Movie insulting Prophet a plot against Islam, says Karlığa

He also said Islamophobia and hatred towards Islam is not a new phenomenon but in fact has a long history, and that the Crusades, which were also based on misinformation and provocation, lasted for 250 years.

Defining the infamous film — of which he has seen only some parts — as “worthless, ordinary and simple,” Karlığa said, “Everyone has reached a consensus on this fact [of the banality of the film].” While not approving the manner of the protest among Muslims, Karlığa said he finds both the film and the reactions to it provocative. He believes that the film “is a plot against Islam to make people say that Islam is violent, with the help of provocateurs among protesters,” and commented that he does not believe “the ones who killed the ambassador in Libya acted on purely Islamic motives.”

Responding to questions on the movie “Innocence of Muslims,” which has provoked violent reactions and is cited as the cause of riots that ended in the killing of US Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens on Sept. 11, 2012, Karlığa stated: “The explosion theory in physics applies to societies as well. The Islamic world has faced deep grief and hard days since the beginning of imperialism. Oppression and the existing problems of Muslims sometimes lead to overreaction.”

When asked why Muslims always fall into the same trap of provocation, as in the case of the Danish cartoons and threats of Quran burning, and are unable to react peacefully, he said: “There is no peaceful environment in the places of these violent reactions. They are always in an atmosphere of conflict. There is a psychological dimension to these reactions. We cannot deny the fact that the underlying reason for the harsh reaction in the Muslim world is the low level of culture.”

Directing attention to the mutual fear and misinformation between Muslims and the Western world, Karlığa referred to the strong reaction to the building of a mosque in New York in the recent past. “Extremism exists in an atmosphere of fear,” he argued. “On both sides, there are those who benefit from expanding fear.” In Karlığa’s view, “the neocons and evangelists try to bring about a project of the clash of civilizations.” He emphasizes that this is indeed a project, and not merely a theory.

When asked about the vicious cycle of offending Muslims and violent reactions to provocation, Karlığa said that “the vicious cycle dates back to the emergence of Islam. The way to overcome it is healthy and accurate information, dialogue and acting on a common civilization ideal.”

What is that ideal? According to Karlığa, “universal values, such as respect for human life and acceptance of the other with mutual respect.” Another such universal value is the alliance of civilizations, he added. When asked whether this could be successful or not, Karlığa stated: “This will not happen overnight. I am talking as someone who knows the 1,500-year-old background of these issues.” And while he admitted the limited functioning roles of international organizations, he called on the UN to declare Islamophobia a hate crime, similar to anti-Semitism, in remarks responding to attempts by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in this regard. According to Karlığa, “Hate towards Islam is very evident in this movie,” but is not limited to it. “For the last 15 to 20 years, this hate towards Islam is very common in the Western media and even in some religious organizations. The message that aims to be given is that Islam is equal to terrorism, barbarism and immorality.”

Some have argued that the now-infamous film, or other portrayals of the Prophet Muhammad considered offensive by the Muslim world, should be considered under the doctrine of freedom of expression. Yet, as Karlığa points out, “No freedom grants you the right to insult and defame a faith.” In fact, he said, “Freedom of thought and expression is allowed in Islam as long as it does not insult, cause aggression or encourage terrorism,” and, moreover, “These criteria are similar to Western values, although what is sacred differs from faith to faith.”

It is Karlığa’s contention that “Islam requires respect not only for its own values, but also the values of non-believers. No matter how much they insult our Prophet, we would never insult their Prophets or sacred values. If someone insulted Christ because he was born without a father, we would react to it as Muslims.”

Karlığa called for patience, and the transmission of accurate information about different faiths on both sides, leading to mutual enlightenment. He criticized the West for bigotry and the easy acceptance of inaccurate information on Islam. Comparing the recent film with the time of the Crusades, Karlığa stated: “You see that not much has changed in a thousand years. Some in the West are very bigoted in this respect. Because Muslims display the wrong reactions, we always blame Muslims. Some churches still say extremely inaccurate things about Muslims.”

As far as criticisms of the Muslim world’s inability to remove the offensive film from the Internet, Karlığa concedes that it does not in fact have such power. “Muslims always react because they are not in an active position and they are not able to constrain their reactions in a reasonable framework,” he explained.

With all this in mind, the Civilization Studies Center has produced a documentary titled “The River that Runs to the West,” in an attempt to disseminate accurate and balanced information about the Muslim world. But, he said, “It’s a twist of fate that it was aired in France and Germany during the latest protests.”

As to what individual Muslims can do to overcome the challenges posed by insults to their faith and inappropriate reactions, Karlığa recommends “reaction within certain limits, without falling into the traps of the provocations.” And he emphasized once more the importance of dissemination of accurate information about Islam by Muslims themselves.

(Today’s Zaman)