[Dr. Hasan
Muhammad Wajīh is an expert of linguistics of negotiation and
cross-cultural communication at the Azhar
University. He can be contacted at wageih@yahoo.com. Dr.
Wajīh moderated the discussion at El-Sawy Culture
Wheel, April 15, 2006]
Synopsis
"The recent ghastly strife and anger over the
Danish cartoons shows the danger that comes
of our failure to listen and respect what is precious and sacred
to others..." [H.R.H. Prince
Charles during his visit to the Azhar, Cairo, March, 2006]
Crisis
Management is an
emerging and important field for scientific enquiry and for practical use for those who are
keen to manage
the ambiguities of crises in a scientific and systematic ways. However, the term "Crisis Management"
"“itself- has become of a little bit regressive and backward nature. This is because it was recognized that
"Crisis Anticipation" & "Prevention" should be given all the priorities, so as we may be able to
intervene
in the very early pre-crisis phases to anticipate and prevent the potential crises. Of course,
that was not the
case when dealing with the chronic crises that have taken place between the Arab-Islamic
world & the West. Such
crises had histories of poor management by all sides, receding and then
reemerging in a new way...This is
because the roots of such crises are not dealt with.
Now, if we
look at the nature of our meeting on
15th of April 2006, which is to be attended by distinguished
diplomatists, media representatives,
experts and academics, we may not be able to avoid scrutinizing on the
Danish cartoons crisis. Simply because of
the "Negative Uniqueness" of such a crisis. Such "Uniqueness"
actually lies in the fact that preachers of different
religious orientations, along with media people, were
very quick to form a "unique discourse combination"
that produced a hell blazing fire
discourse for millions of people around the globe. I call such a crisis
"A preacher /Media open-
channel crisis". Preachers and media people were far ahead of diplomats, crisis
management experts, and
decision makers in taking the matter of managing the crisis into their hands. Also, the
crisis, in its early
and key stages, was being almost totally managed by a new world leader called "Mr.
SMS"...where SMS
messages were being extensively but haphazardly launched by the crisis management parties on
both sides.
Thus, the crisis management business was moved from the hands of "The Formal First Track
Diplomacy
actors to the hands of the Public/Popular second track diplomacy actors, where preachers and
media
people were the major actors and players. Acts of demonstration that turned violent in a few places in the
Islamic world and boycotts, using the "media as a conflict exacerbation tool" rather than a
"conflict
management tool" characterized these key phases of managing that crisis.
In such a
context, this study
attempts to provide a scientific base for trying to actively manage "The Post-Cartoon
Crisis" phase and to provide
a perceptual frame matrix with related unanswered mirror future questions to
help in anticipating and preventing a
potential similar future crises.
The Case Study
Questions:
This preliminary case study
is intended to address the following mirror
questions:
1- How did Westerners and people in the Arab
Islamic world perceive the Danish cartoon
crisis?
[In addressing this question, section one of this
paper provides a taxonomic analysis of
the perceptual frames of the crisis according to the concerned interactants
in the West & in the
Arab/Islamic world. Such an analytical taxonomy provides a panoramic view of incompatible
frames that may go
unnoticed.]
2- What is the "Crisis Perceptual Matrix" with its related future
questions?
[Such a crisis matrix is intended to generate "“ future oriented - and debatable questions
that
are directed to the concerned parties in both the West and the Arab Islamic countries to contribute in solving
the post-cartoon crisis phase and to anticipate and prevent similar crises from breaking out.]
3-
What is
the future program of action, with its related questions, that needs to be operationalized by a
trained responsible
world task force from both the West and the Arab Islamic world?
[In
addressing such a question, section
#2 of this preliminary study is intended to demonstrate very
briefly:
A- The ’existing program’
"“using the NLP terms- which is characterized by a big
communication gap, mistrust, double
standards, missing chances and absence of effective
treatment of the roots of the crisis between the Arab
Islamic world & the West.
B- The communication
problems & traps that need to be avoided to operationalize a
’Targeted win-win program of action’ that
should be in the interest of both the Arab Islamic world & the
West.
4- What are the key authentic
Islamic global communication values and rules that should pave the
road and help in operationalizing a far
better global cross-cultural communication program that works for all?
[No doubt that many
interactional files in the Globalized World Media and few kidnapers of both
’politics’ & ’religion’ on both
sides especially after the sorrowful terrorist acts of
September 2001, have associated Islam unfairly with
Dogmatism, Totalitarianism, Terrorism and many other
’Awfulisms’. This third section titled "How to
respond if one is offended in a crisis situation?" is
intended to demonstrate some of the key authentic and
global Islamic communication maxims. This third section,
also, will shed light on the requirements for
managing of Anger, Tension, and Anxiety, at the media,
education and public diplomacy levels. It does
focus on the importance of transforming negative forms of anger and
tension into a constructive and focused
agenda that is based on scientific findings and embedded in ethical and
humane grounds.
A Brief
outline of theoretical framework adopted in analyzing the cartoon crisis in
this paper
The
theoretical framework adopted in this paper could be simply rendered here in the
following figure
#1:
A simplified theoretical framework and the procedures of this study:
1-
Tracing the
key analytical perceptual western frames of the cartoon crisis
2- Tracing the key analytical
perceptual Arab frames of the cartoon crisis
3- Reducing the frames in 1 & 2 to only nesting 12
frames with
related future questions that form the "crisis perceptual matrix"
4- A NLP process to be
suggested and
operationalized to address the question of "How to respond if one is offended in a crisis
situation" which is the
point for departure to manage and to activate a long win-win stability and
peace based on a justice program
that is guided by scientific communicative maxims and Islamic global
values.
* A detailed version of the
theoretical framework, along with other cases in addition to the
Danish cartoon crisis, will be included in a
longer paper to be published by the dialogue among
civilizations program, Faculty of Economics & Political Science,
Cairo University.
* NLP stands for
"Neuro-Linguistics Programming"
Cognitive frame theory in
negotiation is a theory about the working
mechanisms of the chunks of "Reasoning. Language, Memory & Perception"
through which we form our opinions &
stances regarding events or crises. Frames could be classified in many
configurations. (1)
In this
case study we use the simple self-explanatory terms of "frame" & "sub-frame". We
also use the term nesting
frame to mean a main frame that subsume under it sub or nested frames. Our use of data in
this study will
demonstrate clear illustrative data examples of these terms.
Section #
1
Western perceptual frames of the Danish cartoons
Frame #1: The
frame of
a wide international crisis
"The Danish Prime Minister Anders Rasmussen has
described the
controversy as Denmark’s worst international crisis since world war II."(2)
Reverend
Harold Neilson,
who is a prominent figure in a big Danish Christian delegation who visited Egypt after the
cartoon crisis, said:
"We were stopped." We now want dialogue inside Denmark as we need it outside Denmark.
He added: "We discovered that
the distance between Denmark and Indonesia or between Syria and Norway for
instance is just ’A push on a
computer button’ to manage dialogues with such pace..."The deep sense of the
crisis could be also demonstrated
through the unprecedented intense world media coverage.
Frame
#2: The frame of absolute freedom of
expression
Much western media coverage of the
caricatures of the Prophet Mohamed peace be upon him,
[PBUH], and several writers depicted such caricatures
as a form or act of "Freedom of Expression".
Section
77 of the constitutional Act of Denmark (1953)
reads: "Any person shall be at liberty to publish his ideas in
print, in writing, and in speech, subject to
his being held responsible in a court of law. Censorship and other
perspective measures shall never again be
introduced. Danish freedom of expression is quite far-reaching, even by
Western standards. Despite official
German protests, Denmark has long been a safe haven for printing of Neo-Nazi
propaganda. The Organization
Reporters without Borders ranks Denmark at the top of the list for freedom of speech.
(3)
Frame
#3: Drawing the cartoons is a very strong insult
Contrary to frame #2 above,
Robert
Fisk, the Middle East correspondent for the famous UK newspaper The Independent, considered
the
act of the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten "An act of ’western hypocrisy’ & ’implied
double
standards’. For in some European nations, like France, Germany & Austria, among others, it is
forbidden
by law to deny acts of genocide. In France, for example, it is illegal to say that the Jewish Holocaust
or
the Armenian Holocaust did not happen. (4)
Fisk added that: "This is not a great time to heat up the old
Samuel Huntington garbage about a "Clash of Civilizations". Iran now has a clerical government
again.
So, to all intents and purposes, does Iraq (which was not supposed to end up with a democratically
elected clerical
administration, but that’s what happens when you topple dictators). In Egypt, the Muslim
Brotherhood won 20
percent of the seats in the recent parliamentary elections. Now we have Hamas in charge
of "Palestine".
There’s a message here, isn’t there? That America’s policies "“ "regime change" in the
Middle East
"“ are not achieving their ends. These millions of voters were preferring Islam to the corrupt
regimes which we
imposed on them.” (5)
Fisk concluded: "For the Danish cartoons to be dumped
on top of this fire is
dangerous indeed. In any event, it’s not about whether the prophet should be
pictured. The Qur’an does
not forbid images of the prophet, even though millions of Muslims do. The problem
is that these cartoons portrayed
Mohamed as a Bin Laden-type image of violence. They portrayed Islam as a
violent religion. It is not. Or do we want
to make it so?" (6)
Peter Mathews wrote an article
entitled "When freedom of expression becomes a
weapon" (7)
Frame #4: Freedom of Expression as a
superiority complex weapon
"...By
focusing on isolated expressions of anger and by describing
these instances as pandemic, the media is force-feeding
its viewers with the Neo-Con’s "Clash of
Civilizations" thesis and thereby spreading its nefarious
’We-the free, democratic, good, mature and
civilized" against "THEM" "“ the freedom-hating, despotic, evil,
childlike and barbaric" world-view." (8)
Frame #5: The antagonizing frame of activating irreconcilable
gap and describing Islam as
virus that requires a cure
"...When an entire people are subsumed into
this thesis of
irreconcilable difference, alarm bells should thunder. One commentator on a British TV
news
report went so far as to describe Islam as a "virus that requires a cure." As for the Yahoo message
boards, a cacophony arose from the features articles, many calling for nuking the lands of Islam into a
"sea of
glass" and applying the "final solution" to Arabs in the US and Europe. What we are
witnessing is a
further marginalization of the marginalized, an increased bullying of the
bullied..." (9)
Frame #6: The blasphemy frame
"...According to Islam, the
crafting of images of
Mohammad is the height of blasphemy. The way it was done, repeated and then
celebrated is akin to
incinerating Holy-of-Holies in public...that these images are offensive to Muslims.
Our own leaders are often quick
to decry art and statements offending Christian and Jewish sensibilities."
(10)
Frame #7: Media
oversimplification of the cartoon crisis
"...What is cause
for real outrage is how the western media
also appears enthusiastic about making a storm-in-a-tea-cup of the
comprehensible reaction by a small number of
Muslims. Doing so, given the human catastrophe visited
upon Iraq by the self-proclaimed "civilized world" and
the subsequent anguish and humiliation experienced by
Muslims, will likely exacerbate this situation, as the past
24 hours is making worrisomely evident. Our
’free-press’ is currently offering neither context nor
analysis when addressing Muslim reactions to these
caricatures. The coverage of what had been tiny isolated
protests and threats of violence has been anything
but responsible. As such, these reports serve only to stoke
the flames of hatred while keeping us in
the dark. Our ’free-press’ is selling-out its stated mission,
and its public, most cheaply...’ (11)
Frame #8: The larger frame context of the cartoon
crisis
"...The context is
a long history of invasion, occupation, careless killing,
intensive pillaging, oppression,
humiliation and the subsequent radicalization of many people in the Middle
East. Presenting the public
outcry of a few hundred Muslims as indicative of a billion people spread over
dozens of nations only
deepens an already profound sense of divide between ’US and Them’. To do so is
not merely sensationalist
and irresponsible; it’s akin to a crime against truth, justice and
humanity..."(12)
Frame #9: Official & high standing western figures frame
The pope
has said
that it is necessary to respect the world’s religions and avoid harming religious sensibilities.
(13)
Prince Charles, the prince of Wales commented on the cartoons during his last visit to Cairo "“March
2006, and like so many world leaders & distinguished dignitaries, strongly condemned them. He stressed
that
"Islam, like Christianity and Judaism, is a religion of understanding compassion and mercy". For him,
the three
Abrahamic faiths stem from the same heavenly root. In his visit to the Azhar University, he said:
"The recent
ghastly strife and anger over the Danish cartoons shows the danger that comes of our failure
to listen and to
respect what is precious and sacred to others. In my view, the true mark of civilized
society is the respect it
pays to strangers."(14)
The heir to the British throne is trying to
prove a point: "that the people who
uphold the Abrahamic tradition must learn to live happily together and
to respect and come to terms with the
cultural differences that sometimes seem to poison the relationship
between westerners & Muslims. It is not the
differences per se that are the root cause of the tensions,
but rather the bigotry, overzealous dogmatism
and fanaticism that creates the seemingly
conflictual situation". (15)
Frame #10: Hidden hand
frame
The Danish Christian
delegate to Cairo, among others, capitalized on the hidden hand frame.
The statements of the delegate urge
people to understand that this crisis is intended to destroy the good relations
between the Arab Islamic
world & Denmark. (16)
Frame # 11: The apology frame
The Danish
Prime Minister’s
open letter to Al-Ahram readers reads: "It is a great pleasure for me, in this edition
of Al-
Ahram, to extend my warm greetings and sincere whish for friendship, dialogue and cooperation between
our cultures and our countries. I am deeply distressed that many Muslims have seen the drawings in a
Danish
newspaper as a defamation of the Prophet Mohammad. The newspaper has apologized to the
Muslim world for
the offense caused by the drawings. And I have made it clear that neither the Danish
government, nor the Danish
people have any intention to insult Muslims or any other religions community.
Freedom of expression is one of
the fundamental principles for a free and democratic society. At the same
time freedom of the press of course
entails responsibility, and should respect the beliefs of all
religions. I see Islam as a religion of peace and
dialogue. We should not allow extremists to present a
false picture of Islam. Recent events in a number of
Muslim countries underline the need for renewed
dialogue between cultures, please accept my very best wishes for a
peaceful and prosperous future. (17)
Frame #12: The controversial governmental censorship &
Intervention
"...The
right to freedom of expression is a fundamental one, necessary to protect the
exercise of all other human
rights in democratic societies because it is essential for holding governments
accountable to the public.
Freedom of expression is particularly necessary with respect to provocative or offensive
speech, because
once governmental censorship is permitted in such cases; the temptation is enormous for
government
officials to find speech that is critical of them to be unduly provocative of offensive as well. The
freedom
to express even controversial points of view is also important for societies to address key political,
social, and cultural issues, since taboos often mask matters of considerable public concern that are best
addressed
through honest and unfettered debate among those holding diverse points of view. Although
international human
rights law does impose certain limits on the right to freedom of expression (discussed
below) the important
functions served by that right require interpreting those limitations narrowly."
(18)
Frame #13:
Western perceptual frame of picture & hate speech
"...Not all
speech that is hateful constitutes
’hate speech’ that must be prohibited under international human rights
law. Advocacy of religious hatred
can be suppressed only when it constitutes imminent incitement to unlawful
acts of discrimination, hostility or
violence. In addition, to constitute such incitement, the
discrimination, hostility or violence must be
urged or promoted by the speech in question. It is
incitement when opponents of speech or those who find the speech
offensive use violence, since that would
give censorship over any speech to those who are willing to employ
violence to attack it. In this case,
the main complaint against the cartoons is that they offend Islam, not that
they have inspired acts of
violence, criminal harassment or tangible discrimination against Danish or other
Muslims. Speech that
targets a religion for disrespect, as opposed to speech that targets believers for
unlawful acts, is
protected, however offensive it may be..." (19)
Frame #14: The Double standard
frame
"...Many European nations still have blasphemy laws, although they are seldom
enforced.
Some of these laws prohibit blasphemy against only certain religions, such as Christianity.
Such laws are
clearly discriminatory and may reflect broader societal discrimination.
Moreover, many of these laws should
not be on the books at all. Although the European Court of Human rights
has upheld some of these laws, it is far
from clear why certain religious beliefs should be protected from
critical discussion or even ridicule when other
political beliefs, aesthetic views, or cultural opinions are
not. Freedom of expression is valuable for allowing
broad public debate of any topic. It is wrong to exclude
from that debate certain religious beliefs, because speech
on these topics is about ideas, not incitement or
even advocacy of violence..." (20)
II-
Frames of perceiving the cartoons in the
Arab/Islamic world
1- Arab/Islamic frame #1: The
outrage and anger
frame
"...We are sorry if some Muslims lost their senses and turned violent, but
you just
don’t know how dear Prophet Muhammad is to our hearts." [A young Muslim on amrkhaled.net] Many
newspaper’s head lines came as anything but not the prophet of God..." (21)
Ten Muslim ambassadors
wrote a joint letter to Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen asking him to take a stand on the issue,
which
he refused to do. He said, Denmark had a free and independent press and refused to intervene. That was
in the early
stages of the cartoon crisis. Such an act did exacerbate the situation further at that time and
caused the Saudi
Arabian Ambassador to Denmark to be recalled to Riyadh for consultation. Delay to respond
with deserved positive
moves on the part of the government in Denmark added to the feeling of anger and
tension at that early stage of the
crisis and caused more angry demonstrations.
Arab/Islamic
frame #2 The "Muslim ’terrorist’s"
frame
Outrage and angry feelings in the Arab Islamic world
were not only because of the blasphemous
cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad [PBUH] as a stereotypical
terrorist, but such cartoons were mainly
perceived in the Arab Islamic world as the highest level of
escalating the unfair and ongoing perceived Western
campaign that has already synonymized the words ’Arab’,
’Muslim’ and ’Terrorist’. So
we are talking from such an angle about very antagonizing frames for any
ordinary Muslim. (22)
In an article
called "The authoritarian dogmatic media" Ahmad al-Nayfir,
a Tunisian writer (23) criticized Western media
coverage of the cartoons and criticized the "dogmatic"
stances taken by a group of 12 writers who put their names
to a statement in French weekly newspaper
Charlie Hebdo warning against "Islamic Totalitarianism".
They associated "Islamism"
with Fascism, Nazism, Stalinism. Among these writers were Salman Rushdie,
Taslima Nasreen. (24)
Arab/Islamic frame #3: The apology frame
The overwhelming
majority in the
Arab/Islamic world was very quick to request a formal apology from the government of Denmark. The
response
was only: "Denmark has a free an independent press."
Carsten Juste, Jylland-Posten editor"
“in
-chief, told AP what he did was within the constitution, the Danish penal codes and international
conventions. "We are sorry if Muslims have been offended in their faith. It was not the intention.”
(25)
For many people in the Arab Islamic world, that was not enough of an apology.
The
Arab/Islamic frame
#4: The West has destroyed all the bridges for dialogue [The straw that broke the camel’s
back]
Much Arab media coverage raised the question of how can we go for a dialogue with the
party who is
directing one insult after another and now it is an unforgivable insult? Some headlines
came as "The
dialogue of insults!" (26) Dr. ‘Alī al-Agala described the event as
"The greatest sin".
(27)
A group of my students at the Azhar University wrote a very
interesting paper on the Danish crisis.
They provided their conclusion in the title of the paper which came
as "the straw that broke the camel’s
back...’ (28)
For the overwhelming majority of people who
look at the crisis through such a frame,
Egyptian preacher ‘Amr Khālid’s visit to Denmark was
seen as:
1- Aborting the Angry
stance of Muslims for the prophet of Islam.
2- Watering down
the whole issue in a naأ¯ve way that only
helped the government of Denmark to find a way out of this
crisis.
3- Getting out of a collective stance
that should be firm by all Muslims against the
Blasphemous aggressors against the prophet of
Islam.
4- Paving the way for the Danish
government to tighten its fist on the Muslims living in Denmark
(29). For the majority of those who looked
through such a frame..."If we boycott, if we reject any dialogue, we did
that as a reaction to the rejection
of dialogue of the party who insist to put the entire MUSLIM world down and
carry out unjust and unfair
dialogue. For the opposers of dialogue, the other party wants a group of "Muslim
puppets" who accept
unbalanced forms of dialogue if not a "dialogue-based
insult"
Arab/Islamic Frame
#5: The boycotting frame
There are extensive discourse
signs regarding the call for boycotts.
Such persuasive signs need a separate study, but that frame showed, very
briefly, the power of language when
it plays on deep religious and cultural cords. The boycotting discourse frame
played on the very legitimate
act of boycotting as a peaceful, non-violent mechanism of venting anger. When some
other people wanted to
reflect on the danger of the boycott game and its irrelevance, boycotters said: "If they are
that free to
insult us ...we should be free to boycott them."
Arab/Islamic Frame #6: The condemning of
violence frame
Sub-frame 6-1-:
All the informed circles of
’Fatwa’ in the Arab/Islamic world condemned all forms of violence. These
’Fatwa’
were compatible with the western democratic rights or sub frames of: a- demonstrating b-
boycotts c-
filing of legal suits d- the right to use the media to refute ill-founded
allegations.
Sub-
Frame 6-2- The condemning and the compensation sub-frames
Some
Islamically-informed types of
proposals like the one proposed by Fādil Sulaymān, among others, did
not only condemn some protests
that turned violent in Syria, Lebanon, and Pakistan where protesters set fire to
Danish consulates; but also
called for compensation. In Sulaymān’s words: "Guess what they (The West)
would think of us if we
decided to pay the necessary sum of money in compensation for setting fire to consulates,
which is
definitely a violation of Islamic tenets? Sulaymān asked: "This is how we would educate people
about
our ’Sharī‘a’ (Law) which seeks justice. That is why so many non-Muslims
adopted Islam
at the time of prophet Muhammad (PBUH) (30)
Arab/Islamic Frame #7: The Hidden Hand
Frame
Conspiracy theory discourse in the world today is a beast by itself. It does need a
separate
study. In the Arab Islamic world, conspiracy is a popular discourse pattern in discussing almost
every debatable
and ambiguous issue. Several articles tried to send a message like the
following:
"...Do not get carried
away and fall in the conspiracy trap..." Some world elements
want to cultivate unmotivated conflict by setting
Arab/Islamic world against Denmark & Europe. Such a
discourse frame could be found in an article that came
under the title of "The hidden hand" by Rajab al-
Bannā of Al-Ahrām newspaper (31). The Danish
delegate who visited Egypt in the wake of the
early stage of the crisis played on that cord of the "hidden hand
discourse" in a very clear
way.
Arab/Islamic Frame #8: The legal frame
Much Arab media
coverage focused
immensely on the legal frame, requesting that Muslims should call for their "Legal Rights" and for
raising
the issue to the UN, seeking an international decree that criminalizes any offenses against creeds. The
call
was also motivated by the fact that the UN issued a decree to condemn equating Zionism with discrimination. In
a meeting with the Danish Christian delegate to Cairo, Dr. Usāma al-Bāz, the political advisor to
the
Egyptian President Husnī Mubārak said: "As a lawyer I real ask, where is the Danish law?.. for
in any
country in the world there is a local law that criminalizes acts of Slander, Libel,
Defamation and
Blasphemy. The world should understand that Muslims are not that angry only for
the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH),
but they would be equally angry if Jesus or Moses or any prophet of god is
mocked or slandered. Al-Bāz
called for applying the local laws on any outlawed parties, instead of
talking about "Hidden Hands..." (32)
Arab/Islamic Frame # 9: The globalized western media
gigantic machine frame [The media: weapons of
mass deception]
Under the above descriptions,
much Arab media coverage and intensive discourse took
place as they were describing the frame that must be
dealt with in the Danish cartoon crisis. The main arguments
raised in that context tried to demonstrate
examples of the Western media bias against the Arab/Islamic world. An
article by Sikander Ziyad Hashmī,
ridiculed "The naأ¯ve coverage" of trying to depict the crisis as
"Islam vs. Freedom of
Expression"(33). Nashwa, a 34 year old journalist and student in the Azhar’s
Da‘wa
(preaching) institute said: "The foreign press had a field day reporting on the violent
attacks in an
attempt to depict Muslims as terrorists who do not respect freedom of expression." (34)
A
general
comment in the Egyptian context was: "Why the Western media never focused on the overwhelming majority
in
the Islamic world who expressed their disagreement and their justified ’logical’ anger in a very
civilized
manner!!"
Arab/Islamic Frame # 10: playing on people’s religious sentiments & the
Attribution Frame
Sub-frame 10-1- ‘Imād Jād, of Al-
Ahrām newspaper said: "Arab regimes fueled the sedition even further to achieve some political
interests. They played on people’s religious sentiments in an attempt to save the much-lost support of their
nations and to drive people’s attention away from pressing internal issues" (35)
Muhammad Sabrīn
of Al-Ahrām addressed another attribution discourse pattern/frame, when he said that there is an
international exacerbation of the cartoon crisis by some European countries to give themselves room and
justification for tightening the rope on the Muslim citizens in Europe & launch new procedures to restrict
the
immigration or citizenship of Muslims. In that article he touched on the issue of integration of Muslim
citizens
in Europe. (36)
Section #2
The Crisis Perceptual
Matrix
After
having analyzed a big set of data pertaining to the cartoon crisis from both the
Arab/Islamic & Western media
sources, it was possible to extrapolate 25 key perceptual frames and sub-frames
on both sides. These nested 25
frames could also be reduced only to 12 key nesting frames. Such frames give
us the panoramic picture or what we
may call in crisis management terms "The crisis matrix". Absence
of such a matrix makes managing any similar
crises or managing the current post crisis phase a very
difficult, chaotic & perplexing task. The following table
shows the crisis perceptual matrix and related
future mirror questions.
The Crisis
Matrix
The Arab & Western perceptual
nesting frames of the cartoon crisis & related
questions
Arab Mind
Western
Mind
Perceptual Frames
Perceptual Frames
Frame #1: The frame of a wide-scope international
crisis
Related
questions:
*What are the lessons to be drawn from
this crisis?
* Which ways and
approaches to be pursued to anticipate & prevent possible
similar crises?
Frame # 2: The freedom of
expression frame
Related
questions:
* How should the Arab Islamic mind & the
Western mind may address the following
equation which came in a public statement by Amnesty International?
"...The right to freedom of
expression is not absolute. Neither for the creators of material nor their
critics. It carries
responsibilities and it may, therefore, be subject to restrictions in the name of safe guarding
the rights
of others. In particular, any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes
incitement
to discrimination, hostility or violence cannot be considered legitimate exercise of freedom of
expression.
Under international standards, such "Hate speech" should be prohibited by law. (37)
Frame
#3:
The media negotiation of meanings & images in managing crises
Related
questions:
* How to avoid the devastating impact of biased, misinformed, ill-trained media
interactants, especially in a crisis of that scope?
* How can we promote & enhance a positive
responsible
role of the media in such conflicts on both sides?
Frame # 4: The education
frame
Related questions:
* How to filter existing educational material
from
distortions and incorrect images; especially when it comes to creeds and religious figures?
*
How can we get
more representative and authentic images in our educational text books that develop the
accurate knowledge and
skills needed for managing of cross-cultural communication differences in both
sides?
Frame # 5: The
hidden hand frame
Related question:
*
How should we develop an environment and
modalities that resist the negative role of conspiracy theory,
rumors, misinformation and disinformation?
Frame #6: The apology
frame
Related question:
* What is an
acceptable apology and what is not,
especially when it comes to deep cross-cultural communication issues?
Frame #7: The
controversial governmental interference and the role of religion in a
society
Related
question:
* What are the levels of governmental possible and
impossible interference to
regulate and deal with the thorny issues of religion and identity in the context of the
big cultural
differences like the ones that caused the cartoon crisis to exacerbate?
Frame # 8: The
outrage
& anger frame
Related question:
* What about managing cross-cultural
differences when it comes to managing or mismanaging outrage, anger and provocability levels?
Frame #
9: The Muslim ’terrorist’ and ’Antichrist’ frames
Related
question:
* How to stop the on-going process of stigmatization and moral assassination of the
Arab/Muslim character by synonymizing the words ’Arab/Muslim/Terrorist & Antichrist...which is being
practiced
by certain Western media circles and which causes sharp polarization and very tense relations
between the Arab
Islamic world & the west?
Frame # 10: ’The destruction’ and ’building’ of
’communication bridges’ and issues of integration frames
Related
questions:
* How to maintain and address a balanced equation of a dialogue that is based on
justice,
mutual respect, equal footing and on continuous basis between the Arab Islamic world & the West?
* How to
avoid one-track mindedness, trap oriented, and dependency forms of dialogues?
* How
to produce palpable and
healthy win-win results from the on-going dialogue? [Palpable good win-win results
would be the only momentum
giving force to continue the dialogue and convince those who oppose the dialogue
or those who became totally
unconfident with its real results ...that their argument is invalid.
* In
what possible ways may the Arab
Islamic world and the West cooperate in issues of immigration and
integration of Muslims in the West, in a way that
enhances good relations, that may contain the global
negative impact of what came to be known as ’racial
profiling’ ’hate crimes’ and other forms
of ethnic and religious discrimination?
Frame # 11: The boycott frame & condemnation of
violence frame
Related
question:
* What are the lessons drawn from the
Danish cartoon & crisis "“When it comes to the
practices of boycott- for both the West & the Arab Islamic
world?
Frame # 12: The legal dimension
frame
Related
question:
* How to go for a world standardization process to deal
positively and justly with
issues pertaining to libel, slander, defamation and blasphemous acts?
The above
12 perceptual nesting
frames form the matrix of the cartoons crisis. These frames also form the ingredients of the
on-going
protracted tensions and crises between the Arab-Islamic world and the West. The main purpose of this study
is to provide such a perceptual matrix with its related questions as a preliminary scientific discourse
analysis
that is needed as necessary step that may help sincere researchers, diplomatists, media
representative and world
decision makers to get a panoramic view of the multilyardness and complexity of the
task of trying to manage the
cartoon post crisis situation and to anticipate and prevent similar potential
crises.
Section
#3
How to respond if one is offended...especially in a
crisis situation?
As
shown through section #2, this study, then, raises many related
questions that may be generated from the introduced
perceptual crisis matrix, rather than addressing them.
Future detailed studies are needed to scientifically address
all these questions. It is suffice here to
highlight some derived communication maxims from the analytical
taxonomy included in this crisis
matrix. These maxims will be also looked at from the Islamic values perspective
that may help in addressing
the question of "How to respond if one is offended... especially in a crisis
situation?"
These maxims are:
Maxim #1:
Be an
effective
listener, enhance and upgrade your "listening fitness" on continuous bases:
Among
the very telling
perceptual frames of the introduced crisis matrix in this study, is the one provided by
H.R.H. Prince Charles, he
said:
"The recent ghastly strife and anger over the Danish cartoons shows
the danger that comes of our
failure to LISTEN and respect what is precious and sacred to
others..."(38)
Of course "our
failure" here should be understood as "our failure" in both the
Western world and the Arab Islamic world as
well. We have so many sorrowful examples of dialogue and
negotiation cases that failed because of lack of keen and
positive listening on the part of both of the
interacting parties in the Arab/Islamic world & the West.
Listening fitness does need good training,
especially in cross-cultural communication contexts. For
listening skills require from a socio-linguistic
perspective, simultaneous complex processes and abilities
like:
A- The ability to shut off your
"inner listening"...i.e. when you only listen to your inner
voices...or engage yourself with the
argument you want raise in a given topic without giving yourself a chance to
listen carefully to what the
other party is trying to communicate.
B- The ability to retrieve from your
short and long term memory
any relevant or relative texts to what is being said to you, so as you may be able to
make sense out of
it.
C- The ability to respond in a good manner that commands the respect and attention of
others.
* An insight from an Islamic perspective of a communication theory:
A
good
number of Qur’ānic verses and speeches (Hadith) of the Prophet Muhammad [PBUH] show
the
extremely vital importance of being a good listener...a quality that is very missing in the interactions
among many
Muslims and non-Muslims alike:
For listening in the meaning of paying good attention the
Holy
Qur’ān says:
"... Íã ÊäÒíá ãä ÇáÑÍãä ÇáÑÍíã. ßÊÇÈ ÝÕáÊ ÁÇíÇÊå ÞÑÁÇäÇð ÚÑÈíÇð áÞæã íÚáãæä ÈÔíÑÇð æäÐíÑÇð ÝÃÚÑÖ ÃßËÑåã Ýåã áÇ íÓãÚæä..." (ÓæÑÉ ÝÕáÊ 4)
)
"...Giving
good news, and admonition: yet most of them
turn away, and so they hear not..." (41:4)
For listening in the meaning of rationalization...The
Holy Qur’ān
says:
"...æÞÇáæÇ áæ ßäÇ äÓãÚ ÃæäÚÞá ãÇ ßäÇ Ýì ÃÕÍÇÈ ÇáÓÚíÑ..." (Çáãáß 10)
"...They
will further say: "Had we but listen or used our intelligence, we should not now) be
among the companions of
the blazing fire...!" (67:10)
For listening in the meaning of "empty or
non active listening (Where
many people may nod their head and make facial expressions that give the
impression that they are listening well,
while they are not. The Holy Qur’ān
says:
"...æáÇ ÊßæäæÇ ßÇáÐíä ÞÇáæÇ ÓãÚäÇ æåã áÇ íÓãÚæä..." (ÇáÃäÝÇá 21)
"...Nor be like those who say, ’we hear’, but listen
not..." (8:21)
Maxim #2:
No for hasty generalization that
usually lead
to injustice:
Interactants in the Arab-Islamic world should stop to think of the
West as a one
block. The same applies to westerners who look at the Arab Islamic world as one stereotypical
block. Such an act of
over generalization usually leads to misjudgment and injustice. Some of the perceptual
frames introduced in this
study criticized such an over generalization. [See for instance frame #7 Western
frame]
An Insight
from an Islamic perspective of a communication theory:*
"Over
generalization is a communicative
practice that is not acceptable Islamically speaking, The Holy Qur’
ān
says:
"íÃíåÇ ÇáÐíä ÂãäæÇ ßæäæÇ ÞæÇãíä ááå ÔåÏÇÁ ÈÇáÞÓØ æáÇ íÌÑãäßã ÔäÆÂä Þæã Úáì ÇáÇ ÊÚÏáæÇ ÇÚÏáæÇ åæ ÃÞÑÈ ááÊÞæì æÇÊÞæÇ Çááå Çä Çááå ÎÈíÑ ÈãÇ ÊÚãáæä..." (ÓæÑÉ ÇáãÇÆÏÉ 8 )
"...O ye, who
believe, stand out firmly for God,
as witness to fair dealing, and let not hatred of others to you, make
you swerve to wrong and
depart from justice. Be just; that is nearer to piety and righteousness. Be
pious, for God is well
acquainted with all that ye do..." (5:8)
Maxim # 3:
Pay
good attention to
actual subtle and detailed discussions without negative presuppositions or suspicions:
No
doubt that analyzing the elements of the on-going debate for instance, on the "Issue of freedom
of
expression and related concepts in the crisis under scrutiny in this study, show that positive & non-suspicious
stance would, eventually, get all parties in a closer touch to better understand the nature of the deep
cultural
differences embedded in that crisis & may lead to a better world standardization to overcome such
differences.
* An insight from an Islamic perspective of a communication
theory:
Seeking perfect information, avoiding misinformation, disinformation and negative
suspicion
traps are good traits of a good communicator.
The Holy Qur’ān
says:
"...íÃíåÇ ÇáÐíä ÂãäæÇ ÇÌÊäÈæÇ ßËíÑÇð ãä ÇáÙä Çä ÈÚÖ ÇáÙä ÇËã æáÇ ÊÌÓÓæÇ æáÇ íÛÊÈ ÈÚÖßã ÈÚÖÇð..." (ÇáÍÌÑÇÊ: 12)
"...Oh ye who believe! Avoid being trapped in the many cases of suspicion. For
suspicion in certain cases
is a sin: And spy not on each other, nor speak ill of each other behind their
backs..." (XLIX: 12)
Maxim #4:
Ascertain the truth of the news and that
the information you have is
perfect information
"...íÃíåÇ ÇáÐíä ÂãäæÇ Çä ÌÇÁßã ÝÇÓÞ ÈäÈà ÝÊÈíäæÇ Çä ÊÕíÈæÇ ÞæãÇð ÈÌåÇáÉ ÝÊÕÈÍæÇ Úáì ãÇ ÝÚáÊã äÇÏãíä..." (ÇáÍÌÑÇÊ: 61)
"...Oh ye who believe! If
a wicked person (usually people who you don’t know then you discover they
are not honest) comes to you with
any news, ascertain the truth, lest ye harm people unwillingly, and after words
(you feel that you need to
repent heartily..." (XLIX: 61)
Maxim #5:
Control your
anger and never be
the party to escalate conflicts or to turn violent and be on the track of managing interactions
with
assertiveness, confidence and never fear harm or injustice.
One of the most important lessons
to be drawn from the cartoon crisis is regarding the dimension of "anger Mechanisms", anger management and
anger
mismanagement. In this regard, there are common and reciprocal mistakes that did take place in the
interactions of
the concerned parties in both the West and the Arab Islamic world. The perceptual frames
analysis provided in this
study show some illustrative examples. The real problem of the cartoon crisis lies
in the fact that it is not an
ordinary crisis...It is what we may call "media / preaching open channel
crisis". By this term, we mean that
it is the type of crisis that put journalists, media people and the
preachers of all their various orientation
together, to be far ahead of diplomats, thinkers, well informed
academic experts informed official religious
circles and world decision makers. Of course a crisis of that
make-up is far more difficult to control. The
anger dimension in managing this crisis was left to very
poorly trained crisis managers. Here we must draw the
attention to the fact that the control of outrage,
anger and appropriate management of the provocability level of
the interactants in a given crisis is part
and parcel of the effective management of any crisis.
NLP studies
in that respect inform us that
anger management should be dealt with in a constructive way. NLP studies show
that:
"People who are
easily angered generally have what some psychologists call a low tolerance for
frustration, meaning simply
that they feel that they should not have to be subjected to frustration, inconvenience,
or annoyance. They
can’t take things in stride, and they’re particularly infuriated if the situation
seems somehow unjust: for
example, being corrected for a minor mistake. What makes these people this way? A number
of things. One
cause may be genetic or psychological: There is evidence that some children are born
irritable,
touchy, and easily angered, and that these signs are present from a very early age. Another may
be
socio-cultural. Anger is often regarded as negative; we’re taught that it’s all right to
express anxiety, depression, or other emotions but not to express anger. As a result, we don’t
learn how to handle it or channel it constructively. Research has also found that family background plays a
role.
Typically, people who are easily angered come from families that are disruptive, chaotic, and not
skilled at
emotional communications".(39)
The point to be made here is that appropriate angry
management needs a lot of
training and controlling of so many variables stated above.
Now back to the
angry interactions in the
cartoon crisis, we may see how complicated the matter is. In an interview with a
Dutch journalist, I responded to
one of her questions regarding the killing of the Dutch director Van Gogh
saying that, of course any reasonable
person should condemn such a terrible act. But I raised to her the
following point:
If you run a
psychological test that is intended to measure the provocability level,
for instance, for choosing future diplomats
in any country. It is much expected that many good number of the
examinees would fail that test. Sometimes the
percentage in many advanced countries could be 70 or 80 % of
the examinees. So how about if you run the same
psychological test in matters of creed and religion on the
air or in a movie?
Can’t you get at least 5
or 2 % of highly easily provocable people who may act
very violently...That was the case when a Dutch director ran
"his provocability level testing" through his
highly "“culturally- antagonizing and highly insulting movie
’Submission’. The same thing happened when 12
highly antagonizing and highly insulting cartoons were
published. The point here that people should be
responsible and should use their own discretion before being
astonished or appalled regarding the reaction
towards their provocative acts.
* An insight from an
Islamic perspective of a communication
theory:
Anger & outrage control is in the heart of the
teachings of all heavenly religions.
In Islam such an issue is extensively addressed. Muslims and non-Muslims
should be reminded that the Prophet
Muhammad (PBUH) said in a Hadith narrated by Abu Harairah that
Allah’s Messenger
said:
"The strong is not the one who overcomes the people by his strength, but
the strong is
the one who controls himself while in anger." (Bukhari, 8/135 and Muslim, 4/6311-6314)
Also
Abu Hurairah narrated:
"A man said to the prophet "Advise me". The prophet said, "Do
not be
angry and furious." The man asked (the same) again and again, and the prophet said in each case, "Do not be
angry and furious." (Bukhari, 8/137)
Aishah narrated that the prophet said:
"The
most
hated person in the sight of Allah is the most quarrelsome person." (Bukhari, 3/637)
For
the angry
feelings that may be triggered by the current on-going negative "Religious Polemics" raised and
discussed by Dr.
Cornelis Hulsman in a recent paper of his (40), it is important to remind Muslims and non-
Muslims alike that the
Holy Qur’ān says:
"...æáÇ ÊÌÇÏáæÇ Ãåá ÇáßÊÇÈ ÇáÇ ÈÇáÊì åì ÃÍÓä ÇáÇ ÇáÐíä ÙáãæÇ ãäåã æÞæáæÇ ÁÇãäÇ ÈÇáÐì ÃõäÒá Çáíßã æÇáÇåõäÇ æÇáÇåßã æÇÍÏ æäÍä áå ãÓáãæä..." ( ÇáÚäßÈæÊ 46)
"...And argue not with the
people of the book (the Jews
and the Christians), except in the best way, unless it be with those
of them who do wrong. But say (to
them), ’We believe in the revelation which has been sent down to us and in
that which has been sent down to
you; our God and your God is one; and to him we submit (in Islam). (29:46)
References
1- For
detailed literature on framing and the cognitive theory in
negotiation see for example:
* Minsky, Marvin "A
framework for representing knowledge", MIT-A-I
Laboratory memo 306, June 1974.(http://web.media.mit.edu/-minsky)
* Goodpaster, Gary, A guide to
Negotiation and Mediation, Transnational publishers, Inc. New York,
1979.
* Graber A. Doris,
processing the news: How people tame the information tide, Longman, 1984.
2-
Times online, February
15, 2006.
3- Ibid, 2.
4- Fisk, Robert. Independent.
5- Ibid,
4.
6- Ibid,
4.
7- Mathews, Peter "When Freedom of Expression becomes a weapon", Information clearing
house
(http://www.information.clearing house.info)
8- Ibid, 7.
9- Ibid, 7.
10- Ibid,
7.
11- Ibid, 7.
12- Ibid, 7.
13- BBC news, February 20, 2006.
14- Prince
Charles, unity
in faith, a speech by his royal highness, the Prince of Wales. Al-Azhar University, March 21,
2006.
15-
Ibid, 14.
16- CEOSS reception of the Danish delegate to Cairo, March 5,
2006.
17- Rasmussen, Andres
Fogh, Danish Prime Minister, a letter to the renders of al-
Ahrām Weekly, February 9 "“ 15,
2006.
18- Human Rights Watch: "Questions & Answers on the
Danish Cartoons and Freedom of Expression",
(http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/02/15denmark/2676.htm)
19- Ibid, 18.
20- Ibid, 18.
21- See
for just an example Al Esboa Newspaper, February
6, 2006.
" ÝÏÇÄß íÇ ÑÓæá Çááå...ÇáÇ ÑÓæá Çááå" (ÇáÃÓÈæÚ 6-2-2006)
22- Many articles in the Arab Media communicated such meanings. See for
instance:
* Hazem Abdel Rahman, "The story is far deeper than just some cartoons", al-
Ahrām
March, 12, 2006.
"ÇáÍßÇíÉ ÃÚãÞ ãä ÇáÑÓæã..." (ÇáÃåÑÇã 12 ãÇÑÓ 2006)
*
See Heikal’s article titled "Clash
of Civilization: The Danish Crisis", al-‘Arabī,
March, 12, 2006.
"ÕÑÇÚ ÇáÍÖÇÑÇÊ" ÇáÚÑÈì Ýì 12 ãÇÑÓ 2006.
23- El Neifer, Ahmad, "The Dogmatic Media", Al-Hayat Newspaper,
March, 11, 2006.
24- 12
writers’ statement on cartoons, Charlie Hebdo, March 1, 2006.
25- See
Jyllands-Posten
apology.
26- See Al-Ahrām Newspaper’s "Dialogue of Insults...",
March 1, 2006.
27-
El Eglah, Mohamed, "We call for an International decree to criminalize disdain of
prophets and heavenly religions",
Manar Al Islam, February 1, 2006.
28- A student’s group paper
titled "The straw that broke the
Camel’s back: Denmark Crisis from Cross-Cultural Communication
Perspective." (Mahmoud El-Mahdy, Mohamed
Abdoul-Saud, Mohamed Hussein, Mohamed Aly, Mahmoud Abdel-
Fattah).
29- See for instance a report by El Esboa
newspaper titled "The five sins of Amr Khaled
initiative visit to Denmark", March 12, 2006.
* Also see
Hassan M. Wageih’s article titled "Preachers
and disagreement on management of the Danish crisis" al-
Akhbār, March 9, 2006.
"ÇáÏÚÇÉ æÇáÎáÇÝ Íæá ÇáÃÒãÉ ÇáÏäãÇÑßíÉ..." Ï.ÍÓä ãÍãÏ æÌíå - ÇáÃÎÈÇÑ 9 ãÇÑÓ 2006.
30- Al-
Ahrām Weekly, March 1,
2006, a report titled "We introduce ourselves".
31- Al-Bannā,
Rajab, "The Hidden Hand", al-
Ahrām, March 5, 2006.
32- For a detailed citation of al-
Bāz statement when meeting the
Danish delegate, along an analytical account of the interaction of that
meeting, see Hassan M. Wageih’s
article "Real & Fake Conspiracy Theories in the Danish Crisis", al-
Akhbār, March 23,
2006.
"ÇáãÄÇãÑÉ ÇáÍÞíÞíÉ æÇáæåãíÉ Ýì ÇáÃÒãÉ ÇáÏäãÇÑßíÉ" ÌÑíÏÉ ÇáÃÎÈÇÑ 23 ãÇÑÓ 2006.
33- Hashmi, Ziad, Sikander "Danish cartoons Islam vs. Freedom of Expression?" (WWW. bismika.Allahuma.org)
34- Ibid, 28.
35- Ibid, 28.
36- Sabreen, Mohamed "A Minaret in the heart of Europe", al-Ahr?m, February 13, 2006.
" ãÆÐäÉ Ýì ÞáÈ ÃæÑæÈÇ..."ÇáÃåÑÇã Ýì 13 ÝÈÑÇíÑ 2006. ãÍãÏ ÕÇÈÑíä.
37- Amnesty International Public Statement, February 6, 2006 (http://web.amnesty.org)
38- Ibid, 14.
39- APA: online "controlling anger…before it controls you" (http://www.apa.org) , for detailed account of literature on NLP you may see: Knight, Sue "NLP At Work: The difference the makes a difference in Business", Nicholas Brealey, London 2002.
40- Hulsman, Cornelis & Yell, Elizabeth, Polemics: A discussion paper, unpublished first draft, AWR, March, 2006. [Editor: This will be published in a forthcoming issue of AWR]
