Protest justified but without the force of violence

The attack on the US diplomatic mission in Libya, in response to the film “Innocence of Muslims”, was tragic indeed. It could certainly exacerbate religious tensions and misunderstanding and lead to more conflicts, even though the protesters claim that the reason for the attack was the misleading content in the controversial film, which was posted on YouTube.

It was unfortunate that some protesters chose a violent approach to vent their anger toward the film. Of course, there are questions of whether the pretext of freedom of speech has gone too far. The makers of the controversial movie have obviously failed to understand the sensitivity of the issue. But that does not justify the violence that has led to the loss of life, including that of Chris Stevens, the US ambassador to Libya.

The US preaches to other countries about the value of freedom of expression. But this case illustrates a thin line between offensiveness and freedom of speech. Western countries might say they cherish freedom of expression, but they must also be careful and sensitive when dealing with certain issues which, to others, are perceived as off-limits. This can include issues relating to faith, religion and spiritual leaders. If they fail to handle certain sensitive incidents carefully, it can trigger serious consequences and bring unnecessary damaging.

The Muslim world, meanwhile, must not allow such incidents to exacerbate existing problems and thus create the wrong impression of Muslims. Reason and peaceful protest are the best ways to rebut derogatory attitudes towards Islam.

Here in Thailand people have, in general, shown respect towards those of different religions and faiths. We have long seen people of different faiths living peacefully together. Violence should never be a part of any religion. 

People who respond emotionally to inflammatory incidents can easily fall into the trap of those people with ill intent. Muslims have recently shown the world remarkable victories in the battle for equality and justice, with the mostly peaceful uprisings of the Arab Spring. People around the world understand and are sympathetic to Muslim frustrations about this controversial online film. Events that are unfolding will show how well the majority of Muslim people respond to the incident.

It is undeniable that reaction to the film stems largely from simmering anti-American sentiment. Views from local speakers who attended a recent “Kom Chad Luek” programme aired on The Nation Channel on Friday gave insight into the attacks on US embassies across the Muslim world. The guests reflected the views of many ordinary Muslims. 

Saravuth Sriwanyos suggested that Washington should also be accountable for allowing this controversial movie, produced in the US, to get into the public domain. Veerachote Hameema said nothing could justify mob violence that leads to casualties. People who think the movie creates misunderstanding should correct that misunderstanding by educating or communicating to get the right message across. Violence can only lead to more conflict and hatred.

The guests agreed that Muslim people in Thailand were talking about how they too might protest. Paitoon Promwong said people were talking about the film and discussing options to show their disapproval. One panellist said they have to act because it is an obligation under their religion. But they insisted that protests should be peaceful, and that Muslims can coexist peacefully with people of different faiths in Thailand. They also noted that anyone who resorts to violence is apparently not part of any religion.