Freedom Of Expression As Incitement Of Violence
By Subhash Gatade
15 February, 2006
Countercurrents.org
What I find interesting is that these demonstrations and embassy-burnings are a response to a tasteless cartoon. Did the Danish imam who travelled round the Muslim world pleading for this show the same anger at Danish troops being sent to Iraq? The occupation of Iraq has costs tens of thousands of Iraqi lives. Where is the response to that or the tortures in Abu Ghraib? Or the rapes of Iraqi women by occupying soldiers? Where is the response to the daily deaths of Palestinians? (THIS IS THE REAL OUTRAGE, Tariq Ali, Quoted in ‘The Guardian’ February 13, 2006)
Dr. Asar Abu Sharak, Linguistics Professor at Al Azhar University, Gaza is very disturbed these days. Considered a moderate, he has spent a great part of his life for the cause of inter communal amity, but the recent controversy over the caricatures of Prophet Mohammad has shaken him to his roots. Sharing his grief with the NBC correspondent he plainly says: It is basically a part of broader conspiracy against Muslims. According to him the publication of these cartoons is causing “a clash of civilizations that it will widen the gap of misunderstanding between the West and the East.” He said he believed that this was an example of a double standard, that when someone denigrates the Holocaust they throw them in jail. But when someone denigrates the religious figure that Muslims hold most dear, they call it freedom of speech. (By Charlene Gubash , NBC News, Updated: 3:29 p.m. ET Feb. 3, 2006)
Definitely Prof Sharak cannot be considered to be alone who have felt humiliated, disturbed and angry over the recent controversy depicting Prophet Mohammad in cartoons. One is witnessing militant protests spanning from London to Lebanon or Jakarta to Kabul where thousands and thousands of angry Muslims have taken to streets to protest these cartoons. Sproadic violence has also occurred at places claiming a few lives. Danish embassies have come under attack at few places. A diplomatic row is also seem to be developing where many a middle eastern countries have called back their ambassadors to Denmark, Iran has even ordered scrapping of contracts with Denmark.
After all why is it that the disapproval conveyed by a few Danish Muslim clerics over these cartoons could snowball into a big international protest. It is clear that when the twelve cartoons depicting the Prophet first appeared in a rightwing daily in Denmark ‘Jyllands Poste’ way back in September, nobody would have imagined that a massive international protest awaits their publication. The said cartoons were also later republished by many European and a few Asian newspapers.
What is so ‘shocking’ about these cartoons which have agitated the Islamic world never before? It is worth noting that the controversial cartoons not only present image(s) of the Prophet, which is forbidden according to a broad section of followers of Islam, but to top it all one of the cartoons shows him wearing a turban which resembles a bomb. Even a layperson can understand that the cartoons thus convey a loaded message which equate Islam with terrorism and portray its founder as a ‘terrorist’. One can very well see that it is part of the post 9/11 folklore propagated by the Bushes and Blairs where stigmatisation of the whole Muslim community is quite deliberate.
Looking back it is clear that if the Danish government had taken cognisance of the feeling of hurt experienced by a section of the Danish Muslim community things would not have reached this stage. But the intransigence shown by the Prime Minister of Denmark over this sensitive issue has led his country to a situation where its image as a tolerant nation has taken severe beating and it is also feeling the economic pinch due to scrapping of contracts. Ofcourse the reason for his adamant behaviour are not very difficult to understand.
Denmark of today is a pale shadow of its earlier self. A country with a population of 52 lakhs with 2 lakhs Muslims, it has always been one of the most liberal countries in Europe. But as things stand today, it has one of the toughest anti immigrant laws in its statuebooks in the whole of Europe. Islamophobia is on the rise. Gone are the days when getting immigrant status in Denmark was easy as compared to other European nations. The nineties have proved to be a watershed in its history, which has shown surge in anti immigrant feelings. The coming to power of Andrews Fog Rasmussen as Prime Minister with crucial support provided by overtly anti immigrant Danish People’s Party has led to more hardening of attitudes vis-à-vis the immigrants. It was mark of the hardening of stances that the Prime Minister even refused a meeting with the diplomats of a few Middle Eastern countries when they came to communicate their sense of disapproval about the cartoons.
Interestingly while the broad masses of Muslims have expressed their strong sense of disapproval a section of the newspaper editors who published the cartoons justified their actions by claiming that they were exercising their freedom of artistic expression and critique of opinions and beliefs. But as the recent statement by Amnesty International made it clear , the right to freedom of expression is not absolute – neither for the creator of materials nor their critics. Rejecting the justification of newspaper editors for their ‘espousal of freedom of expression’ it was frank enough to remind them that the right to freedom of expression carried responsibilities and could therefore be subject to restrictions to safeguard the rights of others. Amnesty also made it quite explicit that racial or religious hatred that constituted incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence could not be considered legitimate exercise of freedom of expression.
Robert Frisk, the legendary journalist associated with ‘The Independent’ tried to expose the hypocrisy of the European states vis-à-vis the right to ‘freedom of expression’. He rightly observes : “I also enjoyed the pompous claims of European statesmen that they cannot control free speech or newspapers. This is also nonsense. Had that cartoon of the Prophet shown instead a chief rabbi with a bomb-shaped hat, we would have had "anti-Semitism" screamed into our ears--and rightly so--just as we often hear the Israelis complain about anti-Semitic cartoons in Egyptian newspapers. Furthermore, in some European nations..it is forbidden by law to deny acts of genocide.“(07 February, 2006 The Independent)
Ofcourse while the anger of the followers of Islam seems palpable, one also cannot overlook the fact that the whole issue has given an opportunity to many of the discredited rulers of Islamic countries or leaders of extremist formations to further their vicious agenda. In this connection Afghanistan can be considered a crucial example. Media is already agog with news about the violent protests inside Afghanistan, which saw many deaths. Fact of the matter is that Hamid Karzai, the present ruler of Afghanistan, whose own security is dependent on US soldiers and whose writ does not extend beyond much of Kabul, is said to be one of the first to condemn the insult to Islam. It is not difficult to understand the rationale behind Karzai’s move. It not only gives him some legitimacy in the eyes of the Afghan people but also helps project him as a true defender of Islam. The way Hosni Mubarak, President of Egypt tried to snatch initiative on this score from the extremist elements was also noted in the media.
Tabish Khair, Professor of English in Denmark rightly notes that the flaring of emotions strengthens extremist forces on both the sides and leads to throttling of the moderate voice. It is not without coincidence that so far only Abu Sistani, the well known Islamic cleric of Iraq has come out with a reasonable statement condemning both the drawings and the violent reaction by the Muslims.
Although it is easier said than done, at the present juncture a serious challenge definitely awaits the reasonable voices among the Muslims. Nobody can deny the Muslims their right to express their dissent over the drawings. And it can definitely take multfarious forms : ranging from peaceful demonstrations to boycott of Danish products. But their cause would get further enhanced if they are able to rein in violent reaction from some extreme elements. The Theo Van Gogh murder is still fresh in the minds of people in Europe and the West. It need not be repeated that this film director from Netherlands was murdered by a fanatic because he had made a film on ‘violence against women in Muslim socities’ whose format had become controversial. Already there are calls for the head of the cartoonist(s) from some stray faction of the Talibans.
As a writeup in one website (www.chowk.com) February 4, 2006 rightly advises: “
Instead of violent and ridiculously over-the-top rioting by Muslims about the drawings that were honestly and fairly offensive, the Muslims now have an opportunity to engage the West in a serious dialog about their faith, their sensibilities and the religious taboos. There are elements in the West that would continue to deride the Muslims but the vast majority in the West or in rest of the world would surely appreciate a reasonable and peaceful exchange of views on this subject.”One does not know how things would unfold themselves in such a delicate issue, but one thing is certain that things would just not remain the same once the controversy is over. As an outsider to the whole scenario one can just wish that they turn for the better.
