{"id":192299,"date":"2017-05-11T12:44:25","date_gmt":"2017-05-11T16:44:25","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/freedom-of-religion-in-eu-diplomacy-defending-a-cause-or-promoting-divergent-interests-euractiv\/"},"modified":"2017-05-11T12:44:25","modified_gmt":"2017-05-11T16:44:25","slug":"freedom-of-religion-in-eu-diplomacy-defending-a-cause-or-promoting-divergent-interests-euractiv","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/freedom\/freedom-of-religion-in-eu-diplomacy-defending-a-cause-or-promoting-divergent-interests-euractiv\/","title":{"rendered":"Freedom of religion in EU diplomacy: Defending a cause or promoting divergent interests? &#8211; EURACTIV"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>    In recent years, the EU has taken several initiatives to    promote freedom of religion across the world, even though the    cause has been losing some of its lustre within international    relations and has thrown into question the idea of basic rights    as an indivisible whole, writes Professor Franois Foret.  <\/p>\n<p>    Franois Foret is a professor of political science at    Universit Libre de Bruxelles.  <\/p>\n<p>    It reveals a search for a balance between various factors: a    symbolic display of unity around fundamental principles vs a    calculated defence of the sometimes divergent interests of the    EU as a whole, of member states and different Community    institutions; preference for law over politics to contain the    conflictual dimension of religion vs pragmatism leading    sometimes to bend principles to comply with conditions on the    field.  <\/p>\n<p>    The emergence of a European strategy for promoting religious    freedom is not a direct result of treaties, since the EU has no    competence in this matter, particularly as regards defining    what (and who) is a religion.  <\/p>\n<p>    The prism of human rights, the fundamental mission and ultimate    justification for the EU, thus offers the only possible action    repertoire. Its consensual dimension suits best diplomats that    have the difficult task of getting twenty-eight member states    to speak with one voice.  <\/p>\n<p>    This explains why the European External Action Service (EEAS)    launched in 2011 has found that freedom of religion offers a    symbolic cause with which it can assert itself at little cost    as a political actor in dealings with third countries as well    as other EU institutions.  <\/p>\n<p>    However, things become appreciably more complicated as soon as    one moves from upholding principles to putting them into    practice. Our research has analysed the case of the EU    Guidelines on the promotion and protection of freedom of    religion or belief, a document intended to inform the approach    taken by agents and partners of European diplomacy in the    field.  <\/p>\n<p>    Published in 2013, the document was the subject of our survey    of EEAS Delegations around the world in 2015-2016 and should be    subjected to an official impact assessment in 2017.  <\/p>\n<p>    The main findings of this research first of all confirm the    secondary importance of religion in diplomatic practice.    Whatever its salience as a problem needing to be dealt with,    and its political visibility, it continues to meet    indifference, mistrust or hostility among foreign affairs    professionals whose ethos calls for issues to be rationalised    with a view to finding compromises recognising the interests of    all parties.  <\/p>\n<p>    Even reduced to the notion of freedom of religion, in itself a    legal codification limiting its potential for controversy,    religion remains too uncontrollable a variable to easily find a    place in the diplomats tool kit.  <\/p>\n<p>    The EU is exposed to the flaws inherent in any policy promoting    religious freedom. Three dangers are lying in wait:    regionalisation, confessionalisation and religionisation.  <\/p>\n<p>    Regionalisation: reducing religion to freedom of religion ends    up with religion becoming visible only where freedom of    religion is under threat, thus masking it as a political    variable at work within established democracies and increasing    the risk of opposing a secular, pacified Western world to a    developing world dominated by religious passions and violations    of fundamental rights.  <\/p>\n<p>    Confessionalisation: attempts to measure religious freedom    stress individual practices, based on a conception of religion    strongly influenced by the Judeo-Christian model which does not    necessarily take account of the realities of other spiritual    traditions with their less marked distinction between the    sacred and the profane and between the individual and the    collective.  <\/p>\n<p>    Inequalities between religions may be increased to the benefit    of those of them which have a hierarchy and spokespersons to    make themselves heard. In certain cases, the break with    equality is explicit, for example when some European political    actors defend the idea that the EU should prioritize the    protection of Christian minorities in danger in third    countries, because of its civilizational heritage.  <\/p>\n<p>    Religionalisation: the umbrella of religious freedom held out    by the EU and other international organisations may lead some    social groups or individuals to reformulate their originally    secular claims in religious terms in order to benefit from the    golden opportunity thus provided. Social, economic, cultural or    territorial divisions may thus be invested with a spiritual    dimension which makes it harder to resolve differences.  <\/p>\n<p>    A final manifestation of European policy on religious freedom    which has led to polemics was the 2016 appointment by the    President of the European Commission Jean-Claude Junker of a    special envoy for the promotion of freedom of religion or    belief.  <\/p>\n<p>    This singularisation of the notion has emphasised the break    with the European vision of fundamental rights as an    indivisible whole. The personality of the holder of this office    (Slovak Jan Figel, a former Commissioner known to be a fervent    Catholic) and the announcement of its creation in the presence    of the Pope in the Vatican has given the post a culturalist    connotation.  <\/p>\n<p>    Finally, the fact that this Special Envoy reports not to the    EEAS but to the Commissioner in charge of International    Cooperation and Development has increased the perception of    religious problems as particular to the most deprived parts of    the world and does little to clarify the EUs bureaucratic    framework.  <\/p>\n<p>    During Jan Figels first twelve-month period in office, the    post gained a certain amount of visibility and took its place    without major clashes in the institutional galaxy of the    Community, but its real impact remains uncertain. The    reappointment of the Special Envoy for an extra year announced    in April 2017 did not resolve the ambiguities in his role or    overcome resistance to it.  <\/p>\n<p><!-- Auto Generated --><\/p>\n<p>More here:<\/p>\n<p><a target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow\" href=\"http:\/\/www.euractiv.com\/section\/freedom-of-thought\/opinion\/freedom-of-religion-in-eu-diplomacy-defending-a-cause-or-promoting-divergent-interests\/\" title=\"Freedom of religion in EU diplomacy: Defending a cause or promoting divergent interests? - EURACTIV\">Freedom of religion in EU diplomacy: Defending a cause or promoting divergent interests? - EURACTIV<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p> In recent years, the EU has taken several initiatives to promote freedom of religion across the world, even though the cause has been losing some of its lustre within international relations and has thrown into question the idea of basic rights as an indivisible whole, writes Professor Franois Foret. Franois Foret is a professor of political science at Universit Libre de Bruxelles <a href=\"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/freedom\/freedom-of-religion-in-eu-diplomacy-defending-a-cause-or-promoting-divergent-interests-euractiv\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":9,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[187727],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-192299","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-freedom"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/192299"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/9"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=192299"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/192299\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=192299"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=192299"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=192299"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}