Conspiracy against the Muslim World?

The POST, Sun, Feb,19, 2006.

Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema


It is not easy to prove whether or not the publication of blasphemous caricature of Holy Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) is part of a well calculated conspiracy against Islam. Ostensibly all indicators are pointing towards the existence of a well calculated and thoroughly thought out conspiracy. Reportedly these provocative, inflammatory and blasphemous caricatures were originally published in September in a Danish newspaper. Not much reaction was witnessed at the time but recent republication indeed invoked strong reaction among the Muslims all around the world.

The arguments advanced by supporters of such despicable publication in the West revolve around the freedom of expression without recognizing that they themselves have already put restriction on the freedom of expression. All civilized societies are fully cognizant of the essential limitations on the freedom of expression. The freedom of expression does not imply to ridicule the most respected personalities in their societies without any rime and reason. For example in some countries there are laws governing the publication of stories relating to Holocaust. According a report published in a leading American newspaper that ‘it is illegal and punishable by prison sentence to make statements denying or questioning the existence of Holocaust’. It is a crime to make ‘false statements about the Holocaust’, reported the newspaper. One interpretation of such laws would indeed be that it is not all that offensive to denigrate the Muslims but not the Jews. 

There is no doubt in my mind that many in the west failed to comprehend the intensity of respect accorded by the Muslims to Holy Prophet (PBUH). Any derogatory publication is bound to have strong reactions among the Muslims. Not only angry reactions to the publication of cartoons should have been anticipated but to justify such publications have further added fuel to the fire. Angry mobs have stormed some of the embassies and caused damage to the properties. In fact many Muslim protesters have died as the law and order agencies tried to maintain control over the demonstrators. It is indeed difficult to find any Muslim who is not hurt or outraged by the publication of such cartoons. The basic assumption is that all Muslims are hurt by this act. However one needs to highlight two distinct types of reactions. There are those who expressed their rage in somewhat violent forms. Then there are those who felt extremely hurt but expressed their feelings in peaceful protest marches. The protest march in Karachi is a good example. Peaceful march indeed is always preferred way of protests than angry outburst. Anger overwhelms the rational streaks and facilitates irrationality to gain strength. But sometimes it may become necessary to express anger in order to communicate the true intensity of the hurt feelings. However this does not give a license to damage property and endanger life. Hence it is usually not condoned.

The protest marches in both Lahore and Peshawar resulted in arson and damages to the property of the innocents who were equally hurt by the publication of cartoons. The violence in marches clearly points a finger towards the calculated and carefully planned work of the trouble makers. No only the President and the Prime Minister have strongly condemned the publication of cartoons but the National Assembly was equally vociferous in its condemnation. Besides the members of the National Legislative bodies also undertook a peaceful protest march. Undoubtedly the publication of blasphemous cartoon has placed the governments in Muslim countries in a very difficult situation. However the general trend that has been witnessed during these demonstrations in various countries is that all governments have made efforts to control mobs and effectively prevented them from taking law in their own hands. This is not to ignore or gloss over few incidents in some countries where one has witnessed deaths of few individuals and damage to the properties.

The reaction among the western countries over the angry demonstrations in the Muslim world can also be divided in two categories. There are those who kept on justifying the publication of cartoons and invariably take refuge beyond the over quoted notion of ‘freedom of expression’ and are continuously and actively engaged in securing support among the western countries. And then there are those who realized the cantors of the blunder and are engaged at the moment in defusing the situation. Among them not only the important leaders have apologized for hurting the feelings of the Muslims but they are also providing recipes for arresting the widening gulf in relationships between the Europeans and the Muslims. The foreign policy chief of the EU Javier Solana went to Egypt to enlist the support of the Egyptian leaders in order to defuse the situation. He stressed that the blasphemous cartoons should not be allowed to divide Europe and the Muslim world. But perhaps more important effort came from the OIC which could permanently plug such undesirable developments.  

The Muslim countries have advanced a proposal expressing wish to include a reference to the protection of particular values in the resolution that would create a new Human Rights Council. According to OIC proposal the new body should strive to ‘prevent instances of intolerance, discrimination, incitement of hatred and violence arising from any action against religions, prophets and beliefs which threaten the enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms’. The proposal also stresses that ‘defamation of religions and prophets is inconsistent with the right to freedom of expression’ and that states, organizations, media have ‘responsibility in promoting tolerance and respect for religious and cultural values’. Whether or not OIC proposal is given due weight in the establishment of Human Rights Council remains to be seen but one thing is clear that this is a commendable effort to plug undesirable repetition of similar eventualities in future. If such a proposal is not given due considerations, then the existing beliefs that west is working against the Islamic world is likely to get more strength.  

There exits a widespread belief that the war against terrorism is in fact a war against the Islamic world. Many also believe that the underneath current of such inflammatory cartoons is to project that all Muslims are terrorists. There are many within the Islamic who are continuously engaged in dampening such impression but their efforts are constantly obstructed by deliberately created hurdles. The idea of ‘Enlightened Moderation’ was one such effort which has not been accorded deserving considerations. Had the west earnestly tried to resolve the disputes like Kashmir and worked towards the establishment of an independent Palestine, widespread suspicions among the Muslims would have been considerably reduced.It would not be too far fetched to assume that circumstantial evidence points towards the existence of either conspiratorial efforts to further provoke the Islamic world or efforts reflective of sheer ignorance of Islamic values are contributing towards the widening of the gulf between the Islamic world and western world. Despite being fully cognizant of the reaction demonstrated at the time of publication of Rushdi’s book ‘Satanic verses’, some of the western newspaper did not hesitate to publish blasphemous cartoons. The reaction to the cartoons was not a surprise to many in the Muslim world. 

The Pakistani Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz has appropriately asserted that ‘the publication of blasphemous cartoons had hurt the feelings of Muslims all over the world and there was a need in the west to be more sensitive to such issues. The Prime Minister further stressed the Islamic belief in inter-faith harmony. The demonstration of insensitivity to religious feelings of the Muslims is bound to invite strong condemnation and even undesired violence at times.  

Cognizant of the respect accorded to Holy Prophet (PBUH) by the Muslims, the publication of cartoons is a clear testimony to the deliberately contrived insensitivity. To add fuel to the fire are the subsequent attitudes demonstrated by some of the European countries along with some of their leader’s supportive speeches. It would be advisable to scrupulously refrain from indulgence in such pursuits unless the objective is what the circumstantial evidence is pointing it out.
 

The writer works for Islamabad Policy Research Institute.