A Turkish newspaper is reporting that President Barack Obama
will attend the second annual United Nations Alliance of
Civilizations (AoC) forum in early April during his visit to
Turkey.[1]
The AoC is an attempt by the U.N. to quell perceived tensions
between Muslim and Western nations by promoting dialogue. Although
well-intentioned, the effort has little prospect for success due to
bias and objectionable proposals to freedom of expression. The base
document for the Alliance of Civilizations focused on the supposed
failings of Western countries while largely ignoring the faults of
Muslim nations. It also endorsed the idea of constraining freedom
of media, speech, and expression in order to combat "Islamophobia."
This is an agenda similar to the effort by Muslim countries to
prohibit "defamation of religion" that the U.S. has opposed in
other U.N. forums. Rather than attend a U.N. talkfest wedded to
objectionable ideas, President Obama should spend his time in the
region more constructively, for instance discussing with the
Turkish Prime Minister how Turkey can work with the U.S. on mutual
concerns like bringing pressure on Iran to halt its nuclear
program.
A Less Than Useful Forum
A successor to the Iranian-proposed Dialogue of Civilizations
and brainchild of former U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, the
Alliance of Civilizations aims to improve relations between Western
and Muslim countries by responding "to the need for a committed
effort by the international community-both at the institutional and
civil society levels-to bridge divides and overcome prejudice,
misconceptions, misperceptions, and polarization which potentially
threaten world peace."[2]
The 2006 report from the High-Level Group for an Alliance of
Civilizations fell far short of this goal. Indeed, the report often
simply endorsed ongoing initiatives like the multilateral peace
process to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict or repackaged
calls for increased assistance from Western countries. When it did
offer analysis and recommendations, they were burdened by biased
perspectives and a list of objectives-instead of a strategy-to
revive the economic performance of Middle Eastern and North African
nations.[3]
Among the worst of the recommendations was the report's support
for constraining media content and coverage in Western countries
"including the use of terms such as 'Islamic terrorism' and
'Islamic fascism'-[which] have contributed to an alarming increase
in Islamophobia which further exacerbates Muslim fears of the
West."[4] The report virtually ignored the pervasive
constraints, official or otherwise, on freedom of speech,
expression, and the press in many Islamic countries.
Despite its problems, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon
appointed the former president of Portugal, Jorge Sampaio, as the
High Representative for the Alliance of Civilizations in April
2007, giving him the task of promoting "the Alliance of
Civilizations as a credible and viable attempt to diminish the
dangerous tensions between diverse societies and their threat to
international stability"[5] and established a voluntary Trust Fund in
September 2007 to support the Alliance of Civilizations.
Not unexpectedly, the report of the first annual Alliance of
Civilizations forum in Madrid in January 2008 illustrated that the
AoC continues to support constraints on freedom of expression and
speech in order to combat "Islamophobia":
One of the biggest challenges in engaging "Muslim" and "Western"
societies is the rise of "Islamophobia." Constantly, Muslims and
Islam are on the defensive. The point of departure for discussions
on Islam is often that it is not a violent religion. In the
non-Muslim world it is thought that it is the responsibility of
mainstream Muslims to differentiate themselves from extremists. The
non-Muslim world also has a part to play in actively
differentiating between the religion and acts of terror.
Stereotyping is often a product of intended ignorance. There are
resources being constantly deployed to spread disinformation and
misperceptions of others. This can be described as an industry of
ignorance. To counter this, it was proposed that a human right
to be understood should be promoted as a mutual obligation for
all societies and cultures. Additionally, education around this
right should be incorporated into school curricula and textbooks,
such that it can become the basis of interaction between cultures
and societies.[6]
To accomplish the objectives of the AoC, which, presumably,
include taking action to help combat negative "stereotyping" by the
media and establishing an indefinable "human right to be
understood," the AoC has created:
- A Media Literacy Education Clearinghouse to create a
"participatory global repository of information, resources, and
good practices relevant to Media Literacy Education, Media
Education Policy and Youth Media"[7];
- An Education About Religions and Beliefs Clearinghouse to offer
"consensus guidelines about teaching about religions and belief in
elementary and secondary education; collections of curricula about
religions and beliefs in elementary and secondary education, and
where possible, evaluations of curricular outcomes; links to
relevant associations, institutions and organizations; and events
of interest to researchers, policy-makers and educators working in
this area"[8];
- A Rapid Response Media Mechanism to "provide a platform for
voices that can help reduce tensions in times of cross-cultural
crises" and establish a "network of experts to develop messages
(i.e. op-ed articles, audio and video statements and interviews)
that help frame contentious issues in less polarizing terms and
offer insightful and nuanced perspectives on complex debates"[9];
and
- A multi-million dollar Alliance of Civilizations Media Fund
"aimed at financing mainstream film productions that help promote
cross-cultural understanding and combat stereotypes."[10]
It is easy to imagine how a tyranny of relativism could govern
the information collected, since the countries involved do not
share the same values or philosophies.
Pushing Back Freedom
There is remarkably little information on exactly what the AoC
has accomplished aside from holding meetings and establishing
Alliance-approved databases of experts and organizations who can
discuss youth, education, media, and migration issues.
There is major cause for concern considering the AoC's ongoing
support of constraints on freedom of expression and speech. As U.N.
High Representative for the Alliance of Civilizations Jorge Sampaio
announced at a 2008 press conference in Iran, "There is a balance
to be found between freedom of expression and respect for religion
and for religious feelings and principles."[11] These types of
platitudes are unworthy of a true effort to promote frank dialogue.
Freedom of expression means little if it is subject to the
sensitivities and feelings of those who may be offended by personal
statements on, or media coverage of, religious matters. After all,
non-controversial statements and views are rarely subject to
censorship. Discussions stilted and constrained by censorship are
unlikely to "promote understanding and reconciliation among
cultures globally and, in particular, between Muslim and Western
societies."[12]
In U.N. debates, the balance between freedom of expression and
"respect for religion and for religious feelings and principles" is
increasingly tilting against freedom of expression and speech. The
Organization of the Islamic Conference, for instance, has convinced
the U.N. Human Rights Council and the U.N. General Assembly to pass
resolutions that limit freedom of speech in the name of opposing
"defamation of religions" and "Islamophobia."[13]
Only weeks ago, the Obama Administration announced that it would
not participate in the upcoming Durban Review Conference (Durban
II) on racism, in part because the conference's resulting draft
document embraced the troubling concept of "defamation of
religion."[14] It would send mixed signals, to say the
least, for the U.S. to boycott Durban II in protest over the
concept of "defamation of religion" while simultaneously embracing
the idea of constraints on freedom of expression and speech through
President Obama's attendance at the Alliance of Civilizations
forum.
A Better Use of Time
President Obama is right to recognize that not all Muslims are
extremists, and he is right to express his hopes that Western
nations and moderate Muslims can work together to confront Islamic
extremism, which threatens them both. Such sentiments are logical
and echo those of President George W. Bush, who also sought to
reach out to moderate Muslims and work with them to combat
extremism.
Such objectives are not likely to be advanced by the AoC. A
dialogue subject to censorship, regardless of intent, is unlikely
to be productive or fruitful. Instead, President Obama should
express, unequivocally, his commitment to freedom of speech and
expression-even if it leads to statements deemed unacceptable by
the AoC. Rather than attend the AoC forum in Turkey, the President
should dedicate his time to soliciting Turkey's cooperation on
serious foreign policy objectives, such as halting Iran's nuclear
program.
Brett D. Schaefer is Jay
Kingham Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs in the Margaret
Thatcher Center for Freedom, a division of the Kathryn and Shelby
Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies, at The Heritage
Foundation.