A month after the Charlie Hebdo attack in Paris, Islamists targeted freedom of speech again when a gunman targeted Copenhagen’s Krudttønden cultural centre, which hosted the ‘Art, Blasphemy and Freedom of Expression’ event. Among the speakers at the event was Lars Vilks, the Swedish artist whose ‘anti-Islam’ cartoons drew outrage from the Muslim world in 2007. Having been targeted at least twice before the Copenhagen shootings, Vilks is believed to have been the main target of the attack that killed film director Finn Nørgaard and injured three police officers.
Just like in the aftermath of the Charlie Hebdo attack, when a Parisian kosher market in Porte de Vincennes was targeted, killing four of the 19 Jewish hostages, the Great Synagogue in Central Copenhagen was attacked the day following the shooting outside Krudttønden cultural centre.
That Islamist gunmen attacked ‘blasphemers’ and Jews in back to back terrorist attacks in two different countries in just over a month, is neither a coincidence nor a random choice of targets. ‘Blasphemers’ and Jews rank at the top of the Islamists’ hit-list, which results in frequent manifestations of ‘anti-Semitism’ and violent demonstrations against free speech, owing to an assortment of reasons, the most pivotal of them being their ideological indoctrination.
The response of certain members of the Muslim community to the Copenhagen shootings, however, was as awe-inspiring as it was rare.
Over 1,000 people – predominantly local Muslims – formed a human shield outside an Oslo synagogue a week after the attack, as symbolic protection for local Jews. With hate crimes against Muslims, and anti-Muslim bigotry on the rise in Europe, the Muslim community should empathise with the rise in anti-Jewish bigotry as well – something that has been a European problem for centuries. And so when Muslims chanted ‘No to anti-Semitism, no to Islamophobia’, while simultaneously forming a human chain outside the Jewish place of worship, what they were actually doing was fighting bigotry against both the religious communities through calling out the radicals within their own ranks.
The significance of the human ring outside a synagogue, which simultaneously shielded Jews and free speech, needs to be stressed by moderates and reformists all over the Muslim world. Let’s not forget that Muslims went to what is virtually an unprecedented degree of support for the Jews, as a protest against a Muslim who targeted an ‘anti-Islam’ cartoonist and demonstrated against the man who blatantly and violently targeted Jews and their place of worship.
By forming a human ring outside a synagogue, the peaceful and non-violent Muslims disassociated themselves from the radical members of their community following the biggest terrorist attack in their country in recent memory. Instead of playing the victim card and focusing on a potential backlash against their own community following an Islamist attack (case in point: Sydney siege), those Muslims went ahead and took the one step that guarantees reduction in the backlash.
If more Muslims uphold freedom of speech, which is epitomised by the freedom to offend, the claim that Islamist fundamentalists are a fringe minority would be vindicated
By calling out Islamist terrorism they not only conspicuously protested against the violent act, they inadvertently hit two integral features of Islamist ideology as it is practiced: hatred for Jews and disdain for freedom of speech. If more Muslims uphold freedom of speech, which is epitomised by the freedom to offend, and castigate anti-Jewish sentiments, the claim that Islamist fundamentalists are a fringe minority would be vindicated. Unfortunately, as things stand, that is far from being true.
While around 1,000 Muslims formed the human ring, around the same number (700-1000) attended El-Hussein’s funeral. Furthermore, should we be honest about the Muslim world, the prayers for Jewish extermination prevail in mosques all over Muslim majority countries and so does the sentiment that blasphemers be killed. Holocaust denial and/or its eulogy, is more prevalent in Muslim countries than the rest of the world. And 13 Muslim countries have capital punishment for blasphemy, while most others have at least imprisonment as punishment for prisoners of conscience.
The vindication for attacking blasphemers and the Jewish population has been extrapolated from Islamic scriptures for the past 1,400 years, which is precisely why venom against blasphemy and Jews still prevails in the Muslim world. The apologia for anti-Jewish parts of the scriptures claiming either a weak chain or narration, or a particular context, needs to be shunned for the more practical solution, which has been adopted by a significant percentage of members from all other religious communities: not treating the scripture as unquestionable.
The Muslims promoting freedom of speech and harmony with Jews – as exemplified by the human chain in Oslo – do it despite a multitude of examples from Islamic history, tradition and theology suggesting otherwise, not because of it.
When a significant percentage of Muslims start accepting and propagating the idea that not all their acts need sanctions from Islam, we will finally see a tangible distinction between Islamists and Muslims. When Islam forms a part of most of the Muslims’ identity and not its entirety, we would rechristen ‘Islamophobia’ to ‘Muslimophobia’ or simply anti-Muslim bigotry. And calling out anti-Jewish bigotry, by contradicting our history and theology will go a long way in bursting the idea of a monolithic Muslim world – an idea that is being fuelled by us more so than any other community, as things stand.
