VZCZCXRO6913
PP RUEHBC RUEHDA RUEHDBU RUEHDE RUEHGI RUEHJS RUEHKUK RUEHLH RUEHPW
RUEHROV RUEHTRO
DE RUCNDT #0851/01 2841339
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 111339Z OCT 07
FM USMISSION USUN NEW YORK
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 2761
INFO RUCNISL/ISLAMIC COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RUCNMGH/MAGHREB COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RUEHHI/AMEMBASSY HANOI PRIORITY 0153
RUEHHE/AMEMBASSY HELSINKI PRIORITY 0495
RUEHMU/AMEMBASSY MANAGUA PRIORITY 0090
RUEHSK/AMEMBASSY MINSK PRIORITY 0175

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 04 USUN NEW YORK 000851 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
IO/PCC FOR PAUL DENIG 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PHUM KIRF AORC UNGA XF XC XD NU CU
SUBJECT: UNGA HIGH LEVEL DIALOGUE ON INTERRELIGIOUS AND 
INTERCULTURAL UNDERSTANDING 
 
¶1. (U) Summary:  Speakers at a UN General Assembly High-Level 
Dialogue on Interreligious and Intercultural Understanding 
and Cooperation for Peace, Oct. 4-8, stressed the value of 
dialogue and education in overcoming misunderstanding and the 
importance of respecting basic freedoms, particularly freedom 
of religion and expression.  Addressing the issue of 
stereotypes and misunderstanding, many focused on the 
misinterpretation of Islam and in several instances this 
discussion led to criticism of the West, the media and 
freedom of expression.  While many delegations cited examples 
of actions taken within their own countries to increase 
understanding between religions and cultures, few made 
specific recommendations for international action.  Two panel 
discussions focused on the importance of dialogue, respect 
for human rights and the importance of local leadership and 
grassroots action.  U.S. Ambassador Christopher Ross 
highlighted the need for dialogue between moderates and 
extremists within each faith in parallel with interfaith 
dialogue.  U.S. Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy 
and Public Affairs Karen Hughes stressed the importance of 
dialogue, education and exchanges to promote intercultural 
and interreligious understanding and to reduce misperceptions 
between groups.  End Summary 
 
------------------------------------- 
Dialogue Between and Within Religions 
------------------------------------- 
 
¶2. (U) Most countries welcomed the High Level Dialogue and 
supported international, regional, national and local 
dialogue as the key to creating a tolerant, secure and 
peaceful world.  Nearly all provided examples of successful 
cultural and religious dialogue within their own regions and 
nations.  While most argued that interreligious dialogue is 
important to avoid the clash of civilizations, very few 
countries called for dialogue within religious traditions as 
a means to address extremism. 
 
¶3. (U) Indonesia, Pakistan and Finland were the only speakers 
that addressed dialogue within religious groups.  Indonesia, 
recognizing that conflict and tension also rise between 
factions of the same religion, called for intra-faith 
dialogue.  Pakistan called for an initiation of "dialogue 
among our own people to build further understanding of the 
true spirit and values of their own and other major 
religions." Finland called for self-reflection and discussion 
of beliefs and freedoms within religious communities. 
 
----------------------------------------- 
"Islamophobia":  Where does it come from? 
----------------------------------------- 
 
¶3. (U) Nearly all delegations argued that lack of 
understanding and stereotypes create division between 
religions and cultures, specifically between the Western and 
Islamic world.  Most delegations called for increased 
religious and cultural education and dialogue to reduce 
stereotyping and blamed current conflicts on lack of mutual 
understanding, as well as underlying socio-economic and 
political factors.  However, several countries pointed the 
blame at the West for what they described as growing 
discrimination and attacks on Islam and on Muslim people 
around the world. 
 
¶4. (U) Algeria argued that this tension comes from an 
incorrect association of Islam with violence, intolerance and 
extremism.  Pakistan stated that in the post-9/11 world, 
Islam is perceived by the West as propagating terrorism, 
extremism and bent on striking at Western values.  Syria and 
the OIC also focused on the Western role in creating 
anti-Islamic sentiment.  The OIC pointed to campaigns of hate 
speech to denigrate and attack Islam, noting, "Islamophobia 
is on the rise." 
 
¶5. (U) The Pakistani representative stated that in the 
Islamic world, the West is seen as suppressing Muslims in 
places like Palestine, Iraq and Kashmir.  Malaysia stated 
that "oppression and ill treatment" of certain groups, such 
as the Palestinians and Muslim minorities, contribute to the 
conflict between the West and the Islamic world.  The UAE 
argued that violence, occupation, cultural and economic 
domination by developed states increases feelings of 
injustice, inequality and marginalization in developing 
nations and leads to "a breeding ground for new security 
 
USUN NEW Y 00000851  002 OF 004 
 
 
threats that include extremism, violence and revenge." 
 
¶6. (U) Western media were often accused of creating a 
negative image of Islam.  The Pakistani representative argued 
that Western media exploit freedom of expression to propagate 
insults against Islam and its sacred symbols.  Kuwait also 
argued that fear of Islam leads to discrimination and that 
the media have a large role connecting Islam with terrorism. 
Senegal pointed to the abuse of freedom of expression to 
attack Islam.  Cuba also criticized the Western media for 
their negative portrayal of Islam as a religion associated 
with terrorism and violence. 
 
¶7. (U) Jordan noted an attempt to portray Islam as a religion 
of violence, but also mentioned the need to combat extremism 
within Islam, specifically citing the need to define who is 
authorized to issue a Fatwa. 
 
----------------- 
Role of the Media 
----------------- 
 
¶8. (U) Most countries agreed that the media play an important 
role in promoting understanding between religions and 
cultures and cited ways to include the media in this 
dialogue.  However, some sharply criticized the media's role 
and called for measures against media abuse, particularly in 
their portrayal of Islam. 
 
¶9. (U) Saudi Arabia called for international laws regarding 
respect for religion and attacks on religious symbols.  The 
OIC also called for legal provisions to prohibit defamation 
of religions and their sacred symbols to avoid "provocative 
attempts that poison relations between the adherents of 
different religions, under the guise of freedom of 
expression."  Pakistan called for prohibition of hate 
literature and the "defamation of religious personalities 
under the pretext of freedom of expression."  Malaysia, 
Kuwait, Cuba and Lebanon also noted the media's sometimes 
negative role, but stopped short of calling for restrictive 
legislation. 
 
------------------- 
Practical Solutions 
------------------- 
 
¶10. (U) Most speakers called for continued dialogue and 
education in general terms.   Nearly all speakers cited 
examples of interreligious and intercultural dialogue and 
harmony within their own nations and steps already taken 
nationally and regionally to achieve cooperation.   Education 
was almost unanimously recognized as key to a solution.  The 
majority expressed support for the work of The Alliance of 
Civilizations, an initiative of the UN Secretary-General, 
co-sponsored by Spain and Turkey, to urge governments and 
civil society to work to overcome prejudice and 
misperceptions. 
 
¶11. (U) Several nations praised regional action plans, such 
as the Asia-Pacific Regional Interfaith Dialogue, which seek 
to increase connections, foster tolerance and improve media 
coverage.  European countries expressed support for the 
EUROMED Barcelona process. 
 
¶12. (U) Several countries, including the Philipines, Belarus, 
Vietnam and Syria, called for establishment and strengthening 
of a focal unit on interreligious and intercultural dialogue 
within the UN Secretariat.  Belarus also suggested broader 
involvement of the UN Secretariat's ICT mechanism.  Pakistan 
called for the establishment of a common school training 
diplomats and officials from nations representing different 
faiths to teach greater understanding of other religions and 
cultures. 
 
------------------------------------ 
Dialogue as a Platform for Criticism 
------------------------------------ 
 
¶13. (U) Several speakers used the opportunity of the High 
Level Dialogue to criticize other nations.  Nicaragua 
criticized powerful UN members for their "addiction to 
warfare", the UN for its inability to curb the "insane 
concept of preventive war in which the potential aggressor 
looks into his crystal ball to decide who will be the next 
 
USUN NEW Y 00000851  003 OF 004 
 
 
target of its occupations and aggressions", and the Security 
Council for its failure to criticize powerful nations, even 
in cases of flagrant violations of the UN charter. 
 
¶14. (U) Cuba accused global power elites of imposing their 
culture as part of a neo-colonial policy. Its representative 
stated that "today's world bears witness to genocidal wars 
that the powers of the North wage in their voracious pursuit 
of hegemonic dominance."  Cuba alleged human rights 
violations committed "in the name of the so-called "war on 
terror." 
 
¶15. (U) Azerbaijan used the platform to accuse Armenia of 
ethnic cleansing and genocide and to call for international 
cooperation for restoring the rights of Azerbaijani refugees. 
 Serbia criticized the government of Kosovo. 
 
¶16. (U) Syria used the platform to criticize current world 
trends.  Its representative called the twentieth century the 
most violent, despite globalization and advances in science 
and communication.  He pointed to colonial injustices against 
Afro-Asian and Latin American cultures and the first use of 
nuclear weapons. He called for an end to using religion for 
expansionism and settlement and for an end to the 
Israeli-Palestinian conflict. UAE also called for a solution 
to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. 
 
----------------------------------- 
Panel Discussion with Civil Society 
----------------------------------- 
 
17.(U) Along with the plenary speeches, two panels comprised 
of members of civil society discussed interreligious and 
intercultural dialogue and current best practices.  Many 
panel members called for turning dialogue into action and the 
need to respect human rights around the world.  They stressed 
the need to use local leaders for successful dialogue and 
peace building.  Several examples of local initiatives were 
presented. 
 
18.(U) Many speakers addressed the role of the media.  A 
Nigerian Imam criticized the media for lack of sensitivity to 
religion and culture.  A speaker from a Spanish NGO called 
the clash of civilizations a "clash of ignorance" and argued 
that the media have an important role in changing 
misperceptions.  A Sri Lankan journalist cited erroneous 
reports, such as initial attribution of the Oklahoma City 
bombing to Middle Eastern terrorist groups, as evidence that 
the media often report based on stereotypes.  Although these 
reports are later proven false, he asserted that the damage 
is already done. 
 
19.(U) Several speakers addressed the need for 
self-reflection within religions.  A U.S. professor called 
for religions to examine extremism within their own 
communities.  He argued that religions cannot deny that 
extremists are a part of their community, since they use 
their same text and teachings to preach extremism.  Egypt's 
representative disagreed, arguing that he is Muslim, but has 
"nothing in common with those who kill in the name of God." 
Speaking for the U.S., Ambassador Christopher Ross called for 
two parallel dialogues: one between different religions and 
another, equally important, between moderates and extremists 
within a religion to seek a return to non-violence. 
 
20.(U) The Philippines recommended the creation of a UN body 
organized for interfaith dialogue whose membership would 
include members of civil society. 
 
-------------- 
U.S.Statement: 
-------------- 
 
21.(U) Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public 
Affairs Karen Hughes delivered a well-received statement 
focusing on the positive impact of religion.  She stressed 
the importance of dialogue, education and exchanges to 
promote intercultural and interreligious understanding and to 
reduce misperceptions between groups.  The full text is 
available at 
http://www.un.int/usa/press releases/20071004 225.html. 
 
22.(SBU) Comment:  While uplifting, this high-level dialogue 
is not likely to lead to a measurable improvement in 
 
USUN NEW Y 00000851  004 OF 004 
 
 
interfaith or intercultural understanding. 
KHALILZAD