Ladies and Gentlemen,

Thank you for coming out this evening to share ideas. When I was invited to Chatham House I was, of course honored, but when I was asked to speak about the “Islam” versus “West” conflict and my experiences as a member of the High Level Group of the Alliance of Civilizations, I hesitated. 

I hesitated for a number of reasons – for I felt that speaking on this subject has become a political exercise. And certainly I don’t consider myself a politician. Secondly, I didn’t wish to fall into the trap of the current discourse. By this I mean the faulty terminology of “Islam” and the “West”. Given the complex deliberations underway for over a decade, I wondered what I, in particular, could add. 

This was the same feeling I had when I was asked to join the HLG  of the Alliance of Civilization. Our purpose in that group was to come up with practical means to counter the rhetoric of the clash of civilization. Till then, my own experiences had been as an individual interested in practical action for education and youth. Through my work in these fields I had learned to put trust in promoting a culture of quality and innovation. Such a culture sets the groundwork for genuine development so a nation, and its people, can stand with dignity as a partner in the international community. I had learned that youth are ready to shape their future, given the proper tools and a landscape of innovation. And I had discovered that when there is a common goal, communities of diverse cultures, religions and value come together to imagine and realize a better future. So when I join the HLG of the Alliance and Civilizations, it was important for me to bring these lessons forward in order to create new and innovative ways to answer the clash narrative. 

We were a diverse group in the HLG, in many ways representative of many voices struggling to be heard throughout the world. Before we set out on our task, the entire HLG questioned the fact that by confining our discussions to Islam and the West we were actually taking shelter under the frame we were trying to disassemble. We queried why any discussion on an alliance of civilizations necessarily rightfully noted that conflicts generated from differences between political groups, classes and nationalities offered more cogent explanations to violence than culture and religion. Yet, after much discussion, the HLG noted that the dichotomy of Islam and the West had become, regardless of its truth value, the prevailing political doctrine of our time. And in order to illuminate the political nature of the current dichotomy, the group deemed it necessary to argue from inside the box, so to speak. 

Personally, I have never felt comfortable with this restriction and I felt that our willingness to succumb to this perceived reality limited our creativity. We did a fair job at deconstructing the current paradigm, but we didn’t effectively construct an alternative vision. Therefore, I would like to take some time today to clarify my position on what I feel are necessary steps from deconstruction to construction. 

 Distinguished Audience, 

I believe that in order to refute the Islam versus The West doctrine we need to engage in both critical thinking and design thinking. Through critical thinking we can analyze the faultiness of the current political doctrine, and point out the weakness of the premises upon which it is based. Through design thinking we dare to build an alternative reality. 

This whole process begins by conceding that narratives of conflict and cooperation had been one of the mechanisms through which human history has been recorded, unfortunately, we often accentuate the clashes that occur when groups come into contact with each other and under emphasize how societies learn from conflict, as well cooperation. Along with narratives of confrontations, there are narratives of cooperation. 

This is especially evident in the history of interaction between Muslims and European civilizations. There have been numerous contacts between the two civilizations over the past 1400 years, in trader, welfare, learning, art and technological exchange. There have been both periods of peaceful interaction and periods of competition and war. Throughout our history we have been bound together as neighbors, who sometimes get along and sometimes do not. But because we are neighbors, we have always found it necessary to work out our differences. 

From the 8th century onwards Muslims traded with Italian merchants along the Mediterranean and with Slavic and other northern European as far as the North and black seas. The works of scholarship from Bayt AL Hikmah, which were gradually translated into European languages, transferred Muslim Knowledge of cartography, philosophy, science, art, and mathematic to Europeans and contributed greatly to the European renaissance. Medieval Europeans studied Ibn Rushid, AL Razi, AL Ghazzzali and AL Kindi with enthusiasm and various book translated by Muslim thinkers become the core texts of the first Western universities. 

What brought these neighbors together and kept their histories intertwined? Two things. One is trade and the other is curiosity about the other.

One can argue, too, of course, that Muslim west relations have also been characterized by violent confrontations. And that also is true. However, in these periods of conflict, we still learned from each other. For example, chronicles related that when the Crusaders came into contact with Muslim civilization they were deeply affected by new technologies, medical knowledge, legal institutions, and religious traditions. Frankish Crusaders adapted trade as a means of livelihood and became middle men in the trade between east and west. Centuries after the Crusades, European respect for Muslim Prowess and ethics in welfare would be echoed Voltaire when he wrote: “Salah al Din never persecuted anyone for his religion; he was at the same time conqueror, humane and a philosopher”. 

In the Arab region, particularly our recent collective memory has been scarred by conflicts with the west, beginning with European efforts at colonization. The policy of divide and conquer broke alliances between communities that had co- existed for centuries. 

The drawing of the new maps across our geographical and political landscape created fissions which still exist to this today. The attempt to apply secular principles resulted in a fear of losing our fundamental religious principles. And the hunger for our energy resources led to the support of authoritarian to insure the flow of oil. 

Yet, even these violent interactions have seen the rise of positive exchanges. The exchange of knowledge and values has continued, with the economic and technological interdependence strengthening over the past century. 

The spirit of trade and curiosity still strive, despite the persistence of political violence. 

It is important to honest about the nature of present day political violence. Political violence is not only carried out by individuals or disenchanted groups, whether they are secular or religious. It is also carried out on a massive scale by illegal actions of States against other States and by States against their own citizens. Political violence doesn’t necessarily mean the spelling of blood in war or conflict; it can also mean the destruction of a community through other means such as economic sanctions, and disregard of political choices that lead to a slow and humiliating process of decline. 

Violence is a political act, not a cultural or a religious one. And Islamic activism, like Christian or Jewish activism doesn’t necessarily entail violence. Activism of any kind is a response to long standing feelings of humiliation and frustration, powerlessness and hopelessness. A stand against the status quo. It is not a stand against democracy, but rather a cry of help for change. 

Ladies and Gentlemen, 

If we accept this argument, then we have to concede that the solutions we have formulated in the past are faulty. That now leads to the second stage of problem solving – design thinking. In order to build a solution we have to discard fear of failure. We have to try what has not been tried. That is not what we have been doing. 

We are faced by problems of global proportions and instead of offering solutions that are out of the box, we continue fighting over the box itself! Instead of framing our solutions in a global context, we cater our responses to a faulty political doctrine. In order to really counter violence we need to move beyond the rhetoric of “terrorism” and “security” and accurately diagnose the causes.

I feel we have a lot to learn from those ancient traders and scholars who used trade and common values to broker progress. And I appeal to their modern day counterparts: policy makers, ambassadors, politicians, and entrepreneurs to call for genuine intellectual and political mobilization requires that we listen to the arguments of those seduced by violence, in order to transform them into a dialogue of peace. It entails that we start talking to each other at the highest level of political dialogue and publicity proclaim these discussions. It is equally important to understand the fears and concerns of those who are burdened with misinformation and prejudice, and brighten the darkness of ignorance with a torch of understanding and hope. We have to revise the belief that war or confrontation can solve the problem of violence and replace it with politics of dialogue and diplomacy.

We need to construct an ethic that we can agree upon, based on our shared values, to guide our solutions. 

Ladies and Gentlemen, 

From the very beginning Muslims recognized the importance of ethics and morals in guiding human development. Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) set this example when he created the compact of Medina that formed the constructional foundation of the political community. The noted historian Ibn Khaldun noted that while economy and knowledge play an important role in the development of human societies they should remain subservient to ethics. Indeed the common tradition shared by the Abrahamic Faiths accentuates the importance of moral order for the progress of the human kind. 

At the same time we should note that no one has a monopoly over God and that the Militant piety that is manifesting itself in many of the world’s religions is a deviation from the essential values of our shared religious tradition. Though only a minority of religious activities commits acts of violence, we must be unified in condemning their vision of annihilation. Likewise, we should denounce aggressive secularism that disregards the beliefs and values of others and is openly hostile to the freedom of worship and practice. It is a deviation from its own humanist tradition. We must be steadfast in replacing both forms of arrogance with a creative global ethic constructed and agreed upon by both religious and secular communities. 

It seems this discourse is sadly missing from the current debate. To reactivate such a vision, we need to propagate a global ethic which bridges divides and respects diversity. An ethic which clings to what we have in common and leave space for our differences. 

Only such an ethic can guide the path of globalization and redirect us from current course. Surely we have proven that without a moral and ethical framework, globalization is on a road to destruction. 

Perhaps, you consider such a plea naïve. But let’s brainstorm, fearlessly, like true design thinkers, as to which practice a measures this global ethic might entail. 

Ladies and Gentlemen, 

I believe we need to focus on our youth because it is the next generation who will construct this ethic, and in the process a new understanding between Islam and West. It is time we stopped looking at youth populations as a problem to be solved, both in the Middle East and in Europe, and depend on them to be part of the solution. As the HLG report notes, the Middle East and North Africa has the lowest rate of youth participation in the labor force, but one of the highest proportions of young people among the general population. Other studies have indicated that 100 million jobs need to be created over the next 15-20 years. Clearly there is a role for both governments and the private enterprise to stimulate the job market so that youth can become an engine for development. 

Perhaps we can learn from the experience of East Asia where the young bulge of the 60’s and 70’s was a significant factor in economic growth. 

Europe also needs to think innovatively about its growing populations of Muslim youth and stop viewing them as a menace. 

While the Muslim world has a growing youth population, Europe has a graying population. In 2000 the UN projected that EU states would require over a million and half migrants to maintain their 1995 working – age populations. There is no reason why the change demographics of both regions cannot augment the other’s development. We merely need to put in place the proper mentality and politics to make it so. 

In both regions we need to reclaim the confidence of our youth – not only economically but politically – by working to empower their voices so they can affect the future through non –violent means. The activism of violent movements is appealing because it call for change in the status quo. And it is the status quo that is the target of the anger. In the Middle East youth are not against western culture, but foreign policies and the internal political policies of their countries that support the status quo and oppress the majority. In fact, a 2005 study conducted across six countries in the Middle East indicated that while there is a general dislike of American foreign policies in the region, the majority of people admire the freedom and democracy of Europe. At the same time they point to a vacuum of political relationship in the Arab region. 

Political disenchantment is equally a problem for Muslims in Europe. In a 2004 poll nearly half of all surveyed Muslims in the United Kingdom demonstrated that they would not vote in the next election. The report concluded that while Muslims in Britain expressed confidence in national institutions such as the judiciary, legislature and political parties, they remained disconnected politically. 

I believe that if we genuinely change the real living conditions of young people, both in Europe and the Middle East, and allow them full economic and political participation in their societies, then the appeal of violence will dissipate. Youth can be both the driving force toward economic interdependence and the badly needed source of innovation thinking required to instigate a genuine renaissance between the West and Muslim countries. 

Ladies and Gentlemen, 

Education lies at the heart of a revival of cooperative relations. By this I mean broad based education, which is not just connected to school based learning but targets how we perceive ourselves and each other and how we participate in each other’s economic prosperity. 

It is important to take a trilateral approach to educational reform, focusing on the access to education itself, the content and the methodology of education. We have to work hard to eradicate illiteracy, for illiteracy stand in the way of social and economic justice for citizens. We have to work equally hard to reassess the content of what we feel we know and how we learn it. This includes the acceptance of narratives which may be untrue and unquestioned, both in the West and in Muslim countries. Further, we have to make sure that the content of education is relevant to our economies and world market and prepare our citizens for full participation in the global economy. Finally, the methodology of education is equally important for it is through critical thinking, openness, and cross cultural understanding that we can make indoctrination, blindness and cultural arrogance obsolete. And as I have said, critical thinking is the first step in designing an innovative model of the future. 

Let me be clear, however, that education alone can achieve very little without venues for political and economic mobilization. There is evidence to suggest that higher education actually leads to more political and economic awareness. Such consciousness, without political freedom and economic opportunity, is certainly no guarantee of non- violence. 

Yet, we should be ready for the outcomes of empowerment and not allow fear of change to stunt our brave steps toward understanding. Education and democratization allow open public expression of pent-up hostility and this will have to run its course. In Muslim societies this may take the form of various types of political activism than challenge the status quo of the past few centuries. In Europe, it may result in serious challenges to foreign policies, immigration policies, and a rethinking of Europe identity. Therefore, reforms in education, both in the West and in Muslim countries, must be accompanied by genuine political and economic reforms, and foreign policy shifts. In this end, I firmly believe more stable and competent societies will emerge.

Certainly, there is a need to ensure the integrity of strong institutions that can carry us through these changes. Rules of law, accountable governance, representative parliaments and the emergence of active civil societies are insurance policies in times of transition. A strong civil society allows citizens to express their diversity. And certainly diversity is strength. This is evident to us in the Gulf as diverse populations have helped us built our nations. And it is evident to Europeans as large Muslim populations have assisted in building the European economy. Also, partnerships between institutions of learning do much to deconstruct mythologies of confrontation and sustain a genuine transfer of knowledge based on quality and confidence. The role of institutions or learning cannot be underestimated in negotiating change and serving as centers of innovation. 

Ladies and Gentlemen, 

Like KGOs and institutions of research and learning, the media has an enormous role to play in promoting genuine change – it can be a powerful ally or enemy or dialogue and understanding. Unfortunately, it appears the media has fallen prey to the sensationalism of violence and the perpetuation of clash doctrine. 

Is it possible for the media to priorieze an alternative reality of understanding? It is possible for the media to move away from embedded journalism and the hidden agendas of states and big business and offer a balanced presentation of events? Will the emergence of new media really gives global citizens the chance to observe, analyze and make up their own minds? Will the advent of the citizen journalist provide a new energy that can steer the communication industry toward innovation? These are all questions yet be answered, and implicit in them is a hope that these aspirations can become building blocks in constructing understanding. 

Of course we need not depend on the goodwill of the media to transform itself, we can equip ourselves with instruments to deal with the barrage of biased information we receive every second. In the AOC report, one of my special interests was the advocacy of media literacy – the critical ability to read the code and signs of the media, all around us, through all forms of media, including popular entertainment, advertising, video games, internet sites, we are bombarded with derogatory images of others. We need the tools to uncover the true intentions of these provocations and the methods to reconstruct an alternative vision that balances freedom of speech and responsibility. If we equip ourselves with the proper instruments we can become immune cynical manipulation in the cause of violence. 

Distinguished Audience, 

The clash of civilizations dogma is a flawed doctrine used to justify cynical political acts of aggression, on both sides. It is time of wake up from this illusion, the terror of the discourse which is defining us and writes a new story. This awakening, or yakkadah, as we say in Arabic must be reciprocal and it will take genuine efforts and political will on all sides. It is time to move from illusion to Alliance. 

Though the rhetoric is based on an illusion, its results are very real. The ballets of rhetoric and the missiles of narratives are real and they are destroying us. We, Muslims, like all people don’t want to live in continue violence and insecurity; we want to built an environment where we can prosper and grow, and where we have a right to make own decisions. 

Choosing act for peace is not an easy route. Choosing to innovate and design an alternative reality is not a task to take a lightly. It entails that we trust each other and have confidence in ourselves. It requires us to collaborate, to brainstorm together, to put our fears aside and seek a cure in creativity. The path to progress is paved with a shared moral vision – with true respect for each other’s difference, not merely tolerance. It leads to a place where our words are supported by actions. 

And who will lead us to this better place? Surely this task cannot be allowed to fall only into the hands of politicians. It remains with all of us, especially our young; it is, after all, human beings who construct their own reality, who are the actors and directors of the course they choose. To quote one of England’s national treasures “Men at some times are masters of their fates, the fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves, that we are underlings”. 

And it is never too late to transform ourselves, to change a foe into a friend, an ordinary person into an extraordinary innovator for peace, and an underling into a leader.