Tolerating Intolerance

Crucially, it is precisely this tolerance of intolerance that has allowedvocal and violent radicalised Islamist minorities to silence Muslim majoritiesand to transform the global image of Islam into the grotesque parody of thefaith that the Danish cartoons sought - perhaps indelicately - to reflect.

Offensive though these cartoons may have been - and they were not offensiveto at least some Muslims, who saw in them, not an insult to the Prophet or thefaith, but rather a critique of the unrelenting violence that has become thedefining character of much of the Muslim world - the criminal incitement andcalls to 'butcher/kill/beheadthose who insult Islam' have only reinforced the images the cartoons reflected,"allowing mass hysteria to define Islam's message".

What dishonours Islam more? A few irreverent cartoons? Or the acts ofremorseless murder, of relentless violence against people of other faiths, ofthe intimidation and abuse of all other faiths and communities, which theIslamists - including states adhering to the Islamist ideology, such as Pakistan- routinely engage in? Why, then, does the Muslim world not rise up in rageagainst these fanatics and political opportunists who are bringing disgrace anddisrepute to their faith? Why are the voices of criticism against extremistIslam and Islamist terrorism so muted?

Indeed, why is it that all occasional and invariably qualified criticism ofthese terrorists is accompanied by vague justifications of the need to'understand root causes' and the 'hurt' caused to the 'Muslim psyche'? Is the'Muslim psyche' uniquely susceptible to injury?

Venomous characterisations of Hindus, Jews, Christians and, generally, allkafirs, are the stock-in-trade of the discourse in some Muslim countries, oftencommunicated through official media, such as national television channels. Theideologies of hatred against other faiths are systematically propagated in somany Muslim states - we in India are familiar with the Pakistani case, where schoolcurricula routinely demonise non-Muslims.

And do the words or pictures or caricatures by non-Muslims do more injury tothe 'Islamic world' than the hideous acts of terrorism that Islamists have beeninflicting on non-Muslims - and, indeed, on so many Muslims - all over theworld? Worse, after so many Muslim-majority states have simply wiped out theirown minorities, or are, even today, in the process of doing so, these verystates go shrieking around about 'hurting the sentiments of minorities' whensomething is said against Muslims or Islam.

Indeed, 'Islamic' states oppress even their own sectarian minorities - bethey non-Wahabbi Sunnis in some cases, or Shia, Ismaili, Ahmadiya, or Sufi, inothers - not only through systematic denial of elementary religious rights tothese sects, but, as in the case of Pakistan, through state sponsored terroristmovements against such minorities - recall that the Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan wasset up by General Zia-ul-Haq to target Shias in the wake of the Iranianrevolution, and continued to enjoy the support of the state under successorregimes, till it got mixed up with the Al Qaeda and anti-US terrorism, and lostits status as a sarkari (state supported) jihadi organisation.

Many 'Islamic' countries have institutionalised this intolerance, outlawingthe public practice of any other Faith, and made the possession of any religiousicon, other than Muslim, a punishable offence. Non-Muslim minorities live inabject terror of blasphemy laws in Pakistan, as in many other Muslim countries.

The truth is, the state lies behind much of the Islamist extremism and frenzythat we are witnessing today. To return to the case of the Danish cartoons,there was no 'spontaneousoutburst' of popular sentiment; it was only after the Organisation ofIslamic Countries decided to whip up emotions around the issue, and states likeSyria, Lebanon, Egypt and Saudi Arabia began to incite the rabble throughofficial statements and actions, or statements by religious leaders tied to theregimes there, disseminated through official media, that the violent streetprotests commenced.

In Pakistan, the protests and the violence have principally been led by theJamaat-ud-Dawa - the reincarnation of the purportedly 'banned' Lashkar-e-Toiba -which has flourished under state patronage, and that was cast by the Musharrafadministration into a 'leadership' role recently in the relief operations afterthe earthquake that devastated parts of Pakistan occupied Kashmir.

But the 'cartoon crisis' is not unique. Even while this controversy wasraging across the world, Shia minorities were being attacked by Sunni terroristsin Pakistan; in the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir, a case was registeredagainst the local chapter of the Bible Society of India for the 'grievous crime'of distributing "gas cylinders, three water bottles, audio cassettes and acopy of the New Testament in Urdu" to earthquake victims in a village inUri.

In Ladakh, riots were engineered between Muslims and Buddhists because sometorn pages of the Quran were recovered, leading to allegations of sacrilege. Inthe Aligarh Muslim University, a young girl was being threatened with collectiverape for daring to protest against a diktat against wearing jeans and a T-shirt.These are only a few current and proximate examples of a remorseless oppressionover the decades.

Such thuggeries are, of course, not unique to Islam. There are extremistgroups drawing dubious 'inspiration' from other faiths who ape such conduct aswell, and Valentines Day this year - as in the past few years - attracted theire and violence of Hindu extremist hooligans. But these remain - fortunately -aberrations in the larger context of conduct among adherents of other faiths.They have increasingly become the dominant form of public articulation in theMuslim community.

There is an American Indian saying: 'it takes an entire village to raise asingle child'. Similarly, it takes a very large community, often entire nations,to raise a single suicide bomber. For far too long, extremist Muslim discoursehas been tolerated - to the point of incitement to murder - in the belief thatacts of terrorism are distinct from such ideologies of hatred. But it is thewide acceptance within large sections of Muslim communities in many countries ofthese ideologies of hatred that produce the environment within which groups canmobilise, recruit motivate, train and deploy terrorists and suicide bombers.

Muslim liberals have long advocated 'understanding and tolerance' whendealing with Muslim sensibilities, but have seldom been known to aggressivelyargue for greater 'understanding and tolerance' for other faiths in 'Islamic'countries, where the record of intolerance towards and oppression of religiousminorities is utterly revolting. There is a great 'Muslim exceptionalism' atwork here.

The 'Muslim world' demands an absolute freedom without limits, but confers nofreedom whatsoever, either on other faiths, or on dissent within its own faith.The 'tolerance' advocated by certain passages in the Quran is only something toparade at inter-faith conferences, and constitutes no part of the practice ofmost Muslim majority states - no doubt with occasional exceptions.

The demand, today, to impose a selective censorship in Europe on speech thatis insulting to Muslims - when similar speech against other faiths enjoys fullfreedom - is an effort by Muslim minorities to impose, through mass violence andintimidation, their belief systems within the larger systems they have come toinhabit.

Europe would be, not only foolish, but suicidal, if it succumbs to thisterrorism and coercion to invent new curbs on the media and on the freedom ofspeech. The democratic world must remain committed to its enlightenment valuesand ideals, and to the rough-and-tumble of free discourse in the 'marketplace ofideas'. All communal thuggeries, whatever faith they may claim to 'represent',must be brought to an end, and every available means must be bent to thispurpose.

Personally, I think, the more fun we make of our own religions, the better itwill be for the whole world, and, indeed, for our respective Faiths. I amimmensely proud of being a Sikh, and am confident that no jokes or cartoons canever undermine the eternal verities of my religion.

K.P.S.Gill is Publisher, SAIR; President,Institute for Conflict Management. This article was first published in the Pioneer.