Muslim Minorities
in Europe, the Real Target of the Cartoons
By Professor Nazeer
Ahmed
CA
As people die and embassies burn, diplomats and
religious leaders alike struggle to contain the
damage caused by caricatures of the Prophet Muhammed
(pbuh) published in a Danish newspaper. The mayhem
has caught political observers off guard. But
they should not have been surprised.
The protests have taken on a momentum of their
own and have prompted even those who are normally
circumspect on political issues to call for calm.
These include the Pope and the King of Saudi Arabia.
Even Iran, which initially encouraged the protests,
seems to have had second thoughts. The foreign
minister of Iran has lately called for restraint.
In the hands of a great leader, the energy of
the protests could have been channeled into a
positive mass movement. There is no such leader
on the horizon. Instead, the energy of the historical
moment is dissipated in loss of life and property.
Historians may well record the cartoons and the
mass reaction as a watershed in the centuries
old dialectic between Islam and Europe. There
are several elements in the current interaction.
Some argue that this is an illustration of the
clash of civilizations. This is fuzzy logic. It
would be more precise to argue that it is a clash
of a godless Europe with both Christianity and
Islam.
Islam and Christianity have been in close embrace
for fourteen centuries, in conflict and cooperation,
negotiating, learning from each other and jostling
for position. Europe abandoned Christianity and
chose secularism. What is new today is that technology
has forced Islam and a godless West – and
other faith-based civilizations - into shared
space where they are forced to confront their
own internal contractions. The cartoons and the
protests are a manifestation of this internal
dialectic within each civilization.
The Europeans paint this issue as one of freedom
of speech. This is sheer hypocrisy. The same editors
who published caricatures of the Prophet rejected
similar caricatures of Jesus (peace be upon him).
And just this week a court in Austria sentenced
the British historian David Irwing to a jail sentence
for questioning the holocaust.
Others make the claim that it was satire. Since
when did gross insult become satire? The cartoons
were downright racist and designed to inflame.
The reasons for this mischief have to be sought
elsewhere.
For two hundred years, until the Second World
War, Europe had colonized much of Asia and Africa
where the natives were treated with contempt,
fit to serve the white man as servants. Power
carried with it an aura of superiority. The legacy
of colonialism has sunk deep into the European
psyche. Many Europeans still believe they can
treat Asians and Africans with the same contempt
they did a hundred years ago. Old habits die hard.
The world has changed. Power and wealth are shifting
back to Asia. The emergence of China as a global
power is grudgingly acknowledged by the West.
The emergence of India as a major international
player is resisted. Witness, for instance, the
hue and cry in France and Spain over a recent
attempt by an Indian businessman to take over
a major European steel company. The role of Europe
in world affairs is shrinking. It will continue
to decrease as the new century rolls on. A shrinking
Europe, gasping for breath, is waging a rearguard
action to preserve notions of its superiority
that are absurd in the 21st century. European
secular ideals, which at one time ruled the world,
are under challenge from traditional cultures
that were thought of as inferior until recently.
The European mind has yet to learn to accommodate
itself to the changing realities.
The target of the cartoons is not the Muslim nations
who are a sorry bunch toiling under crushing burdens
of illiteracy, poverty and massive debt. Vast
areas in the Muslim world have become marginalized
slums in the new global order. Some are occupied
outright. It is more likely that the real target
is the growing Muslim presence in Europe. Immigration
from North Africa has added five million Muslims
to the population of France. Turks are a major
presence in Germany. Indians and Pakistanis are
three million strong in the United Kingdom. Conversion
is alive and active. All told, there are fifteen
million Muslims in Europe. And this number does
not include those in the European portion of Turkey.
The growing Islamic presence is a challenge to
secular Europe. The immigrants, and the native
converts, take their religion seriously. Unlike
their Christian compatriots, the Muslims have
not yet accepted the supremacy of a godless culture.
Not knowing how to accommodate the new faith,
an irreligious Europe reacts with a Xenophobia
not witnessed on European soil since the 1930s.
There are elements of political mischief as well.
The editors, and those behind them, knew there
would be a reaction to the cartoons. Why was there
this unnecessary needling of Muslim religious
sensibilities at a time when there is a burning
rage in the Islamic world? As if to reinforce
the provocation from Denmark, several newspapers
in Europe republished the caricatures. The widespread
protests and the loss of life and property accompanying
them is exactly the fuel that feeds the Islamophobia
of right wing political parties. The process works
almost mechanically in three steps. First, you
deliberately provoke. The other side reacts. You
use the reaction as additional fuel to whip up
distrust of the reacting party. Then the process
repeats. Look for snapshots of the mass hysteria
to be repeated on television news for years to
come. There has been a sustained buildup of anti-Muslim
propaganda in Europe over the last twenty years.
The demonizing of Muslims, of their faith, their
religious figures and their sacred books remind
one of the demonizing of Jews in Germany in the
early 1930s. Once a climate of Xenophobia has
been created, and a potential adversary has been
dehumanized, it becomes easier to isolate, marginalize
and perhaps even expel him. Must the history of
the 1930s be repeated all over again?
The conduct of Muslims is also hypocritical. While
the cartoons were sacrilegious, no less sacrilegious
is the destruction of landmarks associated with
the Prophet in Mecca and Madina. This writer had
the privilege of visiting Saudi Arabia several
times, the first in 1977, and the last in the
year 2000. It was astonishing how many landmarks
had vanished in the intervening years. Yet, where
are the Muslim voices of protest against these
acts of destruction? There was never a time in
history when the followers of a tradition, be
it secular or religious, systematically destroyed
their own history and culture as the Muslims themselves
have done in recent years. If this process continues,
the Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) may well be relegated
to a legend like some other Prophets, rather than
a figure who appeared in the full blaze of history.
On the face of it, the protests were against vilification
of the Prophet. Yet, how many Muslim jamaats forbid
their members to send darud when the name of the
Prophet is called? How many forbid the celebration
of meeladun nabi, the way it used to be done in
bygone years? How many love him the way he deserves
to be loved? Some Muslims have brought down the
Prophet to that of a mere mortal who delivered
a message and then disappeared. Gone is the mystery
and the transcendence of Noor e Muhammadi. It
is easy to vent your anger by destroying the property
belonging to others. It is much more difficult
to take stock of your own shortcomings and channel
your anger to improve yourselves.
Let the cartoon episode mark a watershed in the
modern history of Islam when the Muslims woke
up and rededicated themselves to the love of the
Prophet. Let us react to provocations and insults
with acts of Ehsan within a paradigm of sublime
love that the Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) personified.
It was divine love that sanctified the name of
the Prophet.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
