Pak Sahafat – Europe, as one of the usual claimants of human rights protection, had a late and passive reaction to the desecration of the Holy Quran in Sweden, which hurt the feelings of the Muslims of the world, and once again showed the gap between claims and actions.
According to Pak Sahafat News Agency, while the Muslims of the world were celebrating Eid al-Adha last week, the Swedish police, in an anti-Islamic and anti-religious decision, agreed to the plan to desecrate the Holy Quran by a citizen of this country and allowed anti-Islamists to burn the holy book of Muslims in front of one of the mosques in Stockholm.
This is despite the fact that the Court of Appeal opposed the police’s action in banning Quran burning more than two weeks ago after the desecration of the Holy Quran in front of the Turkish Embassy in Sweden.
Stockholm’s previous action in this regard was met with weeks of demonstrations and calls for boycotting Swedish goods and Turkey’s opposition to the country’s membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
In recent years, some European and especially Scandinavian countries have been the scene of violation and desecration of Muslim sanctities. In the shadow of the support of the Swedish police, the right-wing extremists tried to set fire to the Holy Quran, and Muslim protests were also suppressed.
Background
After this heinous act, the international community, especially the Muslim countries, strongly condemned it, and some of them summoned the Swedish ambassadors in their countries in protest against this act. While Hattak is an Iraqi-born man who has applied for asylum in Sweden, the head of Iraq’s Supreme Judicial Council on Thursday ordered that he be prosecuted and legal steps taken to extradite him to this country.
Last Thursday, Iraqi citizens marched towards the Swedish embassy in Baghdad and entered the embassy in protest of the Stockholm government’s permission to insult the Holy Quran and demanded the expulsion of the ambassador.
Since it was expected that the European Union, as one of the claimants of protecting human rights, would quickly condemn this desecration that hurt the feelings of hundreds of millions of Muslims, but the bloc’s reaction was significantly delayed.
However, it seems that this long-delayed reaction was not intended to condemn or oppose insulting the Quran, but to condemn the gathering of Iraqis in front of the Swedish embassy. The European Union started its first sentence in a statement this Saturday: The European Union is closely following the developments in Baghdad and also calls for calm and restraint. We condemn attacks against diplomatic places.
After expressing diplomatic concerns, the statement of the Europeans addresses the issue of insulting the Holy Quran and adds without mentioning the permission issued for this heinous act: The European Union joins the Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs in strongly opposing the burning of the Quran by a person in Sweden. This action does not in any way reflect the views of the European Union.
It is also stated in this statement: Burning the Quran or any other holy book is insulting, disrespectful and a provocative act. Demonstrations of racism, xenophobia and related intolerance have no place in Europe.
Expressing symbolic regret that this heinous act took place at the same time as Eid al-Adha, the European Union stated that it will continue to defend freedom of religion or belief and freedom of expression outside and inside the bloc. “Now is the time to come together for mutual understanding and respect and prevent further escalation.”
The importance of the subject
Looking at the body of the statement and the use of words that deliberately avoided Sweden’s condemnation of desecration of the Holy Quran, it can be seen that the European Union not only does not take much action in practical terms to combat anti-Islamism, but even from the appropriate wording for condemning it.
The Europeans strongly condemned the gathering of Iraqis in front of the Swedish Embassy, ​​which was a protest against the desecration of the Quran, and in return, they limited themselves to only a declaration of opposition to the burning of this holy book. In announcing their opposition to this issue, they hid behind the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Sweden and did not take an independent position on this issue.
In the following, the issue of “burning the Quran” was placed in the shadow of insulting “any other holy book” and again, no specific position was taken in condemning this action at the same time as Eid al-Adha. We have always witnessed that this bloc has not made any serious efforts to prevent Koran burning and anti-Islamism.
Not only Europe has not taken a step in the field of Islamophobia, but it has had occasional objections to some activities in this direction, including setting a day to fight Islamophobia.
Organizations aligned with the European Union, including NATO, not only supported this anti-Islam movement, but called it “freedom of expression” in their opinion. On Thursday, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, in a two-sided stance, on the one hand considered the burning of the holy book of Muslims as an offensive and objectionable act, but on the other hand claimed that “in an independent legal system, this is not necessarily illegal.” This senior NATO official also did not consider the burning of the Holy Quran in Sweden “illegal” and considered it a part of freedom of expression.
Assessment
The Western group, especially the European Union, enters the scene when harming human rights appears in their favor and issue statements that even intervene in the internal affairs of countries. At these times, each of these countries, by using the capacity of the media as a tool, creates a media atmosphere to advance their goals to make what is a small issue appear big.
But in the recent case, when a volume of the book Qomdes of Muslims was burned in Sweden, despite hurting the feelings of hundreds of millions of Muslims, on the eve of one of the biggest holidays in the Islamic world, it is enough to issue a brief and conservative statement.