Debate rather than violence should be the tool to confront any insult to Islam or Muslims by Said Shehata

The violent reaction by Muslims in
part of the Islamic world to the anti-
Islam film that was produced in the
United States is staggering and
unjustified but is not surprising. It
happened before and it happen again
if similar criticism and insults to Islam
and Muslims occur.
If there were only peaceful
demonstrations, no one could oppose
them because it is part of democracy.
But using violence damaged Muslims
and democracy, especially in Egypt,
Tunisia, Libya and Yemen. The Taliban
claimed killing two American marines
as revenge against the film. Three
people were killed in Tunisia because
of clashes between protesters and the
police, and some were injured in
Egypt. In Libya, the US ambassador
was killed with three American
diplomats, but it is thought that this
incident was planned before and had
no direct link to the film.
There were attacks on American
embassies in several Muslim
countries, such as Yemen, Libya,
Egypt, Sudan and Tunisia. Many of the
demonstrators did not watch the film
but were mobilised by TV channels,
websites and word of mouth.
There is no justification to kill innocent
souls and damage buildings. As US
President Barack Obama and US
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said,
the film is despicable, but this not an
excuse to kill others.
The problem lies with the notion of
using force in Islam. There is an
urgent need to revise this notion in
order to avoid this happening again in
the future. Some Muslims used
violence as a reaction to the Danish
cartoons and to Pope Benedict’s
speech that were considered insulting
to Islam. Farag Fouda, a renowned
liberal thinker, was killed because of
his overt criticism of Islam and the
fatwa to kill Salman Rushdie because
of his book, The Satanic Verses, has
not been revoked.
We now witness the same scenario
repeat itself. I remember debating the
Pope Benedict speech with a Muslim
Brotherhood leader on television few
years ago. I was astonished to listen
to him saying that only one person
was killed in Somalia because of the
Pope’s speech that was considered as
insulting to Islam and Muslims. My
comment at that time was that Islam
did not need to be defended by
Muslims through violence but rather
through debate and convincing others.
In addition, Mohamed Emara, the
well-known Islamic thinker, said
recently that Islam has been under
attack from the West and the focus
should be on those attacks more than
what happened in some Muslim
countries. He did not condemn those
violent actions and this is understood
by some circles in the Muslim world
as a blessing to defend Islam through
force.
In Islam there are some verses in the
Quran and Hadith that highlight using
force as a way to stop evil and there
are different interpretations of those
verses. For example, one hadith says:
“Whoever, among you, sees
something abominable should rectify
it with his hand; and if he has not
strength enough to do it, then he
should do it with his tongue; and if he
has not strength enough to do it,
(even) then he should (abhor it) from
his heart, and that is the least of
Faith.” For some, this is justification
for the use of force.
Muslim scholars and leaders must be
blunt and clear about using force to
defend any verbal attack on Islam and
Muslims. Without a brave step by
concerned Muslim institutions, such as
Al-Azhar, the International Association
of Muslim Scholars and the
Organisation of the Islamic
Conference, to issue a clear message
saying that any insult to Islam and
Muslims should be challenged by
debate and not violence, the cycle will
repeat. And not just once, but again
and again.

#CONSENSUS 2015