What caps the matter is their saying that the objective of dialogue between civilizations is interaction to create an alternative superior civilization through the method of seeking to find what is common between the civilizations. This, in turn, leads to progress, flourishing, and spreading peace. How bad is the deduction of this concept by someone using His ﷺ saying.

"Say: 'O People of the Book. Come to a just word between us. That we worship none but Allah nor associate anything with Him nor some of us taking each other as lords.'" [TMQ Al-Imran: 64]. So he says: "This is a dialogue with others from a position of equality." Then he interprets His ﷺ saying: "To a just word" into the word "common (mushtarake) between us" and "we do not say we dialogue to (reach) to our word." This understanding of the ayah is slandering upon Allah, as the meaning of 'sawa' is just ('adl'), i.e., a just word which the ayah explains subsequently. There is nothing in the ayah, whether in its wording or its meaning, that indicates we invite them to a common word. He definitely did not intend that we associate in a just word by the evidence of his saying: "We do not say that we dialogue to our word" so nothing remains except that we want the common civilization. The call to interaction and seeking to find what is common between the civilizations is mixing the truth with falsehood; Allah prohibited the People of the Book from this, and also Muslims by greater reason. He (SWTH) ta'ala said:

"O People of the Book, why do you mix the truth with falsehood while you know?" [TMQ Al-Imran: 71]

After we have clarified their intention from the dialogue between religions and dialogue between civilizations, and their objective from this, we now move onto the issue of clash in its various types, economic, intellectual, military and political.