Who is behind cartoon-provoked violence?

Subscribe

BEIRUT. (RIA Novosti political commentator Marianna Belenkaya.) -- The wave of demonstrations against the controversial cartoon images of Prophet Mohammed began in Palestine, or at least the demonstrations held there were the first to cause repercussions.

The events took place barely a week after the radical Hamas movement won the parliamentary election there.

It is strange that this wave of Muslim indignation has risen only now, as the cartoons were first published in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten in late September 2005. At that time, officials and organizations, such as ambassadors of Muslim countries, the Organization of the Islamic Conference, etc., demanded apologies. But Western journalists rejected the demand as an infringement on the freedom of the press.

International journalist organizations called on their colleagues around the world to support the Danish journalists. Their appeal was heard only three and a half months later. In early January a Norwegian magazine reprinted the Danish cartoons, while other European media followed suit only after protest actions broke out across the Islamic world.

Nobody can say why any of this has happened now, as there are too many possible explanations. In some countries the demonstrations serve to distract the people from economic and social problems. Others want to rally society against the external threat and strengthen the regime. Still others aim at destabilizing the situation and framing their political adversaries in power. Each country has its own specifics and its reasons for stirring peaceful demonstrations into violence.

The fiercest protest actions are held in the most conflict-ridden parts of the Islamic world - Palestine, Lebanon and Syria. They are a direct result of the actions of European and American politicians regarding the Broader Middle East, meaning the Muslim world, rather than the policy of European journalists.

Hamas's victory in Palestine showed that a democratic model, which the West is trying to spread to the Broader Middle East at the United States' initiative, does not work there. Or rather, it is not working as its advocates hoped it would. Washington thought democracy would help stop Islam from becoming too radical. Instead, the radical Islamic forces are using free elections to come to power.

The West is scared. The words of U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld at the recent 42nd Munich Conference on Security Policy clearly demonstrate this. He has called on allies to strengthen solidarity and increase military spending in order to preclude the creation of a global extremist Islamic empire.

We see glaring proof of the Islamic threat, with European diplomatic offices burning in Muslim states and Muslim protest demonstrations held in Europe. Hamas came to power in Palestine shortly before the Munich conference, the situation around Iran's nuclear dossier is deteriorating, and new explosions claim lives in Iraq. And the memory of the torching of thousands of vehicles by Muslims in France is still fresh.

Is there a "hidden force" behind the current unrest or is it a spontaneous expression of public outrage? There is no answer to this question so far. The cartoon-inspired violence has cast a bright light on relations between Muslims and Christians, which have turned from a political issue into trouble for millions of ordinary people.

The current conflict drew the world's attention to the deep gap that divides the West and the Islamic world. The two sides have become aware that they regard life differently and their opinions are incompatible.

The West is frightened but not surprised. The current events fit the view of Muslims that has developed after the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the United States. All we've done is published some cartoons, and the Muslims threaten to kill us, the West seems to say. Western journalists complain that the Islamic world does not understand the meaning of freedom of the press.

Their Muslim colleagues say they know what freedom is. They ask why they cannot criticize Jews or express doubts about the Holocaust, if Western journalists deem it possible to offend the religious feelings of Muslims? They say that the West likes to speak about democracy but refuses to talk with Hamas, which has won a democratic election. Why can some countries have nuclear weapons but prohibit others to do the same?

The answers to these questions are obvious to a Westerner, but everything looks different in the Islamic world. Why are some countries always right and others are always wrong?

Moreover, it is the Arab intellectuals who are asking these questions. They are insulted by both the cartoons and the attacks on European embassies. Many Lebanese say protest demonstrations were necessary but their outcome will harm the image of Islam and might destabilize the situation in Lebanon, which is tottering on the edge of a civil war. This is the reason why religious leaders have tried to stop crowds from going too far in Beirut. But the Danish consulate was burned down anyway.

There must be a core reason behind the torching of Western diplomatic missions. Who would want this done and why? Unfortunately, there are too many interested parties, both in the West and in the Islamic world.

Images (the cartoon-inspired violence)

Newsfeed
0
To participate in the discussion
log in or register
loader
Chats
Заголовок открываемого материала