Having failed to get the desired response through local channels, the self-appointed defenders of the Prophet decided to go global. Abu Laban contacted Muslim diplomats in Copenhagen, eleven of whom sent a letter to Denmark’s prime minister requesting a meeting.51 They raised the issue of the cartoons alongside three other examples of a claimed “on-going smearing campaign in Danish public circles and media against Islam and Muslims.” Signatories of the letter declared that “Danish press and public representatives should not be allowed to abuse Islam in the name of democracy, freedom of expression and human rights” and called for the Danish government “to take all those responsible to task under the law of the land in the interest of inter-faith harmony, better integration and Denmark’s overall relations with the Muslim world.” The OIC also sent a letter along similar lines.52
Rasmussen, the prime minister, responded with a letter in which he reaffirmed his support for cross-cultural dialogue. But he also stated, “The freedom of expression is the very foundation of the Danish democracy,” and that while concerned parties could bring cases of blasphemy or hate speech to court under existing laws, “it is for the courts to decide in individual cases.”53 Rasmussen refused to meet with the ambassadors.
Thus thwarted, the Danish imams organized delegations to spread cartoon rage across the Middle East. There, they displayed not only the Jyllands-Posten cartoons but also images from other Danish publications as well as three significantly more offensive, entirely unrelated drawings, whose origin is murky. The threesome made wildly exaggerated claims about repression against Muslims in Denmark; for example, asserting that they are not legally permitted to build mosques.54 Representatives of the imams’ group traveled to Cairo, Damascus, and Beirut. They received a particularly warm reception in Egypt and enjoyed the assistance of the Egyptian ambassador to Denmark in organizing high-level meetings. Meanwhile, word of the drawings spread.
By early December 2005, there were reports that the Pakistani Islamist party Jamaat-e-Islami had offered a large reward for anyone who killed one of the cartoonists.55 By December 18, Jyllands-Posten faced “an avalanche of death threats against its staff,” and the Danish Security and Intelligence Service (PET) had become involved. As the crisis continued to escalate, Danish Muslims unsuccessfully attempted to bring criminal charges against Jyllands-Posten on the basis of laws banning blasphemy and hate speech.56
At the same time, the cartoons were condemned as blasphemy by the OIC, the Muslim World League, and the Arab League, while the World Assembly of Muslim Youth charged Denmark with “Islamophobia.”57 In late December, the Islamic Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (ISESCO) threatened a political and economic boycott if no official apology was forthcoming from Denmark, and later it followed through on this threat. ISESCO’s president, Abdulaziz Othman Altwajiri, described the cartoons as “a form of racism.”58 The December 2005 OIC summit in Mecca initially convened to discuss sectarian violence and terrorism but took up the cartoons issue, and the Danish imams’ dossier was passed around on the sidelines.59
In the last days of January 2006, fifteen gunmen occupied an EU office in the Gaza Strip. They claimed that Norwegians (a Norwegian paper had republished some cartoons) and Danes would be barred from the area, and they demanded an apology from the two governments. A German NGO volunteer was briefly kidnapped from a hotel in Nablus, in the West Bank; and the Danish Red Cross and the Norwegian People’s Aid Group withdrew employees from Gaza, the former citing “concrete threats.” The Red Cross also pulled an employee from Yemen. Danish troops in Iraq began operating under an elevated alert level.60
Rasmussen repeatedly stressed that the government could not apologize for Jyllands-Posten, since “the Danish government and the Danish nation as such cannot be held responsible for what is published in independent media.”61 Contrary to OIC and UN pronouncements on the subject, he affirmed that “freedom of speech is absolute … it is not negotiable.”62 In a January 31 statement, Rasmussen explained that “as my personal opinion I deeply respect the religious feelings of other people,” and added, “I would never myself have chosen to depict religious symbols in this way.” Nonetheless, he continued to maintain his position, stating, “freedom of expression … is a vital and indispensable part of a democratic society.”63
The Pen versus the Sword
Against this backdrop of mounting pressure and intimidation, a number of European newspapers decided to demonstrate their support for freedom of speech. On February 1, Germany’s Die Welt reprinted the cartoons. Papers in France, Spain, Switzerland, the Netherlands, and Italy published the images on the same day.64France Soir and the Netherlands’ De Volkskrant quickly became part of the story itself when they received bomb threats.65
On February 3, 2006, Rasmussen met with Muslim ambassadors and reiterated that, while he was “distressed” over the way the cartoons had offended some Muslims, “a Danish government can never apologise on behalf of a free and independent newspaper.”66 That same day, Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, a “special advisor” to the Muslim Brotherhood and widely followed figure in the Arab media, issued a fatwa that called for a “day of anger.”67 In a sermon broadcast on Qatar TV, he told his audience, “We are lions that zealously protect their dens, and avenge affronts to their sanctities.… We are a nation that should rage for the sake of Allah, His Prophet, and His book.” He also called for a UN resolution against “affronts to prophets” and reiterated the boycott threat.68
As Rasmussen was meeting with Muslim leaders on Friday, February 3, protests surged across the Muslim world. Rioters railed against the cartoons, with crowds reaching tens of thousands in some places. Threats and bombings rocked the Palestinian territories. Demonstrations erupted in Somalia, with protesters in the country’s northeastern region of Puntland marching on the buildings housing UN and NGO personnel. Protestors gathered outside the Danish embassy in Bangkok and trampled the country’s flag; Indian police scattered protesters in Delhi with water cannons and tear gas.69 Two protesters were killed and six police officers injured when demonstrators attempted to force their way into an American airbase in Bagram, Afghanistan, and hundreds of demonstrators in Laghman province called for “death to Denmark” and “death to France.” One protester told the BBC that those behind the cartoons’ publication “want to know whether Muslims are extremists or not”; as far as he was concerned, he went on to say, “Death to them and to their newspapers.”70
On February 10, thousands of Muslims across Africa, Asia, and the Mideast set out from their mosques after Friday prayers to demonstrations against the cartoons, some ending in violence despite calls by many religious leaders for the protests to remain peaceful. On February 9, top Taliban commander Mullah Dadullah claimed that his organization had recruited 100 suicide bombers since the start of the controversy over Denmark’s “blasphemous” cartoons. He offered a reward of 100 kilograms of gold to anyone who murdered the cartoonists.71 In Afghanistan, by February 11, eleven people had died in riots.72
Next door in Pakistan, on February 14, bank guards in Lahore shot and killed two demonstrators in a crowd that was attacking buildings. In Islamabad, protesters had to be dispersed with tear gas.73 Three people died in protests the following day. A 70,000-strong protest in Peshawar escalated into attacks on foreign businesses by youths wielding rocks and guns. Demonstrations across the country on February 16 drew tens of thousands of participants; there were 40,000 in Karachi alone, where rioters burned effigies of the Danish prime minister and called for breaking off relations with Denmark. A Kentucky Fried Chicken franchise in Peshawar—its connection to Jyllands-Posten unknown—was set ablaze. Attackers also targeted the offices of a Norwegian cell phone company. Turabal Haq of Jamat Ahl-e-Sunnat, the group responsible for the Karachi demonstration, declared, “The movement to protect the prophet’s sanctity will continue until the pens of the blasphemous people are broken and their tongues get quiet.”74 Several protests ended in violence against diplomatic targets in
Indonesia, Libya, Syria, Lebanon, and Iran. Denmark and Norway advised their citizens to leave Syria, and Denmark withdrew its ambassadors from Tehran, Jakarta, and Damascus, variously citing threats and a lack of host government protection.75
Attacks on Christians
In some cases, what began as anger at a group of largely secularist Danish cartoonists and editors also led to attacks against Christian targets. In Turkey, on February 5, a gunman murdered Italian priest Andrea Santoro, who had founded the magazine Window to the Middle East to encourage interfaith dialogue.76 A Maronite church in Beirut, Lebanon, was stoned despite attempts by mainstream Sunni clerics to prevent such acts since, as one cleric in Dar Al Fatwa asked, “What do the people who live in Ashrafiyeh have to do with the people who published those blasphemous cartoons about our Prophet?”77
Pakistani protesters also targeted Christians. Rioters in Sukkur burned a Christian church after tensions over Jyllands-Posten were exacerbated by allegations that a Christian man had burned pages from a Qur’an.78 On February 17, a crowd in the city of Kasur assaulted a United Presbyterian girls’ school, breaking the windows and forcing the occupants to flee; the rioters also attempted to attack a Catholic church. In Peshawar, students and members of Islamist groups attacked a missionary school. At the behest of local Christian leaders, Muslim official Pir Ibrahim Sialvi reminded listeners on February 12 that Christians were “local people” and not involved with the cartoons.79
In Nigeria, cartoon demonstrations quickly gave way to attacks on Christians that set off widespread interreligious violence. On February 18, cartoon rioters in the northern states of Borno and Katsin set eleven churches alight and attempted to burn one man alive; sixteen people were killed.80 Muslim rioters in the northern city of Maiduguri, carrying machetes and iron rods, burned thirty churches. In the melee, at least eighteen people, mostly Christians, died, including three children and one priest, Fr. Michael Gajere.81 In Bauchi, also in the north, twenty-five people died in attacks against Christians, which may also have been linked to unfounded rumors of Qur’an desecration by a Christian schoolteacher.
Muslim Government Responses
Muslim government officials joined the protesters in wholeheartedly condemning the cartoons, but they took mixed stances on the demonstrations themselves. In some cases, they appear to have been directly involved, while in others the reaction to an issue initially publicized by governments now appeared to be growing beyond their control.82 Given the difficulty of holding a truly spontaneous demonstration under Iran’s and Syria’s regimes, it was widely held that the regimes themselves were directly responsible for the protests that occurred on their territory.
Iran’s Ayatollah Khamenei called violent protests in Tehran “justified and even holy,” while the Iranian government cut trade ties with Denmark and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad threatened a boycott of all countries in which the cartoons had appeared.83 In India, an Islamic court issued a death fatwa against the cartoonists, and a minister in the state of Uttar Pradesh offered a reward of $11 million and the recipient’s weight in gold for any successful cartoonist-killer.84 Turkish prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan proclaimed that press freedom should have its limits; Pakistan president Pervez Musharraf claimed the cartoons were indefensible on grounds of free expression.85 Afghan president Hamid Karzai called for “a strong measure” from western nations to prevent the appearance of offensive cartoons. Iraq’s transportation ministry declared a freeze on its contracts with Denmark and Norway, and the Basra city council urged for Danish troops to be pulled from the country if Denmark’s government would not apologize.86 Indonesia’s president, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, urged Muslims to accept apologies for the cartoons but also declared that their republication “sends a conflicting message to the Muslim community: that in a democracy it is permissible to offend Islam.”87
Some leaders, while denouncing the caricatures, also condemned the cartoon violence. Malaysia’s prime minister, Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, urged cartoon protesters to keep their response within reasonable bounds.88 While charging the West with widespread “demonization of Islam and the vilification of Muslims,” he also called for Muslims to refrain from “sweeping denunciations of Christians, Jews and the West.”89 Kuwait’s Parliament called for legislation banning insults against religions and lauded Muslims’ desire to defend Muhammad but also declared that “irresponsible acts … disfigure that emotion and makes it look like aggressiveness and destructiveness.”90 Iraq’s Ayatollah Sistani, while condemning the “horrific action” of the cartoons’ publication, also faulted “misguided and oppressive” parts of the Muslim community whose deeds “projected a distorted and dark image of the faith of justice, love and brotherhood.” Elsewhere, newspapers were shut down and editors were arrested.91
On February 20, a number of leading Islamic scholars and professors, including the grand mufti of Egypt, issued a fatwa that denounced the cartoons’ publication as “an entirely unacceptable crime of aggression.” It also called on Muslims “to exercise self-restraint” and avoid “acts not sanctioned in Islam, such as breaking treaties and breaching time honored agreements by attacking foreign embassies or innocent people and other targets.” However, the fatwa also urged the OIC and Muslim governments “to press the United Nations to issue a declaration criminalizing any insult to Muhammad, Jesus or Moses or to any other revered prophetic figure.” Indeed, this officially endorsed prong of the antiblasphemy effort would remain an issue long after the violent protests died down.92
The Cartoons in the West: Press and Government Responses
Western countries saw a wide range of reactions to the cartoon controversy on the part of both government officials and private editors. While a number of papers published the cartoons to make a point, and a few others did so in the interest of reporting the news, many refrained from doing so out of fear of causing offense, suffering violence, or both. In the United States and the United Kingdom, the drawings went largely unpublished even as they came to dominate the news cycles. Meanwhile, statements from government officials ranged from one minister actually urging papers to reprint the cartoons, to a head of state urging the prosecution of a paper that had done so. In general, the notion that freedom of expression was somehow distinct from the freedom to insult or offend appeared to gain considerable traction.
Beyond immediate responses to the twelve caricatures, the cartoon controversy has become part of a far-reaching international debate on the parameters of freedom of expression. International and private Islamic organizations have echoed the position of Muslim governments, contending that freedom of speech (for those who accept the concept at all) does not cover religious insults. As a spokesman for Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood asserted, “We believe in free speech and a free press, but this does not give you the right to hurt me by hurting the prophet.”93 In Saudi Arabia, Sheik Abdul Rahman al-Seedes, of Mecca’s Grand Mosque, not only declared that the Muslim world would “demand a trial” over the cartoons but also called for an international ban on insults to Islam.94 This widely shared demand became a subject of contention between European institutions and Islamic organizations as they sought a resolution to the cartoon crisis.95
The Aftermath
Although the most concentrated furor of riots, threats, and diplomacy in connection with the Jyllands-Posten cartoons occurred during February 2006, the aftermath of the crisis has continued. In the UN, the incident has had a lasting effect on the tone of ongoing debates over “Islamophobia” and freedom of speech. Related legal cases brought in by France, Canada, and Denmark took years to resolve; and threats and violence from Islamist terror groups against those involved in the cartoons’ production, and in some cases their conationals, have periodically resurfaced. Death threats against opposing voices continue to be heard.
In March 2006, Osama bin Laden declared that the cartoons were part of a “new Crusade” and warned of a response that would “make victorious our messenger of God.” He stated that the loss
of life in European bombings “paled (in comparison) when you went overboard in your unbelief and freed yourselves of the etiquettes of dispute and fighting and went to the extent of publishing these insulting drawings.” Bin Laden also called for a boycott on goods from the United States and from European countries that had backed Denmark, and punishment of “those responsible for this terrible crime, committed by a handful of crusader journalists and others who have fallen from the faith.” Al-Qaeda’s second-in-command, Ayman al-Zawahiri, declared that “the hatred of Western crusaders, directed at the honorable prophet Muhammad … forces us to make a risky decision: Are we prepared to sacrifice ourselves and everything we own in the way of God or not?” In May, Al-Qaeda operative Mohammed Hussain posted on the Web a video calling for Muslims to “avenge your prophet.” He announced, “We deeply desire that the small state of Denmark, Norway and France … are struck hard and destroyed … destroy their buildings, make their ground shake and transform them into a sea of blood.”96
That same month, Pakistani journalist Hamid Mir reported that twelve terrorists were traveling to Denmark to kill the cartoonists.97 Cartoon rage also apparently motivated one of three suspects arrested in August 2006 in connection with a plot to detonate bombs on German passenger trains, which failed only due to a problem with the detonators.98 In May 2007, prosecutors listed the caricatures, together with the presence of Danish troops in Iraq, among the motives behind a thwarted plot to detonate a bomb somewhere in Copenhagen, for which four men were subsequently convicted and sentenced to jail terms.99 In October 2007, a Danish convert to Islam, arrested with three others on terror charges, stated in court that his group had considered attacking Flemming Rose’s house with a remote-controlled car bomb.100 In September 2008, the U.S.-based security think tank Jamestown Foundation discovered plans to poison Denmark’s water supply in retaliation for the cartoons on an Al-Qaeda-linked website.101 In July 2008, an Islamist rebel leader was apprehended by government forces in Chad after a month of calling, according to Ahmat Mahamat Bachir, the country’s Security Minister, for a “holy war against Christians and atheists” that “would be launched from Chad to as far as Denmark.”102
Silenced: How Apostasy and Blasphemy Codes Are Choking Freedom Worldwide Page 31