On the challenges of intercultural dialogue

James Edleston has been Head of International at BYC since 2009, before which he worked as a Youth Programme Manager at Think Global (previously DEA).  His role at BYC involves supporting youth representation, global campaigns and projects, intercultural learning and action, global youth work and European and international policy.

Here he talks about his experience of working with the Active Citizens programme for the promotion and development of intercultural dialogue in South Asian countries.

Could you highlight your experience working with people in Bangladesh, Nepal, and Pakistan in terms of intercultural dialogue?

A special feature of the programme is that people can reflect on their place in their community (before they engage in dialogue). Dialogue can be a dangerous thing. You can’t just sit in a circle and talk.

The Active Citizens Programme has two parallel goals. The idea of the programme from the very start was that there were two distinct aims. One was about building trust and understanding, and the other was about community action…let’s say, ‘sustainable development’...social action for positive change. And these two things were seen as mutually reinforcing. That by building trust and understanding we can work together to change our community for the better, but by working together we also build our trust and understanding, and bring our communities close together and live in a more peaceful way.

So this was kind of the conception…the core of it, and that’s why these two parallel aims have always been there. Every time we write the vision, it’s got something to do with peace, or trust, or coexistence. And the other one is about community development or sustainable development, or social action. There are always these two things. And that is sort of the vision. It’s about understanding each other first, it’s about the belief in every individual to be able to make a change, it’s about the power of working together to create new solutions. These are all principles, and everything we do fits between these two elements.

Giving a space to people in a programme that can be very technical is really important. We spend a of time on investment in the initial stages (of the programme) – understanding ourselves, our motivations, how we interact with others, the way we work in our communities, what we think about things, what we believe, what we want for the future. We invest quite heavily in that. And that’s I think, one of the reasons why it spreads quickly and engages people; and people give a lot of voluntary time.

In areas where there is serious conflict, like every-day insecurity, people engage quickly in the vision of a more peaceful coexistence. In a place like Pakistan, I guess it resonates with people who experience these things every day.

Just about your own experience with meeting people from South Asian countries like Pakistan, how do you think intercultural dialogue has taken place between you and facilitators you have met over the past three years?

I have learnt probably a lot more than I have shared from this programme, and that’s because we have been able to bring together people from all over the country with completely different perspectives, and that’s one thing that I feel is a strength.

In the UK issues of class, and status, and power, and wealth are more obvious because it is the country I was brought up in; it’s not so obvious (for me) here. But it does seem that the people that Active Citizens engages are quite diverse. I have definitely engaged people with very, very different perspectives, and people who I really respect have some times very challenging views for me. So I have to engage in the process myself; I have to engage in dialogue with participants myself and put my assumptions on hold; (I have to) engage in very deep questioning where I am challenged to think all that kind of stuff. So I’m learning more about intercultural dialogue by being here. It’s learning by doing.

What have you learned about intercultural dialogue?

Being forced to live those principles, and live the way we think the way we should interact is a challenge. It helps because we have to understand all the challenges that the Active Citizens face when they do the work.

What challenges does intercultural dialogue face in this region and what inherent strengths does it possess (to overcome them) and flourish?

There is an assumption that when we say ‘intercultural dialogue’ there are two cultures that we can see – provincial, or tribal or a country. But it goes deeper than that.

The challenge for intercultural dialogue is how it’s done. There is a danger that it can be superficial. One real challenge is that it is much easier to bring together people in a dialogue who obviously belong to different cultures but share the same economic status, or have wealth, are well travelled, have been to a university…that’s quite easy. In any country of the world you can bring well travelled, well educated people together, and have a good conversation. Sometimes this is easier than bringing together people with a different status or some other subtle difference.

So that is really a challenge: where can intercultural dialogue be most effective and who with, and not to be content with taking the easy road. What do we call good quality intercultural dialogue? What outcomes are we looking for?

People resist dialogue because they think that it is a danger to their identity and culture. There is going to be resistance to any externally organized process that gets people talking. There is always going to be suspicion, and that is a definite challenge.

There are dangers too in bringing people together. If there is underlying tension and conflict, then it can be a very dangerous and explosive situation. If it’s not well managed then it can make things worse.

**James Edleston was speaking with Younus Khan and Sadia Rahman ** 

Getting the ball rolling

There are some things that have become associated with Balochistan of late; most of them unpleasant. Quetta, the capital of Balochistan, even with its wide open spaces and tough terrain was once regarded as a melting pot of different ethnicities, cultures, and religions. Other images that the name ‘Quetta’ conjured up were a laid back lifestyle, hospitable people, apple orchards, and bustling market places famed for their selection of nuts and dried fruit. In the summers Quetta also served as a base for families vacationing in the not-too-far hill-top resort, Ziarat.

Sadly, a few of the things that come to mind nowadays when one hears ‘Quetta’ are ethnic and religious divisions, organised violence, acts of terror, and mysterious abductions. Not too surprisingly the general consensus for visiting Quetta is: avoid if possible. But closing one’s eyes does not make a problem go away. Some people are relocating from Quetta but most people will stay – regardless to the extent the situation deteriorates to. These persons of different ethnicities and subscribing to different faiths have lived in the same city for generations and will hopefully find a way to live together in harmony for many, many years to come.

Empathy is the essential ingredient for – not merely existing in the same place peacefully – but more importantly to help members of different communities understand one another better and to form relationships with one another. It is hard to empathize in dangerous and unstable times, but this is when it is needed the most. This point was brought home by a group of young people from the city who celebrated diversity and harmony through sports.

Shanti Nagar is an area of Quetta which has been historically inhabited by the Hindu population of the city. A stream and a watering station divide Shanti Nagar from the nearest Muslim settlement. Both communities have had an arrangement for years by which they share the watering station to replenish their water supplies. Tension existed though because of the waste disposed off into the stream. Since the Muslim area is located downstream, most of the trash found its way there.

With time as the levels of pollution in the stream rose tensions turned into a debate, followed by accusations and finger pointing when no mutually acceptable solution could be agreed upon. The standoff reached the tipping point when the elders of the Muslim jirga – a traditional tribal council whose decision is considered unquestionable – hinted at blocking off access to the stream and the watering area.

The solution to the looming crisis came from a group of young people in the most unexpected form. It is not uncommon for young people from both communities – young and old to form friendships. A group of friends comprising both Muslims and Hindus had also attended an Active Citizens training together. They grasped this as the ideal situation to put their training to the test. They put their heads together to come up with a way to encourage constructive dialogue in a friendly atmosphere. They reached the conclusion that to encourage members of both communities to start talking again some sort of positive interaction was needed. One such positive form of interaction they decided was sports.

Quickly two teams from both communities were put together to participate in a friendly football match. All arrangements were taken care of by the funds pooled together by the group of young Active Citizens. Community members were invited to attend the match free of cost and the total turnout on the day of the match was approximately 150 people. At the conclusion of the match elders from both communities were honoured, and young people from both teams spoke about the important role that dialogue plays in resolving conflict.

As a direct consequence of the efforts of these young people influencers from both communities resolved to clean up the stream and to help finance the building of a proper drainage facility. Within two weeks the stream was much cleaner and proper drains were built. Proper waste disposal has not been a topic of argument between these two communities since. Several football matches have been played though.

Knocking down walls

Salman Uqali is a resident of Maqli, Thatta. The housing community he lives in is located in the better part of the city. One disturbing trend that Salman noticed though was his neighbour’s practice of encroaching on public land. Soon this practice of building illegal encroachments spread throughout the neighbourhood; the city authorities too did not take much notice of this illegal activity.

The two lane road of Salman’s street was soon turned into a one lane road because of structures raised on one side of it. These included extensions to drive ways, and in some cases boundary walls of houses too covered part of the road.

Not only did this cause inconvenience for motorists and pedestrians it was dangerous as well. Another effect of the encroachments was that they drove down property prices of the housing community.

It was apparent to Salman that this illegal activity had to be stopped – starting with this own house. Salman’s house’s boundaries to extended over into the city’s land but he convinced his family to remove the illegal construction.

Deciding to have all illegal encroachments removed from his neighbourhood Salman began researching Thatta’s zoning laws and paid regular visits to offices of the local authorities.
Because of Salman’s persistence the illegal encroachments were soon removed from his neighbourhood and the road passing through his street is being repaired and will once again have two lanes.