Misinterpreting a fiasco

A series of characteristically sloppy articles and reports in the Norwegian press has raised the issue: why aren't Norwegian Muslims take a more visible stance against violence and terrorism?  In response to this, Noman Mubashir decided to arrange a demonstration last Saturday night to show that most of the 80,000 Moslems in Norway are against terrorism.

According to Bruce Bawer (who was there and took photographs), about 200 people showed up for this demonstration, and 150 of these were non-Moslems who wanted to show support for the initiative.  A particularly uncharitable interpretation would be that the remaining 79,950 Muslims are favorably or neutrally disposed to terrorism.  And you can be sure that xenophobic tendencies in Norway will be uncharitable.  This, to translate the Norwegian expression, was an "unfortunate development."

Noman Mubashir isn't likely to try this again soon, and the Norwegian press is not exactly making huge headlines out of the fiasco.  One "expert," Kari Vogt, warned that the demonstration wasn't likely to get a lot of interest, because it was Carl I. Hagen who challenged the Muslim community to take a stand.  And Carl I. Hagen is the most prominent politician who speaks out against the Muslim influence in Norway.

So here's what I think:

• Norwegian Muslims shouldn't be obliged to arrange a demonstration to show that they're against terrorism and violence.  Such purity tests are undignified and undemocratic, and Carl I. Hagen should know this.
• It would appear that many Moslems feel that the uproar following Van Gogh's murder is closely related to the pressure they experience every day to assimilate to Norwegian culture, to become less "Muslim" and more "Norwegian."
• In addition, many Moslems probably don't completely buy into the premise that there's a war against terrorism - they see a conflict between two worlds they both feel a part of, and are likely to be ambivalent about it.
• All this anger and anxiety is getting in the way of a reasonably coherent response to terrorism among the Norwegian Muslim community. 

I would imagine that these points cause two kinds of reactions, both partly right and mostly wrong:

1. "Excuses, excuses - we can only interpret the poor turnout as proof that Norwegian Moslems either actively or tacitly support terrorist acts."
   

   There must be dozens of causes I believe in that don't bring me out to the streets to protest.  We - or rather Noman Mubashir - should ask why they didn't turn up, but we shouldn't leap to conclusions.  On the other hand, it should be pretty clear to the Muslim community leaders that even if it's unfair, it's time they made their view on terrorism very clear. 

2. "We have to do more to understand the situation Norwegian Moslems find themselves in, and reach out to them in the spirit of understanding and solidarity."
   

   The problem isn't just us, and we can't take all the responsibility for solving it.  As Christopher Hitchens recently noted in a discussion with Jon Stewart, we are really witnessing a civil war within Islam, and terrorism is really a way to drag others into it.  Norwegian (and indeed European) society has a lot of medieval xenophobia, racism, and other bigotry to exorcise from its collective soul, but the big problem is modernity breaking through into the Middle East.  What Norwegians should say is: "we'll deal with our medieval heritage if you deal with yours, and better yet, let's do it together."

I could always hope that the Norwegian press and political leaders use this as a way to make the debate a bit more sophisticated and nuanced.  I'm probably hoping in vain, though.