Dialogue Definition History Intercultural Dialogue Theology Religion Essay Example

while preventing and resolving conflicts through the promotion of human rights, democracy, and the rule of law. 2. The Council has outlined specific objectives for intercultural dialogue which involve principles fostering equality and comprehension among participants.Intercultural dialogue encompasses various principles, such as sharing perspectives, understanding different viewpoints, and identifying cultural traditions' similarities and differences. It also involves promoting non-violent conflict resolution, managing cultural diversity democratically, and bridging the gap between those who perceive diversity as a threat and those who see it as an enrichment. To effectively promote intercultural dialogue, it is crucial to prioritize democratic governance of social diversity and the promotion of social coherence. Collaborative development of new projects, practices, concepts, and philosophies plays an essential role in achieving this objective. Rather than providing a strict definition for intercultural dialogue, it is more helpful to focus on the "enabling factors" that define genuine interactions. According to the Council of Europe's suggestions based on previous experience, at least six significant conditions should be met or achieved throughout the process. Intercultural dialogue incorporates several important principles to promote equality and understanding. These include treating all individuals with equal respect, actively participating in voluntary dialogue while maintaining an open and curious mindset without a competitive desire to "win" the conversation. Intercultural dialogue involves recognizing cultural similarities and differences, having knowledge of one's own culture as well as other cultures, and finding common ground for appreciating and respecting these distinctions.The text highlights the importance of human dignity and democracy, emphasizing that every individual is valuable regardless of their language, race, color, folklore, faith or nationality. In today's interconnected society, cultures no longer remain isolated but instead engage

in interactions where ideas are shared. These interactions allow individuals to express themselves authentically and showcase their unique perspectives. Communication plays a crucial role in these encounters as it goes beyond spoken words to include facial expressions, reactions, gestures, and eye contact. Our inner world is externalized and transmitted without verbal expression. The world has become more connected and every moment we encounter can either facilitate or hinder intercultural dialogue. Every interaction essentially becomes an intercultural exchange because culture is inherent to being human [1]. Article 22 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights [2] discusses the preservation of culture; however, culture extends beyond mere preservation as it encompasses self-expression, thoughts, emotions, and preferences - permeating all aspects of our existence. Each individual's cultural world is unique and shaped by traditions and personal experiences which hold profound significance (Banus, Enrique).Communication is the foundation of human behavior and social interaction, as it enables the exchange and understanding of messages (Banus, Enrique). Each message holds cultural significance, turning every conversation into an intercultural dialogue. When our cultural worlds intersect, interactions with others become crucial in daily life, providing opportunities for greetings, expressions, and conversations. The nature of these interactions may vary depending on the level of connection shared with each individual or group encountered (Banus, Enrique).

Intercultural dialogue challenges established procedures and strategies for mental survival in a complex world; it is both an art form and a paradigm shift (Banus, Enrique). Contact and communication naturally give rise to biases and stereotypes as we assert our collective identity in contrast to "the other," which is a common process. However, intercultural dialogue acknowledges that "the other" is not just

an adversary but also a necessary complement that allows individuals to express their thoughts and ideas authentically.

Interestingly enough, present-day societies tend to reinforce the perception of hostility between one's own identity and alterity. This reinforcement becomes particularly evident as state authority diminishes, creating space for regional/national movements that gain strength within states. Moreover, globalization and interconnectedness weaken state power while internal diversity within societies grows stronger.The concept of squares and places has expanded beyond individual belonging to represent the diversity of the world. Local levels align with global trends, which can create uncertainty. This leads to the emergence of new collective identities that sometimes prioritize group interests over individual fulfillment. Intercultural dialogue values culture as a positive expression of the human spirit; however, it becomes difficult to simply celebrate culture and dialogue in light of atrocities like Auschwitz and Gulags. Culture encompasses both the best and worst aspects created by humans. Therefore, discussions on intercultural dialogue should include promoting critical thinking to avoid cultural relativism while finding a balance between tolerance and intolerance.

In international politics, intercultural dialogue emerged as a response to Huntington's Clash of Civilizations theory. President Mohammad Khatami introduced the term "dialogue among civilizations" during his speech at the United Nations General Assembly in November 1998. In recognition of this, the General Assembly unanimously declared 2001 as the Year of Dialogue among Civilizations. Unfortunately, these efforts were overshadowed by the September 11 attacks that fueled fear, suspicion, and war.

To address these challenges and promote global cooperation on cross-cultural issues, the United Nations launched the "Alliance of Civilizations" initiative in 2004UNESCO's aim was to promote dialogue and unity among societies and communities, while actively

advocating for cultural diversity and intercultural dialogue. The organization recognizes that safeguarding and advancing cultural heritage is crucial for fostering creative diversity, countering ignorance and intolerance, and strengthening intercultural competencies. Cultural pluralism is emphasized through exchanges between civilizations, as highlighted in 'The Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity' (2001) and the Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions (2005). UNESCO believes that cultural diversity is a shared heritage that unites humanity, contributing to both economic prosperity and personal development. According to UNESCO (2002), individuals have the right to express their cultural identity through language and access means of expressing their culture, with a particular emphasis on protecting the rights of minority groups and indigenous peoples. These cultural rights are seen as an "ethical imperative," reflecting a commitment to human rights and fundamental freedoms.The Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity, created in response to the September 11th terrorist attack as a rejection of cultural hatred and promotion of intercultural dialogue for peace (Matsuura, forward to UNESCO, 2002), highlights the significance of cultural exchange. Intercultural dialogue plays a crucial role in fostering creativity by allowing cultural traditions to thrive through interactions with other cultures (Article 7). While often referred to as a melting pot, the United States' perspective on cultural diversity differs somewhat from Europe. In Europe, there has historically been an emphasis on nurturing a rich educational culture aimed at coexistence despite political, religious, linguistic, and cultural differences [5]. The EU states have faced aggressive and violent events in the past but after World War II peaceful coexistence became an immediate necessity. Currently characterized by peace, economic success, and increasing political integration, Europe

still faces challenges from "the other," including expansion and various political or economic crises. Intercultural dialogue is seen as a solution to promote mutual understanding, better coexistence, and strengthen the sense of European citizenship and belonging.The European Union has historically paid little attention to intercultural dialogue, with the exception of Jacques Delors' 1992 initiative "A Soul for Europe". This initiative aimed to incorporate spiritual and ethical aspects alongside the economic and legal dimensions of the EU. However, intercultural dialogue is given significant importance within the Council of Europe, aligning with its core mission. In 1993, during the First Summit of Heads of State and Government, cultural diversity was emphasized as crucial in Europe, along with the necessity for tolerance in an open society. As a result, various measures were established such as the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities in 1995, creation of the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance, and launch of "All Different - All Equal" – a European Youth Campaign against racism, antisemitism, xenophobia, and intolerance. The Third Summit of Heads of State and Government recognized intercultural dialogue in 2005 as a means to promote awareness, understanding reconciliation, and tolerance. It is also seen as a way to prevent conflicts while ensuring societal integration and coherence [7]. In 2008,the Council of Europe introduced "the spiritual dimension of intercultural dialogue," acknowledging religion's potential role in one's identity alongside cultural ethnic or linguistic backgrounds [8].The Council of Europe (2008) defines intercultural dialogue as the exchange of perspectives between different individuals or groups at various levels, including within societies, between European societies, and between Europe and the rest of the world [9]. The

significance of intercultural dialogue is highlighted in the White Paper on EU morality. This paper aims to establish a coherent and long-term policy for promoting intercultural dialogue within Europe and with neighboring regions. Supported by all 47 member states of the Council of Europe [9], it targets policymakers and practitioners at different levels, emphasizing the importance of upholding human rights, democracy, and the rule of law as stated in the European Convention on Human Rights. The paper proposes an intercultural approach based on individual human dignity, shared humanity, and common destiny as a progressive way to manage cultural diversity. It serves as a guide for action at national, regional, and local levels by outlining the principles of the Council of Europe in promoting intercultural dialogue. Additionally, it includes an evaluation of past activities, successful practices, recent research on intercultural dialogue, and recommendations for implementation. Moreover, it presents a long-term vision for fostering intercultural dialogue within European societies, encompassing cross-border and neighboring regions.The White Paper aims to provide policies, initiatives, standards, and tools for supporting intercultural dialogue. It also explains how the Council of Europe can assist in improving conditions for promoting intercultural dialogue. The discussion on intercultural dialogue in Europe reached its peak during the 'European Year of Intercultural Dialogue' in 2008. Similarly, the European Union's 'Year of Intercultural Dialogue' in 2006 had a goal to promote intercultural dialogue and raise awareness on active European citizenship among young people and disadvantaged groups. The Rainbow Platform (now called the Platform for Intercultural Europe) encouraged civil society participation. With a budget of 10 million euros, this initiative supported flagship projects, co-financed national projects, conducted an information campaign,

and carried out evaluations. The EU took inspiration from other international administrations while establishing the declaration for the 'Year of Intercultural Dialogue'. Unlike the UN's approach, the main focus was on social coherence issues and developing a common identity within European civil order. Notably absent from this text are discussions about conflict, peace or war; instead it emphasizes that intercultural dialogue is closely linked to bringing together peoples as a fundamental aspiration underlying Europe's construction.The Lisbon Strategy aimed to make the EU globally competitive economically, but did not address potential conflicts in line with the original initiative for the 'Year of Intercultural Dialogue'. During the Commission's inaugural conference titled "Peace, Security and Stability: Intercultural Dialogue" in March 2002, interreligious dialogue and peacebuilding were prominent topics. However, during the 'Year of Intercultural Dialogue', there was confusion surrounding the concept itself. The focus mainly revolved around education related to arts, heritage, youth development, culture promotion, and sports activities. Building citizenship was emphasized as a significant goal, with religion receiving only a brief mention. Notably, seven flagship projects during this year focused primarily on the artistic sector and placed strong emphasis on multilingualism, youth involvement, and urban culture. Some groups that received subsidies were also beneficiaries of the previous "European Year of Equal Opportunities for All" in 2007. The EU's approach differed from other international organizations or European politics regarding intercultural dialogue within its 'Year of Intercultural Dialogue'. Mascia argues that intercultural dialogue should be based on universal and trans-cultural values; however, limited information is available regarding effective implementation of dialogue and ensuring effective policies in this field.
During the European Union Year of Intercultural Dialogue, various approaches were

implemented to promote intercultural understanding, including using music and cultural instruction as means of fostering dialogue, providing capacity building for enterprises that support intercultural dialogue, and creating national action plans dedicated to this cause. The text also examines the importance, influence, and challenges associated with mediation, gender, ICT, and religion in intercultural dialogue.

The increasing recognition of intercultural mediation can be attributed to heightened societal and cultural tensions stemming from international issues like minority rights or immigration. This perception is evident across multiple fields including informal and formal education, social work, international affairs, and research. In response to these concerns, programs have been developed along with websites and university studies based on renowned experts such as John Paul Lederach (1995) or Johan Galtung (2000), who proposed theories addressing this topic.

Galtung's "conflict theory" underscores conflict as both destructive and constructive; it highlights the hazards posed by violence but also recognizes the potential for positive change.Intercultural mediation (ICM) is often used when relationships between individuals or groups from different cultures become strained, imbalanced, tense, or hostile. These situations have significant implications for specific segments of society and overall security. Mediators play a crucial role in facilitating non-violent and culturally sensitive resolution practices (Fischer and Wiesand). According to Bernd Mueller-Jaquier's definition of Intercultural Mediation, the focus is on addressing the needs of individuals or smaller groups while de-escalating conflicts. This closely aligns with certain approaches to intercultural dialogue.

Intercultural mediation involves specialized neutral mediators who help conflicting parties achieve various goals. These mediators improve communication processes, promote understanding of culture-specific norms and values, encourage effective conflict resolution strategies, strengthen relationships, and foster empathy among those involved. Additionally, intercultural mediation promotes

the use of mediation rules to minimize legal involvement and increase participation in resolving conflicts. The ultimate objective is to facilitate mutual understanding so that parties can make their own decisions, address underlying issues, and prevent future disputes.

In recent times, intercultural mediation activities have primarily taken place outside the European Union (EU), particularly in regions affected by wars and violent conflicts.Despite this, Europe and intergovernmental administrations as well as member provinces within it have played a crucial role in promoting peaceful conflict transformation through assistance and support. In countries such as South Africa, Rwanda, Palestine, Sri Lanka, and Southeast Europe, foreign policy efforts and development cooperation initiatives have been implemented. Furthermore, there have been various initiatives aimed at training future mediators in intercultural mediation techniques.

The Yugoslav wars from 1991 to 2001 were a significant political and humanitarian crisis in Europe that emphasized the importance of intercultural mediation. These conflicts stemmed from unresolved disputes between traditional minorities and majorities in the region. DragojeviA‡ and DragiA‡eviA‡ A eA?iA‡ stress that intercultural mediation has played a vital role in addressing these challenges as newly formed states grapple with societal integration issues that impede their development.

Even after the war ended, the lack of communication and dialogue between cultural groups remains a substantial social obstacle, highlighting the necessity for resolution.UNESCO launched a project in Bosnia and Herzegovina to empower local cultural activists, enabling them to create cultural mediation initiatives that go beyond cultural and national boundaries. Milena DragiA‡eviA‡ A eA?iA‡ and Sanjin DragojeviA‡ suggest that the regional aspect of this project provides a suitable framework for fundamental efforts and projects in intercultural education. Mediation efforts took place before, during, and

after conflicts, with some resembling techniques used in individual divorce cases. These efforts involved diplomatic initiatives between government officials and representatives. The text also mentions the Dayton Treaty, which ended the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia in 1995. Additionally, it states that the treaty helped resolve conflicts between ethnic Albanians and the majority population in Macedonia through new administrative and constitutional provisions. However, there is uncertainty about how these agreements should be implemented as the newly formed regions need to redefine their values, rules, symbols, and common goals.