it as either a great world religion, the last hurdle before lib-
eral democracy declares victory as the world’s last and lasting order, or as
religion that went astray at the hands of extremists. As such, how to conduct
“within faith” dialogues in the Muslim world is vital. Another challenge is
determining how the Organization of the Islamic Conference can help real-



ize this goal – how it can become a “clearing house,” a follow-up organ, and
a source of information for all of the initiatives claiming interfaith under-
standing as their aim.

In the last analysis all people, regardless of their particular faith, bear the
final responsibility of being aware of and having a vision for their society
and faith, as well as of striving for openness and empowerment in their own
societies.

Madani: A Review of Inter-Civlizational Dialogue 147