Freedom of expression and multi-culturalism

Mon. February 13, 2006

Freedom of expression and multi-culturalism

For those of us, who love adventure movies and fairy tales, Denmark has always occupied a special place in our hearts for its being the land of the Vikings and, of course, that of Hans Christian Andersen. In recent times, it became famous for its civilised lifestyle, tolerant social habits, high standard living and generous social benefits. From an ethnic point of view, until the 1960s, it was a remarkably homogeneous society. True, there were small communities of North Europeans and Jews, but they more or less belonged to the same culture. Things started to change in the sixties when rapid economic expansion forced the Danish government to invite guest workers from countries like Turkey, Bosnia (then part of Yugoslavia), Pakistan, Iran, etc. who belonged to a different culture. But the government and the society, in general, were tolerant towards the immigrants because they were needed to sustain the country's economic growth. They also hoped that the guest workers would eventually leave. But they did not. Even then, until 2001, the relationship between the host community and the immigrants were, on the whole, peaceful.

The 2001 election changed all that. A coalition of conservative parties with a strong anti-immigrant and anti-Islamic bias came to power. Since then a series of xenophobic measures have been taken by the government to make the Muslims feel unwelcome in Denmark. The Danish participation in the American invasion of Iraq and deployment of troops in Afghanistan did not please the Danish Muslims. Recent public statements by Danish leaders -- some of them quite important in the political hierarchy -- have not only shown their ingrained arrogance but also their contempt for Islam and the Muslims. Some of them have gone so far as to describe Islam and the Muslims as "cancerous tumours", which in any civilised country would be considered as hate speech.

It was in this politically tense climate that in September, 2005, a conservative newspaper called Jyllands Post published a series of cartoons mercilessly lampooning Prophet Muhammad which angered the Danish Muslims further. One of the cartoons showed Prophet Muhammad wearing a bomb-shaped turban with the fuse burning. Another showed him complaining about the shortage of virgins in heaven to an impatient line of suicide bombers. These cartoons are not only offensive to hundreds of millions of Muslims around the world but also unnecessarily provocative. With a view to lowering the tension, the representatives of the Islamic community in Denmark first collected 17, 000 signatures and talked to the paper but could not get any satisfactory response. Instead, it accused the Muslims of being "undemocratic and intolerant". Later, to show their concern over the deteriorating situation, ambassadors from eleven Muslim countries tried to have an audience with Mr. Rasmussen, the Danish prime minister. They were snubbed by him. The prime minister refused to see them on the ground that the press had merely exercised its democratic right to express freely. The Muslims were not satisfied. In November, while visiting Denmark, Mr. Tayipp Erdogan, prime minister of Turkey refused to hold a joint press conference with the Danish prime minister as a mark of protest for his attitude on this issue. Mr. Rasmussen remained unperturbed.

It was at this point that the Muslim community in Denmark decided to internationalise the conflict. Al Yazira picked up the issue and started giving wide coverage to it. In December, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights expressed the UN's concern and wrote that the cartoons violated the religious sentiments of others and therefore, unacceptable. At a summit of 57 Muslim countries held in Mecca in December, the leaders expressed "concern at rising hatred against Islam and Muslims ......

and condemned the use of the freedom of expression as a pretext to defame religions." On January 10, a Norwegian newspaper published the caricatures in an act of solidarity which led many Muslims in other parts of the world to believe that Islam was definitely under attack in Europe.

In the Middle East and elsewhere, people started holding protest demonstrations. Realising their economic power, many Muslim countries in the Middle East started boycotting Danish products. After violent demonstrations in early February, Danish legations in Damascus and Beirut were attacked and subsequently burnt by angry Muslims. At the time of writing this letter, demonstrations are still raging across Europe and the Muslim world. Several demonstrators have already been killed by the police trying to protect Western interests. Despite all this, Mr. Rasmussen remained adamant. On February 9, he "reiterated that there would be no Danish apology for the cartoons,.....and asserted that: We are on the right track" (See International Herald Tribune, February 10, 2006)

While I mourn for the loss of life and regret the acts of violence perpetrated against the Danish and Norwegian legations in the Muslim world, I feel that because of the West's hegemonistic assumptions and euro-centric attitudes, most people in Europe are rather insensitive to other cultures and civilisations. A false superiority complex is so ingrained in them that they do not even feel the need to acquire a little more knowledge about the world outside Europe and North America except perhaps the bare minimum, which is often slanted.

Monotheism is one of the fundamental tenets of Islam. In the seventh century, Arabia was populated by a number of warring tribes and clans. They worshipped a variety of different gods. Idolatry was common and the country was full of pagan shrines. Prophet Muhammad unified all these warring factions into one single nation under the principle that there is a supreme being called Allah, who is omni-present and omniscient and "there is no god but God". The existing idols were destroyed. In order to ensure that the Muslims did not revert to idolatry, images of all prophets including that of Prophet Muhammad was prohibited. After so many centuries, that prohibition still remains in effect. That is why most Muslims feel very strongly about this issue.

These are politically sensitive times for Europe. Because of globalisation and the West's colonial past, Europe has now become a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic and multi-religious continent. Europe must accept the fact that there are more than 25 million Muslims who live in this continent and that they are not going to disappear. Therefore, the media and the governments have a special responsibility to be knowledgeable about other cultures, ethnic groups and religions. Mr. Rasmussen's behaviour in this crisis has been lamentable. He has behaved as a fundamentalist zealot, who is firmly convinced that he is in possession of the absolute truth. This, in my opinion, is not in conformity with the best European tradition of enlightened thinking. It is difficult for me to understand how taking a cup of coffee with eleven aggrieved ambassadors would have compromised his so-called democratic principles. The media and the government cannot afford to be self-righteous and indulge in waving their brave democratic credentials at every opportunity to justify their actions or inactions. Democracy also means respect for the rights of the minorities. They should be aware of different sensitivities. Freedom of expression is, no doubt, cherished by every human being, no matter whether he is a Christian, a Muslim or a Hindu. But every right has its limits. One's right to exercise freedom of expression ends where it violates the freedom of others. If one is not careful, freedom of speech can easily turn into hate speech.

The West's colonial aggressions in Muslim countries for the last three centuries, its unconditional support for Israel, its insensitivity to the prolonged suffering of the Palestinians, its double standards on the issue of nuclear weapons and more recently its efforts to control the oil resources of Muslim countries through massive military interventions and regime changes etc. have created a sense of frustration, anger and humiliation among the Muslims all over the world. They see the so-called democratic values of the West as an exercise in hypocrisy. All this resentment is naturally projected into the Muslims of Europe. It is against this backdrop that one must examine the publication of the caricatures and the subsequent Muslim reaction. One should never forget the ignominious days of recent European history, when under a democratically elected government, anti-Semitic caricatures fed the Holocaust. Today, the Europeans and the Americans take extreme care not to offend the sensitivities of the Jews. Is it that difficult to extend the same consideration to the Muslims as well?