Even when offended, one cannot defend one's religion by trashing another, writes Ibrahim Nafie As many tried to contain the negative repercussions of Pope Benedict XVI's recent remarks, French philosopher Robert Redeker wrote an article for Le Figaro in which he gave an unflattering description of the Prophet Mohamed's personality and concluded that Islam called for violence. The article came at a time when Pope Benedict XVI was offering one form or another of an apology, saying that he meant well and the quotation from the Byzantine emperor didn't express his opinion. Last Monday, the pope conferred with Muslim ambassadors to the Vatican to allay their concerns. In the Muslim world, reasonable people urged the pope to apologise and said that dialogue should continue among Muslim and Christian institutions, especially the Catholic Church. The aim of dialogue, many agreed, was to reach a common understanding and establish mutual respect among various creeds. A meaningful dialogue that respects all religious views could go a long way towards reducing extremism and bigotry on all sides. But even on the Muslim side, some people reacted in a manner that could cause great damage to the Muslim calls. Some people traded insults with other religions, urging violence, and widening the gap of mistrust. Defending one's religion is one thing; lashing out at other religions is another. And incitement to violence is unacceptable under any circumstance. We have extremist groups operating on both sides of the divide. We have fanatical people who want the conflict to continue. We have people who respond with insulting slurs to the pope's words. And in the West, some people, such as Redeker, continue to denounce Islam in the strongest terms. I don't expect the extremists on both sides to give up their game. So it is up to the moderate majority to assert itself. It is up to reasonable people among us to make things harder for fanatics. No one is going to benefit from slandering religions; no one but extremists that is. It is important for reasonable people on both sides to have a real dialogue. We don't need to argue about which doctrine is better or which faith is superior, for this is a waste of time. We need to have a dialogue that leads to better understanding and appreciation. Let's promote respect among all religions and creeds. And let's respect what believers themselves think about their religion. In the Arab world, we can create an organisation whose main task would be to lay down foundations for understanding and respect among religions and beliefs. Such an organisation should monitor all affronts to religions and beliefs and refer them to competent state departments. Such an organisation can, for example, demand the expansion of the anti- semitism law passed by US Congress two years ago. That law needs to become comprehensive, banning all forms of hostility towards religions and belief. At a later stage, that same law may be turned into a UN agreement concerning affronts to faith. The UN can, for example, set up an affiliate organisation whose task would be to monitor affronts to religion and punish violators. Angry words will not take us anywhere. Vandalism would only play into the hands of our enemies. We need to take objective and systematic action. I hereby propose the formation of an Arab organisation for the monitoring of hostility and affronts to religions. That organisation should, in cooperation with other cultural and religious groups, draft an international agreement banning affronts to all religions.
