4.1 Grant full recognition to all non-sectarian political forces, including the « Islamists »
The first and most urgent recombination of the Union’s policy-making entails getting our heads down together with the whole spectrum of the Arab political playing-field, and doing some serious intellectual and informal -as against merely political and institutional – bridge-building. The whole notion of an ‘Islamist trend’ will have to be deconstructed/reconstructed along the lines of a pivotal distinction too rarely highlighted: a majority of Arab political actors, for reasons of identity, display high sensitivity to the assertion of Muslim cultural markers. Such an assertion process by no means predetermines the adoption of particular modes of political action and can by no means be perceived as antinomic to or exclusionary of the dynamics of political liberalisation and social modernisation. No doubt, the EU can and must conserve the right to set its face against political actors who do not respect its own ethical code. But it must do so with an equal zeal, whatever the vocabulary of the actors concerned, and not on the sole basis of a real or supposed «Islamity», highhandedly ostracising the whole spectrum ofpolitical formations qualified as «Islamist», for that reason alone.
Without seeking exemption from any of the usual diplomatic requirements, the Union would do well to include in the list of its interlocutors (government-level, to be sure, but also from the ranks of the opposition and among members of civil society) the whole spectrum of political families in the field, and more particularly those – an overwhelming majority – among Islamist groups which willingly accept the principle of such dialogues or interactions. Often present in parliamentary settings, as in the case of Palestine, Yemen, Jordan, Lebanon, Kuwait, Iraq or Saudi Arabia, not to mention situations in which they participate in government, or are leaders of the same (as in Lebanon or in Palestine, and tomorrow Iraq or elsewhere), they should by no means be ostracised in any way which might contribute to perpetuate the idea, credited by the terrible counter-performance concerning Palestine, that anti-Muslim sectarianism is currently rife in Europe.
The intellectuals associated with EU agendas must of course hail from all horizons of thought and not systematically exclude (as the programme of the Civil Forum and the NGO platform both to some degree tend to do) participants considered as akin or belonging to Islamist circles.
4.2. Beyond the «theologising» of political tensions
Acknowledging the existence of moderate Islamist trends entails the EU no longer straying – whatever the propensity of certain actors, state-level not excluded, to do so – into the minefield of an «ideologisation» or, worse still, a «theologisation» of our understanding of the tensions within, or in relation with, the Arab World. Still more than the efforts towards cultural or religious fence-mending, however necessary the latter may be, Euro-Arab relations today stand in need of mecanisms able to ensure a better distribution of political ressources, that is to say, an enhanced degree of international justice, or even more modestly a less openly flagrant degree of injustice.
If cultural shoulder-rubbing may well usefully contribute to such an outcome, but can by no means be thought to serve as a substitute. The register of the «dialogue of cultures» or of «civilisations» should thus never justify the refusal of a lay reading and a purely political answer to tensions with the Arab world. Recourse to a culturalist, theological or «civilisational» approach indeed often inhibits any apprehension of the lay and political matrix of the conflict of interest involved, and hence the respective responsibility of the actors, on the regional, global or nation-state levels.
4.3. Redefining the missions ofintercultural dialogue
«Europe and the United States share the same values», declared in 2004 President Chirac, with Prime Minister Tony Blair by his side. No doubt. But does this necessarily entail that «these two countries» (sic) should consequently «fight the same combat» ? Perhaps, but… against whom ? Against «African or Asian «civilisations», concerning which the sleeper remains that they implicitly do not share the same values ?
The diversity of symbolic practises, rites and references is all too often wrongly extrapolated to lend credence to the idea of more substantial differences, rooted in purportedly mutually incompatible «values.» The intercultural dialogue should thus serve to help the largest number of people possible on both sides of the Mediterranean become aware that cultural diversity is in fact circumscribed within the field of the symbolicreferences (historical or mythical references, be they profane or religious) mobilised by different cultural groups to legitimise their values, but that, essentially, they do not in fact subsume these values themselves.
This confusion is not new and its consequences, all negative, are multiform. From Ataturk making access to modernity for his fellow citizens conditional on the wearing of a precise form of « European-style» cloth cap to French emotionally charged reticence when confronted with the wearing of the hidjab (not only in state schools), via the well-known temptation for believers of all denominations to deny the existence of a humanistic common denominator transcending religious affiliations, the analytical and political blocages entailed by this confusion between the «substance» of values and the symbolic references mobilised to legitimise them are legion. The intercultural dialogue promoted by Europe must thus contribute to demystify and denounce them, by clearly identifying the numberless ways in which dogmas, doctrines and communalisms deny that the culture of the other possesses any capacity to express a universal reference.
4.4. Thinking and surpassing unilateralism in cultural relations: hearing in order to be heard, learning in order to teach
The outreach towards the Arab World of European means of communication, in particular audiovisual, is no doubt a praiseworthy objective. But its main consequence should not be a worsening of the inequity in the balance of infomation flows between North and South. If it wants its messages to be received, Europe must inversely allow – without prior discrimination – the public opinions of the Arab World to be receivable within the Union.
On the European territory, true pluralism in sources of political information concerning the Arab and Muslim world stands out as being one of the essential preconditions for the abeyance of so many misunderstandings and tensions with that region of the world. However, as of today , the balance in flows of public speech concerning conflict in the Middle-East remains particularly uneven. Yet when one of the four legs, say,ofa chairor table takes it on itself to be higher than the others, or when it is in fact forbidden to one of the latter to reach a height which would enable it to participate in the sharing of a common equilibrium… it is the very possibility of any real «togetherness» (whether national or international) which soon tends to be jeopardised. Europe should not shy away from encouraging its Arab counterparts from building their own autonomous knowledge base concerning itself. To our precious Research Centres for the Social Sciences concerning the Arab World (which might be more fruitfully «Europeanised» in order to strengthen their potential and their gravitational pull), might indeed be added , as mutually beneficial in the shared task of elaborating a common capital of scientific knowledge, the future rise of Arab Centres for European Studies.
While retaining its aspiration to make its teachings audible in the South, Europe should grasp every chance it can get to carefully listen to the Arab World and learn therefrom. In addition, European programmes for the learning of the languages of the Arab World and in-depth cultural stays on the part of European students in the region undeniably constitute one of the best means of leverage in this field.
(…/…)
François Burgat,
CNRS IREMAM Aix en Provence
