Considering the recent entry of my home nation into the spotlight of the media, it probably comes as no surprise to those who know me that I now feel a need to speak out and lend some form of illumination to my cultural background - one, which has recently managed to offend Muslims worldwide and most Middle Eastern nations to an extent that might well culminate in tragedy, if it hasn't already.

Danes and religion.
The Danes are generally a practical people. From the era of Norse paganism to the introduction of Christianity by Harold Bluetooth at around 965 AC, and all the way up until today, there has been a tradition of tempered restraint when it comes to allowing religious interference in secular matters; perhaps because a relatively harsh climate forced the Danes to put survival at the top of the agenda on many occasions in the distant past when the gods proved less than helpful. Perhaps the Danes, in recognition of the fact that they are, in reality, converts and share a history involving dual religions, are more open to the idea that religion is something very personal and individual, rather than homogeneously omnipresent.

Rituals and ceremonies can be shared with others, but the true kingdom of deity – the greatest wonder – fills the universe of the self and remains invisible to everyone else. It follows, then, that religious customs and rules are of superficial value – a mere formality, at best. It is the intent, rather than the letter, which must be embraced, and hence, if you approach a Dane, citing verses from a religious text in a bid to impress him, I guarantee that you will be sorely disappointed.

Denmark and immigration.
In recent decades, Denmark has become host to an increasing number of people seeking refuge from hunger, war, and violent persecution. Kurds, Tamils, Somalis, and many other nationals have sought asylum within its borders and the Danish government has addressed many issues in its efforts to accommodate and govern the newcomers.

The main concern of the Danes has been the question of integration – how to prevent the creation of isolated ethnic enclaves and ensure the participation of immigrants in the Danish society. One obvious problem has been the inability of some immigrants to speak Danish, even after staying in the country for many years. Another has been a stark cultural difference in the view of women's rights of yet other immigrants, culminating last year in the highly publicized murder of a 19-year-old Pakistani-born woman, shot down in the street in broad daylight by her own brother, motivated by her refusal to marry the man her family had chosen for her.

With the influx of immigrants follows a flow of seemingly alien values which clash with many different native values intrinsic to Danish culture. A continuing debate in the media as well as in the political arena centers on where the immigrant's obligation to integrate stops and his right to express an individual identity begins.

Jyllands-Posten's motivation.
How did things go so horribly wrong? What was the Danish newspaper's motivation for printing these allegedly blasphemous cartoons, depicting the Muslim prophet? To put it into a sentence, Jyllands-Posten believes that Danish citizens have an obligation to benefit the Danish society, in reciprocity to how the same citizens benefit from that society, no matter where said citizen was originally born.

If you've chosen to become a member of the club, you're expected to contribute in some way. If you're isolated and unable to interact with your fellow citizens because you refuse to learn how to speak and understand their language, or subscribe to a culture of disrespect toward fundamental humanitarian values in a manner that threatens the security of your fellow citizens, the state, acting as the representative of its citizens, must intervene in some way and make right what is wrong.

Thus, if Danish imams incite hatred and call for jihad against non-Muslims, they should be prosecuted by the state. If self-proclaimed neo-Nazis incite hatred and acts of violence against immigrants, they, too, should be prosecuted by the state. If someone issues threats of violence against any individual or institution, for whatever reason, the result should be identical.

This insistence on intervention by the state on its citizens' behalf may stem from the fact that, during World War II, Denmark was invaded by German troops and as a result of the forceful transfer of power from the Danish state to the occupants, who often had little regard for the well-being of non-Germans, the Danes were oppressed and some even unjustly murdered. Among those were Jewish citizens, those unable to flee, who were captured and sent to Nazi-run concentration camps abroad where very few survived. The memory of that time still lingers in the Danish psyche, which is why people who wish to oppress and abuse the freedoms of their fellow citizens are not well tolerated.

Returning to the case at hand, it all started last year with author of the Danish book titled, in translation, "The Koran and the life of the prophet Muhammad," Kåre Bluitgen, complaining that he was unable to find anyone willing to provide illustrations for his work, since artists he had approached worried about the potential for a violent reaction from Muslim extremists if they depicted the prophet.

Although the publication of that particular book never met with any objection from the Danish Muslim community, the artists may indeed have had good reason for their fears. The author Salman Rushdie was condemned to death by Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini upon the publication of his book "The Satanic Verses" in 1989 and was forced to live in hiding for many years. More recently, director Theo Van Gogh was killed after he made a film about violence against Muslim women.

Nevertheless, Jyllands-Posten, after pondering the question of whether it is reasonable for the media to censor themselves out of fear of becoming the target of violence, decided to test the waters and commissioned twelve cartoonists to render Muhammad as they, themselves, saw him. The result was twelve satirical portraits of the prophet, which are now the outrage of the Muslim world. I am quite certain that most of those outraged have never actually seen the images themselves.
Here's a sample of the drawings, so you can judge for yourself.

These twelve cartoons might never have become an international issue, were it not for a group of Danish imams, led by Ahmed Abu Laban, who initiated a series of meetings with Middle Eastern representatives, starting with the Egyptian ambassador, in an attempt to put pressure on the Danish government. Unfortunately, one of the delegation's members spread misinformation during these meetings and said that Jyllands-Posten was a state-run newspaper and that the Danish government intended to publish a censored and adulterated version of the Koran.

Personally, I do not understand how a Danish citizen could possibly possess such a grave lack of knowledge about the state of affairs in his own home country. Nevertheless, it appears to be mainly this one person's contribution which really set things in motion. The damage was done, even after the Danish prime minister attempted to set the record straight and explain the true nature of the situation to the growing number of outraged Middle Eastern nations.

Incidentally, this is not the first time a cartoon has caused such controversy, although none in the past have led to embassies being attacked and firebombed by angry mobs, as is presently the case.
In 2002, The Tallahassee Democrat printed a cartoon created by Doug Marlette, which prompted The Council on American-Islamic Relations to demand an apology on behalf of one billion Muslims. They got none.

My personal theory.
Looking at the big picture, I suspect that several nations in the Middle East have been desperately looking for something like this. After nine-eleven, Muslim nations felt that their honor was tainted by the perpetrators and they have felt the weight of this guilt along with the distrust of the Western world for a very long time. They felt, perhaps, that the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan was justified, but that invading Iraq was a blow to the pride of the entire region. Iraq was probably the most powerful nation in the Middle East until it was decimated by U.S. forces during operation Desert Storm.

Today, Iraq has only the semblance of a nation, plagued by violence and internal bickering exposed to the world by foreign media, and a continued inability to feed, much less secure the safety, of its own citizens. As a direct result, extremism is rampant, undermining the apparent power of several neighboring governments.

The Middle East may have its inherent challenges in terms of government, but the meddlesome West only makes things worse. What's more, it is obvious that challenging the power of the U.S. amounts to suicide unless you're crazy enough to enter into a race against time in a bid to acquire nuclear arms. However, history has shown that the U.S. is much more respectful toward nations that've got the bomb.

It is a matter of hurt pride, not some twelve cartoons. It's about a feeling of impotence concerning the ability and opportunity to mind one's own affairs. The cartoons are an excuse to raise an issue that will provide some counterweight to the collective shame that is the helpless state of the Middle East. It probably doesn't help that the Danish flag bears a great resemblance to the banners carried by Christian knights in the era of the crusades. It is all very unfortunate, and I think even more so, since my country is merely a scapegoat for sentiments and events it has had very little impact on.

What now?
So what do we do about all this? Most importantly, we must resist succumbing to our fear and our tendency to allow radical factions on both sides of controversial issues, such as this, to take us hostage in their wars. When faced with spectacular and unreasonable attacks by people, who claim to represent a large interest group, it may be tempting to believe them. It is easy to forget that, on an individual level, the Muslims, who attack embassies and fuel this entire overreaction, are a minority. So are those non-Muslims who resist a peaceful coexistence of Islam and other religions worldwide. In reality, they are just the ones who shout the loudest - and those attracting the media's attention. Unfortunately, the vast number of moderate, well-informed citizens across the world, who do not agree that violence and threats solve anything, are rarely heard at all. Perhaps it is time to speak up.