KAREN ARMSTRONG DESCRIBES POPE’S WORDS AS "EXTREMELY DANGEROUS"
By Lucy Jones

Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, DC
December 2006, pages 28-29

Many European newspapers thought Pope Benedict XVI should have
shown greater sensitivity in his Sept. 12 address to the University
of Regensburg, in which he quoted a Byzantine emperor, Manuel II
Paleologus, as saying: "Show me just what Mohammed brought that was
new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as
his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached."

"Like the Danish cartoons," said the London Times on Sept. 16, "the
pope’s words provide a golden opportunity for Islamist militants to
inflame the millions who have no access to his full speech with a
distorted interpretation of his words and his intentions.

"It might have been wiser," The Times added, "if the pope had excised
from his speech any remark, especially a quotation about the Prophet
Muhammad, that could be taken out of context by those for whom
ecumenism is anathema."

Admonished Britain’s Guardian the same day: "Even if Benedict XVI,
despite his reputation for meticulous preparation, had failed to
appreciate the impact of his thoughts, his advisers should have.

"There might have been less protest had Benedict a clearer record
in favor of dialogue with Islam," the newspaper continued. As a
cardinal in the Holy See, Benedict was known to be skeptical of John
Paul II’s pursuit of conversation, the Guardian noted. One of his
earliest decisions as pope, it pointed out, was to move Archbishop
Michael Fitzgerald, one of the Catholic Church’s leading experts on
Islam and head of its council on interreligious dialogue, away from
the center of influence in Rome, to Egypt as a papal nuncio.

"[The pope] appears to have had no idea that his academic musings at
his old university in Bavaria would have such an impact," wrote The
Independent on Sept. 17, "and that is precisely why he deserves to
be criticized."

Writing in the same newspaper the following day, however, the author
Karen Armstrong found it "difficult to believe that his reference to
an inherently violent strain in Islam was entirely accidental.

"Coming on the heels of the Danish cartoon crisis," she continued,
"his remarks were extremely dangerous. They will convince more Muslims
that the West is incurably Islamophobic and engaged in a new crusade."

In Germany, however, Die Welt said on Sept. 18 that the Islamic world’s
anger about the quote was groundless because it merely expressed a
"historically documented fact."

According to the newspaper, it is neither provocative nor blasphemous
to point out that "Christianity, abuses notwithstanding, is essentially
not a religion of conquest, as practiced personally and successfully
by the prophet of Islam.

"The hysterical reactions from the Muslim world mainly show that there
are enough influential people who take advantage of any opportunity
in order to start a clash of cultures," it concluded.

"The pope does not have to apologize for expressing an opinion," said
Spain’s El Mundo the same day. "He upheld an idea we fully share:
tolerance."

But Germany’s Frankfurter Rundschau of Sept. 18 thought the pontiff’s
remarks were ill-advised.

"A pope is not a scholar who can philosophize for himself without
considering the consequences," the paper argued. "He must put himself
in the place of those listeners who feel humiliated by the West."

Echoed France’s Liberation the same day: "He is not expected to compete
with Bush’s neoconservatives in fueling… a war of civilizations,
but to preach coexistence between religions."

French Genocide Law Said to "Contribute to Dogmatization" "Pointless,"
was how France’s Liberation of Oct. 13 described a bill passed by
the lower house making it a crime to deny that the Turks committed
genocide against the Armenians in 1915.

Even if some dispute the term "genocide," the newspaper editorialized,
"The destruction of the Armenian people of Asia Minor…is an
historical fact which is hard to deny."

It went on to add, however, that the new bill "contributes to the
dogmatization of historical research, the best example which can
be found in Turkey," and concluded, "This law will hinder the very
people who are seeking progress in this area."

"It is not for the law to write history," argued Le Monde the previous
day. "It is for the people of Turkey to remember and for diplomacy
to encourage them to do so."

Turkish intellectuals who already have spoken of the genocide at home,
Le Monde pointed out, believe the French bill "would be grist to the
mill of nationalists ready to demand that Ankara impose…economic
reprisals against France."

It "borders on the absurd," noted Austria’s Die Presse of Oct. 12,
that France may make the denial of Armenian genocide punishable by
imprisonment, while in Turkey prison looms for those who say genocide
occurred.

"How can there be an open, scholarly discussion if this can land you
in prison in two countries?" it asked.

However, that day’s Der Standard supported the bill, which had yet
to be passed by the Senate and president.

While acknowledging that the vote may be the result of "consideration
for the 450,000 French-Armenians in the country," the Austrian paper
went on to argue that the killings seem to meet the genocide criteria
laid down in United Nations conventions.

"This is why the bill passed by the Paris MPs is to be approved
of," it concluded, "even though it may be based on petty electoral
considerations."

Nobel Prize for Turkish Writer Seen as Having "Strong Political Aspect"
In addition to the Nobel Prize for Literature, Orhan Pamuk "could also
have received the Nobel Peace Prize," wrote Spain’s El Pais on Oct. 13,
the day after the Turkish writer was awarded the honor. "He is one of
the intellectuals who has reflected with the greatest brilliance…on
the depravity of national, ethnic or religious fanaticism."

Awarding the prize to Pamuk was "the best decision the Nobel Prize
committee has taken for years," opined Germany’s Frankfurter Allgemeine
Zeitung the same day, likening it to 1970’s Nobel Prize to the Soviet
dissident author Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.

The Czech daily Hospodarske Noviny of Oct. 13 questioned the judges’
intentions, however. "The Nobel Prize for Literature for a writer
who was charged in Turkey last year for daring to speak aloud about
the Armenian genocide and massacres of Kurds has a strong political
aspect," it said. "Pamuk’s literary qualities are unquestionable,
but the Nobel Prize committee’s decision this year was more political
than literary," it concluded.

Afghanistan Described as "Let Down By the Rest of the World" The
murder in Afghanistan on Sept. 25 of Safia Amajan, director of the
Ministry of Women’s Affairs in Kandahar, emphasized "the despicable
ideology of the Taliban," the U.K.’s Independent wrote the following
day. Amajan had opened numerous female schools and provided hundreds
of women and girls with an education that, only five years ago,
was denied them by the obscurantist Taliban.

Her murder-believed to have been orchestrated by the Taliban-underlines
how shamefully Afghanistan has been let down by the rest of the world,
said the newspaper.

"The reason is neglect," it continued, adding that President Hamid
Karzai’s warnings about the deteriorating security situation in his
country "were ignored by a world preoccupied by Iraq.

"It is now apparent that the battle for Afghanistan did not end in
2001," the newspaper concluded. "The fall of Kabul was merely the
beginning of that struggle. And, as this latest murder shows, the
terrible truth is that the forces of enlightenment and democracy are
in retreat."

Lebanon Cited as Possible Role Model for Palestinian State Germany’s
Die Welt of Sept. 21 welcomed the parliament’s approval for the
dispatch of up to 2,400 navy personnel to patrol Lebanon’s coast.

There are "good reasons" for the deployment, the paper argued, ranging
from the need to stabilize Lebanon to Berlin’s desire to become
"an important player in the Middle East."

That day’s Frankfurter Rundschau agreed, saying that parliament has
taken the correct decision. There is an "historic dimension" to the
deployment, the newspaper noted, because a stable Lebanon could serve
as a template for a future Palestinian state.

"An established state, with Beirut as the capital, in which citizens
take matters that concern them into their own hands, could turn out
to be a model for the center of the Middle East conflict," it said.

Lucy Jones is a free-lance journalist based in London.

06/0612028.html