The
reported desecration of the Qur’an by US guards at the infamous
Guantanamo prison, as originally published in the Newsweek on
May 9, 2005, was not—as it should have been—an opportunity for a
thorough examination of US army practices, and thus human rights
abuses, toward Muslim inmates in the numerous detention camps
erected throughout the world.
Considering
that such practices are quite consistent with the overriding policy
adopted by the Bush administration throughout the Middle East, one
hardly crosses the border of reason when one expects key newspapers
to contextualize the reported flushing of the Qur’an down the
toilet with similar practices in Iraq and Afghanistan.
But
as experience has shown, that’s just too much to expect. Instead,
the focus of the vast news coverage and commentary throughout the
media was fixed on the less urgent matter of journalistic
responsibility and the seemingly inherent problem of Muslim
backwardness and sadism.
The
Times of London made a clever choice when it selected a
Muslim, Irshad Manji, to address the fierce response to the scandal.
Jacoby
drew a comparison between the barbarian Muslims and the
nonviolent and civilized everyone else. |
|
In
an article entitled “Why don’t we Muslims grow up?”, Manji,
who seems demonstrably disengaged, found it most appropriate to
prompt a discussion in semantics, questioning the wholesomeness and
sanctity of the Qur’an itself. The Qur’an, according to the
writer, “contains ambiguities, inconsistencies, outright
contradictions and the possibility of human editing.”
What
does this have to do with anything?
The
article, also published by the celebrated New York Review of
Books, insisted on pinning the blame on the popular, and
sometimes violent, Muslim response to the report rather than the
culminating feelings of anti-imperialist oppression experienced by
the poorest of Muslim nations, most notably Afghanistan.
On
the other hand, Jeff Jacoby, a columnist for the Boston Globe,
chose to push the limits of cultural insensitivity to downright
insult in his piece entitled “Why Islam is disrespected.”
Opening
his article with imaginary scenarios of Christians, Jews, and
Buddhists violently rioting in response to the desecration of their
religious symbols, Jacoby aims to catch his unsuspecting audience
off guard, weaving together a fantastic anecdote and then
pronouncing that these stories “never occurred.” They were
simply convoluted analogies aimed at enlightening his innocent, naïve
readers through drawing a comparison between the barbarian Muslims
and the nonviolent and civilized everyone else.
“Christians,
Jews and Buddhists don’t lash out in homicidal rage when their
religion is insulted. They don’t call for holy war and riot in the
street. It would be unthinkable for a mainstream priest, rabbi, or
lama to demand that a blasphemer be slain,” and so forth.
Did
it dawn on anyone that the Afghan people might be angry over
years of American occupation? |
|
Other
commentators—who refrained from scrutinizing and “exposing”
Islam’s theological limitations or discrediting its cultural
practices, rituals, beliefs, and so on—confined their arguments to
the issue of Newsweek’s judgment, or lack thereof,
regarding the running of the May 9 article.
Some
sided with the White House interpretation, as uttered by Press
Secretary Scott McClellan in his call on Newsweek and other
outlets not to lose their “credibility.” Others questioned
McClellan’s own credibility. The agreement, however, regarding Newsweek
Editor Mark Whitaker’s clearly forced apology and subsequent
retraction of the article was across-the-board.
It
is ironic that Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff, is in fact the one speaking the unexamined words of truth. He
said that Army Gen. Carl Eichenberry, the senior US commander in
Afghanistan, reported that the violence “was not at all tied to
the article in the magazine.”
So
to what could it possibly be tied?
Did
it dawn on anyone in the mainstream media that the Afghan people
might possibly be angry over years of American occupation? Perhaps
this failed to cross anyone’s mind.
Could
it possibly be that hundreds of millions of Muslims might have had
enough common sense to connect the dots and to establish that the
desecration of the Qur’an is only the latest episode of a
consistent US military policy that hasn’t only dishonored
religious symbols but the sanctity of human life, in fact hundreds
of thousands of human lives?
Could
the hypothesis be true that Muslims, despite their alleged
backwardness, had access to TV news, print media, and the Internet
and might have accidentally run into hundreds of vile photos of
physically humiliated and sexually abused Iraqi prisoners? Could it
be possible that these savages learned of harrowing testimonies of
former prisoners at Guantanamo detailing what numerous human rights
groups unhesitatingly described as “war crimes”?
HRW
issued a statement confirming that the Guantanamo episode is
the norm. |
|
But
why confine the argument to over-generalized, rhetorical questions?
In its response to the scandal, Human Rights Watch issued a
statement on May 19, 2005 confirming that, sadly, the Guantanamo
episode is the norm. “In detention centers around the world, the
United States has been humiliating Muslim prisoners by offending
their religious beliefs,” according to Reed Brody, a HRW special
counsel.
The
defilement of religious symbols like the Qur’an is part of the
unfailing US foreign and military policy that has utilized every
creative, albeit inhumane option to further its colonial designs
throughout the Muslim world for an array of economic and strategic
gains.
Thus,
if Muslim fury is to be examined appropriately and truthfully, the
desecration of the Qur’an must be analyzed together with the
violent death of “at least” 100,000 Iraqi civilians, the greater
majority of them at the hands of the “coalition,” according to
“the first comprehensive investigation of civilian deaths in Iraq,
published in the Lancet” and cited recently by respected
Australian journalist John Pilger. Separating both issues is
downright irresponsible.
But
the media’s interest in appropriateness and truthfulness fades
away before the seemingly much more compelling and urgent topic of
the theological roots of Muslim violence and the Muslim and Arab
minds’ innate deficiency and backwardness.
I
am afraid that it will take more than a simple apology or a
newspaper retraction to right this collective and perpetual wrong.
Much more.
*
Ramzy
Baroud is a veteran Arab-American
journalist and the author of the upcoming volume entitled A
Force to Be Reckoned With: Writings on Al-Aqsa Intifada.