Fahed 2021

Interreligious Dialogue as a Gateway to the Sustainable
Development Goals: A Lebanese Case Study
Ziad Fahed, Anna Maria Daou
Journal of Ecumenical Studies, Volume 56, Number 1, Winter 2021, pp. 24-54
(Article)
Published by University of Pennsylvania Press

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/ecu.2021.0005
For additional information about this article

https://muse.jhu.edu/article/787968
[ Access provided at 21 May 2021 18:37 GMT from the University of Connecticut ]
Interreligious Dialogue as a Gateway
to the Sustainable Development Goals:
A Lebanese Case Study
Ziad Fahed and Anna Maria Daou
PRECIS
Much has been written on the importance of the United Nations Sustainable Develop-
ment Goals in the creation of peace and of just and equitable societies; however, the role
of religion in general and interreligious dialogue in particular in achieving those goals
has not been extensively researched. For decades, religious actors’ and institutions’ role
in conflict transformation, peacebuilding, and reconciliation has been overshadowed.
This essay offers a critical analysis of the outcomes of interreligious dialogue and of its
effect on the implementation of the goals through the work of the Sustainable Network
of Religious Leaders in the North of Lebanon, which was launched by the Dialogue for
Life and Reconciliation. The network worked extensively on matters related to gender
equality and gender-based discrimination, inclusive societies, peace and justice, and
creating partnerships for the goals. It pinpoints the successes, weaknesses, and chal-
lenges of this type of work and highlights the fact that it is only through comprehensive
partnerships that the goals will be achieved. Through the collection of both primary
and secondary data, this research aims at opening new doors toward a practical under-
standing of the role of interreligious dialogue in development and a better empirical
analysis of its effects.
I. Introduction
“
W e cannot permit ourselves to postpone ‘certain agendas’ for the
future. The future demands of us critical and global decisions in the
jour na l of ecumenica l studies

vol . 56, no. 1 (w inter 2021) © 2021
Fahed and Daou • Interreligious Dialogue and Sustainable Development Goals 25
face of worldwide conflicts which increase the number of the excluded and
those in need.”1 During his address at the United Nations Sustainable
Development Summit in New York on September 25, 2015, Pope Francis
focused on the importance of preserving the environment and ensuring
social equality, as well as emphasizing the notion of inclusion through
“leaving no one behind.” Similarly, a number of religious leaders and faith-
based actors have been highlighting the significance of religion and inter-
religious dialogue in helping to achieve the U.N. Sustainable Development
Goals (SDGs) across the world, especially in areas where religion and reli-
gious leaders play a prominent role on the social, economic, and political
levels. Over the years, faith actors have been gradually understanding their
responsibility in building a more sustainable future, first through adopting
and implementing the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), then
through joining a bigger collaboration in 2015 and contributing to setting
the new SDGs, which are part of a broader and more inclusive agenda.2
Although the MDGs were set solely by the U.N., the SDGs were a result of
an all-encompassing negotiation and consultation process with civil society
actors and organizations.3 As a result, the seventeen goals, comprising 169
targets, were signed by 193 U.N. member states that pledged to join forces
with their local communities to ensure that the goals would be achieved by
the year 2030.4
Seeking to achieve the U.N. SDGs has not been an easy task and has
required a strong collaboration between governments and civil society
actors, including but not limited to religious leaders and faith-based orga-
nizations. This is why there is now an urgent need to focus on finding and
applying new approaches to peace that aim not only to address and resolve
the issues of war and violence but also to go beyond that to incorporate
the interpersonal, the communal, the national, and the global through a
1
Pope Francis, “Meeting with the Members of the General Assembly of the United
Nations Organization: Address of the Holy Father,” September 25, 2015, http://www.vatican.
va/content/francesco/en/speeches/2015/september/documents/papa-francesco_20150925
_onu-visita.html.
2
See Emma Tomalin, Jörg Haustein, and Shabaana Kidy, “Religion and the Sustainable
Development Goals,” The Review of Faith & International Affairs 17 (Summer, 2019): 102–118.
3
See ibid.
4
See ibid.
26 Journal of Ecumenical Studies • 56:1
framework of social justice and a culture of peace.5 Unsurprisingly, much

has been written on the role of religion in instigating and increasing con-
flicts, especially in religiously and ethnically divided societies.6 However,
the role of interreligious dialogue as a means to “local” peacebuilding has
gained increasing attention from scholars and policy-makers around the
world. Promoting gender equality, ensuring equitable access to education,
achieving social peace and justice, as well as building partnerships to
achieve all SDGs requires the involvement and contribution of all stake-
holders, whether religious, civil, or secular. Thus, interreligious dialogue
and cooperation are a must between people of different backgrounds in
order to find common ground and develop sustainable policies that bene-
fit all.
Regions such as the Middle East, where religion is a vital component of
society’s fabric, have witnessed a great number of religiously charged con-
flicts, but less well known is the fact that religious actors, faith-based organi-
zations, and the civil society have worked for centuries on peace programs
in different areas.7 In Lebanon, for instance, interreligious dialogue became
the focus of many elites, organizations, and working groups after the coun-
try emerged from its fifteen-year civil war. Even though a number of schol-
ars have written widely on the interpretations of conflict and peace from a
religious perspective and have examined the impact of different types of
interreligious dialogue on the peacebuilding and reconciliation process in
post-war Lebanon, there is still a big lacuna in the understanding of practi-
cal communal interfaith dialogue initiatives and their role in creating an
equal, fair, just, and sustainable future.
5
See Maria Teresa G. Africa’s review of Loreta Navarro-Castro and Jasmin Nario-Gelace,
Peace Education: A Pathway to a Culture of Peace, in Journal of Peace Education, vol. 8, no. 3
(2011), pp. 357–358.
6
See, e.g., Samuel P. Huntington, “The Clash of Civilizations?” Foreign Affairs 72 (Sum-
mer, 1993): 22, https://doi.org/10.2307/20045621; Jeffrey Haynes, Religion and Development:
Conflict or Cooperation? (Houndmills, Hamps., U.K., and New York: Palgrave Macmillan,
2007); and Mehmet Ali Balkanlıoğlu, “Does Religion Bring More Conflict than Peace? A Sur-
vey of Americans’ Attitudes toward Religion and Conflict,” International Journal of Human
Sciences, vol. 9, no. 1 (2012), pp. 712–724.
7
See Mohammed Abu-Nimer, “Alternative Approaches to Transforming Violent Extrem-
ism: The Case of Islamic Peace and Interreligious Peacebuilding,” in Beatrix Austin and
Hans J. Giessmann, eds., Transformative Approaches to Violent Extremism, Berghof Handbook
Dialogue Series 13 (Berlin: Berghof Foundation, 2018), pp. 1–20.
Therefore, we aim to lay out the role of interreligious dialogue in imple-

menting and achieving the U.N. SDGs through peacebuilding, with a
focus on gender equality (SDG 5); sustainable cities and communities
(SDG 11); peace, justice, and strong institutions (SDG 16); and partner-
ships for the goals (SDG 17). This is done through a comprehensive and
concrete review of the definition of interreligious dialogue and its role in
peacebuilding, as well as through presenting the general relationship
among religion, religious actors, and the SDGs. An interpretive phenome-
nological analysis during July–August, 2019, of in-depth, semi-structured
interviews with nineteen members of the Sustainable Network for Reli-
gious Leaders in the North of Lebanon (SNRLNL), was launched by the
Dialogue for Life and Reconciliation (DLR) in 2016. This analysis also
tested the effectiveness and success of religious leaders in working toward
achieving some of the SDGs in marginalized areas in Lebanon.8 However,
it is important to mention that this essay, with its limited scope, does not
aim to establish that interreligious dialogue is the only and most effective
panacea to achieve the sustainable goals set by the U.N., nor does it intend
to generalize the findings for this study to other countries in the Middle
East. It simply seeks to explore the hidden role of interreligious dialogue in
opening lines of communication, fostering reconciliation, and working
toward building a more sustainable future.
II. Interreligious Dialogue and the Sustainable Development Goals

Since the literature on dialogue in general and interreligious dialogue in
particular is quite abundant, dialogue can be defined and understood in a
variety of ways. In its document, Dialogue and Proclamation,9 the Vatican
made an interesting distinction among three different levels in the mean-
ing of dialogue. It first defines dialogue as a process of reciprocal commu-
nication with a need to reach a common goal within the framework of
interpersonal relations; it then delves deeper to identify it as “an attitude of
8
Quotations from these interviews in sections III and IV below are indicated with the
leader’s name and “ ‘Interreligious Dialogue and the SDGs, 2019 interview.”
9
No. 9, http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/interelg/documents/
rc_pc_interelg_doc_19051991_dialogue-and-proclamatio_en.html#:~:text=Proclamation%
20and%20dialogue%20are%20thus%20both%20viewed%2C%20each,both%20oriented%20
towards%20the%20communication%20of%20salvific%20truth.
respect and friendship” between the two interlocutors; finally, it touches

upon the dialogical concepts of mutual understanding, enrichment, truth-
seeking, and freedom.10 This definition of dialogue highlights the different
levels needed to make the process successful. Based on the interviews that
were conducted with religious actors in the SNRLNL, many expressed
that friendships that were developed among them and their families over
the years have created a sense of safety and familiarity that, in return,
allowed them to break down barriers of fear and to work together for the
greater common good.
Catherine Cornille added yet another interesting perspective to the
definition of dialogue by describing it as “any form or degree of construc-
tive engagement between religious traditions,”11 including grassroots
conversations and initiatives, high-level religious debates, social and
political cooperation, spiritual prayers, and solidarity events. This defini-
tion frees interreligious dialogue from elite constraints and makes it
accessible to people at different levels of society. However, it is important
to note the subtle nuance between “interfaith dialogue” and “interfaith
relations,” as the former is more entrenched in interpersonal communi-
cation and has a more mutual characteristic to it than does the latter. In a
multicultural society, the “dialogue of life” moves beyond the religious
and incorporates all aspects of life. Hence, religious actors can have vital
roles in conflict transformation and peacebuilding, especially in coun-
tries where religion is considered an integral part of the society’s
structure.
However, the “dialogue of life” can only be deemed effective if it is also
accompanied by the “dialogue of deeds,” which essentially forces people
who are involved in dialogue to work together in order to create better
social, economic, political, and humanitarian conditions for all people
equally, regardless of their gender, race, ethnicity, or religion. By defining
dialogue as such, scholars stress the importance of religious actors’ and
10
See Felicita Carr, “Peace-Building through Ecumenical and Interfaith Dialogue,” Aus-
tralian Catholic University, 2009, http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download;jsessionid
=BA2FEEB28E165C5403011F506D564FFB?doi=10.1.1.510.6321&rep=rep1&type=pdf.
11
Catherine Cornille, “Conditions for Inter-Religious Dialogue,” in Catherine Cornille,
ed., The Wiley-Blackwell Companion to Inter-Religious Dialogue, The Wiley-Blackwell Compan-
ions to Religion (Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2013), p. 11.
faith-based organizations’ positive involvement in Johan Galtung’s process

of “positive peace,” which is briefly explained as not merely the absence of
direct violence but also the absence of structural violence and equal access
to resources that ensure social justice.12 This concept could be directly tied
to the U.N. SDGs, which also aim to ensure a better, sustainable future for
all through all-encompassing and inclusive policies and actions.
Naturally, dialogue is not only about finding similarities and building
upon them but also about engaging with differences and understanding
them. When one participates in a dialogue on religion, culture, or ethnic-
ity, it is important to keep in mind that all of those concepts are “living
entities,” meaning that they are perennial, diverse, and salient.13 Thus,
dialogue is a distinctive technique to absorb, protect, and transmit the
essence of communicating a complex relationship of difference.14 Unlike
debates, negotiations, arguments, or mediations, dialogue is a carefully
designed process that is capable of transforming itself into a practical
instrument for problem-solving, conflict-resolution, and peacebuilding,
since it allows participants to assess critically and to discuss the hidden
causes of deeply rooted conflicts and deal with them collaboratively.15 In
other words, interreligious dialogue paves the way for effective social, eco-
nomic, and environmental change through restoring relationships and
increasing collaboration that may have diminished due to conflicts, vio-
lence, and war. Reuel L. Howe’s description of dialogue perfectly encom-
passes its reciprocal nature and transformative essence: “Dialogue is to
love, what blood is to body, when the flow of blood stops, the body dies.
When dialogue stops, love dies and resentment and hate are born. But
dialogue can restore a dead relationship. Indeed, this is the miracle of
12
See Johan Galtung, “Violence, Peace, and Peace Research,” Journal of Peace Research 6
(September, 1969): 167–191.
13
See Joseph A. Camilleri, “Introduction: Religion: Part of the Problem or Part of the
Solution?” in Luca Anceschi, Joseph Anthony Camilleri, Ruwan Palapathwala, and Andrew
Wicking, eds., Religion and Ethics in a Globalizing World: Conflict, Dialogue, and Transformation
(New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011), pp. 1–21.
14
See Harold H. Saunders, “Dialogue as a Process for Transforming Relationships,” in
Jacob Bercovitch, Viktor Aleksandrovich Kremeniuk, and I. William Zartman, eds., The
Sage Handbook of Conflict Resolution (London and Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publica-
tions, 2009), pp. 376–391.
15
See ibid.
dialogue. . . . There is only one qualification to the claims of dialogue. It

must be mutual and proceed from both sides, and the parties must persist
relentlessly.”16
Historically speaking, the “public” rise of interreligious dialogue can be
traced back to the year 1893, during the meeting of the World’s Parliament
of Religions in Chicago.17 However, the upsurge of interfaith dialogue
during the last twenty years was due to an unparalleled global interaction
between people from different religious and cultural backgrounds, which
highlighted the reality of diversity and pluralism and simultaneously chal-
lenged religious imperialism and colonialism.18 Although it first emerged as
an attempt to build bridges of understanding and mutual trust, interreli-
gious dialogue on the global scale was the center of mistrust for both West-
ern and non-Western worlds.19 It was perceived by many as a ploy to
promote interfaith fusion at the expense of undermining individual reli-
gious beliefs, as well as engaging in honest and open discussions.20
However, interreligious dialogue is not about that—it is the sum of all
positive and constructive interactions between people and communities of
faith (and nonfaith), based on open communication, honesty, and a criti-
cal assessment of both similarities and differences.21 It is also about
celebrating pluralism, a process that does not seek “to eliminate deeply
held religious beliefs . . . nor to abandon differences”; on the contrary, “it
is about understanding one’s own beliefs and differences in relation to
those of the religious other.”22 This shift in understanding and applying
interreligious dialogue was also noted by governments, policy-makers, and
international organizations. This is why religious actors and faith-based
organizations played an important role in the consultation on the SDGs
16
Quoted in Priti Chaudhari, “Interreligious Dialogue as a Way to Peacebuilding,” Inter-
national Education and Research Journal 2 ( January, 2016): 22.
17
See Leonard Swidler, “The History of Inter-Religious Dialogue,” in Cornille, Wiley-
Blackwell Companion to Inter-Religious Dialogue, pp. 1–19.
18
See Chaudhari, “Interreligious Dialogue,” pp. 22–24.
19
See John Azumah, “The Integrity of Interfaith Dialogue,” Islam and Christian-Muslim
Relations, vol. 13, no. 3 (2002), pp. 269–280.
20
See ibid.
21
See KAICIID, “Media Wise: Empowering Responsible Religious Leadership in the
Digital Age (Pilot Curriculum)” (Vienna: KAICIID Dialogue Centre, 2014), https://www.
kaiciid.org/node/1791.
22
Stephanie Russell Krebs, “Voices of Interfaith Dialogue: A Phenomenological Analy-
sis,” Ph.D. dissertation (Fort Collins, CO: Colorado State University, 2014).
and helped develop more detailed, targeted, and inclusive action plans that
they should work together to implement in order to achieve the desired
results.
Despite the fact that interreligious dialogue seems easy on paper, it
presents itself as a risky challenge for people involved in it. One of the
major difficulties is the ability of individuals to break down stereotypes
that they previously formed in light of their own cultural and religious
upbringing.23 This is one of the main challenges that interreligious dia-
logue in Lebanon faces. Due to the physical green line that separated
Christians and Muslims from each other during the Civil War and the psy-
chological lines that persisted in the minds of people even after the Taef
Peace Agreement, many Lebanese citizens lack basic understanding of the
“different” other. They might never have had the chance to meet and inter-
act with them, increasing fear of the other, along with the rise of communi-
tarian politics. This is why interreligious dialogue should not remain a
surface dialogue; it should move beyond cognitive information exchange
toward sharing life experiences and working together for a common, equi-
table future.
Understanding the relationship among interfaith dialogue, peacebuild-
ing, and the achievement of the U.N. SDGs necessitates the recognition of
the peacebuilding approach of interreligious dialogue, whose main aims
are to break negative stereotypes and halt the dehumanization of the
“other,” to highlight similarities and acknowledge differences, to encour-
age more people to work together toward peace and reconciliation, and to
create an official platform where individuals can air grievances and address
the actual root causes of conflict with honesty, respect, and understand-
ing.24 Galtung’s above-mentioned two-pronged definition of peace requires
a peacebuilding process in ethnically and religiously divided societies that
not only aims to end immediate and direct violence but also targets cul-
tural biases—as well as ensuring social and economic equality.25 This is
23
See Jaco Cilliers, “Building Bridges for Interfaith Dialogue,” in David R. Smock, ed.,
Interfaith Dialogue and Peacebuilding (Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace Press,
2002), pp. 47–60.
24
See Reina C. Neufeldt, “Interfaith Dialogue: Assessing Theories of Change,” Peace &
Change, vol. 36, no. 3 (2011), pp. 344–372, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0130.2011.00702.x.
25
See Atalia Omer, “Religious Peacebuilding: The Exotic, the Good, and the Theatrical,”
Practical Matters (March 1, 2012), pp. 1–31, http://practicalmattersjournal.org/2012/03/01/
religious-peacebuilding/.
made possible through the development and implementation of innovative

tools that engage all levels of society in a real and honest conversation,
both on the religious level and on the political, social, economic, and envi-
ronmental levels.
Hence, interreligious dialogue as an instrument for peacebuilding fits
the aforementioned criteria, as it “amounts to all forms of interreligious
dialogue activities that foster an ethos of tolerance, nonviolence, and trust.
It is based on three principles: self-conscious engagement, self-critical atti-
tude . . . , and realistic expectations vis-à-v is” the results of interfaith peace-
building.26 Engaging religious actors and faith-based organizations in the
exercise of dialogue is important in order to ensure the betterment of soci-
ety through home-g rown solutions in a variety of fields. One of the weak-
nesses of the MDGs that were developed prior to the SDGs is that they
were perceived by many, especially countries of the Global South, as a top-
down approach imposed by the Global North.27 However, when setting the
new development goals and their targets, the U.N. involved a number of
stakeholders, including religious leaders and faith organizations, and worked
on developing more relevant and inclusive targets.28
Furthermore, the international community increasingly recognizes the
role of religion and interreligious cooperation or dialogue on the local
level, as well as the fact that such institutions are better equipped to respond
to unique challenges and work on the development of diverse communi-
ties.29 Commitments to social responsibility, alleviating poverty, preserving
the environment, combating gender inequality and gender-based violence,
and ensuring quality education for all are at the core of most of the old
religions and the new ones that take the lives of saints and prophets as an
example of how to live harmoniously with others in a constantly changing
world.30
Despite the fact that most faith-based organizations have several pro-
grams to help in the achievement of the SDGs, there is still a lot of doubt
26
Ina Merdjanova, ”Overhauling Interreligious Dialogue for Peacebuilding,” Occasional
Papers on Religion in Eastern Europe, vol. 36, no. 1 (2016), p. 26.
27
See Tomalin, Haustein, and Kidy, “Religion and the Sustainable Development Goals.”
28
See ibid.
29
See ibid.
30
See Anna Halafoff and Matthew Clarke, “Sacred Places and Sustainable Development,”
Religions, vol. 9 (October, 2018), article no. 299, https://doi.org/10.3390/rel9100299.
regarding the role and contribution of religious leaders in the implementa-

tion of the goals. Some believe that religious actors’ interest in develop-
ment and humanitarianism goes beyond just that in order ultimately to
convince people of conversion, while others believe that, eventually, reli-
gious teachings will clash with some of the development goals, such as gen-
der equality, peace, and inclusion.31 Further, a number of Westernized
secularist theories claim that religion can never play a positive role in the
implementation of the SDGs, as they are inherently biased, meaning that
this might be discriminatory toward a specific group of people, such as
women or the LGBTQI community.32 While some of these concerns and
limitations are valid, it is also important to acknowledge the necessity of
engaging local communities in the developmental process as a whole and
to highlight “the positive contributions religious organizations, narratives,
and sacred places can also make to sustainable development, and the role
of religious peacebuilders in addressing this structural violence.”33
Simultaneously, religion in general and interreligious dialogue in par-
ticular are not always guaranteed to achieve the U.N. SDGs and can some-
times aggravate violence and inequalities. The overall strategy requires a
strong collaboration among governments, policy-makers, and civil-society
organizations to ensure that the rights of all are being met and respected.
In addition, knowing with which religious leaders to engage is key for the
sustainable implementation of the goals. Opening up a dialogue between
religious actors with relevant backgrounds and experiences is essential to
guarantee a scientific approach to the achievement of the goals and their
relative targets.34 Further, the concept of “leaving no one behind” allows
religious actors to play the role of mediators between the “westernized”
understanding of human rights and some of the more conservative reli-
gious ideologies.35 They can thereby transform themselves into agents of
change, on both the attitudinal and the practical levels.
Since most of those benefiting from the U.N. SDGs are residents of the
Global South, where high levels of religiosity and conservatism have been
recorded, faith actors are key in playing their part in putting an end to
31
32
See Halafoff and Clarke, “Sacred Places.”
33
Ibid., p. 3 (of 12).
34
35
See ibid.
systemized and structural violence and working toward guaranteeing a

more equitable and fair future.36 Therefore, the following section aims to
present how interreligious dialogue and the creation of the SNRLNL has
contributed to limiting gender discrimination and gender-based violence,
pushing toward peace and social justice, creating more inclusive societies,
and building partnerships for the implementation of the goals.
III. The Sustainable Network for Religious Leaders

in the North: Dialogue in Practice
The DLR was born out of the need to create spaces of physical and moral
encounter after the fifteen-year-old Civil War through which Lebanon had
passed. The interreligious dialogue experience that was launched in the
DLR Lebanon started in 2010 through a series of projects, conferences,
seminars, workshops, and training sessions that were implemented to pro-
mote an interactive bridge-building process based on the two concepts of
“dialogue of life” and “dialogue of the hands.” The latter is satisfied by shar-
ing the most elementary things in life—to discover and share the human-
ity and values of the other through understanding the importance of
coexistence, communication, and dialogue. “Without this fundamental
dialogue by which we recognize human strangers as true human beings
like ourselves there would be no real dialogue between strangers and
surely no dialogue between different civilizations.”37
Even after the end of the war in Lebanon in the 1990’s, the invisible resi-
dues of hate and ignorance are still present today. These hidden obstacles
arising from post-war trauma recovery were further exacerbated with the
rise of radicalism, fundamentalism, and violent extremism over the past two
decades. Nevertheless, the DLR came to the conviction that there is a real
need to work on an active peacebuilding and reconciliation program that
engages people at different levels of society and includes them in the over-
all policy-making process. Its approach was based on overcoming blame
and working together for building a better tomorrow. Therefore, the DLR’s
projects, activities, and initiatives target four main axes through the tool of
36
See ibid.
37
Peter Kemp, “Towards a Dialogue of Learning and Criticism,” a paper presented at the
International Conference on the Dialogue of Civilizations, United Nations University, August
3, 2001, Kyoto.
interreligious dialogue: empowering young people and women and high-

lighting the positive role they play in interfaith dialogue, using dialogue as
a tool to create strong networks of friendship and cooperation, creating an
inclusive peace program with a multilevel approach, and building partner-
ships with like-m inded organizations to achieve peace and combat all
forms of direct and structural violence.
The DLR also believes in the role of religious leaders in ensuring a suc-
cessful dialogue among religions and, thus, started a second initiative in
February, 2016, in the North of Lebanon. This initiative sought to build a
sustainable network for religious leaders in the Northern area of Lebanon
and to connect Sunni and Alawite sheikhs as well as Maronite and Ortho-
dox priests for the greater common good through monthly meetings, work-
shops, and seminars. Knowing that Tripoli is a city marked by years of
recent clashes (in 2011, 2012, and 2015), this sustainable network not only
allowed for interaction among the religious leaders themselves, but it also
created a platform for dialogue and positive encounter among other peo-
ple. “Interreligious dialogue, in its different forms, is a point of connection
and interaction; it is a tool that helps an individual transcend in his or her
social consciousness from the limited to the unlimited,” stated Abboud
Gebrayel, member of the SNRLNL, “and since the U.N. SDGs, at their core,
aim to help people transcend and develop as well, then they ultimately
cross paths with religious values that also seek to protect human rights and
guarantee the basis of human dignity.”38
Taking into consideration that religious leaders can be catalysts for
peacebuilding and conflict transformation, the DLR has worked on a series
of activities that created positive spaces of encounter and allowed for better
interactions between people from different backgrounds. Although some
of the members of this network had been living less than 100 meters away
from each other for several years, many of them had never interacted with
one another before the implementation of this project and the creation of
the network. Furthermore, some have been working for more than seven-
teen years in the same sector but never had the chance to partner with others
and work together to achieve more effective and efficient results in educa-
tion, peacebuilding, and social work. This is because entering someone else’s
house was never a possibility, as most of them were raised on the notion of
38
Abboud Gebrayel, “Interreligious Dialogue and the SDGs,” 2019 interview.
communitarian belonging and fear of the other. Therefore, different tech-

niques were employed to encourage dialogue and facilitate the process of
reconciliation, as Ibrahim Dourbaly said during his interview:
Interaction between religious leaders from different backgrounds can hap-
pen on a plethora of different levels. It happens on a daily basis through
exchanges in the market, at school, at work, and in different public and pri-
vate institutions. It also happens on the level of life through sharing similar
values and worries, which increases empathy and decreases fear, and on the
level of formal and informal meetings for lay people and the civil society to
promote the protection of personal identities while simultaneously
respecting and appreciating the diversity that surrounds us.39
The DLR also developed discussion topics that address stereotypes and
negative perceptions. Initially, when launching the SNRLNL, no one
expected that it would last for more than a year, due to the challenges in
the Lebanese context. However, in 2019, more than three-and-a-half years
later, the network was still active and dynamic through several meetings,
workshops, and activities. Mahmoud Naaman, a member of this network,
attributed this success to the fact that religious leaders are regularly given
the chance to speak, listen, interact, and explore the possibility of finding
common grounds to serve humanity as a whole and to achieve the U.N.
SDGs.40 Among the topics tackled by this network, one can highlight the
following due to their significance in Lebanon and the Arab World: coun-
tering and preventing violent extremism; highlighting the role of education,
religion, and family upbringing in protecting women’s rights and achieving
gender equality; building capacities for active listening and successful medi-
ation; using interreligious dialogue to foster inclusive and peaceful societies;
and building partnerships to achieve just governance.
All of the aforementioned topics have allowed a better understanding
of salient social, economic, and cultural characteristics and have increased
the participants’ scope of knowledge and responsiveness. The change was
apparent through the messages delivered by the members of this network,
both in their homilies and sermons as well as on their social media chan-
nels, since they presented a concrete example of the positive outcomes of
39
Ibrahim Dourbaly, “Interreligious Dialogue and the SDGs,” 2019 interview.
40
See Mahmoud Naaman, “Interreligious Dialogue and the SDGs,” 2019 interview.
this network both among Muslim and Christian religious leaders and also
within the same religious groups. Every member of this network was able
to reflect common values in the way they preach, collaborate together, and
implement community service initiatives with their local communities.
Most importantly, the organization witnessed another tangible result
embodied in the decrease in tension between several “warring” neighbor-
hoods in Tripoli, such as Jabal Mohsen, which is predominantly Alawite,
and Beb El Tebbaneh, which is predominantly Sunni. As they saw religious
leaders walking together in the same city on the same streets, playing foot-
ball, visiting each other’s families, and being examples of tolerance and
understanding, people’s outdated images of the others started to change,
and the channels of communication began to open. “The main aim of reli-
gions is to spread peace, and this is not something new. The core of Islam is
peace. We are now working toward the heavenly mission of peacebuilding,
which corresponds with the main aims of the sustainable goals, even if some
Muslims are not able to see those links yet.”41
Besides sustaining and expanding the role of religious leaders in
Northern Lebanon, the DLR has recently launched another network con-
necting believers from different faith groups and facilitating exchange vis-
its between them. The main aim of this step was to promote the value of
solidarity, presenting believers with the chance to understand their coun-
terparts’ religious views, thereby understanding their own. This experience
has shown that many of the stereotypes and prejudices that have been built
up over the years will gradually decrease if people constantly seek to learn
more through attending various services and prayers. Moreover, as an
extension of the religious leaders’ network, the organization was able to tar-
get students and seminarians who are in the process of becoming future
religious leaders. The only way to peace, according to Pope Francis, is
“neither a culture of confrontation nor a culture of conflict which builds
harmony within and between peoples, but rather a culture of encounter and
a culture of dialogue.”42 The DLR aimed to adopt a multidisciplinary and
interdisciplinary approach to religious studies that seeks to promote the
tool of interfaith as an essential gateway to peacebuilding and reconciliation.
41
Kifah El-Ayoubi, “Interreligious Dialogue and the SDGs,” 2019 interview.
42
Pope Francis, “Angelus, Saint Peter’s Square,” September 1, 2013, http://www.vatican.va/
content/francesco/en/angelus/2013/documents/papa-francesco_angelus_20130901.html.
Through the multilevel approach that the DLR has implemented in the
development of the SNRLNL, local communities have experienced that
religion constitutes an integral feature of human development and that
separating religion “from development is to fundamentally misunderstand
what it means to be human.”43 In other words, claiming that development
can only be achieved through governmental policies is a fallacy; it is only
through the collaboration of different stakeholders that an equitable future
can truly be guaranteed.
Since education is a basic right and one of the major outlets for raising
awareness on the importance of values, fair and just treatment, and protec-
tion of human rights, irrespective of their source, the DLR’s increasing
focus is on targeting school and university students through initiatives
developed by its network in the North. The “social order requires constant
improvement. It must be founded on truth, built on justice, and animated
by love.”44 Those values are acquired through both formal and informal
education in schools, which are facing a number of challenges, especially in
poverty-stricken and underprivileged areas. This is why strong collabora-
tion among religious leaders is needed to ensure the maintenance of a high
level of education, accessible to everyone, regardless of gender and social
or economic status. Ramez El Hamawi stressed the importance of educa-
tion and knowledge by explaining that “interreligious dialogue is a differ-
ent form of education. It not only benefits religious leaders, but it also goes
beyond that to educate religious people on common things that matter. It
is a winning cause, as it allows those engaged in it to benefit from the rich
experiences of other civil society groups.”45
As previously discussed, the SDGs are the U.N.’s proposal for a more
sustainable future for all. Their adoption by the U.N. and other parties puts
environmental degradation, climate change, gender equality, wellbeing for
all, society’s development, access to justice, water security, and inclusive,
peaceful, and equitable quality education under the international spot-
light. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development focuses on convening
43
Michel Sidibé, “Religion and Sustainable Development,” The Review of Faith & Interna-
tional Affairs 14 (September, 2016): 1.
44
Pope Paul VI, “Pastoral Constitution of the Church in the Modern World, Gaudium et
spes,” December 7, 1965, no. 26, http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican
_council/documents/vat-ii_cons_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_en.html.
45
Ramez El Hamawi, “Interreligious Dialogue and the SDGs,” 2019 interview.
all synergies and initiatives in monitoring, measuring, and reporting on

progress toward the associated targets spanning the three dimensions of
economic, social, and environmental development. Therefore, the partici-
pation of religious laypeople and communities in the achievement of the
goals supports the concept of “leaving no one behind” and highlights the
social and educational role that those organizations have. For instance,
institutions such as the Islamic Development Bank (IDB) stressed the role
of Islamic Awqaf 46 in contributing to the achievement of Maqasid develop-
ment goals, which are highly similar to the U.N. SDGs.47 In accordance
with their own developmental agenda, the IDB works toward four main
objectives: eliminating poverty, reducing income gaps, providing quality
education for all, and ensuring equal and free access to healthcare.48 In
other words, many religious organizations share the same targets as the
SDGs, and it is through interreligious dialogue, which will eventually lead
to further cooperation and coordination, that those goals can be achieved.
The case study analyzed and expanded below will focus on the contri-
bution of the Religious Leaders in the North of Lebanon in promoting spe-
cific SDGs (5, 11, 16, and 17) through their interreligious activities from the
Fall of 2016 until the Spring of 2019. The interreligious dialogue experience
presented herein seeks to analyze the impact of networking, sharing expe-
riences, and developing common initiatives by members of the network on
the implementation of some of the aforementioned goals. The sustainable
network became a platform where religious leaders from different cultural
communities joined their ideas, efforts, and actions to answer adequately
“both the cry of the earth and the cry of the poor.”49 Since the response to
those cries is multilayered and because their manifestation differs from
one community to the other, it is necessary to learn from the various cul-
tural assets of different communities what their challenges and needs are,
what their spiritual understanding of life is, and what their approach is to
targeting flaws and inequalities. This involves both religious beliefs and the
46
Islamic Waqf is an endowment made by a Muslim to a religious, educational, or charita-
ble cause. The same concept occurs among Christian communities in Lebanon as well.
47
See Mohammad Abdullah, “Waqf, Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and Maqasid
al-Shariah,” International Journal of Social Economics, vol. 45, no. 1 (2018), pp. 158–172.
48
See ibid.
49
Pope Francis, “Encyclical Letter Laudato Si’, On Care for Our Common Home,” May 24,
2015, no. 49, emphasis in original, http://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/
documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html.
social experience related to it. Knowing that the SDGs are a universal call
for action to end poverty and ensure peace and prosperity to all citizens,
the four SDGs selected for this essay are the ones related to the work
launched by the SNRLNL. Ultimately, the DLR aims to duplicate this
experience in five different areas in Lebanon and to transform the regional
networks into one larger-scale national network.
A. Achieving Gender Equality and Empowering All Women and Girls

While many countries have achieved progress in gender equality and
women’s empowerment, women and girls continue to suffer discrimina-
tion and violence in every part of the world, especially in the poorest areas
of the Global South.50 The North of Lebanon—known to be affected by
poverty, repeated recent wars, the refugee crisis, unemployment, and a
high illiteracy rate—is one of the areas in need of awareness of the
importance of the role of women in development and education. Gender
equality requires urgent action to eliminate the root causes of discrimina-
tion that still restrict women’s rights in both private and public spheres. For
instance, some people in closed religious communities still use religious
texts to justify violence against women and as proof that women are
unequal to men, that they are the inferior sex. This is why religious leaders
and institutions hold the responsibility to put an end to domestic violence
through the proper and positive interpretation of religious texts that are,
more often than not, misused by many to justify several forms of misogy-
nistic behavior.
The literal translation of religious texts can “kill” the spirit or essence of
the text itself. . . . It is definitely not wrong to quote anything from [those
texts], but it is also important to understand that they date back to a dif-
ferent culture and to a different era. After the numerous discussions we
had during our network meetings, we discovered that this presents a real
challenge, since it creates a number of misunderstandings and disparities
between the traditions of the past and the requirements of the future.51
50
The North of Lebanon has a number of poor, marginalized, and underprivileged areas.
Women, in general, face many challenges, including, but not limited to, child marriages; cases
of female genital mutilation; physical, emotional, financial, and sexual abuse by husbands,
fathers, or other male family members; low representation in national and local government
bodies or institutions; and limitations in educational and employment opportunities.
51
Simon Dib, “Interreligious Dialogue and the SDGs,” 2019 interview.
The roots of the consociationalism system of governance in Lebanon

dates back to pre-modern and ancient history. However, the concept of
coexistence was formally introduced in the 1926 Constitution, further
expanded in the 1943 National Pact, and controversially reiterated in the
1989 Taef Peace Agreement, which put an end to fifteen years of war and
civil strife.52 Consequently, consociationalists agreed that the distribution
of power based on religious or ethnic identity decreases tension and pro-
motes democracy.53 Hence, confessional status became the basis of
political representation in Lebanon, where the power of political represen-
tatives, whether secular or religious, depends on the social and economic
dynamics of the various groups present within different communities.54
Despite the fact that the Lebanese Constitution respects and protects the
Freedom of Religion and Belief, official recognition is required for reli-
gious groups to receive certain benefits, such as tax exemptions and the
right to apply for individual religious codes pertaining to matters of per-
sonal status.55 This is because neither the National Pact nor the post-
independence Constitution limited the role of religion to the political
sphere but extended it to the public realm as well.56 This fact is quite evi-
dent in the recognition of the Personal Status Regime,57 which offers
religious tribunals and authorities autonomy over personal matters such as
marriages, births, burials, custody, and inheritance, while adopting a civil
judicial system for administrative and criminal matters.58
52
See Mohammed Abu-Nimer, Amal Khoury, and Emily Welty, Unity in Diversity: Interfaith
Dialogue in the Middle East (Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace Press, 2007).
53
See Kenneth Vaughan, “Who Benefits from Consociationalism? Religious Disparities
in Lebanon’s Political System,” Religions, vol. 9 (February, 2018), article no. 51, https://doi.
org/10.3390/rel9020051.
54
See Sami E. Baroudi and Paul Tabar, “Spiritual Authority versus Secular Authority:
Relations between the Maronite Church and the State in Postwar Lebanon, 1990–2005,” Middle
East Critique 18 (Autumn, 2009): 195–230, https://doi.org/10.1080/19436140903237038.
55
See “Lebanon 2014 International Religious Freedom Report,” https://www.justice.gov/
sites/default/files/pages/attachments/2015/10/16/dos-irf_2014_lebanon.pdf.
56
See Joy Aoun and Marie-Joëlle Zahar, “Lebanon: Confessionalism, Consociationalism,
and Social Cohesion,” in Fletcher D. Cox and Timothy D. Sisk, eds., Peacebuilding in Deeply
Divided Societies: Toward Social Cohesion? Rethinking Political Violence (Basingstoke, Hamps.,
U.K.: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017), pp. 103–136.
57
In Arabic: Nizam Al-Ahwal Al-Shakhsiya.
58
See Sally Nelson, “Is Lebanon’s Confessional System Sustainable?” Journal of Politics &
International Studies 9 (Summer, 2013): 332–383.
Since religious courts represent an important reference in social and

religious matters, they hold a bigger responsibility in passing laws that are
fair and just for all. However, in her article, “Negotiating Gender Justice
between State, Religion, and NGOs,” A. H. Grung interviewed a number of
informants who claimed that violence against women is a widespread phe-
nomenon in Lebanon in both Muslim and Christian communities. In fact, a
huge number of femicide cases that took place in recent years involved
Christian women who were killed by their husbands or partners.59 Many
believe that public discrimination against women legitimizes violence and
increases its recurrence, while others state that the lack of openness on the
matter in churches and mosques puts women more at risk of being verbally
or physically abused.60
Most of the members of the network consider it important for religious
leaders to condemn all forms of violence and discrimination against
women in their sermons and homilies, as well as in their capacities as edu-
cators and social workers. “What we need today is a clear charter to protect
women in Lebanon from all forms of violence and discrimination. We also
need to raise awareness in our weekly homilies and sermons. All official
institutions, regardless of their feuds and disagreements, should promote
the U.N. SDGs and help each other to develop and move forward. It is now
the time to focus on educating people, and not only on interpreting reli-
gious texts.”61
In addition to sometimes legitimizing discrimination through public
speeches, some laws approved by civil and religious courts drastically
increase the risk of violence against women and girls. Among the afore-
mentioned discriminatory laws, Article 522 of the Lebanese penal code,
before its abolishment,62 allowed rapists to escape prosecution by marry-
ing their victims. In addition, the Lebanese parliamentary committee is
still reviewing other “unjust” articles related to rape, acts of indecency,
59
See Anne Hege Grung, “Negotiating Gender Justice between State, Religion, and
NGOs: A Lebanese Case,” Religions, vol. 9 ( June, 2018), article no. 175, https://doi.org/10.3390/
rel9060175.
60
See ibid.
61
Mohammad Haidar, “Interreligious Dialogue and the SDGs,” 2019 interview.
62
On December 7, 2016, members of the Parliamentary Committee for Administration
and Justice announced an agreement to repeal Article 522 of the Lebanese Penal Code, which
allowed halting the prosecution or suspending the conviction of a person who had committed
rape, kidnapping, or statutory rape, if he married the victim.
abuse, and kidnapping.63 For instance, a number of religious courts allow

child marriage and set the legal marriage age as low as eight years old.64
These examples, and many more, show how serious the situation is and
how important it is to address such societal needs. “Religious leaders being
the ones who teach religion and interpret religious jurisprudence are the
ones who can introduce in their teaching, sermons, and daily-l ife practices
a different version of their religion through focusing on constructive ele-
ments and highlighting positive positions toward the different other,” said
Dr. Elie El-H indy, one of the project experts, “But no one can preach what
they don’t practice. Thus, bringing religious leaders themselves to interreli-
gious dialogue and interreligious initiatives equips them to play this role
after they live the experience and draw the benefits out of it.”65
The SNRLNL targeted SDG 5 through a series of workshops, activities,
and initiatives. Intensive debates, training sessions, and discussions were
offered to all members of the network by professionals, both men and
women, to open up a platform where the religious leaders could share their
own understanding, experiences, and interpretations on how they could
play an active role in promoting gender equality on the local level and
empower women and girls in their own region. Ahmad Kurdi noted, “I
think that women can play an important role in dialogue. The session on
mediation that was moderated by a female academic from Beirut shed light
on the necessity of promoting the culture of dialogue between people from
different backgrounds. Women also have a definite influence on future
generations. Sharing our experiences and thoughts on the matter opened
up horizons that weren’t so visible to us before.”66
A number of excerpts from sacred texts were referenced to pinpoint the
similarities among the different monotheistic religions on matters related
to gender equality:
Religious institutions face challenges in matters related to violence against
women more than humanitarian organizations do. This is due to the fact
that a number of religious people justify violence through wrong inter-
pretation of excerpts from religious texts and refuse the explanation that
63
See Human Rights Watch, “Lebanon: Reform Rape Laws,” Human Rights Watch, Decem-
ber 19, 2016, https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/12/19/lebanon-reform-rape-laws#.
64
See ibid.
65
Elie El-Hindy, “Interreligious Dialogue and the SDGs,” 2019 interview.
66
Ahmad Kurdi, “Interreligious Dialogue and the SDGs,” 2019 interview.
religious leaders might provide to them. Hence, we can conclude that one
of the main roles of religious leaders and religious institutions is to educate
people on right values and to correct wrong interpretations.67
Despite the fact that members of the network face a number of chal-
lenges in achieving SDG 5, whether from their peers or from certain misin-
terpretations of religious texts, participants were able to agree on several
points regarding the matter and decided to use their own platforms,
churches, mosques, schools, and religious institutions to promote gender
equality by providing women and girls equal access to education, health
care, and decent work; increasing the representation of women in local
authority and decision- making processes in both private and public
spheres; and promoting new legal frameworks regarding women’s protec-
tion from any type of gender-based discrimination. “Women have proved,
throughout the years, that they possess superior intellectual and practical
skills in several domains,” claimed Rached Choueiry during his interview.
“However, her role in interreligious dialogue remains limited in light of
some beliefs that still consider her inferior to men.”68 Furthermore, the
SNRLNL was able to address some of the local community needs to pro-
mote gender equality through providing several training sessions to raise
awareness on matters related to gender- based violence and women’s
empowerment, as well as through repeatedly denouncing any type of
gender-based discrimination in their speeches, sermons, and classes and
on their social media platforms.
B. Making Cities Inclusive, Safe, Resilient, and Sustainable

Making cities inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable is a common
responsibility that needs to be shared by all. SDG 11 aims to do this
through a range of metrics, indicators, and evaluation systems. This is par-
ticularly important in areas that are religiously, ethnically, or culturally
diverse. For instance, the Northern Lebanese city of Tripoli has been fac-
ing rapid growth in its urban population, an issue that has become a major
policy issue for countries around the world since the 1950’s. The increase in
the number of urban poor has been identified as a critical problem by many
researchers thusly: “The rapid growth of the global urban population is one
67
Charles Kassas, “Interreligious Dialogue and the SDGs,” 2019 interview.
68
Rached Choueiry, “Interreligious Dialogue and the SDGs,” 2019 interview.
of the most striking features of the demographic shift taking place in the
world. . . . Just as the world is becoming increasingly urban, there is also an
increase in the number of urban poor.”69 This challenge adds to the role of
religious institutions that, consequently, have a religious social responsibility
toward all members of the society to ensure that all rights are protected
and all basic needs provided. “It is well known, in countries around the
world, that it is the government’s responsibility to ensure that all basic needs
and rights are being met. However, in the absence of honest governmental
intervention, especially in underprivileged and marginalized communities,
religious organizations have to become moral compasses and urge con-
cerned institutions and charitable organizations to protect the weak.”70
Tripoli, the second largest city in Lebanon, has a majority population
of Sunnis (about eighty percent), a Christian minority group (approxi-
mately eleven percent), and the largest Alawite community 71 in Lebanon
(about nine percent).72 In addition to the escalating economic crisis and
in light of repeated clashes and recurring civil unrest, the increase in the
number of refugees has aggravated the situation in the city and has drasti-
cally increased unemployment and illiteracy rates. In addition to eco-
nomic challenges, the Syrian crisis has created political tensions as well as
further divisions between pro-Syrian (majority of Alawite Muslims in
Jabal Mohsen) and anti-Syrian regime factions (majority of Sunni Mus-
lims in Bab El Tebbaneh) in the old town area. A longstanding rivalry has
existed between various groups since the 1975–90 Lebanese Civil War,
with conflicts periodically spreading over social, economic, political, reli-
gious, and cultural matters. Because some of those clashes have created
violent and extremist reactions, “religion and religious institutions are
held responsible to counteract violent extremism, especially in diverse
areas more prone to wars and conflicts, through instigating dialogue, rais-
ing awareness, spreading knowledge, and aiding people to break stereo-
types and prejudices.”73
69
Dinesh Mehta, “Global Overview: Urbanization of Poverty,” Habitat Debate, vol. 6, no. 4
(2000), http://collections.infocollections.org/ukedu/en/d/Js0781e/2.1.html.
70
Gebrayel interview.
71
Living mainly in Jabal Mohsen inside the agglomeration of Tripoli.
72
Based on reports of the Union of Municipalities of Al-Fayhaa (2011).
73
Ibrahim Chahim, “Interreligious Dialogue and the SDGs,” 2019 interview.
Due to repeated clashes, cultural and religious minority groups (mainly

the Christians and Alawites) constantly feel the need for a safer, more
inclusive environment. However, a sustainable city can be achieved only
through creating strong connections between the communities them-
selves and with the city as a whole.74 Accordingly, the SNRLNL initiated
work for addressing the existent challenges, knowing that “dealing with
distress in these cities is not a luxury we can afford to ignore. It is a necessi-
ty.”75 Religious leaders from different backgrounds realized through meet-
ing together, living together, discussing particular topics, or working on
specific projects that, although they have clear differences on one identity
level, there are many other aspects of their identities through which they
can meet and cooperate for goals of common interest. “Most religions
value the human being—all human beings—as the core of their religion
and as the focus of religious teaching (after God). Thus, religious institu-
tions should be concerned with the well-being of their society and all its
components regardless of their religious belonging.”76
Therefore, members of this network and a plethora of other leaders and
partners have been involved in creating cities that are inclusive, safe, sustain-
able, and resilient. Sustainability and resilience in poverty-stricken areas are
hard to achieve, as people are usually in a state of constant fear and con-
stant need. Thus, they are usually more prone to be affected by inflamma-
tory religious and political narratives. During his interview, Ibrahim Sabra
drew on his experience as a member of the network and said that, “through
our experience in the Sustainable Network of Religious Leaders in the
North, we found out that familiarity born out of dialogue, discussions,
meetings, joint celebrations, speeches, and sermons creates comfort and a
sense of safety among people. Therefore, we should be role models of knowl-
edge, solidarity, acceptance, and love.”77
74
See Ayfer Bartu Candan and Biray Kolluoğlu, “Emerging Spaces of Neoliberalism: A
Gated Town and a Public Housing Project in Istanbul,” New Perspectives on Turkey 39 (Fall,
2008): 42.
75
Fritz G. Wagner, Riad G. Mahayni, and Andreas G. Piller, “Conclusions and Lessons
Learned,” in Fritz G. Wagner, Riad G. Mahayni, and Andreas G. Piller, eds., Transforming Dis-
tressed Global Communities: Making Inclusive, Safe, Resilient, and Sustainable Cities (Abingdon,
Oxon, U.K., and New York: Routledge, 2016; orig.: Aldershot, Hamps., U.K., and Burlington,
VT: Ashgate Publishing, 2015), p. 376.
76
El-Hindy interview.
77
Ibrahim Sabra, “Interreligious Dialogue and the SDGs,” 2019 interview.
The network launched a number of local initiatives to address SDG 11

and was able to garner more support and visibility due to their outcome
and general impact. For instance, one of the major events that members of
that group implemented was the sports initiative that joined religious lead-
ers from various backgrounds in a “friendly” game of football. Despite
its simplicity, this game was perceived by many of “Tripolians” as a posi-
tive step toward peace, reconciliation, and resilience. “When we walked
together in Tripoli hand in hand and played football together, you could
see that it was perceived positively by many.”78 The simple step of seeing
religious leaders from different backgrounds playing together, having fun
together, and smiling together showed residents of the city that coexistence
is possible and that fear of those who are different can be broken through
meeting and creating common spaces of encounter. “When people from
different religious backgrounds meet, they are able to share various expe-
riences with each other, thereby breaking several stereotypes and preju-
dices. Meetings between members of the network, public events, and other
exchanges had a positive impact on many religious groups that used to be
in constant conflict with each other.”79
Between 2016 and 2019, the network of religious leaders was able to
build bridges of communication and break many of the existent stereo-
types among them and their respective communities. Conflicting and
pending issues were addressed with the aim of finding a common process
to build inclusive and resilient societies. Many of the members’ families
also played a role through attending a number of conferences and repeated
social gatherings. Consequently, the aforementioned common gatherings,
activities, and initiatives organized during these past four years impacted
local society positively and helped its residents to see religion and the reli-
gious in a new light—one of respect, solidarity, and understanding. Last
but not least, the use of traditional and social media channels by many of
the religious leaders in order to promote a narrative of peaceful coexis-
tence, inclusivity, and resilience shed more light on their initiatives and
their impact on the local and national levels. “We are invited to dialogue,
and we will never give up our responsibility in this matter. We have now
moved beyond mere friendship and succeeded in bringing differing points
78
Hanania El-Katrib, “Interreligious Dialogue and the SDGs,” 2019 interview.
79
Arz Haydar, “Interreligious Dialogue and the SDGs,” 2019 interview.
of view together and in creating common space within communities. Our

responsibility now is to share this experience with others and encourage
them to do the same.”80
C. Promoting Peaceful and Inclusive Societies

SDG 16 focuses on promoting peaceful and inclusive societies. Peace,
justice, and inclusion are critical “enablers” to achieve many other SDGs,
such as alleviating poverty, providing equal educational opportunities for
all, conserving the environment, and ending gender-based violence and
discrimination. Without these values, achieving the U.N. SDGs would be
difficult if not impossible. SDG 16 is therefore often called an “enabling”
goal.81 Consequently, progress toward SDG 16 usually affects progress
toward the other SDGs, and a supplemental indicator set for SDG 16 also
supplements the other SDG indicators.82 Therefore, SDG 16 is not merely a
simple goal but, rather, a comprehensive process that needs a number of
resources for it to be achieved. It lays out the central role of institutions,
encompassing both their function and their ethos, and it logically puts pol-
itics at the heart of those institutions.83 “All members of the network are
aware of the importance of working toward achieving peace and justice.
They are also working hard on spreading the values of justice, peace, and
reconciliation in their respective communities and have succeeded in
doing so over the past four years. However, it is now time to expand our
network and further spread our work.”84
80
Firas Ballout, “Interreligious Dialogue and the SDGs,” 2019 interview.
81
See David Le Blanc, “Towards Integration at Last? The Sustainable Development Goals
as a Network of Targets,” DESA Working Paper 141 (New York: United Nations, Dept. of Eco-
nomic and Social Affairs, March, 2015), https://www.un.org/esa/desa/papers/2015/wp141
_2015.pdf.
82
Interlinkage exists between SDG 16 and the other SDGs at the level of several targets.
E.g., they show the clear link between achieving peaceful societies and SDG 5 on gender-
based violence; SDGs 5, 8, and 10 on various harmful and abusive practices; SDGs 4, 8, and 11
on safe environments; SDG 4.7 on promoting a culture of peace and nonviolence; SDGs 4, 5,
and 10 on discrimination; SDG 8 on rights of workers and employees; SDGs 1, 5, and 10 on
achieving inclusive societies; SDGs 11, 16, and 17 on targets and indicators covering good gov-
ernance and inclusive institutions; and SDG 10 on equal participation.
83
See Alan Whaites, “Achieving the Impossible: Can We Be SDG 16 Believers?” GovNet
Background Paper no. 2 (2016), http://www.oecd.org/dac/accountable-effective-institutions/
Achieving%20the%20Impossible%20can%20we%20be%20SDG16%20believers.pdf.
84
Amer El-Maneh, “Interreligious Dialogue and the SDGs,” 2019 interview.
The role assumed by religious leaders involved in this study focuses on

the promotion of peacebuilding in a society marked by conflicts, repeated
wars, and tensions, as well as high levels of poverty. Whenever conflicts
break out and destroy a fragile society, peace and transition processes
become positive opportunities to transform the underlying causes of vio-
lence and address their effects. Proper peacebuilding, reconciliation, and
forgiveness are more effective means to decrease the possibility that con-
flicts will recur. “The best way to prevent societies from descending into
crisis is to ensure they are resilient through investment in inclusive sus-
tainable development.”85
Furthermore, religious leaders and religious institutions, through inter-
religious dialogue, can play a major part in countering and preventing vio-
lent extremism. Based on the conducted interviews, many believed that,
knowing the other and accepting him or her as a human equal, as someone
who is also seeking the ultimate good, and as a partner in society with
whom cooperation is useful and enriching, one will automatically be less
receptive to extremism in general and to violent extremism specifically.
“Knowing the others and interacting with them limits fear and extremism.
In my opinion, ignorance is the basis of extremism. Our experience within
the network is really positive in this matter, as our meetings and dialogue
groups helped us better understand our own beliefs, move beyond preju-
dices, and discover that violent extremism is refused in all religions and
does not represent any religious value or belief.”86
In 2017, Lebanon ranked 148th out of 163 countries, based on the
Global Peace Index (GPI) progress report.87 Therefore, one of the key
development priorities that the network adopted was building a peaceful,
just, and inclusive society.88 The notion of positive peace was defined by
85
Farid Zarif, “Advancing the Debate on a Culture of Conflict Prevention,” UN Chronicle,
vol. 54, no. 3 (2017), p. 24, quoting U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres.
86
Bernard Ibrahim, “Interreligious Dialogue and the SDGs,” 2019 interview.
87
See Institute for Economics and Peace, SDG 16 Progress Report: A Comprehensive Global
Audit of Progress on Available SDG 16 Indicators, September 21, 2017, p. 103, https://reliefweb.
int/report/world/sdg16-progress-report-comprehensive-global-audit-progress-available
-sdg16-indicators.
88
Based on the report mentioned above, four red flags were given to Lebanon: Conflict-
Related Deaths, Violence against Children, Unsentenced Prisoners, and Public Access to
Information, https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/SDG16-Progress-Report
-2017.pdf, p. 103.
the participants as the capacity for a society to meet the needs of its citi-
zens, reduce the number of grievances that arise due to conflicts and vio-
lence, and resolve remaining disagreements without the use of violence
but through a proper process of transitional justice and reconciliation.
The network addressed this challenge through a range of interventions,
including, but not limited to, supporting spaces for peaceful dialogue at
local, national, and regional levels; strengthening local peacebuilding mech-
anisms; working with the media and active NGOs to promote the peace
agenda; and enhancing the delivery of justice and security for vulnerable
groups, including women, youth, and marginalized groups. “The network
realizes the role of youth in peacebuilding and development; therefore,
interfaith dialogue moved beyond the closed circles of the ‘elites’ into
schools, universities, and other social groups. This helped greatly in reduc-
ing tensions between different ‘warring’ areas.”89
The SNRLNL was able to impact a variety of stakeholders and con-
cerned parties within the scope of their work. Considerable effort was
exerted by all participants for successful outreach to high-level religious
leaders in order to increase their engagement and support of this platform.
They were also able to reach local civil authorities and influence decision-
makers to abstain from using any religious reason to justify violence. “The
attempts by religious leaders to achieve justice, peace, and reconciliation
are sometimes hindered by political and personal interests. Therefore,
what we are trying to do is work alongside higher religious authorities to
free religious institutions from the risk of confessional and sectarian segre-
gation and to focus on the values of peace and justice.”90 To this end, a
number of experts and other professionals offered several seminars and
training sessions to strengthen the participants’ skills in using different
social media tools and platforms and to familiarize themselves with the
“art of influence.”
Since SDG 16 cannot be fully achieved by any single community or
group, local actors, such as the network discussed here, play an important
role in taking a leap forward toward reaching this goal and its targets.
Although governments usually have the greatest impact on development,
89
Fadi Wakim, “Interreligious Dialogue and the SDGs,” 2019 interview.
90
Gebrayel interview.
other organizations can provide support, influence, and understanding of

the required local context. The biggest challenge for this network, since its
foundation, has been to enhance the impact of each other’s efforts instead
of dissipating impact through inchoate approaches. The importance of col-
lective action, collaboration, and participation of multiple stakeholders
will eventually lead to the effective and efficient delivery of public goods.91
Among the SDG 16 indicators that were targeted through the network’s
activities, we mention the following: reducing violence through condemn-
ing it in all its forms, promoting public safety through significantly avoid-
ing any hate speech or call for violence, and lobbying to ensure responsive,
inclusive, participatory, and representative decision-making at all levels:
Part of our responsibility as religious leaders is to ensure proper com-
munication between different parties in conflict. For example, positive
communication between residents of Jabal Mohsen and residents of Beb
El Tebbaneh might help in reducing tensions among them. Whenever my
family, my kids, and those around me see that I am in constant contact
with those “who are different than I am,” then it is easier for them to under-
stand that, despite those differences, we share the same concerns, chal-
lenges, and fears.92
IV. Concluding Remarks: Religious Institutions

as Partners to the SDGs
As previously stated, it is absolutely crucial for all factions of society to
cooperate and work together in order to achieve the U.N. SDGs and their
relevant targets. The religious leaders who are members of the network and
who have become the bedrock of change reached out to their local commu-
nities in order to spread their experiences and their commonly agreed
upon values to the broader public. They targeted different groups, includ-
ing school students, university students, religious students, and civil soci-
ety organizations. With each of these targeted groups, they presented their
personal experience and the common platform they built together. They
91
See David Booth and Diana Cammack, Governance for Development in Africa: Solving
Collective Action Problems (London: Zed Books Ltd., 2013).
92
Naaman interview.
also tried to advance specific initiatives or projects on which people from

different religious groups could work together. Thus, it is logical to conclude
that the network gained a multiplier effect in the participants’ respective
societies. “Both SDG 16 and 17 are crucially important, as the main aim of
our work is to build sustainable peace in our society and to develop inter-
communal partnerships that can make a difference through improving
livelihood and ensuring stability.”93
The SNRLNL and many other religious institutions have been work-
ing relentlessly to help achieve the U.N. SDGs. However, these members
have faced a plethora of challenges in their day-to-day work, ranging from
political interventions on the local, national, and regional levels to misin-
terpretations of religious texts and lack of trust from other civic organiza-
tions. Recent events in Lebanon, since the October, 2019, uprisings, have
been moving toward a civil state with no role for religion in the public sec-
tor. Despite this move toward keeping religion in the “private sphere,”
many groups still perceive religious leaders and religious institutions as
sources of divine power and compasses of morality. This is why interna-
tional organizations and governments should not fail to include them in
decision-making and policy-development processes. However, it is import-
ant to note that religious institutions and interreligious dialogue, just as
other organizations and tools, have a limited scope and cannot achieve
everything on their own. It is only through a systemized process of collab-
oration that the SDGs can truly be achieved. Hanania El Katrib, a member
of the network, stressed the importance of working toward sustainable
development by highlighting the SDGs’ role in “setting straight all that is
being done wrong: by preserving the environment, eliminating all forms of
discrimination against women, and refusing violence. The network is a
platform that helps us spread the development goals.”94
Regardless of the various benefits of interfaith peacebuilding, the road
to reconciliation and development through dialogue requires a great deal
of patience, time, effort, and understanding. Those involved in the field
should aim to create not only a safe space for sharing and understanding but
also a society wherein individuals are respected, and rights are guaranteed.
93
El-Hindi interview.
94
El-Katrib interview.
It is time for religious leaders and religious organizations to understand

that they are not simply bystanders—that their role goes beyond religious
and moral teachings. It is time for them to understand that they have a sig-
nificant responsibility for ensuring social, political, and economic develop-
ment. “We have the capacity to influence people. Our platforms should be
used to share the SDGs and to encourage people to move toward achieving
them.”95
Ziad Fahed (Catholic) received B.A.’s from Lebanese University, Fanar, and Holy
Spirit University, Kaslik, both in Lebanon. From the Catholic University of Lyon
(Toulouse, France), he received a Th.M., a Diplôme d’Etudes Approfondies of Theol-
ogy, and a Ph.D. (2001) in Theology. He taught in Lebanon at the St. Paul Faculty of
Theology, Keserwan; La Sagesse University and St. Joseph University, Beirut; and
Notre Dame University-L ouaize. In 2001–10, he was an assistant professor in Notre
Dame’s Dept. of Social and Behavioral Sciences, while also working as assistant direc-
tor of student affairs. In 2012–16, he was Dean of Students, and since 2018, he has been
Director of the University Mission Office. He has participated in many national and
international symposia and conferences and has published a dozen refereed articles as
book chapters, journal articles (including J.E.S.), and encyclopedia entries. He has
hosted weekly TV talk shows over the years and served on numerous boards of organi-
zations in Lebanon and internationally. In 2010, he founded and is president of the
Dialogue for Life and Reconciliation, a Lebanese NGO that promotes interreligious
dialogue, conflict transformation, and deradicalization among young persons. He
also directed the Lebanese Interreligious Academy, 2010–18, to foster interaction
among university students of different cultural and religious communities. ORCID:
0000-0002-3955-9667.
Anna Maria Daou (Christian) has B.A.’s in Modern Languages and Translation from
Holy Spirit University in Kaslik, Lebanon, and in Communication Arts, Journalism,
and Electronic Media from Notre Dame University Louaize, in Zouk Mosbeh, Leba-
non. Her M.A. in Conflict Studies in Divided Societies (2018) is from King’s College,
London, where she held a Chevening Scholarship. Since 2018, she has been the Com-
munity Engagement Senior Coordinator in the Community Engagement Dept. of the
Adyan Foundation in Beirut. In 2019, she was also a researcher for the Adyan Foun-
dation, doing interreligious dialogue mapping in Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, and Tur-
key. In 2018, she was lead trainer and facilitator for Initiatives of Change in Caux,
95
Kurdi interview.
Switzerland. She has worked with several other organizations in Lebanon and abroad
(Egypt, France, Spain, Albania, the Netherlands), and in the Summer of 2014 was part
of the exchange program at Temple University for the Study of the U.S. Institutes in
Religious Pluralism and Dialogue. With Stacey Gutkowski and Craig Larkin, she
co-authored “Religious Pluralism, Interfaith Dialogue, and Post-war Lebanon,” in
John Fahy and Sami Everett, eds., Emergent Religious Pluralisms (Palgrave, 2019).
ORCID: 0000-0002-0987-5693.

Fahed 2021

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Fahed 2021

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Fahed 2021

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Interreligious Dialogue as a Gateway to the Sustainable

Development Goals: A Lebanese Case Study

Ziad Fahed, Anna Maria Daou

Published by University of Pennsylvania Press

For additional information about this article

jour na l of ecumenica l studies

framework of social justice and a culture of peace.5 Unsurprisingly, much

Therefore, we aim to lay out the role of interreligious dialogue in imple-

II. Interreligious Dialogue and the Sustainable Development Goals

respect and friendship” between the two interlocutors; finally, it touches

faith-­based organizations’ positive involvement in Johan Galtung’s process

dialogue. . . . There is only one qualification to the claims of dialogue. It

made possible through the development and implementation of innovative

regarding the role and contribution of religious leaders in the implementa-

systemized and structural violence and working toward guaranteeing a

III. The Sustainable Network for Religious Leaders

interreligious dialogue: empowering young people and women and high-

communitarian belonging and fear of the other. Therefore, different tech-

all synergies and initiatives in monitoring, measuring, and reporting on

A. Achieving Gender Equality and Empowering All Women and Girls

The roots of the consociationalism system of governance in Lebanon

Since religious courts represent an important reference in social and

abuse, and kidnapping.63 For instance, a number of religious courts allow

B. Making Cities Inclusive, Safe, Resilient, and Sustainable

Due to repeated clashes, cultural and religious minority groups (mainly

The network launched a number of local initiatives to address SDG 11

of view together and in creating common space within communities. Our

C. Promoting Peaceful and Inclusive Societies

The role assumed by religious leaders involved in this study focuses on

other organizations can provide support, influence, and understanding of

IV. Concluding Remarks: Religious Institutions

also tried to advance specific initiatives or projects on which people from

It is time for religious leaders and religious organizations to understand

You might also like

faith-based organizations’ positive involvement in Johan Galtung’s process