Clash of Civilizations?

[CM]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4638609.stm

Personally as a conservative muslim i find this extremely interesting and that it also breaks all the rules of international diplomacy and ettiquete (spelling??).

Any views and comments?

[Darth Zenemij]

I don't want this to sound the lightest bit offensive, but, from what I can read, Muslims have strict teachings not to even look/drink alcohal? So, was herman going against the religion, by canceling a lunch meeting that wasn't serving any wine? Or am I missing something here?

[CM]

The iranis have a very strict intrepretation. While many say you can't drink. The extremely conservative say you can not even sit in a shop that sells alcohol. So having alcohol served during a lunch would be a very big no no from the cultural and religious views of the Iranis.

Personally if your guests can't eat something or do something you try to accomadate them. I mean if someone is vegan, that does not mean you cancel the entire lunch because you don't want to compromise.

[Darth Zenemij]

Hmm. Did they agree to cancel it to respect what the Believe?

[CM]

Para 2: Belgium's parliament speaker, Herman De Croo, decided to cancel a lunch rather than hosting a meal with no wine.

Basically how that paragraph reads is that it was a unilateral move, they did not want to compromise, accept, give in or whatever word you want to use to the Irani request.

Another paragraph:

Guests are not obliged to have alcohol, but we didn't want to bow to outside rules," the spokesman said, adding that Belgian deputies had chosen to "stick to Western customs".

It seems one must stick to western customs when in western countries So much for tolerance.

To add BBC seems to keep changing its articles and paragpraphs as this second paragraph i quoted right now was not in the original link.

[Xandax]

Originally Posted by CM

<snip>
It seems one must stick to western customs when in western countries So much for tolerance.
<snip>

Well - withouth being offensive, but I find that statement so biased and shining of doublestandards.

I'm sure when people visit Iran they have to stick to their customs and not act as they would do normally in their own countries.
When in Rome - do as the Romans.

[CM]

Very true Xandax. Only problem is that in Iran diplomats are provided regular access to alochol if and when they want it. The "diplomatic stores" as they are called cater to the desires of diplomats. Cheapest place to buy alcohol in any country as they are tax free. In Saudi Arabia they have access to beaches while saudi's are not. In Pakistan american diplomats have access to special goods imported directly from the US.

To be extremely honest there are no double standards as there is not a single muslim country in the world where diplomats are restricted from drinking alcohol.

Secondly when people have the inability to drink or eat something does that mean you cancel the entire dinner. Next time a bunch of vegans go to beligium does that mean they cancel the entire dinner because they were planning on serving steak?

[Xandax]

Originally Posted by CM

<snip>Next time a bunch of vegans go to beligium does that mean they cancel the entire dinner because they were planning on serving steak?

Well - if the vegans wanted that no meat would be served at the dinner, then possible.
It is - as I read it - not a matter of wanting the Iranian delegates to drink, but that the Belgium hosts still wanted to be able to serve alcohol to the people whom wanted it.

A spokesman for parliament confirmed that the Iranians would not have been expected to join their Belgian hosts in drinking or toasting.

"Guests are not obliged to have alcohol, but we didn't want to bow to outside rules," the spokesman said, adding that Belgian deputies had chosen to "stick to Western customs".

[dragon wench]

Belgian Senate president Anne-Marie Lizin later cancelled talks with the visitors over the handshake issue.

"We tried to find a solution, but they held fast to their position of not wanting to shake her hand," spokesman Patrick Peremans said.

To be honest, the thing I find most difficult, from my own Western perspective, is the above....

It seems to me that there were severe cultural clashes at every level....

[Dottie]

When people from two different cultures meet it requires both sides to be responsive to the others cultural practices imo. I think that unless a particular practice have moral implications you should try to cater to a guest, and I have a hard time beliving there are moral implications in not serving alcohol.

To be honest, the thing I find most difficult, from my own Western perspective, is the above....

There might be more to this situation then meets the eye. We must remeber that shaking hands is a western way of saluting. While almost all muslims have adopted this when dealing with western males it is not natural to their culture, and in some cases are percived to be a to close contact for people who do not know each other. For some muslims it is also forbidden to touch a woman who is not your sister, mother or wife. Not because you disrespect them but because it is indecent. Now, if the Iranians did not want to salute the woman at all I definatly agree with you, but I find it more likely that they just did not want to shake hands, in witch case I don't think there should be a problem. Why not just bow instead and everything could have been solved easily.

Now, any diplomat should know this, So I think its probable that the Belgian diplomats are being quite unproffesional.

[C Elegans]

Personally, I have always found it very strange that European culture is so fixated with alcohol. How can a toxic drug be viewed as an essential part of the culture and social interaction? However, I do think the Irani diplomats exaggregated when they demanded that the lunch must be served totally without alcohol. In my opinion, the only fair solution would have been to have the lunch and serve alcohol to the Belgians but not to the Iranis.

Originally Posted by dragon wench

To be honest, the thing I find most difficult, from my own Western perspective, is the above....

It seems to me that there were severe cultural clashes at every level....

What in this is it that you view as particularly difficult? In islam, a man cannot in any way touch a woman he is not related to, and a woman cannot touch any man she is not related to. If I have understood things correctly (CM may correct me if I am wrong, but this is what several of my muslim friends have told me) this is a chastity issue, similar to the European christian custumes during earlier centuries where an unmarried lady should never offer her hand to a man.

Handshaking is a typic western phenomenon, many cultures do not greet each other with handshakes at all. It is a well known custum that many people from other cultures are familiar too and have adapted to (as with many Western habits, since we tend to like to spread our culture) but in many cultures it is not the preferred way to greet each other. The European way of taking the entire hand, pressing the palms against each other and shake, is also different from the handshake in the Middle East and Northen Africa, where you only shake with the thumb and fingertips.

I think many westerners who read the above report from BBC erranously will get the impression that the refusal to shake hands with the Belgian senate president had something to do with gender discrimination. Now, I don't know these particular Irani diplomats, but I do not think it was more rude of them to refuse to adapt to European custums, than it was of the Belgians to try to impose the said custums on the Irani. In fact, one would think that international politicians would be educated about different cultures and know that the koran says Muhammed never shook hands with women that was not his relatives.

EDIT: Hehe, it seems Dottie and I had exactly the same thought

[moltovir]

This is new for me, I can't remember it being in yesterday's or today's newspaper. Hurray for objective press . I do not believe the fault is entirely on the Belgian side: the Irani's should've agreed with a dinner with alcoholic beverages for those who wanted them. I think Lizin should have adapted to the Irani customs concerning greeting, in order not to offend them, but I understand the confusion, as it is normal to greet someone in the way it is done in the country you are visiting. If you go to Japan they expect you to bow, if a Japanese comes to Belgium we expect them to shake our hand. I see that as a sign of respect for eachothers culture.

Originally Posted by C. Elegans

Personally, I have always found it very strange that European culture is so fixated with alcohol. How can a toxic drug be viewed as an essential part of the culture and social interaction?

Are you a total abstainer then? I think you exaggerate by stating that only European culture is fixated with alcohol. Nearly every country has it's own kind of alcoholic beverage, and Belgium happens to have a little more than others. The US, the ex-USSR, Asia, Latin-America, South- and Central Africa: everywhere alcohol is used to celebrate things or to create a pleasant atmosphere. Alcohol is only toxic when drank in large quantities: there's absolutely nothing wrong with drinking a glass wine or two a day. Serving quality wine is seen as a sign of respect and hospitality.

[Xandax]

Originally Posted by C Elegans

<snip>
I think many westerners who read the above report from BBC erranously will get the impression that the refusal to shake hands with the Belgian senate president had something to do with gender discrimination. Now, I don't know these particular Irani diplomats, but I do not think it was more rude of them to refuse to adapt to European custums, than it was of the Belgians to try to impose the said custums on the Irani. In fact, one would think that international politicians would be educated about different cultures and know that the koran says Muhammed never shook hands with women that was not his relatives.
<snip>

Actually - it is rude.
Just like it would be rude if westerns doing buisness in for instance in Japan did not bow to their japaneese counterparts, instead of offer the hand, which is as I understand it how they greet each other. (Well - maybe they do shake hands now, and my knowlegde is outdated, but the exampel still stands).

It is about respect for the hosts customs, which the visitor should show, in my personal view/opinion but also from a diplomatic and buisness viewpoint.
It is basically "Negotion 101"

[C Elegans]

Originally Posted by moltovir

If you go to Japan they expect you to bow, if a Japanese comes to Belgium we expect them to shake our hand. I see that as a sign of respect for eachothers culture.

Originally Posted by Xandax

Actually - it is rude.
Just like it would be rude if westerns doing buisness in for instance in Japan did not bow to their japaneese counterparts, instead of offer the hand
<snip>
It is about respect for the hosts customs, which the visitor should show, in my personal view/opinion but also from a diplomatic and buisness viewpoint.
It is basically "Negotion 101"

I understand you point of view, but I disagree. I think the idea of "when you are in Rome, do as the Romans" is outdated and irrelevant in many cases. If you visit a country as a tourist, it's one thing: you go there volontarily and you have no obligations. Neither do the people in the country have towards you. If you don't like the custums of the country you visit, you can leave or choose not to go there. If, however, you are on professional visit, in this case a policial meeting, I think both sides have equal responsibility since the meeting is based on a mutual agreement. The host has choosen to invite them and the visitors have choosen to come, for a specific professional purpose. There is no reason why one party should be forced to adjust more than the other. For the Irani, not shaking hands with a woman they are not related to, is not just a habit, it is a religious and moral doctrine. Why should the host have the right to force them to break their religous and ethical values?
Sure it is polite to adapt to a place you visit, but if cultural values conflict, I do not think the host party has special rights of the host party's values deserve more respect because they are hosts.

Originally Posted by Moltovir

Are you a total abstainer then? I think you exaggerate by stating that only European culture is fixated with alcohol. Nearly every country has it's own kind of alcoholic beverage, and Belgium happens to have a little more than others. The US, the ex-USSR, Asia, Latin-America, South- and Central Africa: everywhere alcohol is used to celebrate things or to create a pleasant atmosphere.

Yes I am. (And socially speaking, in no other part of the world than Europe, is it social problem for me not to drink alcohol.) Alcohol is used in many parts of the world, but it is also not used in many parts of the world. Also, there is a difference between using alcohol for celebrations and special events, compared to the European every day consumption. Whether alcohol use creates a pleasant atmosphere or not is a subjective question.

Alcohol is only toxic when drank in large quantities: there's absolutely nothing wrong with drinking a glass wine or two a day. Serving quality wine is seen as a sign of respect and hospitality.

Alcohol may have beneficial effects on the cardiovscular system in small doses, although as I posted in Frogus thread, the hitherto known safe doses are very low, lower than 1-2 glass of wine/day. You are of course entitled to your opinion, but your opinion is not consistent with current scientific knowledge about the effects of alcohol.
Moderate social drinking show damaging effects in some studies but not in all. I am not going to say it is "something wrong" with drinking 1-2 glasses of wine/day, but it cannot be considered safe from a health perspective. The safety limit for healthy people is currently, in wine, 1/2 bottle of wine/week for women, 2/3 bottle for men (gender differences are based on average body size). Since a bottle of wine is about 5-6 glasses of wine, 1 glass/day would exceed the safety limit. 2 glasses/day would be in the "risk zone" for both men and women.

[frogus23]

Originally Posted by C Elegans

Why should the host have the right to force them to break their religous and ethical values?

Because their ethical values are discriminatory towards women, and hence unethical...

This said, I am in agreement with Dottie and do not know the exact circumstances. If formal salutations are offered, this is enough, and a host cannot ask for more. If salutations or recognition of greeting is not offered in any kind, a crucial part of diplomatic etiquette is broken IMO.