Building bridges between civilisations

  • 2011-07-20
  • Interview by Matt Garrick

Nowadays a key figure in the United Nations, to say Jorge Sampaio holds an impressive CV is somewhat of an understatement. Born in the Atlantic coastal city of Lisbon, in younger life Sampaio cut his teeth as a lawyer and prominent socialist politician before rising to become the president of Portugal from 1996 until 2006. Known for prudence and moderation during his two terms as head of the West European nation, Sampaio was seen as the perfect candidate by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to carry the lofty title of High Representative for the Alliance of Civilizations, a recent UN project, which he was appointed to in 2007. Taking on the difficult role as leader in awakening the 123 nations (including all three Baltic States) and international organizations participating in the Alliance, to concepts such as “soft-power initiatives,” to strive toward equality for all mankind regardless of race, religion or economic background, at age 71 he has a lot on his plate. In the lobby of a boutique hotel in Vilnius’ Old Town, TBT had the chance to chat with Sampaio earlier this month. He was in Lithuania’s capital, scheduled to address a high-profile ministerial conference, the Community of Democracies, where his speech immediately followed that of U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Through our conversation, Sampaio touched on the importance of education in bridging the gap between Muslim and Western cultures, developments of global diversity, and the right of dignity for everyone: always displaying the countenance of a venerable old gent.

So, perhaps we can begin with some background. How did the Alliance of Civilizations come into being?

After the bombings in Madrid, London and Bali, along with, in the long-term framework, the attacks in the USA on September 11, these events, which were around the early 2000s, pushed, I would say in a very good way, the prime minister of Spain [Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero] and his partner, the prime minister of Turkey [Recep Tayyip Erdogan] to propose, by way of a speech at the United Nations, that an Alliance of Civilizations was necessary. It was created precisely to improve understanding and cooperative relations among nations and peoples, across cultures and religions. In particular, it was to improve relations between the so-called Western and Muslim societies. So there is a general scope in the Alliance, a worldwide scope, and that is to address the big issues of cultural diversity, with this point about Western and Muslim societies in particular, and with the view and necessity of a fuel to counter the forces which fuel polarization and extremism.

How did you become involved with this idea?

This idea was picked up by the Secretary-General of the UN at the time, Mr. Kofi Annan. He nominated a twenty member group of experts, from which came a high-level report about what the Alliance of Civilizations would be. What it was all about, what could be done, what had do be addressed. And this was the group report which was the first and last published, and endorsed by the Secretary-General in November 2006. This report mentioned the need for a High Representative to the Secretary-General, and I was chosen in May 2007.

Who partakes in the Alliance?

The Alliance of Civilizations has a ‘group of friends,’ composed of its members, members being states of the United Nations, those who address their will and wish to be part of the Alliance, along with international organizations. We are about 123 members at the moment. The membership has grown immensely since 2007. Since then, we have had three phases, which are framed by what we call the implementation plans.

What were the fundamentals of these phases?

The first phase was from 2007 to 2009, where we tried to make the Alliance operational. The second phase, always framed by our implementation plans, was from 2009 to 2011. Now we are preparing and finalizing, which I will send to the UN Secretary-General, implementation plan three, which is from 2011 to 2013. The initial report addressed the need to counter polarization and extremism through four main issues, which are the mandates of the Alliance. These four areas in which we have to work are education, media, migration and youth. At the same time, we are a platform for our members to be heard, and have been, in the second implementation plan, consolidating the Alliance to this endeavour. And I think that the third, which we are now finalizing, will be addressing more and more the fact that cultural diversity is a pillar of sustainable development, because cultural diversity exists everywhere now and it confronts us with clear challenges.

In what way does the organization see and plan to attack these challenges?

Firstly, by finding out: How are we going to deal with the necessity of good governance over cultural diversity, and also be a tool for security and peace? And how can we counter extremism, counter fundamentalism, by finding what is in common, in terms of the people. We work with the ‘group of friends,’ as I said before, with our secretary to New York, and focal points in all the member countries and international organizations. We have meetings with the focal points and then either we are, at the same time, facilitators of stimulating activity in the areas that I have mentioned, or, I am invited, as is the case here for the Community of Democracies, to give a speech as the High Representative for the Alliance. And this is what we have been doing. Also, I have asked countries to present their national plans. What are they? What are they doing in their own country to address cultural diversity issues? What actions are they undertaking to have a public space of dialogue? We have already completed two regional strategies, one for South-East Europe in 2009, and the Mediterranean strategy, which was very interesting, which was approved in November last year, 2010, in Malta, which is a framework document illustrating the principles of human rights.

What does the document outline as major principles of human rights for the Mediterranean?

The empowerment of women, the necessity of liberty, democracy, and what kind of work has to be done in which areas. And at the same time, after these framework documents, which constitute these regional strategies, there is an action plan to initiate them. Our key for getting everybody involved in these plans is the combination of the government-based ‘group of friends’ and international organizations with the relationship we are having with civil society. Civil societies are always present in our annual forums.

Can you tell a little about the Alliance’s annual forums?

The annual forums are great gatherings of the Alliance. The first was held in Madrid in January 2008, the second in Istanbul, 2009. Madrid and Istanbul, Spain and Turkey, they are the sponsors. From 2010 it opened worldwide and went to Brazil, where we had the forum last May. This year we will have a December forum in Doha [capital of Middle Eastern nation Qatar]. One of the objectives of the Doha forum is to find how we can, considering the fact that culture impacts on development, contribute solutions for cultural diversity issues, to help foster development. This is where we are at the moment. We wish and fight for this not to be just a blah-blah-blah kind of thing, but how to deliver on the ground is what is challenging, because cultural diversity issues are now more complex than ever. Religion is obviously, in its various ways, a very important tool to find public space where diversity of religion is also practiced. How are you going to have a mixture, and how are you going to make it difficult, or impossible, for religion to be an instrument of polarization, instead of being an instrument of peace? This is, I think, what we are asking, what we are trying to do there.

As a microcosm of the whole organization, how do you see Lithuania in terms of heading towards the aims set by the Alliance?

Lithuania is a member of the Alliance, but I don’t know exactly if they have yet presented a national plan. I don’t remember. But the simple fact that a country, I’m not speaking precisely about Lithuania, acknowledges the issues of cultural diversity as such, the fact that a country wants to follow a democratic path and improve in the developments of democracy (because democracy is a process, it’s never done, there’s always something else to add on and make it more perfect), the fact that it acknowledges the need for a good governance of cultural diversity is in itself a great progress. So now Lithuania is a focal point, and we have twice yearly meetings with the focal points, and we wish and want and have been following for focal points to be the connection between the High Representative and the Secretariat within the country itself. And we see at the same time how the country is developing, in either projects or by addressing issues, and evaluate the standards of their own internal way of dealing with diversity. This means finding out how their conditions are for dealing with minorities. What are the rights and aspirations of minorities? Are they being effectively accounted for? What contribution can, regionally speaking, the country develop?

It can be said, Lithuania has come a long way in sustaining a healthy democracy since the days of Soviet occupation. How do these developments strike you?

I was here as a head-of-state on an official visit in 2003, so it’s my second time here. I have a great interest and pleasure of seeing these developments. But this is the role a country can play: Not only within its own frontiers, but at the same time helping the whole process at large. And this is where, in the quest for good governance of cultural diversity, the contribution of that precise country, not only in terms of internal ambitions and challenges, can also assist the community at large.

It seems that the Alliance is an acknowledgment of the breaking down of borders, and coming to terms with this process, altogether. Is this so?

Well, we can’t forget borders. That’s the problem. You can see that in Europe now. In the 27 [member states of the European Union] there is the difficulty of having such a variety [of cultures]. And such as is, the difficulty of having the common ground which built the European Union, and the fact that the financial crisis is affecting, or producing some different and complicated visions within it. But nevertheless, my personal vision, as someone who has this responsibility, is that I think we all have a common purpose. Some of these include, of course, liberty, democracy, the irreversibility of human rights and the quest for (and I’ll put it this way) a very big umbrella, which I think is human dignity. It’s mounted, or based on the belief that there are many things in common, much more in fact than things which divide us. And so we can see diversity as a plus, and not as a minus, and address the fact that diversity brings positive contributions. The Alliance has developed as a sort of soft-power tool. Not for tomorrow, but for the long-term; if we can produce and boost liberty, democratic values, means for security and development, I think then, with a good governance of cultural diversity, you will really have a better world. So these are our endeavours, which unfortunately are not like producing cars, not a straight-forward factory-line procedure.

What do you see as the biggest hurdle for achieving this goal of equal human rights between Muslim and Western cultures?

I see the need for education to be a central role. Education for literacy. Education for the media, and education for the cultures of the other. The religions of the other. Putting together the perception that, ‘you are different from me, but we can organize within our own diversities a kind-of working dialogue,’ and that we are members of the same world. Also trying to achieve trust, trying to achieve the capacity of understanding the place of religion and the rights to practice religion and have a faith, or not to have it. And how this can come together to organize a society in acceptable ways, preserving or increasing the capacity of a democratic standpoint.