The InterAction Council (of former heads of state and government), from its inception in 1983 in Vienna, Austria, was designed to deal with longer-term global issues, which are often passed over by present governments. For over three decades, we annually joined former leaders together with concerned experts to develop policy recommendations for present day leaders and the world at large. The collective wisdom has often been ahead of the prevailing conventional thought at the time, and has later been adopted by others.
  One of the more important initiatives involved Interfaith dialogues between political and religious leaders. During the height of the Cold War, the Council leadership, under the initiative of the late founder, Takeo Fukuda, convened its first interfaith dialogue in 1987 in Rome, Italy. An impressive degree of agreement was reached in Rome, as Helmut Schmidt states in the Foreword.
  Interfaith dialogues became an important pillar in our deliberations, as quarrels, differences between religions were, and often are, a major cause for unrest, even of hatred and loss of life. We regarded this as a perverse use of religion which should, through dialogue, fight extremism and division. From the outset, we had believed that there was a common ethic running through the world’s major religions and philosophies. We sought to define that common ethic, which we believed to be essential in reducing divisions between religions and in establishing a safer world.
  This became part of a larger discussion. Globalisation of trade and commerce and globalisation of the world’s politics have taken place with scant regard to ethical standards. An agreed ethic among the world’s major religions could do much to establish a global ethic, which would influence outcomes in all spheres of activity, including in trade and commerce. We believed that greater adherence to common ethical standards was of critical importance in establishing a peaceful world. The Council held two further interfaith dialogues in Vienna, Austria, in 1996 and 1997, under the guidance of the theologian, Professor Hans Küng, who had long advocated a global ethic.
  After much discussion, a common set of ethical standards was defined and agreed in 1997 under the title a draft “Universal Declaration of Human Responsibilities”. At the core of this codification was the “Golden Rule” - Do not do unto others that which you do not wish be done unto yourself. We hoped that the declaration would be adopted by the UN as the second pillar to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It is unfortunate that the idea of a common ethical standard did not attract sufficient support to achieve that result. Human responsibilities are the other side of the coin of human rights. To enjoy human rights somebody has to behave responsibly. Without responsible behaviour, human rights will disappear. Our draft, however, did achieve wide publicity and wide support, especially in South, Southeast and East Asia and the third world.
  Faced with the second Iraq War in the aftermath of 9/11, and concerned that the war on terror could lead to even greater instability, and to the breakdown of order throughout the world, we convened another interfaith dialogue in Jakarta, Indonesia. The group called on all religious leaders to expressly reject any religious legitimation of violence and terrorism; urged world leaders to make positive steps to cross divides between people of different religions and ethnicity; called on all for tolerance, a life of truthfulness and equal rights and partnership between men and women as well as to recognise universal human values and fundamental ethical standards; and to develop a culture of non-violence and respect for life, solidarity and a just economic order. Many of these values are vigorously pursued in Indonesia, which has not been given sufficient credit for governing the largest Islamic country in the world with moderation and reason.
  In 2007, in response to what we regarded as a general breakdown in ethical standards, especially in the commercial, financial and business community and in western countries generally, we convened another interfaith dialogue in Tübingen, Germany, on how to restore world religions as a force for peace, justice and ethics. It was again central to these studies that there is a common ethic accepted and reaffirmed on more than one occasion by the world’s major religions. Religion, instead of being a source of discord and terror, should be a force for unity and strength and decency. Unfortunately, it is too often used by fundamentalists to create division. It was proclaimed that religious leaders had a significant role to play in harnessing the power of people to face global problems. In order to identify ways to promote peace and solidarity, a set of recommendations was made, while preserving cultural diversity and the plurality of faith communities: to recognise that the common core ethical norms of all religions is the foundation of global citizenship; to reject the misuse of religion by political leaders and urge religious leaders not to let their faiths be misused for political purposes; and to harness the power of religious movements to meet environmental challenges of respecting life and protecting the Earth for the benefit of future generations. The common ethic was central to that recommendation.

We have thus long believed that the common ethics running through the world’s major religions provide the best long-term basis for peace, and for a more just and humane world. We, of course, knew that the global ethic was no substitute for the Torah, the Gospel, the Qur’an, the Bhagavad Gita, the Discourses of the Buddha or the Teachings of Confucius. A global ethic provides minimum basic consensus relating to binding values, irrevocable standards and moral attitudes which can be affirmed by all religions despite their differences. It is also supported by non-believers, as many can and do have a strong ethical standard by which they live without it being based in religious belief.
  The common ethic is based on the two principles vital for every individual, social and political entity: (1) every human being must be treated humanely and (2) do not do unto others that which you do not wish be done unto yourself. We have identified four irrevocable commitments on which all religions agree. They are (1) a commitment to non-violence and respect for life, (2) a commitment to solidarity and a just economic order, (3) a commitment to tolerance and a life of truthfulness (4) a commitment to equal rights and partnership between men and women.
  As we move in the 21st century, a common commitment to the urgent problems of the world is more essential than ever. We have enhanced our belief that acceptance of a common ethic would do much to advance peace and harmony among the world’s people. But a sense of ethics seems to be absent from the policy-making of major governments. How to re-establish the importance of ethical behaviour, in all fields of endeavour, is perhaps the most important question facing us.

As the aging Honorary Chairman of the Council, Helmut Schmidt wanted to see another dialogue under the InterAction Council’s umbrella, we decided to be active once again in this process in Vienna, Austria, the city where the InterAction was born. We also wanted to make the occasion to express our profound appreciation to Chancellor Schmidt for his intellectual leadership in the Council by celebrating his 95th birthday. Dr. Frantz Vranitzky, former Chancellor of Austria and the current Co-chair of the InterAction Council, organised the Interfaith Dialogue on “Global Ethics in Decision-Making” on 26- 27 March 2014. The central question of the dialogue was “What is the significance of these ethical values to politics?” How can we get leaders to ensure that ethics should be part of their approach rather than just stating the need? We have studied the following questions:
 

• ●  What have we learned from history in the 20th century, what lessons have we neglected and what lessons have we forgotten?
•  
• ●  Can we teach the virtue of tolerance - tolerance out of respect and not out of neglect?
•  
• ●  Can we meet the challenge of heeding or shielding our own religious, cultural and civilisational identity and respecting the identity of other peoples and nations?
•  
• ●  Will interests, whether national, institutional or individual, always supersede moral values, the force of truth and justice?
•  
• ●  How can a sense of ethics be rediscovered and play a greater part in decision-making across all areas of human activity, particularly in economics and science & technology that have negative and evil aspects despite the enormous progress they have brought about?
•  
• ●  Can ethically-based human wisdom indeed lead to peace, and to a more just world, given the outlook of the 9 billion population ahead?

 
As Helmut Schmidt stated in his Foreword, no specific answers were made on some of the questions. However, the papers presented to the meeting as well as the vigorous discussions were so valuable that we have decided to publish a book of the proceedings.

When we met in Vienna in March 2014, the ISIS had not been declared as yet, and Boko Haram was not attracting such global attention as today. Recent events have highlighted the chasm that exists between different cultures and religions. The question of free speech and its limits and abuses illustrates that what in one culture is considered a necessary expression of secular values is found offensive in certain religious cultures where respect and awe for religion trumps the right to criticize or make fun. The question increasingly asked is whether it is possible to reconcile religions with freedom of speech. This is just one aspect of a much bigger and troublesome problem we are all facing.
  That is why the Vienna Meeting was so important because it highlighted the differences and attempted to see if it was possible to find common ground. In fact, the sessions also highlighted that this was as much a problem within religions as it was between them. Although the sessions dealt mainly with the broader ethical, political, social and economic issues that divided people, one of the conclusions was that only through communication and interaction could we hope to achieve the goals we all wanted.
  Most of us recognise that freedom is not absolute. Civilised society
requires laws that are just; a system of courts so that we may all live in peace and security. There are laws against defamation, against libeling of ones fellow citizens. Such laws also apply to the written word. Even where matters are not governed by law there is a need to exercise restraint, if harmony is to prevail within a society. The Pope illustrated this clearly only a little time ago during a visit to the Philippines. We need to show respect for other people, respect for those they hold dear and respect for other people’s faiths and religion. This places limits governed by common sense and decency on both the written and spoken word.
  The book consists of five parts. Part I is a collection of speeches made at the Opening Ceremony of the Vienna dialogue and Part II consists of papers presented to the dialogue and summarised discussions. Part III is speeches and papers presented at the aforementioned Tübingen meeting. (Since Professor Hans Küng could not participate in the Vienna meeting due to his illness, we decided to include into this volume his outstanding works for our earlier meeting. Also included are the speech made by Helmut Schmidt in Tübingen and a paper by Prof. Tu Weiming, who also had to cancel his participation in the Vienna meeting due to illness.) Part IV is a collection of declarations and statements from some of our earlier interfaith dialogues. As it was repeatedly stated in Vienna, the importance of efforts like ours needs to be constantly reiterated.
 
We were very fortunate that Rabbi Dr. Jeremy Rosen, one of the most outstanding participants and a British national, accepted the editing of the book on a voluntary basis despite his extremely busy schedule. Our deepest appreciation goes to him, to all the participants and those who worked voluntarily on the production of this volume.
 
It would be amiss of us if we do not express our profound appreciation to several governments: the Government of Japan that has visionally supported the InterAction Council for over three decades; Australia, Austria, Canada, Germany, Saudi Arabia and Sweden. Our thanks go to many other governments, both national and provincial, to institutions and individuals for their support.
 
Believing that the collective wisdom and concrete actions are essential for co-existence, co-operation and justice for mankind, we would like to assert once again the fundamental principles of a global ethic: “Every human being must be treated humanely” and the Golden Rule, “Do not do unto others that which you do not wish be done unto yourself”.
 
 
 
January 2015
 
Malcolm Fraser,
Former Prime Minister of Australia, Co-chair of the Vienna meeting
 
Yasuo Fukuda,
Former Prime Minister of Japan, Co-chair of the Vienna meeting