The Danish cartoons crisis has returned to the international headlines, raising questions about the possible motives of its instigators, writes Gihan Shahine Despite more than two years of diplomatic and other efforts to bridge the gap between the Muslim world and Denmark after the Danish cartoons crisis of 2006, some 17 Danish newspapers last week decided to reopen wounds by reprinting the same 12 cartoons mocking the Prophet Mohamed that were published in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten in late 2005, sparking uproar among Muslims worldwide. The newspapers said they had decided to republish the cartoons in order to defend freedom of expression one day after Danish police revealed that they had foiled an alleged plot to murder the cartoonist. Whereas many Muslims dismissed the Danish newspapers' decision, calling it a "silly offence by disrespectful non-believers", as one 40-year-old Muslim put it, others have not been able to remain unprovoked. Around 4,000 students at Assiut University in Upper Egypt protested against the republication of the cartoons on 19 February in a demonstration on the university's campus that was led by the university's dean and professors. The protesters chanted slogans like "anything other than our prophet", calling for a renewed boycott of Danish products. However important the demonstrations undoubtedly were, even more important from the diplomatic point of view may have been the reaction of the normally quiet ministries of foreign affairs and information in Cairo. Egyptian Muslims had hardly had time to take notice of the news from Denmark before Foreign Minister Ahmed Abul-Gheit stepped into the fray with a statement announcing that he had summoned the Danish ambassador to the ministry in order to voice the country's displeasure at the cartoons. "It is very disappointing to see the persistence of the Danish media in repeatedly attacking the religion of Islam," Abul-Gheit's statement said. "These insulting cartoons have already proved that such shameful actions lead to nothing but increased tensions, confrontation and anger." However, the Danish ambassador to Egypt, Christian Hoppe, later denied having been summoned specially to the ministry to receive the statement, telling Denmark's TV2 television channel that the issue had come up during a scheduled meeting with Abul-Gheit. Whichever of the two accounts is true, there is no denying the fact that public sympathy in Egypt is behind Abul-Gheit, and the Ministry of Information went on to ban four foreign newspapers, including the New York- based Wall Street Journal and Britain's The Observer, from circulating in Egypt for reprinting the Danish cartoons. Two German newspapers, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung and Die Welt, were also banned. The Egyptian Football Federation has also cancelled two youth matches that were scheduled to take place in Egypt on 26 and 28 February against Danish teams, citing "security reasons". Why the cartoons crisis has re-emerged and who is behind it are open questions, with analysts on both sides of the divide weighing up various explanations of who it is that instigates and benefits from creating such rifts between the Muslim and the non-Muslim worlds. During a visit to Denmark Al-Ahram Weekly staff last year, for example, many non-Muslim Danes pronounced themselves keen to have warm relations with their Muslim neighbours (around four per cent of the Danish population is Muslim), and no one wanted renewed conflict. While cultural gaps exist -- for the Danes, nothing religious is above criticism, while Muslims regard the cartoons as an attack on Islam -- nevertheless on both sides of the divide most agree that journalists should be responsible in their actions and should use their influence in a way that does not create strife. According to Toger Seidenfaden, executive editor-in- chief of Politiken, a leading Danish newspaper, one problem is that "there are politicians who are trying to use these issues to their political advantage, 'creating an enemy' and mobilising people against it." Other observers have made similar comments, speculating that there may be more to the present crisis than meets the eye, and attempts are being made to mobilise the Muslim world against Denmark in search of unknown political gains. Some critics have also accused Arab regimes of seeking to manipulate the crisis in order to regain their popularity, noting that during the original crisis protests did not erupt until four months after the publication of the cartoons when governments helped to provoke public anger. There have also been suggestions, such as those made by Christopher Bollyn of the American Free Press, of the existence of a "Zionist conspiracy" intended to drive a wedge between the West and the Muslim world, such that the Arab countries lose a valuable Scandinavian ally. The cultural editor of the Jyllands-Posten, such commentators note, is Flemming Rose, who is close to the Zionist and neo-conservative American writer Daniel Pipes. While he does not rule out possibilities of this sort, Al-Ahram columnist Fahmy Howeidy prefers to focus on what he calls the "cultural gaps and ignorance of Islam" that the present crisis has revealed. "Some 50 per cent of the Danes do not understand why Muslims are so upset by the cartoons," Howeidy commented. "Besides, they [the Danes] are sensitive about Muslims, especially since Western culture presents a disrespectful image of Muslims," he said. "The West does not respect Muslim countries in general. But it also cherishes freedom of expression above all else, because it has lost touch with anything holy." The fact that 17 Danish newspapers had reprinted the controversial cartoons in a bid to defend freedom of expression was a case in point, Howeidy said. "They should not punish 1.3 billion Muslims as a result of the actions of three individuals [who had threatened the cartoonist] who do not represent Islam." In his comments to the Weekly, Seidenfaden agreed that Islamophobia did exist in the West. Many immigrants into Europe come from Muslim countries, he said, and as a result of talk about "fundamentalism and the war on terror, a lot of people would say, yes, this is a war with Islam, a clash of civilisations." The Western media, in Seidenfaden's view, is often biased against Islam, but Muslims, too, had not helped their case when they staged sometimes violent demonstrations during the original crisis, he said. During the present crisis, however, there have been no such demonstrations, and famous Muslim organisations, such as the Mecca-based Muslim World League, have urged Muslims and Islamic organisations in Denmark to remain calm in the face of last week's provocation. "Muslims should not get caught up in the whirlwind of emotional reactions," the League said. Greater efforts are also now underway in educating Westerners about the true face of Islam. Only a few months after the first authoritative Danish translation of the Quran appeared in Denmark last year, The Fog is Lifting, the first of an Egyptian series of documentaries challenging Western presuppositions about Islamic faith and traditions, had appeared on the market. In Cairo, the Al-Sawy Culture Wheel has also shown the first part of a documentary entitled Islam in Brief, which aims to give an accurate understanding of Islam. Foreigners were allowed to attend the showing for free, later taking part in a discussion with producer Imam Fadel Suleiman. However, although such activities to increase understanding are vital they can only go so far. According to Howeidy, "Muslims should also organise peaceful protests and boycott Danish products, while governments should pressure the European Union to pass a law making it illegal to desecrate religious symbols." "If the Danes insist that they have the right to mock the prophet, than we should also practise our right not to buy their products," Howeidy said.
