|
FOR once, the United States is partly on the sidelines of a clash of ideas between Muslims and the West.
But analysts say the Bush administration is being less than surefooted in its responses to the uproar and deadly protests over cartoon images of the Prophet Muhammad that were deeply offensive to Muslims.
In the second week of violent protests, tens of thousands of Muslims demonstrated around the world Friday. Iranian youths rioted outside the French Embassy in Tehran despite calls for calm by governments and religious leaders.
In its first reaction more than a week ago, the State Department appeared to blame the European media for publishing the cartoons, instead of condemning the violence that resulted, although U.S. officials said their message was misconstrued and taken out of context.
Then, after days of careful statements that supported press freedoms while denouncing violence, President George W. Bush suggested anew last week that the press had been irresponsible.
"America's initial response was a bit lacking and regrettable, in that it actually sided with those who were offended as opposed to the Europeans, and particularly the Danes, who should have gotten unqualified support," said Reuel Marc Gerecht, a conservative foreign policy scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and the Project for a New American Century.
Both organisations have tight ties with the Bush administration.
Gerecht blames Middle East specialists in the State Department for tending to placate anti-democratic Arab regimes and mute criticism that might inflame Muslim anger.
Other analysts gave Washington better marks for its response to what, at first, was an issue primarily affecting Denmark, then other European nations where media republished the Danish cartoons in solidarity.
"The administration quite rightly struck a balanced tone, balancing freedom of expression with responsibility in the media," said Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, a civil rights and advocacy group.
As protests turned deadly and European embassies were damaged in Damascus, the administration went on the offensive to accuse adversaries Syria and Iran of fomenting and profiting from violence. "The world ought to call them on it," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said.
Bush had earlier implicated Syria. Neither cited specific evidence, but spokesmen later pointed to numerous circumstantial factors, saying massive street protests could not occur in a near-totalitarian state like Syria without official acquiescence.
The U.S. accusations almost certainly are on the mark, analysts said. The finger-pointing also inserted the administration squarely into the controversy and may have fed a perception among Muslims that the United States was turning the protests to its own ends.
Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah said Rice and Bush should "shut up," and Muslims should continue their protests.
"Where they started having difficulty, and helping to direct and bring anger toward the United States, was taking the position that this was exploitation by politicians," said University of Maryland Middle East scholar Shibley Telhami. "While it's true at some level, it comes across as if it's missing the force of it for the vast majority of Muslims."
Gerecht said the administration was right to speak out as the protests turned increasingly ugly and as Arab government involvement seemed clear.
"What was slightly regrettable was that it took the administration a little bit of time to state the obvious," he said.
Analysts also said they do not detect much satisfaction within the administration that Europeans, not Americans, have caught the brunt of the anger. Many European governments parted company with Bush over the Iraq war, and polls show European publics are often scornful of U.S. influence and motives overseas.
Europe and the United States both recognise that Muslim immigrants are often more assimilated in American society than they are in Europe, and the United States has been the better for it, said Jon Alterman, Middle East program director at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
"They all recognise that, so I don't think there's been much schadenfreude, that 'hey, the Europeans are taking it on the chin for a change,"' he said.
|