Ukraine to mark International Day for Tolerance

Kyiv will host a roundtable on tolerance in the world and in Ukraine, to be organized by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and its Diplomatic Academy of Ukraine, on November 16.

Traditionally on this date Europe and the United States hold rallies against extremism, various kinds of discrimination and intolerance. It stood to logic that Ukraine should join and contribute to this project.

In the 20th and early 21st centuries, mankind became aware that there was no alternative to peaceful, harmonious coexistence between people harboring various outlooks, ideals, or varying in skin color and religious affiliation. The United Nations and its specialized agencies developed a system of worldwide cooperation for the sake of peace, progress, and understanding among the countries and peoples living in different social and economic environments, so as to achieve consensus within a given society, especially in multiethnic countries with several religions, whose go-vernments abide by the UN Charter. In other words, the international community set the task of putting forth social tolerance as an institution.

The 17th-century Cromwell period is regarded as very important in British history. At the time, the Independents and the Levellers stood out from among various Puritan sects that made up Cromwell’s army. Both were for freedom and tolerance. Both doctrines held that not a single point of view can be considered flawless to the extent of dominating others within a given society. Rev. John Saltmarsh, one of the tolerance champions of the Cromwell epoch, said that your views will be as obscure to me as mine to you, until the Lord opens our eyes.

An atmosphere of peace and concord was established in England with religious pluralism and tolerance.

Tolerance first emerged as a problem on the church agenda in Western Europe. Religious toleration marked the beginning of all other liberties germane to a democratic society.

Regrettably, the turn of the 21st century produced a number of hotbeds, all of them being triggered by intolerance — in the ethnic, religious, and political fields: Chechnya, Nagorno-Karabakh, South Ossetia, and the Bosnian War. The latter was ended thanks to the UN peacekeeping forces.

In my opinion, UNESCO stands out among the UN agencies responsible for the development of peaceful cooperation in the humanitarian field. By developing intercultural contacts, promulgating literacy, upholding education, preserving international cultural monuments and nature preserves, UNESCO has helped understanding between various peoples, cultures, and values.

UNESCO’s 28th General Conference adopted the Declaration of Principles on Tolerance (Paris, Nov. 16, 1995), to introduce the tolerance concept into the rules of international public law. In view of the complex situation with the Balkan states, post-Soviet countries, a number of Asian and African regions, the final, sixth, clause of the Declaration reads: “In order to generate public awareness, emphasize the dangers of intolerance and react with renewed commitment and action in support of tolerance promotion and education, we solemnly proclaim November 16 the annual International Day for Tolerance.”

Under this declaration and in conjunction with Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi’s 125th jubilee, Madanjeet Singh, an Indian artist, writer, and diplomat, instituted in 2000 what became known as the UNESCO-Madanjeet Singh Prize for the Promotion of Tolerance and Non-Violence.

Seventy years back, Nazi Germany was swept by a tidal wave of pogroms, starting with the ill-famed Kristallnacht, or the Night of Broken Glass, launching the Holocaust, one of the worst crimes against humanity, let alone tolerance. After the Holocaust, Europe, having lived through its horrors, would seem to be making every effort to erase this horrible period of its history from the European minds. For decades tolerance remained the watchword with the Old World’s politicians. It is still remembered. There is 64,000 euros worth of US aid going to professionally explaining the Holocaust to Lithuania’s college students majoring in grade school teaching.

In 1996, the UN suggested the member countries annually mark the International Day for Tolerance by organizing special public events involving educational establishments and general public.

The International Day for Tolerance acquires a special meaning in the early 21st century, what with the UN General Assembly instituting the International Decade for a Culture of Peace and Non-Violence for the Children of the World, 2001-2010 (A/RES/60/3).

Recent events in Ukraine call for joint actions aimed at combating terrorism, racism, massive discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance.

“In Ukraine, as a multiethnic, multicultural, and multireligious country, a tolerant attitude toward ‘others,’ things that at times appear to be absolutely different, is the main factor of inner stability and peaceful progress,” reads a document prepared by the Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine, in conjunction with the International Day for Tolerance.

Ukrainian society and the state are fully aware of the humanitarian challenges and needs of the 21st century. These boil down, on the one hand, to the need to coordinate the efforts of the international community in solving current pressing issues. On the other hand, there is a necessity of being aware of one’s own national interests, being able to reassess international realities. Ukraine is a multiethnic country and it has to reckon with a number of ethnic time bombs (including the Crimean Tatar and Russian language issues, the differences between the eastern and western regions, and so on). Now and then such time bombs are dropped by certain political forces while playing their power games. Thank God, Ukraine is immune to xenophobic moods. Until now, tolerant attitudes and common sense have been combined to avoid serious conflicts.

Tolerance starts with upbringing, education, and official policy. You can’t struggle against intolerance if the government is intolerant towards its citizens.

An erroneous policy in the sphere of tolerance threatens unforeseeable consequences. A [post-Soviet] society, while in the transition phase, subconsciously keeps looking for the enemy, to blame him/them for all the economic and sociopolitical problems haunting the regime. This “enemy” may well include certain ethnic groups, even countries — mostly depending on the foreign policy course.

Tolerance is a notion that has a number of irrational aspects, because it has everything to do with intellect and mentality. Changing one’s age-old attitude to strangers/outsiders is easier said than done.

Seeking neighborly relations, a number of countries find themselves faced up with similar problems. Europe was forced to solve them after the fall of the colonial system and the emergence of new countries. The ex-Soviet republics followed suit after the USSR’s collapse. These events have taken place during various historical periods, producing, however, consequences that have affected the global social system. Among other things, they have given impetus to interethnic and cultural relationships as one of the factors of social stability and security.

For example, President Nicolas Sarkozy of France is the first head of state of Hungarian parentage in French history. He came to power at the height of anti-immigrant sentiments, which is proof of both the presence of serious problems within French society, and its being prepared to solve them on a tolerant basis.

Liberalism is, of course, an underpinning component of the EU’s tolerance policy, considering that it was largely responsible for uniting Europe. It took a long way, from the idea of ethnic minority assimilation to multiculturalism, the latter meaning the acceptance of every ethnic identity. This tolerant policy helped rid European society of a number of controversies.

It is also true that enhancing to-lerance in European countries has resulted in an uncontrollable influx of Third World immigrants, sharpening the interconfessional issues. On the other hand, this has helped set up the tolerance boundary lines, with pertinent bills being passed by parliaments, forming mental characteristics that would help regulate the tolerance process.

However, the point is not the presence of problems, but the ability to settle them. Today’s Europe has a special kind of legislative and social environment where the complex modern challenges will be adequately met.

This year marks the 15th International Day for Tolerance, an event worth being considered from the who-we-are-where-we-are-headed-for standpoint. This approach to the matter should, of course, be made in a civilized manner, taking into account the opponent’s views, just as there should be a substantiated stand in conformity with 21st-century civilization standards.