Symbiosis of provocateurs

Orkhan Sattarov. Exclusively to VK

The Islamic community is shaken again. The scandalous movie “Innocence of the Muslims”, uploaded onto YouTube, caused a wave of protests in Muslim countries and in Europe, where Muslims are holding protest demonstrations in front of American diplomatic offices. In some Arab countries' embassies, not only American, were attacked. Four American citizens were killed, including the US ambassador to Libya. In Khartoum, the Sudanese capital, the German embassy was set on fire. These heavy and sometimes quite aggressive protests against the scandalous movie caused predictably heated debates in the West.

To be honest, nobody, apart from extremists and misfits, has doubts in Europe and the US that this unprofessional movie is provocative and insulting. US State Secretary Hillary Clinton and President Barack Obama publicly criticized it, calling the movie “disgusting”. It seemed a full-stop had to be put on yet another anti-Islamic story. But the protests aren't abating in the Arab countries.

In the West, discussions are developing according to an old scheme. At first the question is posed: how would Christians react if somebody made a similar film about Jesus? The Western experts state on popular TV-shows that “the progressive Western community is more tolerant than foggy Muslim communities,” and there would be no such reaction. After this the discussion turns to another question: “Why is the Islamic world so intolerant of such gimmicks?” And then experts begin to discuss various factors of the cultural, economic, and inter-political character of Muslim societies.

However, it is impossible to answer the question – why did Muslims react in such a harsh way to the insulting movie? – in a couple of sentences. The majority of participants in the protests were indignant less by the movie than by the lack of desire of the Western political elites to react to it in the expected way. Muslims are disappointed about the fact that law-enforcement agencies and courts are not in a hurry to react to Muhammad cartoons, insulting movies, and so on. Of course, we can discuss differences of cultures infinitely, but the current heavy protests of the Islamic community cause a more serious question: wouldn’t it be reasonable to react to cartoons and movies insulting the feelings of believers? And where does the line between freedom of speech and respect for religious feelings lie?

These questions have become especially acute in Germany, where the neo-Nazi organization Pro Deutschland (For Germany) plans to organize a public viewing of “Innocence of the Muslims.” Pro Deutschland has already undertaken a series of provocations, including placing Muhammad cartoons in front of Berlin mosques and anti-Islamic demonstrations in Cologne in May 2012, which led to clashes with the police and a cruel response by Muslim radicals. German ultra-rightists decided to invite a special guest for the run-through: the American pastor Terry Jones, who became “famous” for publicly burning the Koran. In due time this deed caused serious protests in the Islamic world, including attacks on NATO bases in Afghanistan – the provocative behaviour of the pastor led to the deaths of American soldiers. However, the Interior Ministry of Germany didn’t allow Terry Jones to enter the country.

The current wave of protests is a continuation of the inter-cultural conflict, which became tense at least 7 years ago. Then, many people in the Islamic world decided that Europe and the USA stated clearly that freedom of speech of their “compatriots” is more important for them than the religious feelings of a billion Muslims. The current crisis only strengthens this opinion. Such a principal position by Western society securing its values could cause at least respect, if not understanding, except for one big ‘but’. The West has had precedents of limiting freedom of speech, and such eager support of their “top values” in case of anti-Islamic provocations might be considered a policy of double standards.

One of the brightest examples is the prosecution of WikiLeaks initiator Julian Assange. Of course, he is accused of rape, and the order was given by Sweden, not by the US, but many people believe that the accusations are falsified, and in reality it is the US “chasing the denouncer of Washington’s dirty secrets.” They assert their views by interviews with the “victims”, which are available in Internet. In the US the former senator from Alaska Sarah Palin called for the physical destruction of WikiLeakes initiator, which resembles a fatwa by radical Islamists on murdering a person.

There is another serious example of restriction of freedom of speech in the West – criminalization of public denial, underestimation, support or justification of crimes committed by national-socialists. For instance, denial of the Holocaust. Some experts think that this restriction doesn’t correlate with freedom of speech. Germany, Austria, Belgium, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Poland, Slovenia, France and Switzerland have such laws. Muslim countries pose a question: is it possible that Chancellor Angela Merkel would award the author of a cartoon on the tragedy of the Jewish people for “freedom of speech”, just like she did in the case of the author of the Muhammad cartoons? The German media, by the way, believes that this deed of Merkel’s was the main reason for the attacks on the German embassy in Khartoum.

At the same time, those who said that “Innocence of the Muslims” is insulting and provocative, but the reaction to it is inadequate, are right. Moreover, it is obvious that the riots were exaggerated and encouraged by some forces. Islamic radicals effectively use provocations committed by certain radical elements in the West. As a result, every deed by professional provocateurs inevitably provokes a response which is always inappropriate too. It is a nice chance to gain political bounces for extremists from both sides. Such actions and their consequences lead to further radicalization of Muslim societies and strengthen islamophobic views in Europe. The murder of the US ambassador in Benghazi and the attack on the German embassy in Khartoum don’t encourage cooperation between the Western and Islamic world.

A paradoxical situation appears when Western and Islamic radicals who hate each other grow together into a “symbiosis of provocateurs” and provide each other with “material” for accumulation of political capital. Both of them are interested in further escalation of inter-cultural contradiction.