Jan. - March 2006 
Year 12    No.114

Cover Story


Provocation & Response

 
The Cartoon Controversy

Kåre Bluitgen, a Danish writer who wrote a book for children on Prophet Muhammad reportedly could not find any cartoonist willing to do illustrations. It is commonly believed today that Islam prohibits any depiction of the prophet. The Dutch cartoonists contacted by Bluitgen, it is said, were worried about violent attacks by Muslim extremists. So, ostensibly to protest against self-censorship and defend the freedom of expression principle, Flemming Rose, cultural editor of the right wing Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, contacted some 40 cartoonists to draw the prophet as they saw him. Rose finally received 12 cartoons, which were published along with an article in his paper on September 30, 2005.

Outraged by these cartoons – some of them portray the prophet as a woman-enslaver and a terrorist – a Danish Muslim organisation, Islamic Society in Denmark, demanded that Jyllands-Posten apologise to "all Muslims" and withdraw the offensive cartoons. On October 11, nearly 5,000 Muslims held a peaceful protest demonstration outside the newspaper’s office in Copenhagen. But the paper offered no apology.

On October 19, ambassadors from 10 Muslim countries request a meeting with the prime minister of Denmark, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, to draw his attention to the offensive cartoons in particular and Islam-bashing in sections of the Danish press in general. The prime minister refuses to meet the ambassadors on the grounds that he cannot infringe on the freedom of the press.

In early November, a delegation of imams from the Islamic Society in Denmark go on a tour of West Asia to draw the attention of influential Muslim religious and political leaders.

In the first week of December, Louise Arbour, the UN high commissioner for human rights, expresses concern over the cartoons and says the United Nations is investigating racism of the Danish cartoonists. On December 19, 22 former Danish ambassadors criticise the prime minister of Denmark for not meeting with the 11 ambassadors in October. The same day, the Council of Europe criticises the Danish government for invoking the "freedom of the press" in its refusal to take action against the "insulting" cartoons. (The Council of Europe is an international organisation of 46 member states in the European region, open to all European states which accept the principle of the rule of law and guarantee fundamental human rights and freedoms to their citizens. The council is a separate entity from the European Union.)

The first time public notice of the controversial cartoons was taken in the Muslim world was on October 17, in the middle of Ramzan, when an Egyptian newspaper, El Fagr, published six of the cartoons along with an article strongly denouncing them. Interestingly, the publication of the images reportedly did not lead to any protest from either the religious authorities or the government in Egypt. The first public protest took place in Pakistan in the first week of December.

On January 6, 2006, the regional public prosecutor declared that no criminal charges could be pressed against Jyllands-Posten for it had merely exercised its freedom of expression and had not violated the law of the land.

Had the Posten been quick to acknowledge that some of the cartoons it chose to publish were not just about freedom of expression, had the conservative Danish government not shown a cavalier attitude for three long months, the issue may well have been contained within the boundaries of a tiny corner of Europe. On January 30, 2006, Jyllands-Posten apologised, not for having published the cartoons in the first place but for having inadvertently hurt Muslim feelings. The next day the Danish Muslim Association said it was satisfied with the apology from the newspaper and the prime minister and would now help in improving the situation in the country. By then, however, it was too late.

As the cartoon controversy snowballed, some or all of the cartoons were republished by newspapers in over 50 countries across the globe in a highly unusual show of support for freedom of expression. On the other hand, much of the Muslim world erupted in protests, some of which turned violent and vicious.

According to statistics being compiled by the web site, www.cartoonbodycount.com, by end March a total of 139 persons had lost their lives worldwide and as many as 823 had sustained injuries. The economic costs of the controversy, especially to Denmark as a result of the economic boycotts, are yet to be assessed.

The global polarisation over the controversy has been sharp enough for some to hark back to Samuel Huntington’s questionable ‘Clash of Civilisations’ thesis. Those in the media who have republished or televised the cartoons first published by Jyllands-Posten and governments and politicians who have defended the Danish newspaper and the Danish government claim that freedom of expression is sacred. But critics insist that those championing the cause of absolute freedom are in fact hypocrites for they too recognise and practice self-censorship. Critics say the controversial cartoons in question are not about freedom but an expression of growing racism and Islamophobia in many parts of the West.

In January, none less than former US President Bill Clinton denounced the cartoons as "appalling" and "outrageous" and expressed the fear that having spent decades after the Holocaust purging itself of anti-Jewish prejudice, the West now shows signs of succumbing to a new disease: anti-Islamic prejudice.

Meanwhile, while defending the unquestionable right of anyone to protest against something they feel offended by, many ask whether those Muslims who resorted to violent acts and words in expressing their anger have not ended up reinforcing the very image of their faith that the Dutch cartoonists portrayed.

 

The UN, EU and Islamic Conference share the ‘anguish’ of the Muslim world
at the caricatures of Muhammad but condemn violent response

Following is the text of a joint statement issued on February 7, 2006 by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, the secretary general of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference, Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, and the high representative for common foreign and security policy of the European Union, Javier Solana:

We are deeply alarmed at the repercussions of the
publication in Denmark several months ago of in-
sulting caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad and their subsequent republication by some other European newspapers and at the violent acts that have occurred in reaction to them.

The anguish in the Muslim world at the publication of these offensive caricatures is shared by all individuals and communities who recognise the sensitivity of deeply held religious belief. In all societies there is a need to show sensitivity and responsibility in treating issues of special significance for the adherents of any particular faith, even by those who do not share the belief in question.

We fully uphold the right of free speech. But we understand the deep hurt and widespread indignation felt in the Muslim world. We believe freedom of the press entails responsibility and discretion, and should respect the beliefs and tenets of all religions.

But we also believe the recent violent acts surpass the limits of peaceful protest. In particular, we strongly condemn the deplorable attacks on diplomatic missions that have occurred in Damascus, Beirut and elsewhere. Aggression against life and property can only damage the image of a peaceful Islam. We call on the authorities of all countries to protect all diplomatic premises and foreign citizens against unlawful attack.

These events make the need for renewed dialogue among and between communities of different faiths and authorities of different countries all the more urgent. We call on them to appeal for restraint and calm in the spirit of friendship and mutual respect.

(http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/sg2105.doc.htm)


[ Subscribe | Contact Us | Archives | Khoj | Aman ]
[ Letter to editor  ]

Copyrights © 2002, Sabrang Communications & Publishing Pvt. Ltd.