The Return Of The Danes

So, it's official, the idiotic and completely bloody pointless 'boycott' of all things Danish is over. A conference of Islamic 'scholars' in Bahrain (according to Big Pharoah) has

issued a statement calling for the Muslim world to end their boycott of products made by the Danish company Arla Foods, the manufacturer of Lurpak butter.

I don't know why none of the local papers have reported this, but I did see a freezer at my local Choithram's today, packed to bursting with Lurpak. And the price is now Dhs 8.25, as against Dhs 7.50 before the boycott. I didn't check any sell-by dates.

Dear America

With all the baloney about DP World controlling some ports in the US, I replied to a comment on Secret Arabian. An American commenter had expressed curiosity about exactly how 'free' trade is in the UAE. He'd heard that foreigners could not have full control of their businesses. Here's my reply:

Foreign ownership of companies in the UAE goes like this: generally, you need a local partner, and that partner will own 51% of the business. In Free Zones, however, foreign individuals and companies can own 100% of their business. There is no corporate or income tax in the UAE.

It is likely that the 51/49 ownership rule will be relaxed or revoked in the next few years. Free Zones in Dubai include Jebel Ali port (an enormous industrial area), Internet and Media Cities, Airport Free Zone and Dubai Healthcare City. There are many other Free Zones in the pipeline in Dubai, so whatever kind of business you want to invest in, you will be able to do it without a local partner.

Dubai realises how important FDI is, and that is why they are setting up all the Free Zones (I'm sure Dubai would love to abolish the local partner thing altogether, but that's a UAE Federal law, so it's not so easy).

In terms of Middle East reaction to the cartoons, the UAE has been very moderate. There have been protests and there is a boycott of Danish goods (misguided in my opinion), but there is one thing you absolutely have to understand about the UAE. It is the most liberal country in the region.

It supports the West in numerous ways. It is staking its future on being the friendly face of the Middle East: anyone (who has the money!) can come and live and work and do business here. It is not in the interests of this country to encourage terrorism or extremism in any form. You need to remember that the country is only 30 years old, and what it has achieved in that short time is absolutely mind-blowing.

No response from the anon American yet.

I Got Lurpak!

Only a little bit. BetterArf and I went to the local food and bev establishment this evening for dinner. Beside the bread were some individually-wrapped portions of Lurpak. I immediately stuffed them into my pocket, and we asked a waitress to bring more. This establishment is also selling a lot more Carlsberg than it used to. Good on 'em.

By the time I got home, of course, I had forgotten all about my pocket full of molten Danish butter. Yeukkh!

Lurpak Again

I can't believe the Danish cartoons controversy is not only still going on, it is being used as an excuse for a lot of wanton violence, rioting and needless deaths. 11 in Pakistan, 16 in Libya, etc. For what? To make a point - 'we are upset'. Possibly more accurately, 'our Imam told us to be upset'.

Abu Ardvaark did an interesting post on the topic a few days ago. He described a report he had seen on Al Arabiya TV about "a new petition issued by 41 leading Islamist personalities on February 13 calling for a resolution of the cartoons controversy through the passage of an international law criminalizing insults against Prophets (Mohammed, Jesus, and Moses are the ones named)".

I posted this comment in reply to that:

"No, no, no!

You cannot bind secular countries into observance of the sensibilities of the gazillion religions and sects that exist on earth. So why would you single out one for special treatment?

I appreciate that many people were whipped up into a frenzy of 'I am offended'. But the solution now demanded is just utterly unworkable. It seems to me, and I say this with the greatest of respect to all true Muslims, that many extremists in the Islamic world are trying to use this issue to inflame conflict. And if the ridiculous notion of criminalising blasphemy against all religions were to come to pass, I would be looking for another planet to live on.

The 'offended' are now demanding apologies from the Danish government AND people. Come on! Regret has been been expressed, but you will absolutely not get a full apology from a Government whose laws unequivocally state that it cannot be held responsible for any offence committed by its subjects.

How hard is that to understand? I believe that both the cartoonists and the newspaper have apologised: these are the people responsible, so why not just accept that and get back to normality?

Islamists may mock 'freedom of speech', but it is a right that has been fought for over centuries in the West and it will not be compromised by a bunch of religious fanatics."

Also, I note with regret that our supermarket chains here in the Emirates are still boycotting Danish products. It would be interesting to see what would happen if one of these chains was brave enough to put these products back out on display. I for one would be filling my freezer with Lurpak. I already have a lifetime's supply of Lego (the greatest thing ever invented for kids of all ages).

What gets me about this is that foreign media are saying 'people of the Emirates are fully supporting the boycott of Danish goods' when what they actually should be saying is that 'people of the Emirates are being denied the chance to buy Danish goods'. Bit of a difference. Boycotts don't work the way you want them to. Arla Foods, the innocent victim in all this, are losing $1.5 million every day in the Gulf. Quite soon they will have to decide whether to tough it out, or close down their Middle East operations, resulting in the loss of 800 jobs in Saudi Arabia and 200 in the UAE. Did Arla Foods draw or publish the cartoons? Did they have anything to do with them at all? No they did not.

Does any right-thinking Muslim think this company should be penalised in this way for something they had nothing to do with? Or, for that matter, the government and people of Denmark? Somebody tell me...

(Oh, and I just found this - please read it).

Where's My Lurpak?

OK, I was trying to keep my head down on the Danish cartoon fiasco. But I cannot ignore it any more, it's too important. This issue will probably go down in history as the week when the West and the Islamic world finally realise that they simply will never understand each other. I don't care to speculate about what might happen hereafter.

I do know this: if a similar act had been perpetrated against a Western target (Christ with a bomb on his head, for example) the response in the West would be a chuckle, a shrug of the shoulders. Doesn't matter. Not much bothered.

One of the basic issues here is that the West is largely secular. Religion is important to some people, but it is nothing like as demanding as being a devout Muslim. Western countries are no longer governed by ancient religious tracts, they are governed by humanism and rationality. To quote Voltaire:

I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

And for every single European, this is something we know in our bones. Going against this, for a European, seems to be the exact equivalent of somebody making a joke about the prophet Mohammed. Don't go there. OK?

Nothing much happened back in September when these cartoons were first published, but the leader of the Danish Muslims wanted to whip up a bit of global attention. He printed a booklet containing reproductions of the published cartoons plus a few others that were far more offensive. One of them showed Mohammed (pbuh) with the face of a pig. You'll agree, even if you live on Mars, that that is pretty fucking offensive, but it was nothing to do with the Nyllens-Posten series. Anyhoo, our mullah goes to see the top boys in Egypt and Saudi and wherever else, and shows 'em the booklet. They're a bit upset, but nothing happens...

...until the Hajj tragedy in Makkah, when suddenly the Saudi Government press machine needed to deflect world attention from their never-ending incompetence, and so they turned their attention on the cartoons.

Now we have a boycott of Danish goods throughout the Arabian Gulf. Not as in individual customers not buying Danish goods, but supermarket chains pulling the stuff off the shelves. 'Excuse me, I want to buy a lot of Lurpak'. 'Sorry sir, it's in the cold store, we are supporting the pointless boycott of Danish products'. Hmmm.

So we now have the ridiculous situation where the Prime Minister of Denmark has offered an apology to the Muslim World. He was totally wrong to do so. Correction: apparently he has not apologised. He would be totally wrong to do so. It is not his responsibility. In a free country, the press can say what the hell they like. If that libels anyone then the libelled party has a proper legal path to seek redress. The Prime Minister is in no way responsible for the actions of individuals in his country.

Back to the Muslims. One of the issues is the so-called prohibition on any kind of image of the Prophet. Shi'a and Sufis don't even believe in that. It's not in the Quran, only a suspect Hadith:
http://www.crankyprofessor.com/archives/000492.html. Westerners just don't get it, really, is it the end of the world to draw a picture of anybody? Is it?

Of the twelve cartoons, (setting aside the idea that any kind of representation of the Prophet is supposed to be haram) only two of them can really be considered offensive. If you have not seen the cartoons, go here.

I'm really sorry that this has happened. But here's the thing. Westerners can and will say and publish what they want in their own countries. They have full, sovereign, legal authority to do so. They are not required to observe the sensitivities of Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists or even Christians. They are not even beholden to the sensitivities of their own government (who, after all, are only elected short-term representatives) or of any other government. Unfamiliar with the concept? See this...

Freedom of men under government is to have a standing rule to live by, common to every one of that society, and made by the legislative power vested in it; a liberty to follow my own will in all things, when the rule prescribes not [if not illegal], and not to be subject to the inconstant, unknown, arbitrary will of another man.
- John Locke (1632 - 1704) Political Philosopher and Genius

As long as you are not directly inciting violence against members of a particular religion or slandering any individual then it's OK. I, as a Westerner, I know this in my bones.

And so I am deeply disappointed by the local reaction to this controversy. It is unreasonable, it is directed at the wrong people (not just an apology is demanded locally, but an OATH from the Danish PM that this would never happen again - as if he could even think of doing such a thing). It just highlights two utterly different ways of looking at the world that can probably not be reconciled.
The west: we can say what we like.
The east: no you can't.

Dammit, it was all going so well. My bones are aching.