Is Interreligious Dialogue in International Relations “Dialogue-Washing” for Authoritarian Regimes? an Exploration of KAICIID and ICCS as Track 1.5 Diplomacy
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...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group
2023
|
| In: |
The review of faith & international affairs
Year: 2023, Volume: 21, Issue: 2, Pages: 67-82 |
| Further subjects: | B
dialogue washing
B International Relations B Singapore B KAICIID B ICCS B Politics B Interreligious Dialogue |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | 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. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1931-7743 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: The review of faith & international affairs
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1080/15570274.2023.2200276 |