Muslim anger and Danish motivation
S R Ramanujan
My initial reaction to Muslim anger over Danish cartoons on the Prophet was that it was quite spontaneous and out of genuine hurt when their revered Prophet was caricatured in a most irresponsible manner. Alas, I am proved wrong. If we notice the nature of violence, utterances and threats, it is obvious that protests were only a symbol for something deeper and cartoons were only an excuse to demonstrate religious unity to take on the Christian West and the democracy they proffer which includes fundamental right to freedom of expression.
Let us look at the violence in different Islamic states around the world.
Libya - 11 people were killed when Italian Consulate was attacked.
Nigeria - 45 were killed and 15 Churches were burnt.
Afghanistan - 5 lost their lives when American air base was attacked.
Pakistan - 5 killed and the target was American establishments
Somalia - 1 dead
Turkey - 1 dead
Lebanon - 1 dead
Syria - Norwegian embassy was set on fire
Iran - Danish embassy was ransacked
In all these countries protestors targeted embassies or consulates of Western countries and in Nigeria, the target was clear. Churches were burnt down and one group threw a tyre, according to an AP report, around one man, poured gas on him and set him ablaze. According to the same agency, most of the dead were Christians beaten to death on the streets by the rioters. Though Pakistan spared Christians (probably there are not many), American establishments, fast food centers, cinema halls were ransacked. The cartoon controversy was a God-sent for Pakistan Opposition parties and Islamic groups to vent their anger against Musharraf’s tango with the West, particularly the United States. In every country where there was violence and death over the cartoons, it was local politics like in Pakistan or hostility to the Christian West like in Nigeria, Lebanon or Iran that came handy for the protestors. In fact, the Nigerian massacre was provoked by a right-wing Italian minister for Reforms, Roberto Calderoli’s stupidity in wearing a T-shirt printed with the controversial cartoons.
Fortunately, India was spared of uncontrolled violence so far, but rewards and fatwas were aplenty reminding us of the days of Ayatollah Khomeini. While a Pakistan Muslim cleric announced a reward of one million US dollars and another with less liberal gift of Rs 5 lakhs, Uttar Pradesh Minister for Haj and Minority Welfare Haji Yakoob Qureshi was quite innovative. He not only offered cash award of Rs 51 crore, but gold as well equivalent to the weight of cartoonist’s head. He also offered to make the Denmark Prime Minister richer by 5l crores if he ordered death sentence to the cartoonist. There was also a ‘fatwa’ from a UP Shariat court: "One who puts the cartoonist to death will get the blessings of the Almighty."
While the cartoonist has gone into hiding, 70 people, not many of them protestors, paid with their lives for no fault of theirs. What punishment Quaran sanctions for those responsible for such deaths is not known. Obviously, the Prophet would not have imagined that human lives were so cheap. Or, is it the contention of the protestors that even for these 70 deaths Danish daily is responsible? Coming to "Qureshi reward" it does not seem to be one of those outbursts of a politician. He says he would repeat his statement all over India. Speaking to an English daily, Qureshi said: "It was no rush of blood. I was only the voice of lakhs of Muslims who wanted this reward to happen. I am willing to resign from my seat but will not retract the statement…Anyone having an objection is anti-Islam". More than protests against cartoons, he seems to be building up a constituency for himself. When the Samajwadi party appears to be losing its grip over the Muslim vote in the state in the face of Congress overtures to the community, Qureshis are needed for Mulayam Singh Yadav.
The Majlis party (MIM) in Hyderabad did not allow the opportunity to slip from its hands either. It saw to it there was violence and arson immediately after the Friday prayers thanks to Police complicity. After all, it has to retain its hold over the Muslim electorate which the Congress is trying to gobble up with its 5% reservation for the community and the possible munificence of Sachar Committee. No wonder, the Owaissi brothers (Hyderabad old city Muslims are the property of the Owaisi family!) surrendered before the Police so as to garner public sympathy.
Of course, there were voices of sanity from the same community. For example, Danish Muslims, though offended with the cartoons, condemned the violence arguing that the government of Denmark was not to be held responsible for the cartoons published by a daily. Even in Pakistan, the Punjab chief minister Pervez Ellahi said: "Is this the image of ourselves that we want to paint for the outside world…Are we trying to convince the West that Muslims are indeed violent people?". The All India Muslim Personal Law Board, Maulana Khalid Rasheed condemned in unequivocal language violent reactions to the cartoons and came down heavily on the reward announced by Qureshi.
Interestingly, there are different viewpoints over the cartoons in Denmark itself. While the state of Denmark or its people may not, in any way, be responsible for the cartoons, for the Muslim countries to boycott Danish products, there seems to be a section which is increasingly zenophobic. According to a column in International Herald Tribune, Danish minister for cultural affairs recently called for a "last line of defence against the influence of Islam in Denmark…We have seen the appearance of a parallel society in which minorities practise their own medieval values and undemocratic views…This is the new front in our cultural war". The same column points out that after the flag burnings in the Arab countries, the Danish news media began to refer to the white cross on the flag’s red background as a Christian symbol. So, does this mean the dye is cast for the "Clash of Civilizations", as Samuel Huntington, the author, predicts that the "dominating source of conflict will be cultural".
This takes us to the question as to why did the Danish daily Jyllands-Posten choose to publish those cartoons? Flemming Rose, culture editor of the daily, wrote in Washington Post justifying the daily’s decision. Excerpts:
"I commissioned the cartoons in response to several incidents of self-censorship in Europe caused by widening fears and feelings of intimidation in dealing with issues related to Islam…The cartoonists treated Islam the same way they treat Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism and other religions… In fact, the same cartoonist who drew the image of Muhammed drew a cartoon with Jesus on the cross having dollar notes in his eyes and another with the star of David attached to a bomb fuse. There were, however, no embassy burnings or death threats when we published those.
"Nowhere do so many religions co-exist peacefully as in a democracy where freedom of expression is a fundamental right. In Saudi Arabia you can get arrested for wearing a cross or having a Bible in your suitcase, while Muslims in secular Denmark can have their own mosque, cemeteries, schools, TV and radio stations.
"As a former correspondent in the Soviet Union, I am sensitive about the calls for censorship on the grounds of insult. This is a popular trick of the totalitarian movements. That is what happened to the human rights activists and writers such as Andrei Sakharov, Vladimir Bukovsky, Alexander Solzenitsyn, Natan Sharansky. The regime accused them of anti-Soviet propaganda just as some Muslims are labeling 12 cartoons in a Danish newspaper anti-Islamic.
"The Muslim face of Denmark has changed and it is becoming clear that this is not a debate between "them" and "us" but between those committed to democracy in Denmark and those who are not. This is the sort of debate that Jyllands-Posten had hoped to generate…Did we achieve our purpose? Yes and No".
Well, Fleming Rose may not be entirely right when he compares Soviet repression on writers and human rights activists with the hurt sentiments of Muslims. The point is while the Islamic countries are in a state of turmoil, there is a furious debate in the Western press over what they term as the Muslims demand for "right to freedom from criticism" Koenraad Elst, an Indologist from Belgium who spent a number of years in Benaras Hindu University, writing in the Brussels Journal, says "For centuries Islam has ordered the destruction of everything that is sacred to other religions, starting with 360 idols in the Kaaba smashed to pieces by Prophet himself down to the Bamian Buddhas destroyed by Taliban in 2001, destruction of temples in Bangladesh, (why did he omit India for it put up with cultural vandalism for centuries?) destruction of Christian churches in Iraq. What an arrogance for Muslims with their heritage of iconoclastic insensitivity, to put up this show of indignation for a handful of harmless cartoons. And now, we are being expected to feel pity for those poor touch-me-nots?"
This may be Elst’s view as according to the Liberals in the West, unfettered freedom of expression is a fundamental pre-condition for democracy". But why is the Indian press fighting shy of a healthy and fearless debate on the issue? Is it the fear of intimidation and threat?
contact: s_ramanujan9@yahoo.co.in