Towards a Constructive Pluralism

OUTCOMES

The colloquium Towards a Constructive Pluralism took place at the UNESCO Headquarters in Paris from Thursday 28 to Saturday 30 January 1999. There were 40 participants from 29 countries: politicians, academics and representatives of civil society.

The colloquium was organised by the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) and the Commonwealth Secretariat. UNESCO, with its 186 member states, is dedicated to international intellectual co-operation to promote development for peace and peace for development. To this end, one of its key activities is the Culture of Peace Programme inspired by the universal values of liberty, justice, equality, solidarity and social and cultural dignity. The 54-member Commonwealth is united by a set of fundamental democratic and other values, as embodied in the 1991 Harare Commonwealth Declaration, and a commitment to sustainable development. Both of these inter-governmental organisations are committed to the promotion of unity in diversity.

Preamble: The Challenge of Pluralism

Participants affirmed that ethnic, religious, cultural and other pluralism is a positive phenomenon, to be welcomed and celebrated. There was agreement that everything possible should be done to create conditions in which it can flourish within and between states.

At the same time, it was recognised that difference can be used to promote division and tension. It can be the excuse for marginalisation, exclusion and oppression. And all too often it can be the occasion for violent conflict and even warfare. Participants gave examples of campaigns of genocide, civil war, and other violence which had claimed millions of lives. It was pointed out that, according to one study, 79 of the 82 conflicts around the world between 1989 and 1992 were intra-state in nature and that most of them were linked to ethnic, religious or cultural differences. It was argued that 'divisive pluralism' will constitute one of the key threats to peace in the twenty-first century unless appropriate action is taken. This document suggests ways to prevent such conflicts by promoting the positive alternative.

The colloquium recognised that approaches on this issue need to take account of the significant changes that have taken and are taking place in the world. In particular, it highlighted the dual forces of globalisation and fragmentation and the fact that the world is becoming increasingly homogeneous at a global level but more and more heterogeneous locally. This has important implications for attempts to accommodate the complexities and to meet the challenges of pluralism.

In this context, participants agreed on the importance of appreciating our common humanity and the shared, and universal values this entails. Participants referred to the importance of respect for difference, equality and non-discrimination, the upholding of human rights, the democratic legitimacy of institutions, accountability, participation and qualitative representation. Participants argued that the aim should be equality and inclusiveness, not uniformity. The recognition of difference can strengthen unity by allowing individuals to enjoy the security of particular identities within an accepted social and constitutional framework.

The colloquium recognised the need to balance the affirmation of particular identities and the requirements of an increasingly inter-dependent world in which we all have to co-exist and co-operate.

Identities can be mobilised or exploited for either negative or positive purposes. Finding ways to encourage positive uses of identity is important for all countries, developed and developing, whether they are involved in conflict or are enjoying a measure of peace. This issue is relevant to everyone, as all countries are vulnerable to division.

Participants took a dynamic and positive view of ethnic, religious, cultural and other pluralism as an invitation for people to interact, to celebrate and to learn from difference, rather than a passive acceptance of the fact that pluralism simply exists. It was stressed that pluralism is enriching and that it can make an important contribution both to balanced development within particular countries and the building of positive relationships between countries. The colloquium acknowledged that particular identities and society's means of dealing with cultural and other forms of difference involve arrangements and attitudes which can be made and unmade. Consequently, there is always the possibility of improvement and dynamic evolution, whether this involves building new forms of identity or working with existing ones.

The colloquium recognised that there are problems of terminology and vocabulary and that lack of clarity can impede understanding and the development of consensus. For instance, terms such as facilitating, implementing, managing, accommodating, handling, empowering and sustaining were used and it was recognised that, while often relevant, each had its limitations. Participants also recognised that terminology might be a problem so far as the interpretation of this Outcomes document is concerned - because there will be different understandings of pluralism in different contexts. They were agreed, however, that none of the formulations used should be taken to suggest that there should be any national or international efforts to contain pluralism.

Finally, it was also recognised that greater clarity is needed regarding our understanding of the past and its relationship to the development of a constructive pluralism for the future.

FIELDS FOR ACTION

Introduction

While the fact of increasing pluralism was recognised as universal, it was also acknowledged that each society has its own particular character and history. Matters of pluralism within a state have also to be seen in the context of a wider international environment. This can take a positive form - for instance, by providing a good example or the promotion of intercontinental development through diasporas. Or it can take a negative form: e.g. nationalism in one country can have major implications for others - again through diasporas and the influence of neighbouring nations.

How to respond to pluralism is an issue for us all and needs to be addressed at the personal, social, cultural and political levels: the personal, because it is about who we are and how we define ourselves; the social, because it concerns how we interact with each other; the cultural, because it inevitably involves our beliefs, ideas and understandings; and the political because the accommodation of pluralism involves the distribution of power and access to resources. For this reason, participants considered the role of both the State and civil society.

The State

All participants recognised the important and positive role that the State can play - for instance, by promoting a sense of belonging and common citizenship in a democratic framework - and the continual need for the renewal of its role. But State institutions can also play a negative role if in a pluralistic society they only reflect the priorities of one dominant group. In most states the ethnic and cultural composition of populations is changing and there is often an awakening of ethnic identities within these new demographic landscapes. There is no one particular model that can be applied in all circumstances, and participants stressed the need for a flexible approach.

To help make ethnically, religiously and culturally plural societies work effectively it is important to address the following:

processes of participation that include all groups and ensure qualitative, as opposed to merely quantitative, representation (ie such processes should not exclude minorities in the name of majority rule);

inclusive and flexible approaches to constitution-making - and the working of constitutions - to ensure proper representation of all groups and full representation and participation by minority, deprived and marginalised groups ;

decentralised or devolved structures, as appropriate;

sustainable development and equitable resource allocation;

codes of conduct for politicians and other leaders;

recognition and implementation of indigenous peoples' rights;

the development of educational processes that promote understanding of pluralism and positive attitudes to people in other communities;

providing conditions in which public and other media can reflect the diversity of society;

facilitating the opportunities for inter-cultural contacts and equitable allocation of funding for cultural activities;

a legal framework to safeguard rights;

the building of oversight institutions such as Human Rights Commissions and the ombudsperson, so that they become important role players in maintaining democratic governance.



Civil Society

There is a key role for a vigorous democratic civil society in empowering pluralism (although it is, of course, possible for elements in civil society to exacerbate tensions and deepen divisions). Civil society organisations have the advantage of being flexible, creative and able to promote dialogue through their networks. The following component parts of civil society merit particular attention:

community groups, and other NGOs, which can bridge cross-community divisions;

local authorities, which can be effective instruments in strengthening intra-communal harmony;

the media, in encouraging increased understanding of the realities and issues involved in constructive pluralism;

professional associations, to encourage communication and co-operation between different members of different cultures;

businesses and trade unions to promote diversity in the workplace through inclusive working practices, diverse representation and culturally sensitive working arrangements; · religious groups, which can encourage mutual respect and understanding if they emphasise the inclusive aspects of their respective traditions;

the academic community, through the encouragement of greater understanding of the nature of pluralism;multi-cultural publications and media which provide for the positive self-expression of particular communities and combat divisions;

increased cultural diversity in the market-place.



International bodies

While recognising that international interventions can sometimes be negative, the colloquium also recognised the important and sometimes decisive role that can be played by regional and international institutions and organisations in standing firm against the negative exploitation of pluralism and promoting appreciation and respect for human rights and ethnic, religious and cultural pluralism.

Recommendations

The colloquium recognised that all sections of society need to work in partnership to sustain policies which support, celebrate and popularise constructive pluralism. There is a particular need for positive leadership to make pluralism attractive and viable.

Participants urged UNESCO and the Commonwealth Secretariat, in conjunction with other organisations as appropriate, to:

promote further discussion on issues of pluralism, including at regional level and through the media;

to review the work of organisations already working in this area and to construct a data base of those with technical expertise in the promotion and implementation of pluralism (e.g. in combating stereotypes);

produce a manual of 'best practice', a code of conduct, and normative guidelines;

promote international recognition of the examples of States and institutions which are following best practice;

encourage the creation of 'early warning' mechanisms to detect incipient conflict in plural societies and combat divisiveness and ghettoisation;

distribute this Outcomes document as widely as possible.



It was suggested that this colloquium might be followed by a further small working group to explore these and other possibilities further.

Participants also stressed that:

religious, ethnic, linguistic and other groups should be encouraged to emphasise those aspects in their traditions that foster mutual respect and understanding;

where appropriate and requested, assistance should be given to individuals and communities in reconstructing their identities where these have been disrupted by migration and urbanisation;

a range of educational processes should be developed to support interaction and encourage respect between communities;

academics, policy makers and practitioners should be encouraged to engage in dialogue with each other to inform the debate on pluralism.



Finally, the colloquium underlined the importance of a number of areas in which further research should be undertaken. In this context, it was recognised that a number of bodies could assist in work addressing the following areas:

the implications of globalisation on issues of identity and the capacity of groups to interact;

the impact of technological change on various levels of pluralism;

the affective as well as the rational dimensions of pluralism;

the challenge of pluralism at rural, urban, regional and global level;

the implications of cultural rights;

the effect of existing measures to promote equality and respect for human dignity.



UNESCO's Constitution emphasises that a just and lasting peace in the world cannot be founded on economic and political arrangements alone, but requires the 'intellectual and moral solidarity' of humankind. This forms the basis of our ethical mandate to promote human rights and fundamental freedoms. It is the foundation of our Culture of Peace Programme. A culture of peace is both a living experience and an innovative approach to trying to make the social fabric of every society cohesive ... It is this multi-faceted approach which can make peace, democracy and development truly interactive ... And one of the keys to its success will be attitudes to human diversity, which will be a special issue in the year 2000, United Nations International Year for the Culture of Peace.

Extract from opening address by Federico Mayor Director-General, UNESCO

Examples of the subversive and destabilising effects of 'divisive pluralism' abound. But it is also important that attention should be given to the alternative, positive, concept ... Difference need not produce conflict, any more than sameness necessarily results in solidarity. The challenge is to devise a 'vision' of the way in which people can live together harmoniously in the larger society while at the same time being able to maintain, rather than dilute or lose, a strong sense of belonging to their particular cultural, ethnic, religious or other community.