Statement by H.E. Dr. M.
Javad Zarif
Permanent Representative of
the Islamic
before the Third Committee of the
General Assembly
Agenda Item 109(b)
In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful
Mr. Chairman
Cultural diversity is a critical question confronting humankind in the 21st
century. Previously isolated peoples and
divers cultures are coming to the fore making the world increasingly
multicultural in the present epoch. It is thus imperative to encourage experts
to undertake studies and research on the issue in order to design a normative framework
with a view to enhancing global respect for cultural diversity. We must confess
that there continues to be some conceptual uncertainty and thus anxiety: for
instance whether cultural diversity is another euphemism for the current
polemical discourse on cultural relativism vs. universalism; or whether this
notion is an attempt to justify violations of human rights through erosion of
their universality.
The notion of cultural diversity
is widely and frequently interlinked with such basic concepts as human rights,
empowerment, inclusion, respect for all, tolerance and self-determination in
the globalizing world. Key elements as such are profoundly interrelated and
mutually reinforcing. Questions arising from the interplay between the various
facets and components involved in cultural diversity affecting its edifice are
diverse: How can we reconcile diverse cultures with human rights in a world
brimming with tension, confusion and conflict? What are
the impacts of cultural homogeneity and cultural conformity on the enjoyment of
human rights in a world threatened by attempts to bring about clash of cultures
and religions? How can universality of human rights be preserved while the
international community celebrates cultural diversity? Do States have a responsibility
to ensure creation of an international order in which cultural diversity is
respected? These are demanding questions flowing from the interrelation between
cultural diversity and some basic tenets whose analytical answers will help the
international community to develop a global vision and design a plan of action
to ensure respect for cultural diversity at all levels. Obviously a thorough
review of the issue at hand cannot be done within the very limited space
allowed for this statement, but I will try to address some more critical issues
in this domain. We hope that experts would make further studies on this
question.
Human rights and cultural diversity,
On the philosophical aspect of human rights feature of cultural
diversity, it is evident that human rights are not derived from any particular
culture or tradition; rather they flow from intrinsic dignity of the human person
in all parts of the world. The idea of human rights has developed in the course
of the history of different religions through philosophical, political and
cultural evolution and interaction. This has been manifested over the centuries
in the humanitarian, emancipatory, egalitarian and universalistic
movements. Therefore, human rights represent the center of cross-cultural
overlapping consensus on basic normative standards in our increasingly
multi-cultural societies that give room for different cultural and religious
interpretations.
With this in mind, it is to be acknowledged that human rights instruments
as distinct from human rights themselves have drawn their legitimacy from a
multitude of cultures that comprise the world community. As a result, respect
for cultural diversity and cross-cultural differences is
not tantamount to an intractable trend of non-respect for human rights and values.
Disagreement can in fact take place within a legal and normative framework that
already presupposes the fundamental universality of human rights. Based on this
perception, it appears that all nations and communities throughout the world
with various cultural, religious and historical backgrounds share the concept
of universality of human rights, while stressing on their particularities and
observing their specific cultural and religious values. Consequently it should
be emphasized that the central argument of promotion of respect for cultural
diversity is not in any way the reinforcement of the fallacy of cultural
relativism by virtue of which human rights are culturally relative rather than
universal. Rather, the need for cultural diversity is articulated to prevent
the advancement of attempts for cultural homogeneity and conformity across the
globe.
Cultural diversity versus cultural conformity,
Great lessons are to be derived from the history of mankind. Cultures
and civilizations rose and fell. Many of them came into existence, blossomed
and flourished. And many others embarked on the road to decline. This rise and
fall is the rule of nature in human societies and will continue to characterize
our history in the centuries to come.
What matters the most amidst this fray -- and what in fact constitutes the
foundation of our argument -- is that what causes the strength and decline of
cultures and civilizations and what global consequences arise from these
historical developments.
The history of evolution represents the very fact that for centuries some
cultures came into contact with other cultures and while maintaining their own
characteristics and principles embarking upon a cultural interaction in a
process of mutual enrichment. The confluence of these diverse cultures and
cross-cultural exchange among them not only resulted in survival of various cultures
and human civilization but in fact immensely contributed to the preservation of
old civilizations. Preservation and enrichment of ancient Greek philosophy by
Islamic scholars in the Middle Ages and the ensuing
cultural and scientific interaction between Islamic and Christian civilization
is a shining example in this domain. This cultural openness and creative
diversity gradually broke the ground for consequent scientific and
technological developments in many parts of the world and in recent centuries
in
In contrast, some cultures in the history entered into competition and
conflict with their perceived rivals seeking to dominate or conquer them. Their
philosophy and political strategy centered primarily on generating cultural
conformity and homogeneity within their geographical sphere and other parts of
the world. The result was conflict, violence and war and in some cases decline
and annihilation of the assaulting cultures and identities.
Cultural conformity takes even far more serious dimensions in our modern
globalizing world benefiting from advanced means and dynamics generated by
forces of globalization. The globalization itself entails a conceptual
dichotomy. The rapid advances in global communication system and integrated
markets have brought about the emergence of previously isolated peoples and
cultural identities. There is a compelling urge to revive old traditions and
conventions and to return to indigenous cultural and religious values in
pursuit of recovering the suppressed sense of identity.
On the other hand, the characteristic means and forces of globalization
could also facilitate the process of cultural conformity and imposition of
values alien to various cultures and ideals. Taking advantage of these
dynamics, the proponents of cultural expansionism and cultural essentialism are
making unremitting efforts to universalize their value system at the expense of
demonizing and eliminating other cultural disciplines across the globe. The
persistence of this dichotomy, if unaddressed, will promote the sense of
insecurity among many social groups, peoples and nations which in turn may give
new impetus to the already growing trends of isolation, ethnocentrism,
intolerance and extremism.
Understandably, the resentment of the members of a particular culture or
religion, where they have a sense of defeat and disadvantage against a dominant
culture will unquestionably create and escalate hatred, violence and strife
beyond geographical blocks and along the cultural lines shared by variety of
peoples and nations. And the resultant circumstances, constitutes a clear
threat to the promotion and protection of universal values and human rights.
One solution for this dichotomy is to consider globalization as a form of
institutionalization of a two-fold process involving the universalization
of particularism and particularization of
universalism as Robertson eloquently elaborated in 1992. By virtue of this
formulation, the extremes of the present dichotomy are urged to shift in favor
of moderation, dialogue and tolerance. Any attempt- within this definition - to
denigrate and eliminate a particular cultural identity by the dominant culture
brings as much condemnation and repudiation as the efforts to make cultural
relativism a pretext to justify the violation of universal values and
universally accepted human rights.
Viewing the notion of cultural diversity within these parameters, the
central concern in the international process of norm setting and policy making
need to be premised on developing a global vision for creating an international
order in which:
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, it is our hope that this presentation could
stimulate further debate and exchange of views in order to develop the foundational
elements of the notion of cultural diversity as a contribution to the
advancement of peace, justice, human rights and development.