Is Interreligious Dialogue in International Relations “Dialogue-Washing” for Authoritarian Regimes? an Exploration of KAICIID and ICCS as Track 1.5 Diplomacy

P. Hedges
{"title":"Is Interreligious Dialogue in International Relations “Dialogue-Washing” for Authoritarian Regimes? an Exploration of KAICIID and ICCS as Track 1.5 Diplomacy","authors":"P. Hedges","doi":"10.1080/15570274.2023.2200276","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper explores whether interreligious dialogue (IRD) is employed by state actors that may be perceived as authoritarian as a form of window dressing, or dialogue washing. Two examples are chosen, the King Abdullah International Centre for Intercultural and Interreligious Dialogue (KAICIID), and Singapore’s International Conference on Cohesive Societies (ICCS). It is argued that such examples exemplify IRD as track 1.5 diplomacy, and the context means they veer towards performing dialogue as social cohesion. While criticisms of each are raised, it is argued that the accusation of dialogue-washing is unfounded and that useful IRD, social cohesion, or peacebuilding work emerges from each which accords with the interests of the countries involved and aligns with the nature of IRD under track 1.5 diplomacy.","PeriodicalId":92307,"journal":{"name":"The review of faith & international affairs","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The review of faith & international affairs","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15570274.2023.2200276","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

This paper explores whether interreligious dialogue (IRD) is employed by state actors that may be perceived as authoritarian as a form of window dressing, or dialogue washing. Two examples are chosen, the King Abdullah International Centre for Intercultural and Interreligious Dialogue (KAICIID), and Singapore’s International Conference on Cohesive Societies (ICCS). It is argued that such examples exemplify IRD as track 1.5 diplomacy, and the context means they veer towards performing dialogue as social cohesion. While criticisms of each are raised, it is argued that the accusation of dialogue-washing is unfounded and that useful IRD, social cohesion, or peacebuilding work emerges from each which accords with the interests of the countries involved and aligns with the nature of IRD under track 1.5 diplomacy.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
国际关系中的宗教间对话对专制政权来说是“洗对话”吗?KAICIID与ICCS作为Track 1.5外交的探索
本文探讨了宗教间对话(IRD)是否被国家行为者所利用,这些行为者可能被认为是专制的,是一种粉饰门面或对话清洗的形式。选择了两个例子,阿卜杜拉国王国际跨文化和宗教间对话中心(KAICIID)和新加坡的凝聚力社会国际会议(ICCS)。有人认为,这些例子将IRD作为轨道1.5外交的例证,而背景意味着它们转向将对话作为社会凝聚力。虽然对每一个都提出了批评,但有人认为,对对话洗涤的指责是没有根据的,有用的IRD,社会凝聚力或建设和平的工作都符合所涉及国家的利益,并符合轨道1.5外交下IRD的性质。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Curating Buddhism, Fostering Diplomacy: The “Secrets of the Fallen PAGODA” Exhibition in Singapore In Search of a Welcoming Environment for Religions in the “New Kazakhstan” The Silence of the Roman Catholic Church on the Ukraine War Colonel William Roy Hodgson: A Soldier of Principle, Peace, and Pugnacity for Human Rights The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Soviet Political Religion, and Soviet Law
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1