What triggered the attacks was Paris magazine's repeated publication of offensive cartoons of the Prophet (PBUH) of Islam. In 2006, it reprinted cartoons published by Danish daily Jyllands-Posten depicting the prophet (PBUH) in a sacrilegious way to portray his followers as terrorists. The Danish cartoon had already caused widespread anger and a violent reaction that left at least 50 dead in Muslim countries.
Yet Charlie Hebdo chose not only to reprint something so incendiary, but in November 2011 went on to publish its own blasphemous cartoons inviting a firebomb attack. In 2012 again, it printed similar cartoons leading to last Wednesday's carnage, which sent shock waves all through France. An estimated 1.5 million people participated in Sunday's 'Unity March' organised by the government and led by President François Hollande along with representatives of 40 countries. Many of the marchers carried "Je Suis Charlie" placards to assert their commitment to freedom of speech.
The assault on Charlie Hebdo has been framed as an assault on freedom of speech. Those who came to show solidarity with France, aside from Western leaders with shared interests, included representatives of some of the world's most repressive governments, such as Egypt placed at 159th position in the Press Freedom Index ranking of 180 countries, Bahrain at 163rd, Turkey at 154th, Russia at 148th, and the United Arab Emirates at 118th.
But was the 'Unity March' about freedom of speech or something else? The message the gathering of all Western nations' representatives sent out seemed to be more about forging solidarity in confronting 'the other' than about democratic values. Indeed, France has a strong tradition of secularism and freedom of speech. Unlike another liberal democracy, Britain, where common-law offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel were abolished only as recently as 2008, people in France for long have been free to mock religious doctrine and personalities.
Charlie Hebdo is notorious for lampooning political and religious figures. Secularism in France is an ardently-observed principle separating the state and religion. Insulting the religious feeling of the followers of another faith, however, is not the same as questioning one's own belief system. It reflects contempt and hatred for the other. Besides, there is no such thing as unbridled freedom. Any anti-Semitic or racist expression is unacceptable in Western societies. In fact, France happens to be one of the EU countries where Holocaust denial is an offence punishable by one year in jail and fines of up to EUR 2,500. A while ago, Google was hauled over coals for a racist portrayal of Michelle Obama as a monkey on its blogging site. Google not only removed the picture but apologised too
In a sharp contrast, insulting Muslims is being touted as assertion of a democratic right. In its latest edition Charlie Hebdo has portrayed the prophet (PBUH) in a fresh caricature - this time not so offensive, however. Still, the very figurative representation of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) or any other prophet of the Abrahamic religions is prohibited in Islam. Encouraged by show of support, the magazine printed a record three million copies instead of the usual 50,000 copies. Most Western media have carried this edition's front-page image. The New York Times, in line with its masthead motto "All the News That's Fit to Print", though did not find it fit to print, apparently, because it saw no value in causing unnecessary affront to Muslims.
Defence of a deliberate offence will only aggravate anti-Western sentiments in Muslim countries. What those countries are experiencing is a violent backlash from their own wars in the Muslim world - from Afghanistan to Iraq and from Libya to Syria. Every one of these wars contributed to radicalisation of Muslim populations in one form or the other.
In the first of its two wars in Afghanistan the US, using the Islamic concept of jihad, created religious militants it then affectionately called 'mujahedeen' who later morphed into the Taliban. The illegal and immoral invasion of Iraq turned that country into a hotbed of religious extremism, leading to the rise of the so-called Islamic State (IS). The Western engineered rebellion in Libya, like the other wars, brought unintended consequences. Large swathes of the country, including parts of the second largest city, Benghazi- where US ambassador J. Christopher Stevens was killed in an attack by Islamic militants - remain in turmoil, changing hands between pro-Western government forces and radical Islamist groups like Ansar al-Sharia. West's armed intervention alongside the region's conservative kingdoms in Syria helped religious extremists against the Asad regime, contributing to IS' expansion into Syria. West therefore has itself to blame rather than Islam for Muslim militancy, which is a product of their colonial-style wars.
All these wars, directly or indirectly waged by the West, caused colossal death and destruction. Hundreds of thousands have died, countess other maimed, and millions rendered homeless. Blowback from the Afghan war has destabilised Pakistan; Afghanistan faces an uncertain future whilst Iraq and Syria are broken. As we condemn the loss of 17 lives in Paris those hundreds of thousands who perished in Western countries misadventures in the Muslim world also urge condemnation.
[email protected]
Comments
Comments are closed.