Writing in the Dubai-based daily Al Bayan, Mona Bahar said that the cartoons lampooning Prophet Mohammad were offensive, but the refusal of the Danish newspaper and government to apologise to the Muslims were even more so and their stance is contrary to the principles of human rights. The publishing of the cartoons in the Danish newspaper and other newspapers cannot be accepted even under the pretext of making us of freedom of the press, continued the writer.
Muslims are not against freedom of expression, but this should be done in a responsible way and showing respect for the beliefs of others. Moreover, the newspapers that published the offensive cartoons are clearly guilty of double standards, as they refused to publish cartoons about the Holocaust that could be regarded as offensive to the Jews, said the writer.
On the other hand, the reactions of some Muslims to these cartoons, like attacking embassies of the countries whose newspapers published them, were inappropriate and only harm Islam because they show Muslims as terrorists, said the columnist, adding that burning the Danish and the Norwegian embassies in Syria and Lebanon is unacceptable behaviour that does not reflect the principles of Islam and Prophet Mohammad.
The writer went on to say that both the behaviour of the demonstrators and that of the cartoonist and those who published them is irresponsible. She said that in the same way the Danish cartoons make all Muslims and their prophet extremists, the Muslims who set the Danish embassy ablaze made the cartoonist and the publisher one with the entire nation, both being wrong. She concluded by saying that the Muslims' decision to boycott the Danish products was wise and has had a good outcomes so far.
Ragda Dergam who writes in the London-based daily Al Hayat, said that if the angry Muslims protested against the offensive cartoons only by boycotting Danish products, it may have led to shutting down the newspaper and even the collapse of the Danish government. Affecting Denmark economically would have sent the message, to the ignorant journalist, that insulting Prophet Mohammad cannot be considered freedom of expression, she said, adding that as anger and violence were the main reactions in the Muslim world, it became obvious that extremists are leading the Muslim street, which is dangerous and requires from the moderates to act.
The writer said that the aim behind publishing these cartoons was to start a clash between civilisations and religions rather than to show how free the press was in Denmark. The editor-in-chief of the Danish newspaper apologised to the Muslims for the cartoons, and that apology is all the Danish newspaper could offer to calm the anger in the Muslim world, but Lebanon and Syria brought the issue to a different level when they gave green light to protesters to burn the Danish embassies in Beirut and Damascus, and thus entered a new battle with the European countries and the public opinion in the West, said the columnist.
Dergam also accused Iran of escalating the situation and taking advantage of the cartoons to strengthen its position in the battle with the international community regarding its nuclear programme.
After the publication of the cartoons in Denmark and the dialogue among Muslim leaders, the ambassadors of Muslim countries to Denmark requested to meet with the Danish prime minister in order to discuss the issue of the offensive cartoons; he arrogantly refused to meet with the ambassadors, said Atef Abduljawad in the Omani daily Al Watan. The writer said that if such a meeting had taken place, it is possible that the Muslim reaction wouldn't have reached the extent it did.
The main reason behind publishing those cartoons is the Danish right-wing hatred of the growing Muslim community in their country, said the writer, adding that the newspaper which first published the offensive cartoons represents the Danish right wing. The other European newspapers which published the same cartoons after the Muslims demonstrated around the world are also responsible for the growing protests because they published the offensive cartoons in order to express their extreme dislike of the minorities in their countries, mainly the Muslims. This hatred of the Muslims was one of the reasons behind the protests in the Muslim world.
In the US, only one controversial newspaper showed the offensive cartoons, while all the major newspapers refused to do so, despite the fact that they strongly believe in the freedom of expression. The American newspapers' behaviour is a perfect answer to the European newspapers' claim that they published the offensive cartoons because they have freedom of expression.
Hamad Al Majed said in the London-based Asharq Al Awsat that the demonstrations that erupted in the Muslim world over the cartoons were surprising. The reactions against these offensive cartoons were appropriate, considering the great harm the cartoons did to the Muslim people around the world, but Islam was offended by the West several times recently, mainly in Guantanamo, where soldiers desecrated the Koran, yet the Muslims' reaction was not suitable, said the writer.
The American offence was greater because it took place in an official institution, while in Denmark, the cartoons were published by a private newspaper; moreover, the Muslims' reaction to the Danish offence was different from reactions to similarly offensive incidents, as the people decided to boycott Danish products. The Muslims determined to boycott Denmark of their own will, which forced some Muslim governments to condemn the Danish government firmly.
The unacceptable violence at some demonstrations, during which Danish embassies were attacked, sent a meassage to any party attempting to offend the religious feelings of the other. The writer said that some Westerners argue that publishing the cartoons is acceptable when you enjoy freedom of expression, but this argument does not hold water because by claiming the same freedom of expression, the West does not allow any criticism or questioning of the Holocaust, concluded the writer.
By Thamer Abu Baker
© Jordan Times 2006
