Interfaith dialogue is often presented as a neutral platform, free from explicit state influence. Existing scholarship has largely examined their effects on individuals (Bhabha 1990; Lamine 2004; McCarthy 2007; Baker 2007; Orton 2016). Yet, the political dimensions of such initiatives remain underexplored. This presentation argues that state-sponsored interfaith programs function as policy instruments that promote specific governmental visions of "good religion" (Martinez-Ariño 2021). These initiatives subtly shape norms around legitimate religious expression, often emphasizing limits on religious visibility and encouraging participants to bracket or neutralize their religious identities in public settings. As such, they possibly reproduce systemic inequalities affecting minority and/or conservative believers. The analysis draws on two interfaith programs that exemplify distinct yet comparable political contexts. The first, Emouna (Sciences Po, Paris), launched in 2016 following the 2015 Paris attacks, receives partial funding from the French Ministry of the Interior. The second, Communautés de ruelles (city of Montréal, Canada), created in 2022 after controversies involving Hasidic Jewish communities, is federally funded but operated by a Québec institution—reflecting ongoing divergences between Québec and the rest of Canada regarding religious diversity management (Peker 2021). As France and Québec are frequently compared for their converging approaches to public regulation of religion (Milot, Baubérot, 2005; Strack, Dabby, Koussens, forthcoming), this transnational, work‑in‑progress comparison highlights how public authorities utilize interfaith dialogue as a form of soft power. Both cases illustrate how these programs become infra-legal tools advancing a laïque conception of religion in the public sphere. The analysis is informed by first-hand professional experience within both programs (Emouna, 2021-2023; Communautés de ruelles, 2025).