By Shen Dingli
If nations collide because of different values, globalization
may be giving a new spin to the multiple values involved in
international relations.
From the dim past to the present, international relations could
be categorized as relations of war and peace - nations clashing
over values.
This approach does not project a bright future for relations
among states as it doesn't provide a paradigm for the peaceful
co-existence of different value systems.
A way to avoid conflict has long been sought. A seemingly
uncomplicated approach is for nations to share peace and prosperity
through dialogue and tolerance.
The recipe of dialogue entails not imposing one's values or
faith on others. It involves respecting different peoples'
treasured values and beliefs. It is necessary to understand and
appreciate, or at least tolerate, different cultures and
religions.
The ASEM (Asia-Europe Meeting) Interfaith Dialogue, under the
framework of the Asia-Europe Summit, is just such a platform. It
brings nations together from two continents to address their
diversity and commonality in faith and culture, with the hope of
convergence for the sake of humanity.
For the first time, China is hosting the three-day ASEM
Interfaith Dialogue in Nanjing which concludes today. This is
China's contribution to the multiethnic conversation of the two
continents. This is of particular relevance as Asia still has a
long way to go to reconcile differences among nations and
continents.
The ASEM Interfaith Dialogue helps build mutual understanding
between Asians and Europeans in the fields of interfaith and
inter-religious relations.
The two previous meetings, in Bali, Indonesia in 2005, and in
Larnaca, Cyprus in 2006, addressed the relations of interfaith
dialogue to peace, justice, compassion and tolerance. They called
for more concrete action by religious leaders, academia, government
and the media.
The dialogue approach actually has a lot to do with democracy.
In a democracy, the majority makes decisions which affect the
entire group. At the same time, democracies protect the right to
individual beliefs without necessarily endorsing them.
Historically, Europe has been a place of feuds and strife. The
Peace of Westphalia in 1648 finally introduced the notion of
non-aggression. Meanwhile, the Protestants left Britain for North
America for freedom of religion.
Three centuries later, the two world wars erupted in Europe. It
took the Cold War for Europeans to develop the concept of the
European Security Council between two ideological and military
blocs. The purpose was to talk and act for collective
security.
?
The Asians might have more problems. First, in terms of recent
history, all three major wars since World War II - on the Korean
Peninsula, in Vietnam and Iraq - have occurred in Asia.
Second, while the US has aspired to balance security in the
region, it has not always been constructive in its dealings with
Asia. In fact, Washington has waged all three of the most recent
major wars here, without first pursuing negotiations.
Third, there exists a number of religions in Asia - Buddhism,
Hinduism, Islamism, Christianity, as well as various ideological
concepts. It is daunting to reconcile all these factors to minimize
conflicts. In Northeast Asia alone, numerous security and trust
problems have existed over inter-Korea rivalry, cross-Straits
tension, China-Japan discord, and the abduction issue between
Pyongyang and Tokyo. All these tensions make it truly difficult to
build a pan-Asia dialogue to advance mutual trust and
understanding.
?
The existence of these problems proves the need for an interfaith
dialogue, or confrontations will ensue.
In recent decades, some Asian states have developed regional
dialogue groupings such as ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian
Nations), ASEAN Regional Forum, Conference on Interaction and
Confidence Building Measures in Asia, Shanghai Cooperation
Organization, South Asia Association for Regional Cooperation, Gulf
Cooperation Council and Council for Security Cooperation in the
Asia Pacific as well as the non-governmental Shangri-La
Dialogue.
Most of these sub-regional mechanisms are not yet Asia-wide. But
with the systems in place, Asian countries are now enjoying a
greater chance for peace and prosperity, though their capacity for
building peace and stability is still far behind that of
Europe.
At the national level, with globalization, most of Asia is
developing rapidly as investment and technology are more
accessible. In the meantime, various social tensions are emerging
over the unequal distribution of wealth and national economies'
need to develop in more sustainable ways.
This entails domestic dialogue among various social strata and
the development of a fair and legal system that protects the
interests of people from all walks of life.
It is of the utmost importance to balance the interests of
efficiency and fairness in various Asian countries. Europeans can
share their experience in handling social cohesion and harmonious
development.
Among nations, globalization has not only facilitated
outsourcing and trade but it has also challenged state authority
and governance. With advances in communication, nationalism could
be more readily stirred up to meet the needs of narrowly defined
national interests.
At the intercontinental level, Asia and Europe have many areas
for dialogue. Europe has left its colonial legacy in Asia but is
now the main collaborator in Asia's economic and social
development.
Nanjing is well suited to be the host city for the current ASEM
Interfaith Dialogue. As the costal capital of many dynasties,
Nanjing has its own glamour of cultural cohesion for generations of
Chinese. More tragic, the Nanking Massacre of 1937 is embedded in
the Chinese national psyche affecting relations with Japan.
It is much desired that a genuine interfaith dialogue between
China and Japan could put to rest the different perspectives on
that period. The two continents have much in common in seeking a
fair world political structure but differ to a certain extent in
their understanding of human and civil rights.
The Nanjing round of the ASEM Interfaith Dialogue brings their
communication to a higher level, strengthening peace and
civilization across the Asian-European landmass.
The author is executive dean, Institute of International
Studies, and director, Center for American Studies, Fudan
University.
(China Daily June 21, 2007)
