|
Muslims and the West: A Culture War?
|
By John L. Esposito**
Islamic Studies – Georgetown University
|
Feb.
14, 2006
|
 |
|
Demonstration in Montreal, Canada, on Feb 11, witnessed signs such as "liberty of speech is sacred" (L) and "It is mean what you are doing to Prophet Muhammad" (R)
|
Newspaper
cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad have set off an international row
with dangerous consequences, both short and long term. The
controversial caricatures first published in Denmark and then in
other European newspapers, target Muhammad and Islam and equate
them with extremism and terrorism. In response to outcries and
demonstrations across the Muslim world, the media has justified
these cartoons as freedom of expression; France's France Soir
and Germany's Die Welt ass\erted a "right to caricature
God" and a "right to blasphemy," respectively.
One
of the first questions I have been asked about this conflict by
media from Europe, the US, and Latin America has been "Is
Islam incompatible with Western values?" Are we seeing a
culture war? Before jumping to that conclusion, we should ask,
whose Western democratic and secular values are we talking about?
Is it a Western secularism that privileges no religion in order to
provide space for all religions and to protect belief and unbelief
alike? Or is it a Western "secular fundamentalism" that
is anti-religious and increasingly, post 9/11, anti-Islam?
What
we are witnessing today has little to do with Western democratic
values and everything to do with a European media that reflects
and plays to an increasingly xenophobic and Islamaphobic society.
The cartoons seek to test and provoke; they are not ridiculing
Osama bin Laden or Abu Musab al-Zarqawi but mocking Muslims' most
sacred symbols and values as they hide behind the façade of
freedom of expression. The win-win for the media is that explosive
headline events, reporting them or creating them, also boosts
sales. The rush to reprint the Danish cartoons has been as much
about profits as about the prophet of Islam. Respected European
newspapers have acted more like tabloids.
The
cartoons drive a wedge between the West and moderate Muslims. |
|
What
is driving Muslim responses? At first blush, the latest Muslim
outcries seem to reinforce the post 9/11 question of some pundits:
"Why do they hate us?" with an answer that has become
"conventional wisdom": "They hate our success,
democracy, freedoms…"—a facile and convenient as well as
wrong-headed response. Such answers fail to recognize that the core
issues in this "culture war" are about faith, Muhammad's
central role in Islam, and the respect and love that he enjoys as
the paradigm to be emulated. They are also more broadly about
identity, respect (or lack of it) and public humiliation. Would the
mainstream media with impunity publish caricatures of Jews or of the
holocaust? As France's Grand Rabbi Joseph Sitruk observed: "We
gain nothing by lowering religions, humiliating them and making
caricatures of them. It's a lack of honesty and respect," he
said. He said freedom of expression 'is not a right without
limits'." (AP Feb 3)
A
recently completed Gallup World Poll, that surveyed Muslims from
Morocco to Indonesia,
enables
us to find data-based answers about Islam by listening to the voices
of a billion Muslims. This ground-breaking Gallup study provides a
context and serves as a reality check on the causes for widespread
outrage.
Freedom
of religion in a pluralistic society ought to mean that some
things are sacred and treated as such. |
|
When
asked to describe what Western societies could do to improve relations with the
Arab/Muslim world, by far the most frequent reply (47% in Iran, 46% in Saudi
Arabia, 43% in Egypt, 41% in Turkey, etc.) was that they should demonstrate more
understanding and respect for Islam, show less prejudice, and not denigrate what
Islam stands for.
At
the same time, large numbers of Muslims cite the West's technological success
and its liberty and freedom of speech as what they most admire. When asked if
they would include a provision for Freedom of Speech, defined as allowing all
citizens to express their opinion on political, social and economic issues of
the day if they were drafting a constitution for a new country, overwhelming
majorities (94% in Egypt, 97% in Bangladesh, 98% in Lebanon etc.) in every
country surveyed responded yes, they would.
Cartoons
defaming the Prophet and Islam by equating them with terrorism are inflammatory.
They reinforce Muslim grievances, humiliation and social marginalization and
drive a wedge between the West and moderate Muslims, unwittingly playing
directly into the hands of extremists. They also reinforce autocratic rulers who
charge that democracy is anti-religious and incompatible with Islam.
Where
Do We Go From Here?
Islamophobia
should be as unacceptable as anti-Semitism, a threat to the very
fabric of our democratic pluralistic way of life. |
|
By
the US' seeking to more closely incorporate Europe in its
hegemonic designs in the Muslim world, and Europe’s seeming
readiness to do so, the West would be greatly enhancing the
dominant view among many that this is in fact a clash of
civilizations and an anti-Islamic crusade that is guided by an
Islamophobic West. Recent revelations involving the degradation of
the Koran by US interrogators in Guantanamo Bay and the EU’s
absurd display of solidarity with Denmark in the recent cartoon
controversy which inflamed Muslim passions, is further proof, in
the eyes of many Muslims and Westerners alike, that a clash of
civilizations is being fueled by the West.
This
is further augmented if one notes how Rumsfeld described Europe
and the US during the Munich conference not only as partners with
common strategic interests but rather as the “civilized world”
and as “a community, with shared histories, common values, and
an abiding faith in democracy” facing a war that was declared by
forces wishing to establish “a global extremist Islamic
empire.”
Rumsfeld’s
whimsical, self-serving depiction of the conflict leaves no room
for any criticism of the West. In fact, during his speech at the
Munich conference we do not see any attempt made to distinguish
between the goals of various Islamic movements nor do we see any
acknowledgement of America’s failed policies in Iraq or the role
that the West had historically played in creating many of the
legitimate grievances that Muslims repeatedly mention. Instead,
Rumsfeld reiterated the convenient, self-gratifying cliché that
the conflict is within the Muslim world, as Muslims are
constantly depicted as hopelessly struggling to come to terms with
the benevolent message of freedom that the West is supposedly busy
propagating.
The
US’ newly declared strategic posture aims at the liquidation
of whatever is left of the concept of national soveregnty. |
|
Core
principles and values, like freedom of speech, cannot be
compromised. However, freedoms do not exist in a vacuum; they do
not function without limits. In many countries, hate speech (such
as holocaust denial, incitement to racial hatred, advocating
genocide) is a criminal offense prohibited under incitement to
hatred legislation. Our Western secular democracies represent not
only freedom of expression but also freedom of religion. Belief as
well as unbelief needs to be protected. Freedom of religion in a
pluralistic society ought to mean that some things are sacred and
treated as such. The Islamophobia which is becoming a social
cancer should be as unacceptable as anti-Semitism, a threat to the
very fabric of our democratic pluralistic way of life. Thus, it is
imperative for political and religious leaders, commentators and
experts, and yes, the media, to lead in building and safeguarding
our cherished values.
And
what about Muslim responses? Muslim leaders are hard pressed to
take charge, asserting their faith and rights as citizens,
affirming freedom of expression while rejecting its abuse as a
cover for prejudice. A sharp line must be drawn between legitimate
forms of dissent and violent demonstrations or attacks on
embassies that inflame the situation, and reinforce Western
stereotypes. The many Muslim leaders, from America and Europe to
the Muslim world, who have publicly urged restraint and strongly
condemned violence, play a critical role.
Globalization
and an increasingly multicultural and multi-religious West test
the mettle of our cherished democratic values. As the current
cartoon controversy underscores, pluralism and tolerance today
demand greater mutual understanding and respect from non-Muslims
and Muslims alike.
**John
L. Esposito is Professor of Religion and International Affairs
and of Islamic Studies at Georgetown University. He is the
founding director of the Center for Muslim-Christian
Understanding, a consultant to the Department of State as well as
corporations, universities, and the media worldwide. He is also
author of What Everyone Needs to Know about Islam, Unholy
War: Terror in the Name of Islam, and co-author of the
forthcoming, "Can you Hear Me Now: What a Billion Muslims
are Trying to Tell Us."
|
