This Article is about a summit being held today and tomorrow (Nov 12 & 13) at the United Nations where President Bush, Gordon Brown, leaders of several Muslim nations, and the presidents of Middle Eastern counties including Israel, Lebanon, and Palestine are meeting to discuss interfaith issues and relations throughout the world.
I found this article interesting because we have not discussed faith based foreign policy influence much in class or on this blog, especially in terms of policy outside the US. Bush has been known to host a variety of different religious leaders in America to celebrate holidays such as Ramadan and Passover at the White House. However, I cannot find any indication that he has participated in something this large scale, across international boundary lines. I really commend this summit, I think its great Bush is participating because I do not think that America as a society can fully accept Muslims into our community until international relations get better and the American public sees less exemplimentary extremism and hate.
According to this article, these summits were largely the idea of Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah bin Abdul-Aziz whose country is known for restricting other religions. The special envoy of Saudi Arabia said, "The idea is to send a unified clear message that the world community is in consensus in promoting interfaith dialogue and speaking against extremism, intolerance, and terrorism."
This summit comes a week after the first Catholic and Muslim forum at the Vatican. At that forum, a 15-point agreement was reached between the two clashing religious groups including: “the right of individuals to choose in matters of conscience and to practice their religion in private and public; that religious minorities are to be respected and are entitled to their own places of worship; that human dignity and respect should be extended on an equal basis to both men and women.”
Both of these interfaith meetings seem to be seeking a Jeffersonian approach to religion: “because while I claim a right to believe in one God, I yield freely to others that of believing in three. Both religions, I find make honest men, and that is the only point society has any right to look to.”(Jefferson) However, I think this is just going to be too idealistic of a solution. Religion greatly influences many large scale policy decisions in the Middle East. Just look at Israel, a newly declared Jewish State that lies onto of a small strip of land that all three religions—Christianity, Islam, and Judaism, have very strong ties to. Each believes it is their right to be able to worship on these lands. Nonetheless, due to its overwhelming Western support, this country has evolved into a situation closer to Christianity & Judaism v. Islam. This is just one example though. In many Muslim countries where Christians are the minority, they are restricting from worshiping as freely as they should.
While I think its wonderful that so much discussion is happening between the most influential and important policy deciders in the world, I just cannot help but be cynical in that the nature of religion, with its strong convictions and call to a higher being over life on earth, is too much of a force. Conversations about peaceful relationships between religions should and must happen, but I guess in our generation we will witness how much good they do.
Posts
4 comments:
Thank you God, for not allowing Bono anywhere near this summit. We can only hope that U2 will break up in our life time, freeing our Irish brethren of the burden that is Bono's tenacious mediocrity.
Marion rightly compares the rhetoric of the summit to Jefferson’s approach to religious freedom in America. I also agree, however, that political issues intertwined with religion become so complex that simple discussion about freedoms will not provide tangible solutions.
Yet, Marion's ending with a cynical attitude toward religion's place in the public sphere won't be helpful either. Over this course, I have found it helpful to look at the times when religion and politics produced beneficial changes. The Civil Rights is a great example where religion united groups of people in ways that produced profound changes on America's political landscape.
Also, last night I heard a photojournalist speak about his trips to Darfur. He tells about how this conflict has actually united Muslims and Christians in ways that people would never have expected. I think that the summit discussions are a great beginning, as long as they have a tangible follow through, where the common desire for religious freedom will unite people for common good.
I agree with Marion that this summit is a step in the right direction. I think it is crucial that people realize that the overwhelming majority of Muslims are not extremists, and this seems to have been a major goal of the summit. I am however less cynical than Marion. I think that while these summits can never fully solve the problems caused by religious differences that they can make a real difference
I'm kind of sad to say that my initial reaction to summits like these, filled with the lofty refrains of brotherhood and unity and being more alike than different, is also usually quite cynical. It's like with Slim Fast... you just end up with ambitious, unfulfilled promises and the same lack of willpower you started with. All you did was buy into the hype. So while I will hope, I won't be expecting immediate camaraderie in the Balkans or Gaza Strip.
That said, I do think it's more likely for real interfaith progress to be made if religious figureheads are amicable toward each other than if they aren't. So perhaps, in smaller-scale circumstances where relations have potential for improvement, the outspoken efforts of respected leaders may facilitate the notion of humanity trumping the details. Perhaps.
Post a Comment