14th Congress Autumn Session

Strasbourg 20 November

Statement by Gabriella Battaini Dragoni, Director General of Education, Culture and Heritage, Youth and Sport Council of Europe

 

It is a real privilege to address the Congress on such an important issue as intercultural dialogue, and on a project of such political scope as the “White Paper”.

As you know, the promotion of intercultural dialogue ranks very high on the political agenda of the Council of Europe. At their Third Summit in 2005, the Heads of State and Government declared their determination to ensure that “our diversity becomes a source of mutual enrichment” by fostering political, intercultural and inter-religious dialogue. Since then, the Council of Europe has taken numerous initiatives to take this forward.

I would like to point out, however, that the priority on intercultural dialogue has not fallen out of the blue sky. It is the result of a long history of European debates, expert meetings, publications and field programmes organised in many sectors of our Organisation. This includes the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities.

The Congress has fully lived up to its responsibilities. I am for instance thinking of an important document such as Resolution 232 on “autonomy, minorities, nationalism and European union”, adopted by the Standing Conference of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe as early as 1992. This document already contained in a nutshell all important themes that mark our policy on intercultural dialogue today: the recognition of different ethnic, religious, cultural and religious identities without discrimination; the need for solidarity and cohesion; the role of the values of the Council of Europe—human rights, democracy and the rule of law; the necessity of promoting participation at the grass-roots, regional and national level; transfrontier co-operation; or the key role of culturally sensitive education.

I must congratulate you on your steadfast commitment to the democratic management of cultural diversity, and your untiring efforts over many years to draw public attention to the challenges of intercultural dialogue, the risks of nationalism and intolerance, and the tasks of the various stakeholders in society. Recommendation 170 on “intercultural and inter-faith dialogue: initiatives and responsibilities of local authorities”, adopted by the Congress in 2005, is just one of several major documents of more recent date. It is with contributions such as these that you fulfil your responsibility as the advocate of local and regional authorities.

It comes as no surprise, therefore, that you have played—and are still playing—an important role in the development of the Council of Europe policy for the promotion of intercultural dialogue, which is about to take shape in the form of a key document: the “White Paper on Intercultural Dialogue”. We are very grateful for the written and oral comments and the examples of good practice that many of you have provided earlier this year. They do indeed help us fine-tuning the document, so that it fully reflects the concerns and experiences of local and regional authorities in this area.

The “White Paper” is still under discussion in the Committee of Ministers. At this moment, nobody knows exactly the contents of the definitive document, which we expect to be published in a few weeks. Although the final text is not yet available, it is justified to say that four basic thoughts will inspire the White Paper.

The value base of intercultural dialogue

Firstly, the White Paper will express the conviction that reconciling respect for different identities with fostering social cohesion can only succeed if the policy is based on universal human rights and fundamental freedoms. They are the common denominator holding our societies together. They inspire our political institutions and our everyday political culture. They ensure basic social trust. They form the European consensus on values, which is demonstrated by the accumulated instruments of the Council of Europe in this sphere.


To name just the most pertinent examples: the European Convention on Human Rights (1950) embodied the post-war commitment to human dignity, and created the European Court of Human Rights, which in its case-law interprets the Convention in the light of present-day conditions. The European Social Charter (adopted in 1961 and revised in 1996) made clear that the social rights which it set out applied to all without discrimination. The European Convention on the Legal Status of Migrant Workers (1997) stipulated that migrant workers be treated no less favourably than nationals of member states. The European Cultural Convention (1954) affirmed the continent’s ‘common cultural heritage’ and the associated need for intercultural learning, while the Framework Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage for Society (2005) identified how knowledge of this heritage could encourage trust and understanding. Promoting and protecting diversity in a spirit of tolerance was the theme of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (1992) and of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (1995). Regarding cultural diversity at the local level, the Convention on the Participation of Foreigners in Public Life at Local Level (1992) and the European Charter on the Participation of Young People in Local and Regional Life (2003, revised).

It is often pointed out, rightly I think, that dialogue with those who refuse dialogue is impossible, although this does not relieve open and democratic societies of their obligation to constantly offer opportunities for dialogue. On the other hand, dialogue with those who are ready to dialogue but do not—or do not fully—share ‘our’ values may be the starting point of a longer process of interaction, at the end of which an agreement on the significance and contextual interpretation of the values of human rights, democracy and the rule of law may very well be reached.

Defining intercultural dialogue

The second thought concerns the notion of intercultural dialogue itself. Generally, it is very difficult to find definitions of intercultural dialogue. Some argue that intercultural dialogue may be one of those terms—like ‘culture’ or ‘religion’—that are perhaps best left undefined. The Council of Europe can be courageous enough to propose a definition of intercultural dialogue that sees it as a process that comprises an open and respectful exchange of views between individuals and groups with different ethnic, cultural, religious and linguistic backgrounds and heritage.

In our view, intercultural dialogue requires the freedom and ability to express oneself as well as the willingness and capacity to listen to the views of others. Intercultural dialogue aims to develop a deeper understanding of diverse worldviews and practices, to increase participation (or the freedom to make choices), to foster equality and human dignity, to enhance creative processes and joint action, and to promote the ability of individuals and societies to grow and transform themselves through respectful dialogue with others.

Intercultural dialogue may also serve several purposes. It is a powerful instrument of mediation and reconciliation. It is an essential feature of inclusive societies, which leave no one feeling marginalised or being defined as outsiders. It is important to prevent and de-escalate conflicts, to combat prejudice and stereotypes in public and political discourse and to facilitate coalition-building across diverse cultural and religious communities.

Shared responsibility for action in five dimensions

The third thought takes up the fact that promoting intercultural dialogue is a shared responsibility of the key actors, and translates it into five areas of action, which emerged during the consultations and will form the core messages of the White Paper:

It is obvious that all stakeholders of intercultural dialogue can contribute in all five dimensions. The White Paper, however, will clearly express the conviction that the attitudes and skills of young people are key to the long-term success of intercultural dialogue, and that consequently youth organisations and youth service providers, educational institutions and the media are among those that carry a particular responsibility.

The religious dimension of intercultural dialogue

The final remark concerns the different religious identities, which the general public quite frequently sees as the real source and trigger of cultural conflict in modern societies, for instance with regard to Muslim immigrants who undoubtedly suffer from serious everyday discrimination in parts of Europe. However, the White Paper will not share the view that religion as such needs to be a source of conflict.

The Council of Europe has always recognised that there is an important religious dimension in cultural identities, and hence in intercultural dialogue. Part of the world’s rich cultural heritage is a range of religious, as well as secular, conceptions of the purpose of life. Christianity, Judaism, Islam and other faiths with all their internal differentiations are an integral part of Europe’s identity and history. However, like everyone else, an individual who professes religious faith has a complex identity, which is not defined by their faith alone. The religious dimension is thus best not shut off from other aspects of intercultural dialogue. Instead, it should be addressed by the same spirit of tolerance and open-mindedness. This is fully in line with the secular character of Europe, characterised by the separation between religion and the state and their mutual autonomy.

Implementing the White Paper in practice

Once published, the White Paper is expected to launch debates and lead to practical action at all levels. This is where youth organisations, and young people generally, will have an important role to play.

The supportive framework for action in 2008 and beyond is already prepared. The Council of Europe’s White Paper on Intercultural Dialogue will mark the starting point of numerous programmes and projects, to be implemented over several years within the Organization, nationally and locally. In particular, Chapter 6.2. Strengthening democratic citizenship and participation where reference is made to local integration committees as well as to the Convention on the Participation of Foreigners in Public Life at local level and to the need to encourage local governments to develop initiatives in order to strengthen civic involvement and participation, Chapter 6.4. on Creating Spaces for intercultural dialogue is also very important plus new project on Intercultural cities; Chapter 6.5. Intercultural Dialogue in international relations, Mediterranean dimension of your work; cooperation with Arab cities as well as the Israel-Palestine collaboration. At UN level, the new "Alliance of Civilizations" initiative is entering its operational phase. The European Union declared 2008 to be the "European Year of the Intercultural Dialogue". These are ample opportunities for all of us to learn to cherish diversity, and not to fear our neighbours.

This is what makes your contribution so valuable to us, in the past and in the future.