 Ladies and gentlemen, it's such a pleasure to see so many of you in the audience today. Gentlemen on the panel, I'd like to welcome you warmly to our open forum this afternoon on religious attentions and overcoming them in a minute. As ancient times many philosophers and Plato included have pronounced that it's not possible to live happily and peacefully in a community unless we have common values, unless we have some kind of social cement holding us together. So today our discussion is what holds Europe together and specifically to what degree can religion be the glue that holds us together as a society? Can religions help us move forward or do they constitute a threat to social cohesion and harmony? That is the subject of our discussion. I have the great pleasure of introducing my illustrious panel. Many individuals with a significant cultural and religious background on my far right, Rabbi Pinches Goldschmidt, president of the European Conference of Rabbis. So maybe not your far right, your extreme right, but you've got the wrong science next to your seat. So the best thing to do is just to change seats. Are you sure you're not Mr. Loffe just in here? Well, that's an excellent example that we can change how we can be flexible and we're in a position to put ourselves in other people's religious shoes. So let me introduce you again Rabbi Pinches Goldschmidt in the right seat, president of the European Conference of Rabbis. And then Amar Khaled is the chairman of the Board of Trustees' Right Star Foundation. He's a much-loved and well-known television preacher in the Arab countries. Welcome. Minister Espen Balayde, minister of defence in Norway, I'd like to wish you a warm welcome as well. And on my left side, I believe this is correct, Hamid Shadi, director of research at the Brookings Doha Centre in Qatar, and he's particularly involved with the political landscape and democratisation in Arab countries and the Arab world. And welcome to you, and then Gottfried Loffe, who's president of the Council of the Federation of Swiss Protestant Churches, and a vicar. Welcome. So as I said at the outset, we are not really here to discuss what tensions we need to overcome, but rather how those tensions can become the solutions to them. And having said that, we cannot solve a problem until we know what the problem is. So to begin with, I'd like to talk about the various tensions in Europe. Maybe I could begin with you, Mr. Shadi. In 2010, a book was published in Germany, the Tirozarsien, I'm sure you've all heard of it. It was called Germany's Put Again Into Itself. It addressed the lack of integration, particularly of Muslim immigrants, and this was a massive threat to German prosperity. It was a cause of great controversy in Germany. Was it a surprise for you, Mr. Shadi? Well, I think what we're seeing is the mainstreaming of anti-Muslim prejudice in Germany, but also throughout Europe. It's no longer just the right-wing populist parties that are engaging in this sort of rhetoric, but we're seeing it across the political spectrum, from leading intellectuals, from leading authors, from the mainstream political parties, center-right, center-left, as well. And I think that's one of the really worrying trends going forward, is that it's no longer just the refuge of the fringe, but it's becoming something broader. I think what we are seeing, though, is what I would describe as a clash of values. And I don't think that we should discount this. There are major differences in Europe about the role of religion in the public sphere. And the Muslim minority has a different way of looking at religion than the vast majority of the rest of Europe. So when non-Muslim Europeans talk about secularism, they feel that that's value-neutral, that that gives everyone the right to practice their religion, but only in the private sphere, where I think with a lot of Muslims, and not a majority, but certainly a significant portion of Muslims in Europe, they believe that their religion gives them the right to express that in the public sphere. So I think those are two very different ways of approaching religion in the public sphere. And I'll just also say this, that I think there is something about Islam the way it's currently constructed that makes it more resistant to secularization. And there have been attempts throughout centuries to relegate Islam into the private sphere, but it's failed time and time again. So the question is, I think, is Europe going to be able to accommodate those types of religious sentiments in the public sphere? And I think the jury is still out, and that's where we're seeing so much of this tension emerging. Many thanks. Is this problem which Switzerland is extremely affected by? We've had the anti-minerates law passing referendum in Switzerland, or the initiative for that. So do you believe this is an extreme problem in Switzerland? Well, I think we've heard a very concise explanation of the problem. It's the integration of religion which has a public dimension, which has a scale of values, which has principles about living together in community. And this religion is coming into contact with another religion, which has other principles there as some overlap, but to certainly not everything is the same. So there are frictions, and this relates not only to a small political minority. It relates to large parts of our society. Therefore, we need to take it seriously. If we're thinking about solutions, yes, we do need to address the sources of tension. Those of you who grew up in Switzerland are familiar with these tensions. They're not that new in 1847. We had a religious war here. We know what religious tensions can leave to. So let's remember our own history and then move on and address the issues. So you are saying that the tensions exist? The question is, are they inherent in religions? Or are these tensions being intentionally and purposefully created, caused, used by certain parties? Perhaps I should turn to you, Minister Agap. In Norway, there was a devastating event this summer. I think we can all remember the terrible incidents. An individual shot around 80 people. And this act was the act of a radical individual. However, it was oriented against Islamic philosophy. Where does Norway stand today? And how would you address this issue of tensions and what tensions are there? As you can all imagine, it was an incredible shock that this kind of thing could happen in a normally very peaceful society whose looks upon itself as highly tolerant and multi-culturally open. And this, of course, was a far-right white supremacist, a former member of a political party who is anti-immigrant. But he left the party because he wanted to be far more anti-immigrant than the party was. And who decided to kill a lot of people who were not necessarily immigrants, but people who he saw as representatives of tolerance and multiculturalism, which was what he was fighting. So it was sort of the center of the government, the main government building, the Prime Minister's office and several other ministries, and the political summer camp of the Social Democratic Youth Movement. And the state of purpose, because in this case we know exactly what he meant by it, because he wrote a big book on the internet which he published an hour before the crime, was exactly that. He has to do this because he has to defend against this multicultural tolerance which has no values because it doesn't sort of stick to the traditional Christian purity. Now, this was a solo terrorist. We have found out direct political links, although there are a lot of intellectual connections to other people. But what it led to in our society was a very strong focus on doing what we think is the right thing to do when we are exposed to terrorism is not to allow ourselves to be terrorized, not to change in the direction that the terrorist wants, but rather than the opposite direction. So the collective call of the political leadership as much as the people in general and of all the political parties was more tolerance, more unity, more democracy, more openness. And let's try to look into how can we strengthen the values of unity and diversity, which we think as Europeans and as Norwegians is what holds us together. Because the future as we see it has to be in one way or the other a multicultural society. And that requires a set of tolerance skills. And one of my challenges here is that I think religious leaders of all faiths has the responsibility in help creating the civic culture which makes it possible to coexist and not only coexist but have a mutual tolerance of the different faiths. And I think that paradoxically the outcome of this terrible terrorist attack is that there is more focus on this in Norway in a positive sense. So if one thing was achieved it was that the terrorist really failed in trying to move society in the direction of purity that he was hoping. There are two points there. Interestingly on one hand there's this matter of unity in diversity and the thing that brings us together. And then on the other hand you have the issue of tolerance, the recognition that there are differences and that needs to be recognized. I see us Norwegians and Swiss and everyone is part of a broad European tradition inspired by enlightenment which is very much that what makes us unique is our openness and tolerance and willingness to allow others. I'm not saying that all the parts of the world doesn't have the same. Actually on the contrary a lot of the emerging powers that we're now seeing and which we're discussing a lot in the World Economic Forum are highly multicultural societies with a high social capital of tolerance. But there is something European about this which we have to cherish because if we move in the opposite direction and try to look for something absolutely pure and original first we won't find it. And on the way to that quest we will achieve a lot of conflict and trouble. Herr Abi Goldschmidt, are you interested in how you would see that from your religious community? Where would you say the tensions arise? I would like first of all to say that it's great to be back in Switzerland but you'll allow me to speak in English to respond in English since it has been over 30 years since I've been away. I would like to defer a little bit and say that the problem in Europe is not between religions. It's basically between an enlightened secular society and a religion which comes from another part of the world. And if we take a look at statistics, a Catholic newspaper in France, Lacroix, said that 64% of French are Catholics which is about 41.6 million people. 4.5% which is about 1.9 million people go to church regularly. There are 6 million Muslims in France. 45% say they practice which is 2.5 million people meaning the more people going to a mosque in France than going to church in France. The same is true in England. You have 930,000 Muslims going to the mosque on a weekly basis. You have only 916,000 Anglicans who go to church. So you have here a tension between post-modern secular Europe and immigrants who have come with a very strong religious identity. Now, one of the New York responses was like here in Switzerland the idea to circumcise mosques or what Wilder's Party is doing in Holland. And by the way, the terrible terrorist attack you had in Norway, the person was inspired by Wilder's. Such a terror attack does not happen out of nowhere. There has to be always some kind of support for such a terrible act. It is to attack the Muslim religion which we from our Jewish perspective as a minority. We are the world's biggest experts in surviving as a minority. We are ready to share our expertise with our Muslim brothers in Europe as well. So I think that this reaction of attacking the freedom of religion of mosques, of the way women wear clothes in the streets and the latest attack has been in Holland of also attacking what is on your plate, what kind of meat is on your plate. Outlawing halal and kosher meat. And this attack has been against all minorities. So I think it is not in the spirit of Europe. If Europe wants to keep its identity, its identity as a European Union or as it was said that Europe is a collective union of minorities. So we have to integrate and to teach each other tolerance. I hate the word intolerance. I would hate the word tolerance. I think we should not only tolerate each other, we should respect each other. And we should respect each other's secularism and religiosity. And I think a very important part of this is that the clergy should be trained in Europe. They should come and have European values. This is extremely important. Education is important. And those who transgress, who terrorize other minorities should be punished. But religion, as it is, should never be attacked. And freedom of religion should be one of the last holy ideas which exist in Europe should be kept. Thank you very much. I certainly begin to address the solutions particularly in education for individuals to be useful. I'd like to come back to one point you made by saying that the tension isn't really between the religions but between secular society and the religious society. Mr. Khaled, would you support that view expressed by Mr. Gojmit that the tension doesn't exist really between the religions but rather between the secular society and the religious society? And I prefer to give you my idea about how Muslims think about coexistence, about what they can do in Europe. So first of all, Islam, is Islam accept coexistence as an idea? I believe as a Muslim that yes, Islam accept this and it's very clear in many verses of Quran like we created you in different colors, different cultures, different religions to accept, to exchange benefits through each other. It's part of our religion. And through my Facebook page, we have four million youth in my page. We ask them, is coexistence good for our future? Do you believe in coexistence? And I got more than 80% of these four million yes, they saying yes, we accept and it's part of our understanding to the civilization, to the religion. So when we talk about the theory, they believe. But let's come to the practical life. Practical life, in my opinion, nothing can make the people understand each other like to meet each other, to work with each other, to find a practical projects doing with each other. If we stay talking about Muslims and you cannot find a check hand with one of them or sit or eat or play football together or work together, it will still in our minds you are something me, myself. Before I stayed in UK, big difference between my understanding to the Western people when I was staying in Egypt and then after I come to UK. When the people meet, when they smile, when they think together, when they work together. And I have an example. Do you remember the cartoon crisis in Denmark? Most of Muslims did many demonstrations in our countries and so on, so I don't want to talk about this. But in our organization we said the practical and the right way to go to Denmark to meet the youth, let's talk 40 of our youth and going to Denmark to make dialogue. This is the right way. I stayed there for three days. I have a joke that one of the Danish ladies when one of the Muslims girl coming from Saudi Arabia came with us, when she saw her bag, she was scared. There was a bomb in her bag. And after three days they hugged each other and they cried when they left. And I know some of them still in monthly emails together. This is the human part and the social part is more important in my opinion than the idolages. Idolages, it's your idea, I will respect it and my idea you'll respect it. But once we meet, once we work together a big difference will happen as a human. This is my opinion. That's a wonderful view. Is it perhaps not a little bit too positive, too optimistic? We heard Mr. Locke speak on this earlier. Maybe you'd like to come back on that. Well, I don't know whether it's too positive because it's the only way we have to meet. It doesn't begin with a philosophical approach. It doesn't begin with a religious right. It must begin by sitting down, eating together, meeting each other, educating our children in school together. That's where it has to begin. We have a council of religions in Switzerland for a number of years now where religious leaders can try to do that. Eat together, talk, share a little bit of our lives together. And here perhaps there's a concern because when we do that we can see that in some ways there are differences. The way in which, for example, we let women participate in these discussions, that is different. That's not only different between religions. It's different between certain denominations. We have to recognize that even when we come together there are significant problems. So if we're talking about tolerance, we must have credibility and honesty together with that. Tolerance is fine if everybody comes together for half an hour and then goes back to their world, but tolerance without honesty goes nowhere. I think that's a very important point because we have to be honest about that. And of course the cartoon crisis illustrated one of the limits of tolerance because most Europeans and Danes and Norwegians in Switzerland would say that there is an absolute right to draw whatever you like as a part of the right of expression. That sort of sacrosanct in the post-modern civic society in a sense is something you cannot violate. We do not tolerate people who violate the principle than you can say and write practically what you want, particularly as long as it's not incitement to terrorism, for instance, we all have certain rules. And then on the inside of the logic of many Muslims, not necessarily everyone, but many Muslims, there are certain things you can't do like making this particular drawing of the Prophet, which is also absolute and sacrosanct and you can't deviate from that. And here we want to be respectful and tolerant, but they don't match 100%. You can do a lot of things to increase understanding to reduce the problem, but you can't really sort of square the circle. But the second best what you can do is to have a lot of contact, dialogue, explain to each other why this is an issue, why is this so important for me, why is this so important for you, and then eventually end up by saying that we disagree but we still respect you, although the two logics do not completely connect. And I think the rabbi's point is very good because it is not necessarily a question about the natural essence of religions, but that many of the people who practice Islam in many European countries come directly from what, don't get me wrong, but what some people would call the pre-modern societal setting into a sort of post-modern societal setting. And if they came from an urban setting, a modern Muslim urban setting, they would come with a different set of interpretations of what the religions mean than if they come from the Punjabi countryside, for instance. And this is our issues that we have to deal with. I think they can be dealt with, but we have to sort of have them on the table as a reality. And if I could just jump in, when I hear the word dialogue, I mean, it always sounds very nice, but I'm also skeptical and just to build on some of the previous comments, I think I'm made an important point saying that others have to respect each other's ideologies, but the problem is are Europeans comfortable with the idea when a French Muslim woman says, I believe that God has obligated me to cover my hair, or God has obligated me to cover my face using the face veil. And if you look at the polling, a majority in many of these countries simply don't respect that idea. So the question is how are Europeans going to accommodate themselves to these types of ideas, which to them are offensive, and this is just one example of many others. I think on the other hand, I think Muslims have to also embrace the idea that they don't have the right not to be offended. So everyone should have the right to draw a cartoon, even if it's fundamentally offensive to Muslims. So I think the principle here should be freedom. And when you ban people from wearing the headscarf or trying to ban them from drawing offensive cartoons, that is fundamentally illiberal. And I think what's really ironic is that European liberals who claim to be animated by these post-enlightenment ideals, they are going around trying to ban people from expressing their fundamental rights. This is a fundamental right to cover your hair and no government should intervene in that. And I think that's a principle that should be absolute, but in Europe it is not absolute today. Thank you very much indeed. I think we're coming closer to the tensions. They're now clearly out in the open. I'd like to ask you gentlemen perhaps to be a little shorter in your answers so that we can have a discussion. I'd like to strengthen that point with the following idea. You said that it's the tensions between religious communities and secular communities, which is a problem. Now if we take that a bit further, we can have a lot of examples, no minarets and no headscarfs. But it's not only a question of forbidding Islamic practices, but also Christian symbols. There was a case of an employee of British Airways who was dismissed because she had a cross on and she didn't want to take it off. So I'd like to ask you, Rabbi Goldschmidt, you said in an article in a newspaper recently, you said that you think it's... If we want to... It's also ideological if we want to ban everything religious. This is also a trend in Europe, the separation between state and church. How do you see those tensions? And why do you say it's just as much ideological? There are many ways to define a secular state and the relationship between a secular state and the state religion, or the religion of the majority. And I think many countries in Europe, each one has its own way of doing that. Even though there is a separation between church and celestine in England and the UK, there is no separation. It's a secular state, but there is no separation between... The queen is the head of the church of England. In France, you have laicite. So in the United States, you have a separation but on each dollar you have in God's retrust. I think that we're going to have to redefine, as I would say, as Europe is becoming more religious. And Europe is becoming more religious, not only because the influx of immigrants from other parts of the world. I think religion is playing a much bigger role in this century than last century. Last century was defined by secular movements, which created the biggest killing machines in history. And in this century, religion is much more important again. And I think one of the reasons why we religious leaders are invited here to the World Economic Forum is also a sign that while we do not deal with making money, we have something to add as faith leaders, as leaders of different traditions. So I think that we have to find a new way to tally with each other. And what Dr. Lacher has said, we have to be true. We have to be true to each other and we have to give the same message if we're sitting in an inter-religious dialogue. And we're speaking to each other. When we go home to our constituencies, we should give the same message. Now, I believe that we have to be tolerant to any kind of dress if it's a religious dress. And however, if there are people preaching terrorism, people who are preaching hate in our midst, in Europe, they have to be stopped. There are terrorists each time I go to the airport and I have to take off my shoes. I think maybe one day it will come and we're going to have to wear special pajamas and go on a plane. Who knows? I think what would have happened if a religious leader in the right time, in the right place, would have said the right word. Herr Eide wird Europa religiöser? Is Europe becoming more religious? That's what Dr. Goldschmidt is saying. In the diversity theme, there is also the need to identify oneself. It becomes more important, so it's probably at least an element of that. I think it's difficult to estimate statistically, but I think that when people are more aware of the fact that there are others around, you have more concern about who are you and what are your role and what are your identity. I think what I very much would like to underline this point that I think religious leaders have several important roles and there's very good reason that they are invited here and to the World Economic Forum to discuss this role, because in a sense, I think it's particularly true for leaders or minorities and particularly for relatively recently arrived minorities to try also to be a kind of bridge and an interpreter between the societies, because of the larger society, what are the expectations, what are the limitations of how we can express to the extent that we are sort of invading others, our religious faith and practices and so on and how do we meet and the kind of connection of religious leaders that you describe here in Switzerland. We've had it in Norway quite successfully for many years, initiated I think by a former bishop of Oslo with several Muslim Jewish leaders involved and others exactly saying that we have a collective responsibility of trying to help our followers to interpret our role in this ever-evolving society. Can I also add one more point which I think these discussions have always been important but they're getting particularly important now that we are in a time of crisis because the danger of trying to build politics on exclusiveness is going to be far higher in the decade that we have in front of us than the decade we have behind us because there is a lot of unemployment, there's a lot of uncertainty and insecurity about the future and people's personal lives and the experience from the last time we had the crisis of these dimensions from the 1930s was that the exploitation of purity and the sort of the critique of multiculturalism led to an extremely dangerous situation which then blew Europe apart and not just saying that exactly the same thing would happen again but we have some lessons which we have to sort of bring into this debate that it's not only that we have a current set of issues that we have to solve but we have to prevent against the future where this is becoming a big political problem and that's up to us as politicians to deal with up to the general public to take their role in this and of course it's up to religious leaders another question which is always discussed is the role of fundamentalism so religions can be peace-loving and I think this is something that has been emphasized and shown that the project is something that's been outlined and religion can be linked with that but it has always been said that it's only non-fundamentalist religion so non-fundamentalist currents which can promote that kind of peace so the question once again is what is the problem with fundamentalism how can we how can we get around fundamentalism or what kinds of fundamentalism are unproblematic you have taken interesting positions on this you were a Muslim brother previously and now you are a preacher in the you represent very liberal things what is a good kind of fundamentalism is there a good kind of fundamentalism does it exist let me tell you that let me tell you that I believe that if you're talking about Europe again the the overlaps areas the mutual points between Muslims and the West points I believe that the mutual points much more than the difference so I claim if we not push but encourage Muslims to find where is the best ways to be part of the society not the best integration but to be part this is our country how you support and help this country and if the faith can encourage Muslims and the Christian and Jewish in Europe please look for the needs of the society and this is the meaning of your faith I think that the priorities of the society in Europe this is the role of the faith in Europe in Egypt my country in each place look for the priorities for example Muslims in UK Muslims in UK have a lot of organizations charities but I told them most of these charities for the sake of the Muslims in UK why not to find organizations for the sake and the needs of the British society for example we have in UK Islamic relief looking for the sake of the society not for the sake of only the Muslims as a minority why not to think like that for example environment projects Muslims in UK or in Swiss or in Europe do with this project with another organizations in Europe to work together as one project for the needs of the society I think this is the role of faith and for example let me give you that there is a speech for prophet Muhammad he said to walk to support a poor family better than to stay in my mosque for 40 days to pray so it's micro finance project he's talking about micro finance look to do something this is the meaning of your faith this is my role to encourage youth this is put your energy put your faith in this channel for the sake of the society yes Mr. Locher there is little that connects us to all religious trends the problem of fundamentalism we can all and it seems to me to talk about fundamentalism a religion is fundamental because religion is basically a fundamentalist religion it wants to give the last word it wants to explain everything it's not interested in saying that everything is equal no it wants to be fundamental but that is quite a difference being fundamental and being fundamentalist religions are not fundamentalist as such and I don't think that religion is the basis of fundamentalism that is not the case so you can see the representatives here I am familiar with people who practice these religions are not fundamentalists they have a theological training they have learned how to communicate to get along with other religions so I think that distinction between fundamental and fundamentalism is an important distinction and there I think is where tolerance must end I think fundamentalism is a relative concept because what might seem fundamentalist to an Egyptian is very different than what seems fundamental to a Swiss person so I think it's all relative just to give one example many of you may have seen the televised debate between the Swiss scholar Tarek Ramadan and Nicholas Sarkozy on television where Tarek Ramadan proposed an idea he said we need to have a moratorium on the had punishments those are Islamic punishments the cutting off of the hands of thieves is one example of that or stoning of adulterers so he said we need to have a moratorium on these punishments including the stoning of women Sarkozy went crazy and said essentially saying that's incredibly backward that you were saying that you should condemn it 100% why are you only providing this half measure there should be no room for discussion on this issue so in the Swiss or in the French context what Tarek Ramadan said sounds kind of conservative it sounds kind of fundamentalist but Tarek Ramadan's idea of a moratorium in Egypt is perceived to be very liberal to the point that it's quite controversial and he's being condemned by people for offering this idea of a moratorium so who's right on this everything is relative in life isn't it and today with the transparency of the internet when you say one statement on one side of the world the next day, next minute the whole world knows about it so you have even more of a problem now I met last night for the first time I befriended one of the leaders from Qatar not a religious leader and he told me that there is in Egypt there's a phenomena of Muslims converting to Christianity the Christian sect is the Coptic sect there now this is happening while in Egypt churches are being burned and destroyed and the Copts are being killed now I told them this is not because they like Christianity more than Islam it is because they see Christianity a more modern way of religion now what has been said is the following is that of course when we in the Jewish community we came out from the little ghettos and chattels of Eastern Europe and we moved to the big cities we also had to adapt ourselves to modern secular Europe and this also created new leaders and new leadership and new responses and so did the Protestant church earlier and religions are even though God sent the man made so I think that we are right now at the beginning of a process when a great number of Muslim believers are moving from a country where they were the only ones or the majority to a place where for the time being there are a minority and they're going to have to adapt and the leadership I see today with my colleagues here to my left shows promise and hope that this new European religious leadership is going to adapt is going to find create a new European Islam which is going to be compatible with European values but I want to say something regarding to Egypt actually maybe the image of Egypt we need to be clear and to give you the right image about the Egyptian Muslim and the Christians what I want to say that last month I knew that 100 of Egyptian Muslim and the Christians they working together for a microfinance project in the poor families with the poor families in Egypt and no one ask the others what is your religion working together and I know many of Christians change their religion to be Muslims I know them and I know as you said some else but I remember during the revolution in Egypt that who protects the churches was the Muslims Muslims during the revolutions was afraid about the churches so we protect the churches I know a lot of youth left their families to go to keep the church this is something great happened during the revolution and maybe you saw something like that in the televisions so the image of the Egyptian that they believe we can work together and another point whose right in my opinion right is the needs of the people when I was 7 I asked the youth the Arab youth please send me your dreams for your country after 20 years from now and we put 20 sectors education health coexistence and we got 700,000 dreams and I asked them please put the priorities of your dreams number one was number one wasn't we need to fight Christians number one wasn't we need to be in a fight this is what I'm sure it is not it is very clear we need jobs and number two was women empowerment in the media so it is not like like there is a big problem between Muslim and the Christian and the I'd like to take up another final point before we have two questions which I'm sure are questions as well I'd like to take up the issue of the European basic culture what could be the common core of European culture it's been said here that in many religious movements there are clear convictions there are basic assumptions there are values and one of the problems as Teres Gramadin has already been mentioned has said that in Europe we perhaps forgotten to look at our own roots some theoreticians have said that there is a phobia of ideology a phobia against one's own roots Christophobia a phobia against Christian roots and we have a fear of going back to our own roots and the more we express that fear the more we are afraid of the foreigners and this is something that is coming out Mr. Ida the question to you is this what could be a basic ideological underpinning which could get into that and then put into that gap we have our roots and if we know what our roots are then we can understand how this is better if people who feel insecure about their own identity are more prone to be fearing others it's easier to tolerate others if you're secure and safe in your own identity and thinking but I think the answer is very much that this has worked before not that long time ago we have a long history of doing it the wrong way but modern Europe is very much the opposite of that and has deliberately been developed both culturally politically as a project and I'm not talking only about the European Union but the broader European political project is this unity and diversity where the pride is very much in our own tolerance the pride is in our diversity we can go to another European country and fear more or less at home because it's rather similar and you understand the culture and so on quite easily and I think to build further on that on the premise that it has worked before we have been able to assimilate and to adapt to each other previously I would like to introduce one point which I think is related to that but very often overlooked when Europeans talk about Islam in the world only or from person to person world but there's a lot of Muslims in Asia east of that for India 150 million I think Indonesia predominantly Muslim one of the biggest countries in the world Bangladesh, Malaysia where a lot of this sort of mutual coexistence has established itself over hundreds of years and if you go there these are extremely prosperous countries India is going to be the third most important country in the world for the rest of this decade and it's doing very well and there's a lot of Muslims there so I mean this kind of coexistence which we are struggling with in Europe because it's newer when it comes to the Muslim actually has happened elsewhere quite successfully not that without any problems but I think we should remember that part as well I'm glad that you mentioned the word insecurity and also you said jobs earlier and I think it's interesting that we've been talking now for about 40 minutes and we haven't focused on the economic issues here it's not just a matter of ideology if you look at Arab and Muslim minorities throughout Europe they are disproportionately poor and part of the lower class and have less access to good employment opportunities so the economic becomes mixed with the ideological and sometimes it's difficult to distinguish between them so to what extent is it an ideological problem and to what extent is it an economic problem because when people don't have those opportunities when they do feel economically insecure they tend to look inward and find strength in their own identity and it's not just the minorities but as Europe has will have more and more serious economic challenges you're going to have those who are part of the majority culture who are returning to right-wing groups because their economic needs are not being addressed so it's on both sides so we also have to think what are the economic solutions to this I'd like to give the floor to Mr. Locher and then open the floor to your questions Paradoxically I think that the best thing that could happen to Europe but for everyone in Europe also for their sisters is that Christians become more Christian if Christians realize what's in their gospel what's in their creed and if they go back to living together if they go back to their own traditions because you can't change your religious identity that easily and those values are there and if that happens and we go back to these values we won't have that same fear the majority in this country continues to fear the foreigner and I think it's going to be bad for everyone and these tensions are not going to go away so go back to what is important for us what are our values let's look at our own traditions do we know our own traditions let's look at ourselves and if we can do that we'll go back to our own values and I think we should be more open and I'm convinced that we should also succeed in seeing that the others the foreigners have their own profits who have the same values but I think we have to do this very openly and frankly and let's not try and separate what is already too separate thank you very much indeed for those interesting comments and there is one question here from the gentleman could you give a microphone to the gentleman please so that he can put his question please make your question short don't make your own presentation if you have a question for a particular gentleman on the panel please say don't whom your question is directed otherwise I shall try and keep everything together I work in development assistance and I've worked a lot in India and in Switzerland as a neutral country has delivered weapons to India and Pakistan I'd like to come back to what Mr. Hamid and what Mr. Locher was saying that they said that the economic issues are extraordinarily important and I think religions are being instrumentalized I've seen this in India where very peaceful until for reasons of poverty because of economic reasons the Muslims were stirred up against the Hindus and vice versa and then they started to fight each other and that led to a considerable problem and the problem is that the gap between rich and poor is getting is getting bigger and bigger so I think that's a question we really must address is why do we not have the major representative of religion on this podium, the religion of money and I think it would be great if we did have the Pope of money here because then we could bury all our religious colleagues problems because money would solve all our problems where are the common values among the monotheistic religions here in Muslims we know that there is a ban on interest and they haven't had any losses there and if we weren't able to have interest in all monotheistic religions wouldn't that be a good way of trying to close the gap between rich and poor it's a question for Mr. Locher well there were a lot of issues there I'm not sure that the religion of money is as sustainable as you think we represent religions and I think religions are far older than money because money is made and then it disappears again the major holders of power always have convictions they have values they have societies which are based on beliefs and I think economic leaders wouldn't be making a big mistake if they think religion is marginal and I think there are greater differences now asking me about major economic policies that we could pursue and I wouldn't I wouldn't wish to pronounce about that but I think money should be money should be distributed widely but I think religion should preach religious values and not talk about money and then there was the issue of interest taking interest could you say something about that because that's part of the gospel well that's something which in our own tradition is disputed there are various ways of taking interest and I think we could have a discussion about interest but I wouldn't like to have that discussion here this afternoon there's a gentleman in the middle there please and then somebody to his left ladies and gentlemen I think we ought to look at our own values in the Christian world in my holidays in Turkey I had an experience when our Turkish guide talked about his religion and tried to explain it and said that we in Switzerland and we knew about these issues of apples or bananas and everyone nodded and I think no we shouldn't know that if we don't know what we're supposed to be defending if we don't know the Bible then I think we're on the wrong track and I think when he told us about the Dervishes and what they wanted to achieve and they all wanted to have access to Allah then I think we ought to realize that we don't only have a body we also have a soul and we also have a mind and with that mind we also have contact with the Almighty and if we could find perhaps a parallel with the Dervishes between the Dervishes and us could I ask you to ask a question please or to summarize what you want to say what question are you asking to whom I'd simply like to say that I don't have a question because you will always have questions I'd like to make my contribution and that was my contribution and if that's not enough well that's too bad that was my contribution the gentleman behind you please I have two questions the first was not raised the problem of the rule of law and Europe is characterized by the rule of law and unfortunately the Muslims and we know that in practically every country they have their own law and yet they don't obey the law of the state they consider that Sharia law is more important than the rule of the state and the rule of the land now the question is what do you think Mr. Hamid about how a democracy can reconcile itself with the Sharia law is that possible Mr. Hamid okay well first of all that's an over generalization we can't say that Muslims value Sharia over the laws of their own country I'm an American Muslim I've been part of the American Muslim community growing up and we never had a problem with American laws so we have to be very careful about what we're talking about here that may be true for a minority of European Muslims but I think if you look the majority of European Muslims don't have a problem with laws as they currently exist now the question of whether or not and there's also not to get into this too much but there's also a concept in Islamic tradition that if you're a minority living in a different land you have to respect the laws of that country and that's what's supreme now if we're talking about so Sharia and democracy compatible and that's obviously very relevant for the Arab world where we've seen Islamist parties rising in places like Egypt, Tunisia, Libya and so on and just last week we had the results released that more than 70% of the Egyptian parliament went to Islamist parties now you might say well that's pretty disquieting that's kind of problematic but actually I think it's very encouraging that Islamists are participating in the democratic process and they're reconciling themselves to democracy why should there be a conflict there and in Turkey we have a party with Islamist origins that has been ruling Turkey for 10 years and they've experienced incredible economic growth and incredible economic success as a result of that party's policies so it's not a very simple thing I do think there is a tension between Islam or Islam and Sharia and liberalism maybe maybe that's where there's an issue so for example you have Islamist parties in Egypt who are talking about restricting alcohol consumption now that might be illiberal but it's democratic if the majority of Egyptians want to ban alcohol that is 100% democratic and actually in America in the 1920's we also banned alcohol through the democratic process so liberalism and democracy are sometimes going to be in tension and sometimes you have to decide what do you value more very briefly I think that development in Turkey are extremely encouraging it's going in a very interesting direction and it may be the one of the role models for many of the emerging Muslim states recognizing certain differences and historical issues but I think there's something very interesting going on and my other point there is that I think it's crucially important that we now sort of allow this development in the Muslim world to the extent we have any influence and say it's good that some of these parties like the Muslim Brothers is now taking part in normal politics and dealing with normal budgets and normal trade-offs rather than trying to or having to be forced into the shadow of the mosque where you have sort of a completely different agenda I think the democratization means that you have to deal with the issues we as normal politicians deal with every day which is sort of difficult compromises between different trade-offs which many of these people have not been allowed to simply because their authoritarian leaders were supported by us that it was better to have an authoritarian leader than to have democracy because they might elect the wrong people I just would like to add also that I think over a hundred years or a thirty years ago in Europe they are asking a question if Christianity is compatible with democracy I would like to add to it another one I'm from Russia, I'm from Moscow in 2004 the librarian of the Library of Congress James Billington wrote an article where he said that the Russian Orthodox Church is going to be a vehicle for increased democracy in Russia everybody laughed at him and just a few weeks ago after the big demonstrations in Moscow it was the patriarch who intervened so I think that everything is developing we just need time, patience and tolerance thank you thank you very much perhaps perhaps a good time for you to leave us thank you so much we deserve our warm applause thank you very much all the best our discussion isn't yet quite at an end we can continue until just about five o'clock any further questions in the third row, lady where is the microphone thank you this is now an error but yes please continue okay 10, 20, 30 years ago the debate might have been about racial prejudices and racial tensions whether here in Europe or in the USA today we're talking about religious tensions 20, 30 years time what tensions we'll be talking about isn't it really the issue that discrimination, prejudice and ignorance that exists among us all and that's the real issue that we should be debating if we solve these kind of issues then hopefully there'll be peace amongst all nations thank you are you addressing your question to someone in particular to all of them would you like to answer I can just say something very briefly on that I think we also have to face the reality that these tensions are never going to be resolved it's part of the human condition that we find ways to hate and dislike each other it would be nice to think about some ideal scenario where that would be the case but it's simply not possible even in the US we thought that once we elected the first black president that yes we had finally reached a promised land but in some ways we've seen since then how anti-black sentiment has been on the rise and you see a lot of veiled attacks on President Obama from the Republican Party that touch on his foreign origins and questioning how true he is to American identity so even I think the point here is even if you take two steps forward you're probably ended up taking a step back too and you just have to keep on fighting and hope that you'll at least be able to have forward momentum in the right direction don't think we should want to look behind the religions here these attitudes these negative developments they have their roots and you could perhaps lose sight of the religions and just think that all you need to do is overcome prejudice and just think that all you need to do is overcome prejudice I don't think that's true we need to look at the content we need to look at the issues of religion we need to look at our own religions and not lose sight of them another member of the panel has said alongside with the religious and social factors there are economic factors as well are facts and we can look at these facts I think the question is very good because it's true that in principle any difference can be exploited politically I worked quite a lot on the Balkans during the wars in the form of Yugoslavia and you could saw that very minor differences that people hadn't thought about at all ten years earlier suddenly became very big to the extent that Serbo-Kroat which is basically one language was then distinguished so that you can have a Serbian versus Croat dictionary with the same words so any difference can be a political theme if people make them and in that case it was not age-old hatred that people thought it was deliberate contemporary politics of hatred and difference so in that sense maybe in ten years or twenty years we have a debate about injustice among different kind of the lineators I would just make the point that having observed the world economic form and for several years now and more recognition of the values of equity and equality in growth and that the growth should be inclusive there's much more talk about that now than ten years ago I think ten years ago there was much more talk about that than ten years earlier that just economic growth on its own is not desirable if it is not checked by certain values and equity first because it sort of reduces tensions if it works I mean if you have more equity that will less conflict or more sustainable growth so I mean the point you're making is very good and it is a good reminder that what seems to be religious difference may actually sometimes be actually something else Interest for me I think we haven't really discussed religion extensively enough I think every religion has its own competitive approach there tends to be a competition between the religions in Switzerland you have tithes this church gets money from the government it wants a certain number of participants churches want people not to convert and I think it's the same in Islamic countries I think in Islamic countries there is a large number of converts to Christianity sometimes how do religions deal with that they might recognize there need to be tolerance but they also have to pursue their own interests so as a Christian say I tolerate Muslims I tolerate Jews and believe them their religion is the right one and they want their leaders well I think your question is clear you want to know to what extent the churches can reconcile their need to convert and pursue their own interests with tolerance you don't want to answer the question I give it to Mr. Halle if I'm talking about Islam it's very clear there is a verse of Quran don't push anybody to change or to leave his his religion or if he want to be in another religion don't push him to be in your religion it's very clear for us as Muslims that we respect if someone want to change his religion and I'm talking about myself and I'm talking about a lot of Muslims we have no problem about this point yes some people have some understanding to this verses that no it is not correct but most of the Muslims in the Arab countries believe now that no problem because the verse is don't push anybody for any religion it's a freedom to each one to choose his religion Mr. Locher, but at the same time you're right that's the way things are religions wouldn't be religion if they didn't claim the truth and when we recognize that we recognize how large the problem is because you have different systems each claiming to possess the truth it's not about something which is distant from us about something that is far away from us it's a question of how we deal with gender, with minorities with our children it relates to the way we live day to day there was a time when we thought that could perhaps be ignored but what Rabbi Goldschmidt said is right there are pressing questions and the issue of tolerance must also go hand with hand with an assessment of how honest and that approach is we have an obligation to pursue peace between religions but we need to make that small difference between fundamentalism and fundamentalism if a religion is honest it is fundamental but if it is fundamentalist then it is working against its own fundamental principles at least those that I believe another question here at the front lady in the third row maybe we should take two questions together here and then this gentleman here on this side you might argue that 2001 and 9-11 with the response the war on terror whether you might be able to argue that that is a first step towards what Samuel Huntington called clash of civilizations and that's the question directed to all of you thank you very much I would like to hear the question from this gentleman my name is Ulz or Mr Fleur I'd like to say we all have a father and a mother otherwise we wouldn't be here and in the over the last few millennia we've had the same fathers the creator Adam and Noah then it's not possible to live in peace and respect with one another and in light of the gospels what is the message there what will help us to do that so the class of civilizations and the Huntington theory could I offer you this question yeah well I think Huntington's thesis has been discredited I don't think we don't take it as seriously as we may have a time ago and I think that's positive and that said I think he touches on some things in the article and then the book which do have some truth that ideology matters values matter and we're not all going to become the same but the academic article that I associate myself with more is Francis Fukuyama's end of history and I think those are two of the most influential articles of our time where essentially Fukuyama argues that democracy is moving towards an end point where all of us are going to accept democracy to some extent that's what he's arguing and I think that's what's actually really encouraging post 9-11 that democracy has become the universal language that even if we're Islamist, secularist liberals, leftists that's a direction that people want to go in and right now in the Arab world they're dying in the hundreds and millions that are willing to die for that freedom and democracy so you can have a guy with a really big beard one of these Salafis who's in Tahir Square saying I want my freedom I want my democracy and I'm willing to participate in a democratic process where we resolve our differences peacefully through a political process to me that is the defining change of this era and that's what makes me optimistic I agree with that I think Hansen's thesis has been discredited I think that's true I think there were different reactions after 9-11 and some of them were quite good there were increasing cooperation of police intelligence which actually did prevent certain further attacks but the other part was very dramatic that was the the willingness to allow the terrorists to define our agenda for several years where a lot of western countries led by the previous US administration in a sense accepted this to become a defining moment in a way that you don't really have to because you can respond differently when we had the 22nd of July in Norway last year with this attack on that we had which is our adapted to scale is our 9-11 it was a very strong sentiment not to allow the terrorists to decide what's our agenda to try to make things stay the same as much as possible of course there's certain things you have to do but within the principle and ideas and values that was already existing and in our case I think that was a successful choice because we actually got more of what we had rather than less of what we had when it comes to certain balances between individual freedoms and state security and so on I'd like to have two perhaps two last short questions the gentleman at the back and then there's one lady on the podium well perhaps a thought experiment how do you think the discussion would have gone on the podium when or if a woman were here not just as a moderator but rather as a religious representative I'd keep my question short it's Mr Khaled she said that one of the most important points is having a job would that not just be putting religious questions on the back burner though would that just be ignoring religious questions if we focused on the economy no no no I think that religious now and faith now talking about faith without talking about economy and the role of the faith in the recession and in this period the world all the world thinking about how we will live how we will I believe that this is the role now about faith to encourage the people through the faith to do something for our future for the economy this is what I I believe there is a big relation between how to live between economic and the spiritual leaders and the spiritual role to encourage the people to live in a better future according to your Hamid point about the why we are not going to make a clash now in this period I think people in the Arab world now want to live want to eat want to find a better future so are they talking about coexistence it's very clear now coexistence is our way so this is a relation in my opinion and perhaps we can home that question because earlier you were speaking about 9-11 that was the amazing thing that the attacks didn't come out of a climate of poverty that many of the terrorist attacks rise in prosperous areas or rather of the perpetrators are not poor so maybe there is confusion when you say we need to resolve the economic issues if you say many religious issues might actually be economic issues on the surface there seems to be some paradox well that's why addressing poverty is not going to end extremism extremism is still going to be there fundamentalism is going to be there even if everyone was rich so I think exactly we shouldn't simplify this and say once you give people a job they are going to be happy and actually historically if you look at the most ideological movements the radical movements not just in the Middle East but also in Europe they tend to come from a middle class or upper middle class background at least the leadership maybe the rank and file is different but the leaders of these movements are actually often quite well educated and there's been a number of very interesting studies if you look at Hamas, Hezbollah Islam whatever it is that these are people many of them the leaders with PhDs doctors, engineers and so on the number two in Al Qaeda is a doctor so I mean I think and I think I think the basic problem if you're trying to understand this is as people become more educated they have higher expectations but then their needs aren't able to be satisfied so you have what we call a gap between want satisfaction and want formation it's a political science thing but generally you want more but you can't get it until you're angry and that's where I think a lot of this comes from but I think the bottom line is you have to have an integrated approach addressing poverty is not going to be enough and I think we should be careful not to say that yes all Egyptians want jobs all Egyptians want a better life but also a lot of Egyptians may want to ban alcohol or may want to see Islam play a larger role in public life or may want to see in their ideal world the hands of thieves being cut off you can want both of those things at the same time thank you very much unfortunately we have to draw our discussion to close perhaps right at the end I can draw two or three things together that come from our discussion one view is certainly the clashes the tensions are not only between religions but rather between also between secular societies and religious societies we as Europeans perhaps have to ask whether we're pushing secularizations too far and then the idea of people who know themselves who know their own identity are likely to be less afraid of others who express their own identity forward so again we have to look within ourselves for our own identity ask what is our culture and how do we understand our culture in Europe and something that will certainly remain with me is the hopeful sign that you touched upon namely that the Islamic parties which have been elected to parliaments in Arab countries are involved in the democratic process so that's not a cause for concern but rather a cause for hope thank you very much to all of you for your commitment for your questions, thank you for coming and also I'd like to offer the warmest of thanks to the participants in the panel who have really contributed to a very rich discussion please give them warm applause