Koran burnings: how far should freedom go?
The Danish and Swedish governments are considering whether to ban Koran burnings at demonstrations after a wave of anti-Swedish violence broke out in Iraq in July. But the authorities see a major security threat in Scandinavia as well. The media warns against restricting freedom of opinion.
Don't touch a democratic cornerstone
Banning the burning of the Koran could come back to haunt those who issue it, Dagens Nyheter warns:
“There is a very real risk that the next demand will be to ban jokes about Islam or anything that gives religious people a bad conscience. ... If we ban burning the Koran it will only shift the limits in that direction. It is easy to understand that the faithful are upset when their religion is insulted. But the next time, perhaps when they want to protest as a minority against state domination, they will be grateful to have freedom of expression, which after all is a cornerstone of Swedish democracy.”
Those who bow to violence reap violence
Jyllands-Posten also believes bans are the wrong way to go:
“An important lesson from the Muhammad cartoons crisis 15 to 18 years ago has been forgotten: those who bow to violence don't reap less violence, but more. An oft-repeated but important question nonetheless is critical here: What comes next? ... A person who burns a Koran is no more a threat to public order or national security than a newspaper that prints a cartoon of Muhammad. It is those who react with violence that endanger public order. ... Freedom of expression must not be restricted in our country, even with the best intentions.”
Religious sentiment is not sacrosant
El Periódico de Catalunya sees fundamental European values at risk:
“The exercise of a fundamental right, recognised as one of the key values of the European Union, may be restricted only if it conflicts with other equally fundamental rights. ... Protecting a religion from criticism and insult not one of them. To categorise blasphemy and offending religious feelings as a crime stems from an era that we have left behind us. Even in the EU, there are countries that are becoming more authoritarian. There we can sense the dangers that arise when the most fundamental values of liberal democracy are called into question.”
Freedom of opinion can be painful
De Volkskrant makes it very clear that there are limits to the freedom of opinion - but that religions are also not untouchable:
“Banning protest against religious texts soon becomes a slippery slope. Before long you have people calling for the state to intervene against satire. Religious fanatics are hardly known for having a good sense of humour, as shown by the 2015 terror attack in Paris on the offices of the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo. And that is just one example. ... Freedom of opinion is not an absolute; fomenting hatred and violence against a religious group is punishable by law. ... Security is an understandable priority but people should remember that freedom of opinion can sometimes be painful.”
Sweden is the perfect enemy
Anti-Swedish demonstrators are being instrumentalised, Dagens Nyheter suspects:
“The protests against Sweden are hardly spontaneous grassroots movements. For the most part they are being orchestrated from above. For example, the Shiite politician and militia leader Muqtada al-Sadr organised the storming of the Swedish embassy in Baghdad. .... Political and religious leaders in Muslim countries are using the opportunity to stir up anger and direct it against Sweden. In our country they have found the perfect enemy. The leaders are turning Sweden into a symbol of religious desecration which they can use to mobilise support for their own cause. They are strengthening their own positions of power without it costing them anything.”
Rude awakening for the humanist superpower
The neighbouring country is now being rudely confronted with reality, Jyllands-Posten comments ironically:
“For the self-proclaimed humanist superpower it must be particularly bitter that its goodwill is not being acknowledged. Hardly any other country has shown so much understanding for Muslim countries or opened its borders so wide to migrants. ... However, the balance sheet of its foreign and migration policy is negative in many respects. The political class's experiment of making one of the safest countries in the world multi-ethnic has failed monumentally. ... This is a rude awakening in a world that Swedish politicians thought they could make better - with, they thought, special moral clout. Poor Sweden.”
Place trust in Sweden's values
Göteborgs-Posten wants democratic values to be defended:
“It is not the embassy building that matters. The most important thing is the people. In the short term, that no harm comes to the embassy staff, and in the longer term that we never give up the fight so that more people can express their ideas and thoughts without fear and live their lives in freedom and in the way they want. We can build a new message. Because just as people's faith is anchored in their hearts rather than in books, our values about freedom of expression, democracy and an open society are not anchored in bricks and mortar. We are the ones who decide what kind of country Sweden will be.”
Without rules we're back to might is right
Rather than stubbornly defending an absolute concept of freedom, the Swedes would do better to reflect on what freedom actually is, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung recommends:
“People can criticise yes, but not humilliate. Because in the end a simple logic applies: if the holy scripture of the Muslims is burned or trampled underfoot in Stockholm, it serves no one - except the extremists on both sides who take delight in every new spiral of hatred, violence and counter-violence. No one defends real freedom in this way. This requires rules and responsibility. But if freedom becomes absolute, it ends up being nothing more than the right of the strongest to do things simply because they can.”
Promote understanding on both sides
With their provocations, the populists in Sweden are setting a trap that must be avoided at all costs, La Croix warns:
“It must be stressed that there are rights in Sweden that allow the Koran to be trampled on or burned at public events. But at the same time it is crucial not to pitch believers against each other, and to remember that attacks on the Koran, as on any other sacred scripture, are perceived by many as offensive, disrespectful and provocative. Earlier in July the Pope said he felt 'angry and disgusted' by these acts, stating that 'freedom of expression must never be used as an excuse to despise others'.”
Both firmness and respect needed
For Upsala Nya Tidning, Foreign Minister Tobias Billström has been too conciliatory for far too long:
“Sweden must react more strongly to the attack on the embassy in Baghdad. It is not enough to summon the most senior Iraqi diplomat in Sweden to the Foreign Ministry. We should bring all diplomatic staff home from Iraq, not only for security reasons. But Billström must also show respect and understanding for those whose religion is becoming a political instrument, both in Sweden and in the Muslim world. ... Religious convictions are never an excuse for using violence or exercising power over others. ... Basically, dialogue and trust are the only way forward.”