Since globalization contains far-reaching implications for practically every facet of life, it is necessarily suggests the need to rethink key questions of intercultural communication, multiculturalism, cross-cultural education. The definitions of all these expressions is dynamic, evolving, and reflects the continual changes in our society. In broad terms, it is the ability to make and communicate meaning from one culture to another by the use of a variety of socially contextual symbols. All these thoughts have been questioned not only by philosophy, sociology, and history but also by the process of globalization. These are the concepts of Cosmopolitan view of world societies and cultures.

The word ‘cosmopolitan’, which derives from the Greek word kosmopolitês (‘citizen of the world’), is defined as: familiar with and at ease in many different countries and cultures: his knowledge of French, Italian, and Spanish made him genuinely cosmopolitan, including people from many different countries: immigration transformed the city into a cosmopolitan metropolis, having an exciting and glamorous character associated with travel and a mixture of cultures.

What does the notion of ‘cosmopolitization’ then have to say? And why is it so important to clearly distinguish it from the many ‘cosmopolitanisms’ (Kant, Hegel, Habermas, Nussbaum, Appiah, Benhabib, Held etc.) of European philosophy and extra-European histories of thought? Cosmopolitanism as a theoretical approach, provides fine descriptions of what it means to be and communicate as a global citizen, how to critically study interconnectedness within and across cultures, and how to embrace differences without glossing over them.

Cosmopolitanism can be understood as a socio-cultural condition, which is expressed in the conception of an open and cosmopolitan world. This condition is created from the base of processes linked to globalization, such as greater access to information and the development of communications and telecommunications. These processes facilitate a multiplication of social exchanges – including migrations – as well as cultural contacts which bring us closer to places and cultures which are physically and, sometimes, psychologically distant.

Cosmopolitanism has been used to describe a wide variety of important views in moral and socio-political thought. All cosmopolitan beliefs share the idea that all human beings, regardless of their political affiliation, do (or at least can) belong to a single community, and that this community should be cultivated. Different versions of cosmopolitanism envision this community in different ways, some focusing on political institutions, others on moral norms or relationships, and still others focusing on shared markets or forms of cultural and educational expression. Our interest in cosmopolitanism lies in its challenge to commonly recognized attachments to fellow-citizens, the local state, parochially shared cultures, education and the like.

Within various levels of developmental ability, a cosmopolitan person can derive and convey meaning, and use their knowledge to achieve a desired purpose or goal that requires the use of language skills, be they spoken, written or electronically transformed. A literate person can mediate their world by consciously and flexibly coordinating meaning from one linguistic knowledge base and apply or connect it to another knowledge base.

Some critics contend that the multicultural argument for the preservation of cultures is premised on a problematic view of culture and of the individual’s relationship to culture. Cultures are not distinct, self-contained wholes; they have long interacted and influenced one another through war, imperialism, trade, and migration. People in many parts of the world live within cultures that are already cosmopolitan, characterized by cultural hybridist. As Jeremy Waldron (1995, 100) argues, “We live in a world formed by technology and trade; by economic, religious, and political imperialism and their offspring; by mass migration and the dispersion of cultural influences. In this context, to immerse oneself in the traditional practices of, say, an aboriginal culture might be a fascinating anthropological experiment, but it involves an artificial dislocation from what actually is going on in the world.” To aim at preserving or protecting a culture runs the risk of privileging one supposedly pure version of that culture, thereby crippling its ability to adapt to changes in circumstances (Waldron, 110; see also Benhabib 2002 and Scheffler 2007). Waldron also rejects the premise that the options available to an individual must come from a particular culture; meaningful options may come from a variety of cultural sources. What people need are cultural materials, not access to a particular cultural structure.

In response, multicultural theorists agree that cultures are overlapping and interactive, but still maintain that individuals belong to distinct societal cultures and wish to preserve these cultures (Kymlicka 1995, 103). Multiculturalism is a body of thought about the proper way to respond to cultural and social diversity.

In recent years practitioners in a wide variety of fields -scientific cooperation, academic research, business, management, education, health, culture, politics, diplomacy, development, and others- have realized just how important intercultural communication is for their everyday work. Fast travel, international media, and the Internet have made it easy for us to communicate with people all over the world. The process of economic globalization means that we cannot function in isolation but must interact with the rest of the world for survival. The global nature of many widely diverse modern problems and issues such as the environment, governance of the Internet, poverty and international terrorism call for cooperation between nations. Intercultural communication is no longer an option, but a necessity.

Because important decisions in business, politics, education, health, and culture these days usually affect citizens of more than one nation, the question of whether communication between people of different nations is effective and whether all parties emerge with the same understanding is of crucial importance. Individuals who deal with people from other cultures want to learn how to improve their performance through improving their communication skills. Numerous resources have sprung up to meet this emerging market in the business, academic, education and international relations communities: leading authors have written books and articles on the topic; business services provide consultation for improving the conduct of international business; universities and other educational institutions offer programs or degrees in Intercultural Communication and Cosmopolitism; and researchers have established international journals and academic societies specializing in research on intercultural communication. In fact, intercultural communication has become a business in itself. Following is just an example: Richard Lewis Communications is a company owned by the author of the popular When Cultures Collide: Managing Successfully Across Cultures. They offer business consultancy, run “cross-cultural training” courses and workshops, publish papers and workbooks, and develop software for intercultural communication. Richard Lewis provides a truly global and practical guide to working and communicating across cultures: ”Working in a global team and dealing with business partners or customers across cultures raises challenges and demands new attitudes and skills. Our experience shows that without the right approach, cultural differences greatly reduce effectiveness in the early stages of a relationship. But active management of the internationalization process and a conscious effort to acquire new skills will release fresh sources of competitive advantage. Lack of knowledge of another culture can lead, at the best, to embarrassing or amusing mistakes in communication. At the worst, such mistakes may confuse or even offend the people we wish to communicate with, making the conclusion of business deals or international agreements difficult or impossible.”

Through the exploration of other cultural identities opportunities are provided to recognize points of similarity between cultures that may be hidden from view or not immediately apparent. The focus is on exploring where cultures meet and developing knowledge, skills, attitudes and values that enable interaction and negotiation between cultures. This process of coming to an understanding of others requires self-reflection and the confrontation and deconstruction of sometimes deeply embedded stereotypical views. It challenges both students and faculty to understand how views are constructed and to appreciate that views about oneself are constructed in relation to how we see each other.

Multicultural education is an interdisciplinary, cross-curricular education that contributes to the preparation for students to live and work in a diverse environment. As cross-cultural appreciation and respect become increasingly important in a globalized, interdependent world, it is imperative that students develop an understanding of cultures outside of their own. Multicultural education provides an avenue for schools to develop cultural awareness among their student bodies. Intercultural/ Multicultural education is about developing an understanding of and valuing others and about understanding of and valuing self. It provides opportunities to gain an insight into one’s own knowledge, limits, doubts and attitudes by confronting, interacting and negotiating with other cultures. This requires developing an understanding of why we see the world in the way we do. It allows students to break through their prejudices and get to know something of the actual person behind the stereotype. These types of educational programmers help young people recognize the sensitivity of talking about strongly held beliefs, and the consequences of not handling them with care, particularly the problems that occur when disagreement escalates into conflict or violence.

Perhaps the most common invocations of the label ‘cosmopolitan’ in recent philosophical literature have been in the disputes over cultural cosmopolitanism. Especially with disputes over multiculturalism in educational curricula and with resurgent nationalisms, cultural claims and counter-claims have received much attention. The cosmopolitan position in both of these kinds of disputes rejects exclusive attachments to parochial culture. So on the one hand, the cosmopolitan encourages cultural diversity and appreciates a multicultural blend, and on the other hand, the cosmopolitan rejects a strong nationalism. In staking out these claims, the cosmopolitan must be cautious about very strong ‘rights to culture,’ respecting the rights of minority cultures while rebuffing the right to unconditional national self-determination. Hence, recent advocates of ‘liberal nationalism’ (e.g., Margalit and Raz,) or of the rights of minority cultures (e.g., Kymlicka) generally seem to be anti-cosmopolitan. But the cosmopolitan’s wariness towards very strong rights to culture and towards national self-determination need not be grounded in a wholesale skepticism about the importance of parochial cultural attachments. Cosmopolitanism can acknowledge the importance of (at least some kinds of) cultural attachments for the good human life (at least within certain limits), while denying that this implies that a person’s cultural identity should be defined by any bounded or homogeneous subset of the cultural resources available in the world (e.g., Waldron).

Cosmopolitan cultural identity is introduced across the global and the local, encompassing questions of cultural mastery, mobility, traveling, tourism, and home and nation-state attachments. Cosmopolitanism, containing but also furthering the notion of interculturalism, could constitute an alternative to or complement for ‘cross-cultural education’ in theory or practice, especially via its element of ‘multiculturalism’. The explicit reference of cosmopolitanism to the development of the individual, in contrast to institutionalized frameworks, opens up further usefulness for intercultural education. The cosmopolitanism with the concept “to be concerned for another as I am concerned for myself” — is integral in nature: it contains the conceptual agenda that is common to most cosmopolitan perceptions; it allows them to exist alongside one another; and it encourages a normative, systematic outlook in man – the concern for another for the “good of the whole” – since people are essentials in one connected human system.

This approach is pragmatic in that it suggests a practical solution not only to interpersonal challenges but also to intercultural challenges. The “vision of the good” that overwhelms society demands treatment first before structural changes. A suitable response requires an educational, moral and conscious shift among the citizens of the world. Each person must recognize that his destiny is dependent on his relations with others, meaning anyone outside himself. When openness and concern are placed for others at the top of society’s agenda, when that will be the defining principle for curriculum at the university, there will be immediate progress in the society. People will form an open approach to the world within themselves – a kind of cosmopolitan prism through which they can judge their actions toward fellow people – and it will bring about the change in spheres such as economy, migration, environment, communication, security and more. The cosmopolitan integral education can provide an alternative to the various private affairs. This is a massive mission, that is obligating citizens of the world to engage in mutually beneficial relationships rather than relationships of advantage and distance. Today, even from the most egoistic perspective it is worthwhile to be concerned for the public since future is dependent upon people of the world. (Kapstein & Rosenthal 2009)

Susie Michailidis Ph.D. Professor is Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs at the University of Indianapolis, Athens.

Bibliography:

- Benhabib, Seyla. The Claims of Culture: 
Equality and Diversity in the Global Era. Princeton University Press 2002

- Kapstein, E. B., & Rosenthal, J. H.Ethics and International Relations. Farnham, Ashgate, 2009

- Kymlicka, Will. Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Theory of Minority Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.

- Lewis, Richard. When Cultures Collide: Managing Successfully Across Cultures London: Nicholas Brealey, 1993.

- MacIntyre, Alas dair. “Is Patriotism a Virtue?” In Theorizing Citizenship, ed. Ronald Beiner , 209-228. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1995.

- Margalit, Avishai, and Joseph Raz. “National Self-Determination.” Journal of Philosophy 87 (1990): 439-61.

- Mason, Andrew. “Special Obligations to Compatriots.” Ethics 107: 427-447,1997.

- O’Neill, Onora. Bounds of Justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.

- Rex, Martin and Reidy, David, eds. Rawls’s Law of Peoples: A Realistic Utopia?. Malden: Blackwell, 2006.

- Tan Kok-Chor. Justice Without Borders: Cosmopolitanism, Nationalism, and Patriotism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.

- Waldron, J., “Superseding Historic Injustice,” Ethics, 103(1): 4–28, 1992.

- Waldron, J. “Minority Cultures and the Cosmopolitan Alternative,” in The Rights of Minority Cultures, Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1995.

- The International Conference [...] dealt with the urgent humanitarian crisis which are currently facing religious communities and cultural entities in the Middle East region caused by ongoing conflicts, tensions and extremism.

- The participants in the Conference, Patriarchs and Primates of Christian Churches, religious leaders of the Muslim and Jewish world, as well as other prominent religious personalities, representatives of international politics, academic communities and civil society, expressed their concern about the unprecedented humanitarian situation and condemned human rights violations and acts of terrorism and violent extremism perpetrated against religious and cultural communities in the context of the protracted conflicts in the area, especially in Syria and Iraq.

- The Conference sought to contribute to raising awareness of these pressing issues and enhance international efforts for the immediate humanitarian relief of these communities, their protection from violence, persecution and discrimination, their safe voluntary return and resettlement in their ancient cradles.

- Participants stressed that every effort should be made to urgently stop the conflicts and to ensure respect of fundamental rights and religious freedom of these communities, as well as their right to remain to their ancestral land, where they have maintained a constant presence for thousand years, defending universal values such as tolerance, multiculturalism, pluralism and peaceful coexistence.

- The Conference provided an opportunity to discuss initiatives that contribute to enhance unity against violence in the name of religion or caused by intolerance to cultural pluralism, with the aim to support religious and cultural diversity in the region and establish a dialogue founded on the principles of mutual understanding and cooperation. The participants shared testimonies, interreligious experience and best practices.

- Plenary discussions also focused on ways to restore damaged infrastructure, improve health education and living conditions of these communities in terms of dignity, participation and mutual understanding, and promote development in the region after the end of crisis.

- Furthermore, the deliberate destruction and looting of religious and cultural heritage assets such as churches, mosques, religious shrines and sites, monuments and museums in the region was strongly condemned and support was provided to every effort ensuring the effective protection of these cultural treasures.

- The Conference was further enriched by the experience of already assumed international initiatives. Participants reflected on ways to further proceed, address the pressing humanitarian situation and defend the rights of these communities.

- Participants highlighted the need to remain vigilant and exchanged ideas on a Greek proposal for the establishment of a follow up mechanism in Athens, which will take the form of a Centre that would examine the situation, in terms of freedom of religion or belief and cultural pluralism, would codify the various problems and would elaborate concrete proposals and viable solutions. Participants to the International Conference will be invited to take part to the activities of this Centre.

“While the buildings were not badly damaged, 600 of the Museum’s collection of 1080 artefacts were missing,” the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) said in a statement following a visit of its experts to Minya.

The mission, organized with the Egyptian Ministry of Antiquities and local authorities, follows the 18 August statement of UNESCO Director-General Irina Bokova on the museum’s looting.

The destruction constitutes “irreversible damage to the history and identity of the Egyptian people,” Ms. Bokova said.

She had pledged to lend the Organization’s technical support and mobilize partner organizations of the 1970 Convention against Illicit Traffic of Cultural Heritage, including the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL) and the World Customs Organization.

During the visit, from 11 to 16 September, the International Expert and UNESCO Consultant, Architect Pierre-André Lablaude, and a UNESCO expert also visited other cultural sites damaged during recent unrest, among them, the Evangelical Church in Minya, Amir Tadros Monastery in Fayoum and the Franciscan Sisters School in Beni Suef.

Some other significant churches could not be visited for security reasons.

Several other sites and museums were visited by the experts at the request of the Egyptian Ministry of Antiquities and the Ministry of Culture, notably the belle époque Casdagli Villa in Cairo, which was found to be sound despite superficial damage in February 2013.

Egypt has been undergoing a democratic transition following the toppling of President Hosni Mubarak two years ago in the wake of mass protests. Renewed protests starting in July – in which dozens of people were killed and wounded – led to the Egyptian military deposing Mr. Morsy. The Constitution was then suspended and an interim government set up.

Fortunately enough, the show did not go forever, as necessary action was taken surprisingly not from the Greek government of the time, but of the British tourism companies such as Thomas Cook , who suddenly saw their businesses going under.

However, history repeats itself, the country that only 8 years ago, housed the glorious and prestigious institute of Olympic Games, with mottos such as the Games are coming home, and is only a scorned pariah by the European Union. This time, no mercy has been shown, as the country’s ill economy has created huge needs of loans to avoid going bankrupt and kicked out of the eurozone.

Oh yes, the Monetary Union, the big bet, the great promise that would bring Greece, out of tit’s place as a second rate player, to the heart of the event and at the centre of administration. This was far from truth, as in only 10 years time since the implementation of the common coin, the country is living in a financial nightmare.

But it’s not the Euro’s fault, as if it was only euro to blame, all the countries that adopted it would have been at the same situation. It is the nation’s politics and governmental policies majorly to blame. Years of mishandling the funding given by the EU for the growth of the economy, outbreak of scandals related to corrupt politicians, laws drawn but never implemented, a generally disorganised and chaotic state are just few of the factors that played a key role to the current situation. Uttermost, though is the culture of “only save thy shelf” that is to blame. Greeks have shown a strong individualism, a complete lack of trust towards their own country, their own compatriots and fellow citizens. Take the example of tax evasion, people do not want to pay taxes, do not feel is their duty to do so, as they cannot see any benefit out of it, the health system is bad, the national education system is bad and so on. How though, the services can be improved if there is no income to be invested?

Such individualistic culture governs society infrastructure, being a very strong threat to its unity. Loosing unity, society loses its effectiveness as a whole, its power to implement and enforce changes, degrading and allowing phenomena of violence and brutality to its weaker parts. It is very easy to blame the other, than thyself for all the wrongdoing. Quite a simplistic explanation of the social chaos that is governing Athens at the moment, one might argue but often truth lies in the common sense. Instead of confronting the real problems of financial austerity and unemployment, and taking measures to address this hurdles many efforts have been focused to blame the others for the current situation.

People are witnessing random violent attacks against other people with only criterion a different skin colour or language or religion. Unfortunately, not only these attacks are tolerated but also encouraged or even applauded. The Greeks seem to forget that they have been taking the road to exile from their homeland, the road to ‘ksenitia’ for hundreds of years in an effort to grow out of poverty and famine or as the modern term is to become today’s modern financial immigrants, educated, multilingual but unable to find work in their own land. They immigrate by thousands to other countries seeking a better future. One might say that Greeks never committed any crime or that they are legal and so on. This cannot be more far that truth with a recent example being the involvement of Greek university students in the student loans fraud that cost Royal Bank of Scotland millions of pounds.

Greeks should question their selves, how would they feel if a Greek had been brutally murder by a right wing organisation in a foreign county? Should they allow the same practise to the foreigners on their own land or they should call for other solutions non violent?

Greek civilisation major asset has always been its ability to urbanise and humanise the population, Greeks had never been discriminating against other humans. Hopefully, the country will again be covered with its veil of dignity, decency and self respect and not uncovered of its great social and cultural achievements. Its glorious past dictates a descent present and good future, all it takes is to remember that effectiveness comes with unity.

Dr. Myrto Zacharof is a chemical engineer who studied and works in England.

“From community radio and television to feature films and documentaries, from video art and newspapers to the internet and social media, indigenous peoples are using these powerful tools to challenge mainstream narratives, bring human rights violations to international attention and forge global solidarity,” Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said in his message for the Day.

“Indigenous voices are recounting compelling stories of how they are combating centuries of injustice and discrimination, and advocating for the resources and rights that will preserve their cultures, languages, spirituality and traditions,” he added.

The theme of this year’s Day – ‘Indigenous Media, Empowering Indigenous Voices’ – aims to highlight the importance of indigenous media in challenging stereotypes, forging indigenous peoples’ identities, communicating with the outside world, and influencing the social and political agenda.

The Day was first proclaimed by the General Assembly in December 1994, to be celebrated every year during the first International Decade of the World’s Indigenous People, which ran 1995 – 2004. In 2004, the Assembly proclaimed a second International Decade, from 2005 – 2015, with the overall theme of ‘A Decade for Action and Dignity.’

In 2007, the Assembly adopted the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, which recognizes their right to self-determination and their right to freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development, and develop past, present and future manifestations of their culture in various forms.

In his message, Ban pledged the full support of the UN system to cooperate with indigenous peoples and their media to promote the full implementation of the Declaration, and called on Member States and the mainstream media to “create and maintain opportunities for indigenous peoples to articulate their perspectives, priorities and aspirations.”

In her statement to mark the Day, the Director-General of the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), Irina Bokova, stressed the importance of using indigenous media to integrate indigenous people to the sustainable development model.

“Indigenous peoples face… the sharpest edges of change – from poverty and social injustice, from discrimination and marginalization. This cannot stand. To succeed, sustainable development must be inclusive. All voices must not only be heard but listened to,” Bokova said.

“At a time when debate has opened on the contours of a new global sustainability agenda, the voices of indigenous peoples must be heard,” she added. “Their rights, cultures and the knowledge systems must be taken into account.”

Bokova emphasized that the media provide a way to fight isolation and discrimination, particularly for indigenous women, by providing them with a way to bolster their voices and promote changes in attitudes and social behaviour.

UNESCO, Bokova said, is working to facilitate access for indigenous people to the public sphere, as well as provide them with the necessary skills to document and communicate their knowledge.

Also marking the Day, the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous people, James Anaya, stated that indigenous media can help reduce the marginalization and misinterpretation of indigenous voices, which has been detrimental to their attempts to secure and understanding of their rights within the broader societies in which they live.

In particular, Anaya, and the Expert Mechanism on the Right of Indigenous People, pointed to activities related to extractive industries as issues that require attention from the media to ensure that indigenous rights are protected even though new projects regarding land and resources are being carried out.

Independent experts, or special rapporteurs like Anaya, are appointed by the Geneva-based UN Human Rights Council to examine and report back, in an unpaid capacity, on specific human rights themes. Set up by the Council in 2007, the Expert Mechanism provides it with thematic advice, in the form of studies and research, on the rights of indigenous peoples.

To mark the Day, there will be an event at UN headquarters in New York highlighting this year’s theme, which will include a panel discussion with representatives of indigenous media organizations from across the world, as well as a film screening of the film ‘Voices through time,’ which documents the efforts by indigenous groups to use radio and new communication technologies to build networks.

New digital technologies are opening up great opportunities for creators, consumers and businesses alike. Increased demand for online access to cultural content (e.g. music, films, books) does not recognise borders or national restrictions. Neither do the online services used to access them. This is where collecting societies come into play, in particular in the music sector, where they collectively manage the licensing of copyright-protected music tracks for online use on behalf of composers and lyricists and collect and redistribute to them corresponding royalties.

However, some collecting societies struggle to adapt to the requirements of the management of rights for online use of musical works, in particular in a cross-border context. As a result of today’s proposal, those collecting societies willing to engage in the multi-territorial licensing of their repertoire would therefore have to comply with European standards. This would make it easier for service providers to obtain the necessary licences for music to be distributed online across the EU and to ensure that revenue is correctly collected and fairly distributed to composers and lyricists.

More generally, collecting societies operating in all sectors would have to comply with new European standards providing for improved governance and greater transparency in the conduct of their activities. The need for a change of certain practices was highlighted by recent cases where royalties collected on behalf of rightholders were lost due to poor investment policies, but also by evidence of long-delayed payments of royalties to rightholders.

Commissioner for Internal Market and Services Michel Barnier said: “We need a European digital Single Market that works for creators, consumers and service providers. More efficient collecting societies would make it easier for service providers to roll out new services available across borders – something that serves both European consumers and cultural diversity.” He added “More generally, all collecting societies should ensure that creators are rewarded more quickly for their work and must operate with full transparency. This is paramount to sustaining investment in creativity and innovation which will in turn lead to additional growth and increased competitiveness.”

Today’s proposal pursues two complementary objectives: To promote greater transparency and improved governance of collecting societies through strengthened reporting obligations and rightholders’ control over their activities, so as to create incentives for more innovative and better quality services. Building upon this – and more specifically – to encourage and facilitate multi-territorial and multi-repertoire licensing of authors’ rights in musical works for online uses in the EU/EEA.

In practice:

- Rightholders would have a direct say in the management of their rights, be remunerated more quickly and their ability to choose the most efficient collecting society for their purposes would be enshrined in law. This would bring about better protection of rightholders’ interests, as well as increased access to cultural content for consumers.

- The new rules would change the way in which collecting societies work across Europe, with new requirements such as improved management of repertoire, quicker payments to members, clarity in revenue streams from exploitation of rights, an annual transparency report and additional information provided directly to rightholders and business partners (such as other collecting societies). Member States would need to have mechanisms for solving disputes between collecting societies and rightholders. Improved standards and processes should result in better functioning collecting societies and more confidence surrounding their activities.

- The multi-territorial licensing of authors’ rights for the use of music on the Internet across borders would be facilitated but also subjected to the demonstration of the technical capacity to perform this task efficiently. This would benefit authors, internet service providers and citizens alike.

The Margravial Opera House Bayreuth in Germany, which was built in the eighteenth century, is considered a masterpiece of Baroque theatre architecture. According to a news release issued by UNESCO, it is the only entirely preserved example of its type where an audience of 500 can experience Baroque court opera culture and acoustics authentically, as its auditorium retains its original materials.

The border town of Elvas and its fortifications in Portugal, was also added to the list, as the site represents the largest bulwarked dry ditch system in the world. While Elvas contains remains dating back to the 10th century, its fortification began when Portugal regained independence in 1640. The fortifications designed by DutchJesuit Padre João Piscásio Cosmander represent the best surviving example of the Dutch school of fortifications anywhere.

Another addition to the list over the weekend were the Lakes of Ounianga in Chad, which are 18 interconnected lakes in the arid Ennedi region of the Sahara Desert covering an area of 62,808 hectares. The saline and freshwater lakes are home to diverse fauna and microorganisms.

The World Heritage Committee meets once a year, and is responsible for the implementation of the UNESCO World Heritage Convention, which defines the kind of natural or cultural sites which can be considered for inscription on the World Heritage List.

Other inscriptions to the list this year include a pearling site in Bahrain, an ancient mosque and a 53-metre high tomb in Iran, Masjed-e Jāmé of Isfahan and Gonbad-e Qābus , respectively, and Lenggog Valley, an archeological site in Malaysia.

Natural sites such as the landscape of Grand Pré in Canada, the Carioca Landscapes between the Mountain and the Sea in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, and the Neolithic Site of Çatalhöyük in Turkey, which is formed by two hills and contains 18 levels of Neolithic occupation between 7,400 and 6,200 B.C., including wall paintings, reliefs, sculptures and other symbolic, and artistic features.

In addition, the Western Ghats mountain chain in India was also added to the list. The chain’s forests, which are older than the Himalaya mountains influence the Indian monsoon weather pattern. The site is recognized as one of the world’s eight “hottest hotspots” of biological diversity.

Three mining sites also made the list. The Almadén and Idrija property in Slovenia and Spain where mercury has been extracted since it was first found in 1490, the Nord-Pas de Calais Mining Basin in France where coal extraction has occurred for over three centuries, and the mining sites of Walonia in Belgium.

Other additions include the Sangha Trinational parks in Cameroon and the Central African Republic (CAR), 750,000 hectares which are mostly unaffected by human activity, the Chenjiang fossil site in the Yunnan province in China, and the decorated farmhouses of Hälsingland in Sweden, which date back to the Middle Ages.

However, according to Professor Tihomir J. Markovitch, from Beograd, the striking thing is that very little is said about a third aspect of this essential union, which seems just as important, if not the most important, element of all. This is the matter of culture. Without the “Europe of Culture”, economic and political union could easily run aground.

We should understand the Europe of Culture to mean the deep-rooted sense of belonging to a common intellectual and spiritual tradition, the possession of a common well of respect for the same values, feeling united in a common desire to defend and spread the ideals of freedom and democracy. In the first place, the Europe of Culture is the Europe of freedom and democracy.

Perhaps so little is said about this Europe of Culture because it is viewed as something which has already been attained? To take such a view would be to commit a grave error. Europe is a long way off from spiritual unity. Europe is still, alas, in a state of pronounced spiritual disarray, irrespective of the fact that it is possible to speak of a genuine European civilization, which essentially means our way of life, the manner in which we behave, our eating habits, and the entire organization of our daily lives. North, South, East and West, this particular European civilization is to be found from one corner of Europe to next.

Under Europe’s present situation, this is very urgent. Because what this European civilization lacks is a people truly breathing as one and characterized by a deep-seated urge to erase the bad memories of the past and an unshakable desire to free themselves of prejudice and the evil propensities which often simmer beneath the surface of human nature. In the final analysis, the Europe of Culture is the cement that holds together the bricks and mortar of European unity, strong enough to withstand the most violent storm in an uncertain future.

The essence of this cultural Europe is the realization by all Europeans, whether from west, east, north, south, or even the center, that they are the founding fathers and standard-bearers of one of the fundamental values of civilization and culture, namely that the freedom of individuals is the democracy of societies. Indeed, it was from Europe that the idea went forth some 25 centuries ago to institute a social order in which citizens would be masters of their own decisions and which would depend on no authority other than their freely expressed common well. This was the greatest revolution in the history of mankind.

The Greeks of ancient times were the first to break the chains of oppression, removing the shackles of both physical and spiritual oppression. At the same time, the ancient Greeks were the first to produce an outline of Europe. These two factors were virtually concomitant. Europe was born at the same time as democracy. Now there is a crucial observation; something often forgotten, if not unbeknown to one and all. Democracy was born in a Balkan peninsula that is itself the peninsula of Europe, which is in turn the peninsula of Asia. It was in this corner of our ancient world that the idea was born of the right of men to self-determination. This idea reached maturity parallel to the creation of the Greek community that was the distant blueprint for our European Community.

It is good to remind ourselves of these things again, especially today, at a time when an important page in history is apparently being turned and when Europe can see its rebuilt unity taking shape on the horizon. This rebuilding process is essential after the enlargement and the EU of 27 countries in the coming years.