This week has been difficult at the Danish embassy. It is not every day that you have 300 people in the street with protest signs and ten TV-cameras pointed at your embassy. On the other hand the demonstration on Monday was a very peaceful and calm event – just as the organizers from IAF had promised. And a peaceful and lawful demonstration is a perfectly legitimate way of using the freedom of expression.
At the conclusion of the demonstration I invited the Secretary General of the IAF and the IAF spokesperson to my office, where they handed me a letter to the Danish Prime Minister. The meeting took place in a friendly atmosphere and the IAF used the occasion to explain the anger of Muslims with the reprinting of the cartoon. I had the opportunity to try to correct some of the misunderstandings that apparently are widespread.
First of all, I think it is very important to state clearly that there is no specific or general intention to harm or disturb Muslim feelings or the feelings of other religious communities for that matter. This is and has always been the position of the Danish government.
Secondly, the reason for the republication of the cartoon – as stated by most of the editors-in-chief – was to document a murder plot that had been planned by three persons. Let us not forget that – the events all started out with the successful intervention from Danish police and intelligence in foiling a planned terrorist assassination of the illustrator. So, it was not about causing intended harm to the Muslim population, but about how to document a news story.
Thirdly, it is crucial to understand that the government – and that goes not only for Denmark but for many other countries – has neither means nor political mandate to interfere in the decisions of the free press. That is why it is free. But the press is also responsible and accountable within the law – and very often the editors have to appear before the court to defend their writings – mostly about individual people. Sometimes they win – sometimes they lose their case.
Fourthly, organizations representing parts of Danish Muslim population reacted with a statement saying that 1) they distance themselves from the alleged murder plot, 2) the press is free to choose what to print and that the opponents of the cartoons are free to disagree with the printing, and 3) that in light of the current situation they did not understand the purpose of reprinting the cartoon. The statement concluded by stressing their readiness for dialogue and in fighting radicalisation.
Getting back to the meeting with IAF the main conclusion was that dialogue and mutual respect is the only way to wipe out misunderstandings like this one. This has also been the generel conclusion when talking to other Jordanian national figures during the last week.
And dialogue is actually one of the main reasons behind establishing an Embassy in Jordan. The Embassy will be a partner in dialogue – especially when focusing on enhancing mutual understanding and avoiding new misunderstandings and misconceptions to spread. Many of our projects in Jordan and the region are exactly about this. We want to continue on that track. Our relations with the Arab world have been long lasting and substantial. Just to mention a few examples of what we are doing, the Danish support for the Palestinians is solid and substantial. In Paris last year, Denmark pledged more than 110 mio. USD for the PA. For the refugees from and in Iraq we allocate more than 20 mio. USD a year. Another important aspect is our continued political support in solving many of the most important regional questions.
It seems that it is once again necessary to refocus on issues that unite us instead of highlighting divisive events.
March 3, 2008 at 01:12
Great to read this analysis and perspective. You may be interested in my response to this post
http://www.jordanwatch.net/archive/2008/3/487871.html
March 3, 2008 at 13:19
Thanks for a good read Ambassador. Dialog is key, and the language we use in that dialog is everything.
In a world that seems to be driven by language full of blame, accusation, and measuring of faults, we must try to induce our dialogs with the language of possibility.
I often say that one of the most hopeful human constants is our inherent need for inquiry and dialog – because to know is to keep asking.
What’s important about the demo and visit you mention above, is that it seems the organizers approached it with the attitude of possibility. That gives me hope.
March 3, 2008 at 14:00
There seems to be a huge misunderstanding on the part of people who are taking control of this sensative issue, the newspapers are reprinting the cartoons to express soildarity with the cartoonists who were threatened, but in doing so they lack the conventional wisdom of refraining from harmful acts themselves.
we understand the idea of freedom of the press, as a concept, but in a civilised country like denmark, a country that lends a helpful hand to people in the 3rd world and certainly our region, there should be a certain degree of common sense, you would never allow cartoons that illustrate what might be considered anti sametic, and in the same spirit, any illustration that mocks the islamic faith is considered offensive to the the greatest degree, freedom of speech isn’t absolute, our dismay at denmark is even greater not because it was were those cartoons were printed. but because it wasn’t the place we expect this type of blunt racism to be desplayed.
dialogue is key, it starts neither by insults or threats..nor by the reaction they create.
March 3, 2008 at 18:36
You have the right to defend your constitution and freedom of speech in your country but in the same time you need to deal with the consequenses. As a Jordanian Christian, I was also offended by the cartoons as they are rediculous and in very bad taste and publishing them and re-publishing them over and over is stupid. I support the right of my follow Jordanian muslims to boycott all Danish products as they also have the right to do so.
March 4, 2008 at 09:21
In regards to the Danish Mohammed cartoon, I continue to hear complaints from Muslims and/or Arabs about not being able to get cartoons that ridicule Jews or deny the Holocaust printed in the west. Strange, not once do I hear Muslims complain about not being able to ridicule or deny Bosnian ethnic cleasing, slavery, imperialism, colonialism, Rwanda, Dafur, etc. What’s up with that? Muslims always complain they’re unfairly accused of anti-semitism but they complain ALOT about the western media not openly ridicule dead Jews enough, but never mind the media censorship of questioning or ridiculing atrocities when the victims are Muslims, Arabs, Pakistanians, Africans, Iranians, Afgans, etc.
Do newspapers in Egypt allow the same criticism of Arabs and Jews? The accusations of racism are so ironic considering the above. And even more seriously, what’s going on in Dafur. Would the Arab world be reacting differently if blacks were ethnicly clensing and raping the Arab population? Arabs are relying on the victim of european racism card to benefit themselves in ways that are unethical, and ironically enough they are the first to complain of Jews doing it.
March 4, 2008 at 12:36
- Batir, Thank you for your analysis and kind words. Good idea to highlight your older posts on this issue.
- Nadine Toukan, as you say “Dialogue is Key” – TY for that.
- Ammar, I agree that there is a lot of misunderstanding but I have to disagree on one of your comments about not allowing other cartoons. Anybody is free to express his or her opinion in speech, in text, in drawing or whatever legal media he or she might want to use irrespectably of the content of the opinion. If it after publication is deemed “illegal” by someone it can be taken to court.
- Imad, Thank you for your comment. People have freedom of speech and consumers have freedom of choice. You can make political statements with what you consume or refuse to consume. But I would like to give you my thoughts as an economist about why this is not the best way to react.
The economic side: In this fierce competitive global economy we all live in, very few people actually buy daily products because they originates from some specific country. They make their choice because the product is cheaper or better or whatever rational economic reason they might have. To exclude products for political reasons might give you personal satisfaction, but it leaves you worse off in economic sense.
The development side: Because of outsourcing and for transportation many products are actually manufactured in third countries or locally. By boycotting, the consumers might hurt local production and causing job loss or loss of production in a third country, which has nothing to do with the political issue at stake. I guess it would not be the right moral intention to hurt ones neighbour.
The social side. One country once decided to boycott all products from a country. Unfortunately, some critical medical products were all imported from that specific country. Not all political decisions are wise decisions.
The international side. According to the WTO, member state Governments does not have the general right to issue or to encourage boycotts. It would contravene the general purpose of free trade.
So, I my humble opinion the best way to react is to have a substantial dialogue about the issues at stake, but of course others might want to react differently as long as it is peaceful and within the law.
- Jane Doe, I am not really sure I understand your point. Maybe you could elaborate?
March 5, 2008 at 22:43
There’s a relevant story in this month’s Jordan Business written by Naseem Tarawnah on an emerging Jordanian comic artist and story creator Suleiman Bakhit. I find it relevant to post it here: http://www.jordan-business.net/magazine/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=228&Itemid=40
March 6, 2008 at 12:35
The Danish Foreign Minister spoke yesterday about the cartoon issue in a speech to the United Nations Human Rights Council. You will find the speech at http://www.um.dk/en
March 16, 2008 at 23:00
The debate is ongoing in the Jordanian media. Mostly in arabic on http://www.alghad.jo http://www.alrai.com and http://www.addustour.com, but also less frequently on http://www.jordantimes.com and bloggers http://www.jordanwatch.net Khalaf and http://www.black-iris.com
More from Jordan Times.
June 25, 2008 at 18:11
[...] for. Boycott is a political instrument that consumers can approve or disapprove of but which I for various reasons find [...]