Charlie Hebdo: The real questions (I)

The so-called satirical French publication, Charlie Hebdo, had in 2002 drew a caricature which it claimed was Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), subhanallah, which generated protests in many Muslim countries. On 7th January, this year, the office of the publication was attacked during which 12 people, including two Muslims – Mustapha Ourrad, Copy Editor and Police officer […]

The so-called satirical French publication, Charlie Hebdo, had in 2002 drew a caricature which it claimed was Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), subhanallah, which generated protests in many Muslim countries. On 7th January, this year, the office of the publication was attacked during which 12 people, including two Muslims – Mustapha Ourrad, Copy Editor and Police officer Ahmed Merabet – were killed.
The killing attracted global condemnation including from Muslim countries and Islamic groups. But a week later, on January 14, the publishers packaged yet another set of cartoons which it said were about the revered Prophet (pbuh) of Islam which it will publish. This is to show outright disregard for the feeling of the about 1.6 billion Muslims the world over majority of who stood by them and their nation in their time of distress.
Recall can be made of the reverence accorded Prophet Muhammad, PBUH, through time even by non-Muslims among them, M.H. Hart who wrote in his book ‘The 100: A Ranking Of The Most Influential Persons In History’ that “My choice of Muhammad (pbuh) to lead the list of the world’s most influential persons may surprise some readers and may be questioned by others, but he was the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the religious and secular levels.”
There was also Irishman George Bernard Shaw, who said about the Holy Prophet: “He must be called the Savior of Humanity. I believe that if a man like him were to assume the dictatorship of the modern world, he would succeed in solving its problems in a way that would bring it much needed peace and happiness.”
Even the Catholic Pope Francis, had while speaking about he Charlie Hebdo saga, stated that the idea of free speech and provocation without retaliation sounds good “in theory” but is not how the world operates. He told reporters that you can’t provoke someone without expecting them to get angry. He used an analogy and said that if his aide were to badmouth his mother, he would punch him in the face.” This, though did not go down well with the satirists and the supporters as they descended on the pontiff.
But the Hebdos who lay claim to their caricaturing of personages, except theirs, to so-called freedom of expression, never saw cause to present those peaceful qualities of the Prophet of Islam in their cartoons. Their claim is therefore seen by Muslims and many non-Muslims as selective insult against Islam as they never satirised Jesus, Moses or other leaders of the Jewish religion.
Meanwhile, a lecturer on Middle East studies at Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences, The Netherlands, Dr Phuong-Mai Nguyen, in a talk she presented in response to the Charlie Hebdo attack, made some far-reaching observations under the title, “Charlie Hebdo: The real questions.” Following are excerpts from the remarks:
 “The attack on Charlie Hebdo is first and foremost an attack on France’s most fundamental value. However, there are questions we have taken for granted that we know the answer. Well, probably not.
1.  Is this truly a clash between Islam and the West?
Let’s make a strong note that two of the victims are Muslims: Mustapha Ourrad – Charlie Hebdo’s copy editor, and Ahmed Merabet – a police officer. Twenty two Muslim countries condemned the attack, including countless of Muslims world-wide. Protests were held even in Ramallah, Palestine. Hezbollah leader stated that the attack is more offensive to Islam than the caricatures themselves.
Obviously, it cannot be Islam versus the West if Muslims are found on both sides of the battle. In fact, Muslims are the first victims of terrorism and radical Islam. The number of Muslims being murdered by extremists is 8 times higher than that of non-Muslims.
Calling this incident a clash of Islam and the West also means denying that Muslims share fundamental human rights with the rest of humanity. It is a serious offence to perceive that because these people are Muslims, they don’t deserve to have the basic rights that Western people enjoy, simply because their values dictate the opposite.