Global confrontation and “the caricature war”
At the end of XVII century France of Ludovicus XIV declared war to Holland reasoning it by the fact that the Dutch had made a special medal on which was depicted how Navin’s son Jesus, embodying Holland, was stopping the sun (let’s remind that Ludovicus XIV contemporaries called him “the king of sun”). Sometimes the states wage war even because of football, however these seeming reasons are just causes to hide the real essences of conflicts.
At present the rallies and riots caused by the publication of Mohammed prophet’s caricatures may be explained by the fact of the publication, but in this case there is no explanation to a number of questions.
The events developed in the fallowing way: In September 2005 not a very famous Danish journal published 12 caricatures of Islam’s founder Prophet Mohammed; in October the “Al-Fadg” (the Egyptian pronunciation is “Al-fag”) reprinted these caricatures that didn’t have any after-effects by that time; in December a group of Danish Muslims drew the attention of the participants of Islamic Conference Organization’s (ISO) summit held in Mecca to the 47 page folder of these caricatures. Let’s remark that the summit was mainly devoted to terrorism as well as to the problem of extremely strained relations between Sunnies and Shias, however the discussions stirred up on the caricatures. ISO strictly denounced the publication of caricatures but this wasn’t enough to prevent rallies of protests and attacks on European embassies all over the world. It took two more months for the passion of the faithful to be inflamed to the highest extent.
At the end of January mass rallies began in a number of Muslim and not Muslim countries. In Muslim countries of Indonesia, Iran, Afghanistan, Palestine, Syria, Lebanon and others the rallies were attended by attacks on European embassies. Some clashes caused human casualties. The Muslims called for boycotting the production from Denmark, Norway, and a number of European countries. Tough announcements were fallowed on the level of the countries’ presidents, the bluntest one among which was the announcement of Iran’s president Ahmadinejad.
The latest increase in tension remind Aiatola Khomey’s decision following the publication of “satanic poems” of Salman Rushd, when the writer was blamed for lack of faith and sentenced to death. The author of the caricatures was accused by Talibs who promised 100 kilograms of gold to the fighter of Islam executing the sentence. Besides they announced that they would pay 5 kilograms of gold for every Dutchman, Norwegian or French assassinated in Afghanistan.
At the same time in the Muslim World one can hear other opinions as well. One of the Jordanian newspapers reprinted three of the published caricatures out of the twelve explaining its decision in the following way: the published are just cartoons which may be insulting but they don’t worth the clamor raised against the fact of their publication. The real unfaithful are those who organized Sptember 11 terracts and now are attacking European embassies, etc.
The Islamic World-Europe conflicts outlined by the publication of caricatures may be considered on a few levels.
The first level is connected with S. Huntington’s theory of “The Clash of Civilizations”, the terminology of which was at once used by commenting analysts; they pointed out that what is happening now was much spoken about and became more apparent after the September 11 and the intrusion of American troops into Iran1.
However, the publication of caricatures, which is now formulated as a principle contradiction of the main values of two confronting civilizations (freedom of press against religious sacredness), was a very good cause for resuming the core essence of two different worlds’ confrontation. Therefore quite an insignificant occasion was used to announce about the value clash of the two civilizations excluding the fact that very little part of Muslims takes part in violence actions and most of the Europeans understand the essence of aggravated feelings of the faithful.
The fact that only 300 extremists out of Indonesia’s many millions of population took part in the attack on the Danish embassy and the announcements many European political, social and religious figures appeared with stressing up the inadmissibility of insulting religious feelings of the faithful have come to prove it.
But the cause is given and the world mass media announce that Europe (it is noteworthy that not the West but Europe) with its liberal and democratic principals and Islamic world with its religious values face the confrontation.
Different parties try to benefit from bursts of rage and clashes that gradually become more and more organized and rallies caused by the publication of caricatures.
It is significant that the first days of the protest manifestation in IAEA board of governors was discussed the issue of sending Iran’s nuclear dossier to UN Security Council and a decision was made to send the dossier to the Security Council which meant UN would probably organize Iran’s nuclear program discussion in March.
In its turn it meant that a little more then a month is left for the parties to reach a diplomatic solution of the problem.
It goes without saying that the most complicated and dangerous problem in today’s international policy is the US-Iran unsettled relations, which is conditioned by not only geopolitical factor or opposed economic or political interests, but also by fundamental ideological disagreement which is explained by Iran’s reluctance to accept the US as the only power state.
Iran is the supporter of all the globalization programs directed against Americans or at least
compete with the latter. Of course for Iran Islamic globalization program is of primary importance, for the realization of which the cohesion of the Islamic World must be ensured, something which was impossible to achieve up till now (from our standpoint in our days as well). From another hand it is necessary for Iran to acquire real military-political might, which, from this country’s standpoint, means to have military nuclear technologies. The Iranian authorities well ground their desire with the fact that Israel, which is considered to be the Islamic world’s and particularly Iran’s first enemy, has long ago acquired a nuclear weapon, violating all the international laws and rules. Iran was also encouraged by North Korea’s example, which already has a nuclear weapon therefore making the US and the other big states carry out a very cautious policy with it. It is obvious that the US has a complex towards Iran which is explained not only by the historical memories connected with events following the Islamic revolution: Iran is one of the most important producers of energy carriers and the main rivals of the US, China and the EU states, are supplied by these energy carriers causing additional problems for Washington.
Today Iran uses “the caricature war” for the consolidation of Islamic countries and for mollification of contradiction between Sunny and Shia Muslims. Besides, at present, on the eve of Iran’s nuclear program discussions, the Muslim world is more clearly oriented in favor of the Islamic Republic.
In its turn, being fully aware of impossibility of treating Iran in the same way as it treated Iraq (this country is stronger and more solid and besides Iranian counter blow will fallow to any American blow directed against the strategic ally of the US-Israel) the United States aspires to get the backing of UN Security Council’s permanent members concerning to Iran’s nuclear program.
As a first step some sanctions should be imposed to Iran taking the country in the circle of economic and information blockade. For this purpose the consent of the EU, which seemed to be impossible until recently, is necessary as, being the consumers of Iranian gas, it is in European countries’ interest to preserve normal relations with Iran. It allows planning the dynamic of economic developments and not to depend on Russia very much. In this way the interests of the US in deepening the confrontation between Europe and the Islamic world becomes more evident.
A few other countries (Turkey, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, etc.) also try to make use of the situation. For example Turkey has offered its mediation between Europe and the Islamic world putting forward some conditions: the problems of Cyprus, the minorities and the genocide should be taken away from the negotiation table.
In short, the recent political developments give cause to remember Bernard Show’s expression “Somebody pinched it; and what I say is, them as pinched it done her in”.
The names of the victims are known, these are the European countries, the Muslim communities inhabited in those countries, the peoples of the Middle East. If these developments are not taken under control another Gavrilo Princip of the 21st century will appear (the assassin of Franc Ferdinand) and all of them will become victims.
1 Let’s remember that the theory of “civilization clashes” became actual in 1990s, after the end of Cold War, when the American society faced some problems concerning to the determination of its farther development and future notions. The theory of “clash of civilizations” became the ideology which should have ensured the inner consolidation of the American society for solving outward problems. The tragedy of September 11 2001 made the US president George W. Bush announce about a new crusade after which the real clash, however, was among civilizations , the clash was between the United States and the powers competing to take the international governing system under control.
Return
Another materials of author