Collective Fate
Iran was perhaps the first country in the world to lay its foundation on the basis of culture

The idea of dialogue among civilizations which is now a hot topic in every circle, was approved by the United Nations to respond to one of the biggest problems in the world. From the fortieth century up to the seventeenth century, a new order was set in Europe which was based on immense single-nation powers. But since both nationalist and autocratic systems are apt to accumulate more and more power, such systems were converted to giant empires such as the British, the French, Spanish and Ottoman empires which conquered many realms and spread their power all over the world. However, such an expansionist move was not limited to territorial gains only, but was accompanied by cultural and religious domination and small countries which once possessed authority and credit among their citizens were subjugated and devoured by these giants and were compelled to surrender. Such submission was at times compulsory in which the conquerors replaced the ancient traditions and cultures of the conquered countries with their own. In this manner neither the victor were willing to really export their culture and science to the conquered countries to allow them to become a future rival nor the conquered nations were ready to give up their ancestral traditions.
At the end of World War I in 1918 such imperialistic drives gradually subsided. Britain and France which had emerged victorious in the war sliced and mangled the giant Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman empires into small nations and grabbed all German colonies. But after the World War II, they had to suffer the same fate because the awakened colonies revolted and escaped their domination. England showed enough prudence to give up India but France was not ready to peacefully part with its colonies specially Algeria and had to abandon that state after a war in the 1960’s. The result of such anti-colonial drives was the birth of new countries within the world which gradually became members of the United Nations and found a free tribunal to express their historical claims. Meanwhile another giant was dominating a large part of Asia and half of Europe which was the Soviet Union. Thus a vast part of the world was divided between the capitalists, led by Washington, and communists in Moscow and these giants competed and bullied each other even by resorting to arms to dominate the remaining part of the world which was named the Third World. An example of such thirst for power was armed Soviet intervention in Hungary and Czechoslovakia and the lengthy wars fought by the U.S. in Korea and Vietnam. During that era, called the cold war era, there was no real dialogue between the supervisors and all that was exchanged were threats and protests. If not fully allied with one of these rival camps, the Third World countries tried to fish from the troubled waters to protect their national interests and avoid being devoured by the giants.
But the victory of the Islamic Revolution in the late 1970’s suddenly upset such equations. Up to that time anti-imperialistic struggles by the oppressed nations were based on modernism and revisionism. Even Gandhi and his colleagues resorted first to tradition to expel the British and then tried to build a modern culture. But contrary to such moves the Islamic Revolution wanted to return to genuine tradition and Iran was perhaps the first country in the world that laid its foundation on the basis of culture, and all its future steps such as destruction of the monarchial regime and expulsion of the U.S. from Iran stemmed from that culture. The pioneers of the Islamic Revolution in Iran pursued universal goals and declared that the only way to rid the world from the existing stalemate, which was the fruit of secularism and materialistic thoughts, was to resort to religion and divine teachings. With the collapse of Marxism in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe and the frustration of communists around the world, suddenly a vast ideological void was developed which permitted revolutionary Islam to easily enter the field and fill the void in favor of many oppressed masses.

This new development caused certain Western theologians to resort again to war between the cross and the crescent. Motivated by religious fanaticism and commercial gains, several Christian armies unified and started a crusade against Muslims in the 11th century A.D. In modern times also the Western statesmen thought of waging war between Christianity and the Muslim world, and believed that such a clash between the two was inevitable. But two important matters were ignored in this way of thinking. First of all, there is the least semblance between the conditions of the 20th century world and that of the Middle Ages when the Crusades were fought. Secondly the existing problems in the world are universal in nature. The advance of science and technology in the past millennium has been so great that one cannot change its dimension and can only change its quality. Similar changes have happened in thoughts as well. Communication has so much improved that the reverberation of every important event is instantly felt in all parts of the world. Modern weapons do not know any boundary, and any mistake by leaders of powerful nations may destroy the world.
In the same manner human misery has become global. A great part of the world is deprived of peace, neighbors look at each other with suspicion, men and women have become estranged, children starve from lack of food and drug, poverty and hunger has robbed people of a decent life in many countries, justice has become a dream, malevolence and rudeness is rampant, religious and ethnic wars have claimed numerous victims in Afghanistan, Bosnia, Algeria, Kosovo and Turkey, and despotism and chaos is harassing many people around the world.
Under such circumstances to speak about clash of civilizations and reject dialogue and understanding will be utter folly, because should an atomic war break out not even the safest and most advanced country in the West could escape its devastating effect. Nowadays dialogue of civilization is not a luxury or superficial item but a vital requirement. From 1950 onward the Eastern and Western world have bullied each other to resort to nuclear arms to frighten their rival in order to strike a horror balance, but nowadays this equation has changed. Nowadays there is no difference between two superpowers that can avoid a global war by containment. The difference is among various cultures each of which desires to secure their rightful place in the global scene. On the other hand, all countries know that should they fail to collectively thwart the threat of war, a global war will ensue and will destroy everything. One example of such a threat is the pollution of the living environment so that if various countries fail to find a practical solution to prevent its spread, it will sicken and kill both the poor and the rich.
But dialogue is only a procedure and cannot solve human problems without solid foundations. Such foundations can form a sense of responsibility and a series of fundamental principles common in all divine religions. One can collect all these common and basic principles under the name of “World Ethic”. We must know that mankind is from a single family and essence and human happiness depends on collective use of divine blessings on the Earth. We must be kind to each other and respect justice and peace, move towards social and economic equity and try to nurture every talent. We must base all our actions on equity and sympathy and since all of us believe in a savior none of us must remain negligent of the poor and deprived under the pretext of possessing different traditions and religions. We must derive common principles out of the Constitution and that of human rights charter and lay the basis for world ethic based on the following principles:
1. Believe in solidarity and social and economic equity,
2. Avoid rudeness and respect all forms of life,
3 Be kind and candid to each other, and
4. Believe in equal rights among mankind.

Meanwhile, commitment to such principles must not be mistaken with unlimited liberties.
To us Islam is the most sublime source of moral teachings. Not only Islam endorses all the above principles, but has far better provisions and codes that fortify and augment such ethics. Quran has liberated mankind from the shackles of empty traditions, religious, political and economic hegemony, ethnic fanaticism, slavery and other like evils which prevent mankind from attaining happiness, salvation and unity with God. All fundamental human rights have been anticipated in the Quran.
Ethical principles are repeatedly referred in different chapters in the Quran, but two important principles have been classified which are canons of wisdom and the true path.
Natural human rights are based on such instinctive ethics and by reviving the important, vital and common principles in divine religions one can manage for common understanding among various civilizations, render big services to global peace and contain sedition and chaos.