It took hours from the attack Charlie Hebdo was a fact, until the events in Paris became a fierce battle for freedom of speech in Norwegian. - One turning point, says Vebjørn Selbekk of the Day. - Tragic if Paris terror increases the conflict in Norway, says press veteran Sven Egil Omdal.
(THIS ARTICLE IS MACHINE TRANSLATED by Google from Norwegian)
Attacks. Friday 9. January saw the drama in Paris say preliminary ending, with the storming in the suburb of Dammartin-en-Goële. The two assailants from the attack on the satire magazine Charlie Hebdo 7. January was killed as they stormed the wall of police officers who had surrounded the factory premises they had entrenched.
Then the terror, which also hit a Jewish kosher shop, cost 20 human lives, including the three perpetrators. It is the biggest terror attack on French soil since 1961, the worst in Europe since Anders Behring Breivik 22. July 2011 killed 8 people in Oslo and 69 on Utøya.
Wednesday 14. In January, al-Qaeda in Yemen posted a video on the internet claiming responsibility for the terrorist acts, as perpetrators themselves said a week earlier, stating that the attack was planned by Ayman al-Zawahiri, the organization's camp site Osama bin Laden was killed i 2011.
The Sunday after the attack, 4 millions of Frenchmen showed up in victims' markings. Around the Republic Square in Paris, close to 2 millionaires met, including leading politicians from across 60 countries. In a number of countries around the world, there were similar markings, among others in Stavanger. These spontaneous reactions to the attack were characterized by solidarity with the victim through the slogan "Je suis Charlie" ("I am Charlie").
No peace of mind
Yet it did not take long for tragedy to turn into fiery political debate.
"This was expected. The blindness and deafness our campers have shown over the last few years, are partly responsible for this attack. ”
The verdict of Marine Le Pen, the leader of the French right-wing party Front National, falls on TV channel France 2 mere hours after the announcement of the shooting in the premises of Charlie Hebdo entered Wednesday 7 January. On Monday, former President Nicolas Sarkozy went out and called for a new immigration debate in the country. One member of his party, the UMP, advocated expanded powers of French intelligence, according to Le Figaro newspaper.
The contrast of the days following the July 22 attack could not have been greater. There was no political bourgeoisie in a shocking French society. Nor did it happen many days before Norwegian politicians and commentators began to lift their tormenting fingers.
- Surreal
It was the new TV channel VGTV which, in live broadcast on January 7, first linked the attack on Charlie Hebdo to the Norwegian debate on the Muhammad caricatures of 2006. The criticism of former Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Støre, now Ap-leiar, came all the way at 14 time, a few hours after the attack on the editorial staff, in the midst of the terrorist hunt.
Vebjørn Selbekk, editor of the Christian newspaper Dagen, was a guest in the studio on 7 January together with Hanne Skartveit, political editor of VG. In 2006, Selbekk was the editor-in-chief of the Magazine, which printed the controversial caricatures of Prophet Muhammad on January 10, 2006, and was killed because of the publications. The last week he has received a lot of support from Norwegians, and he calls the Norwegian debate the last week as surreal as the one in 2006.
- It's nice to get so much support, even though the backdrop is awful. It seems as if a lot has happened with the Norwegian attitudes since 2006, says Selbekk to Ny Tid.
- After July 22, the public debate was put on hold until we had more information about what was the background for the attack. Why is it so different now after the January 7 attack?
- I think the situation is different. During July 22 there was talk of a solo terrorist, but here is a terror network that is in force. At the same time, it is important to take our experiences from July 22 and the message based on unity and dignity that one showed then, Selbekk says.
- Stupid government
The conversation about the said broadcast on VGTV quickly brushed on the roles of the leading politicians during the caricature battle. Hanne Skartveit calls the red-green government and Jonas Gahr Støre's stance "cowardly", among other things because Støre that time apologized if anyone felt offended by caricatures in Norwegian newspapers.
When asked by Ny Tid, she explains why it was natural to bring in the caricature dispute and the role of the Norwegian government in 2006 with the Al-Qaeda attack in Paris, she answers:
- There was a natural connection between the cases. Both are about caricatures and the voices of freedom of expression in the face of radical Islamist forces.
– After July 22, the press cautiously speculated on the motive and reasons. Why is it not like that now?
- That's not right. Me took public restraint throughout our coverage. When information about the female perpetrators was available, it was appropriate to put it into that context, says Skartveit.
In recent days, Jonas Gahr Støre has been harshly criticized by both media and political opponents in the Storting, including former government colleague Bård Vegar Solhjell, because the AP leader would not explicitly state that it was right to stand up to blasphemy. The criticism was directed at the following statements in Dagens Næringsliv on January 8, after questions about the right to blaspheme:
"No, I do not want to say that it is important to stand up for the right to blaspheme. I want to say it's right to stand up for the right to freedom of speech. "
Support from Kohn
On the other hand, Støre receives support from the Christian People's Party (KrF). On Wednesday this week party owner Knut Arild Hareide went out and thought Støre had our crystal clear when it came to freedom of speech. "There are no goals to offend to offend. But I think all my opinions are about the same, "Hareide said of the Støre debate for the Class Fight. Also Ervin Kohn, renter of the Mosaic Faith Society, came out and supported Støre's nuances in the debate. Kohn thinks it is difficult to have an open debate on freedom of speech in today's Norway.
It is no better on Løvebakken that the attack in Paris has left traces. On Monday, TV 2 indicated that the Labor Party was aiming for a record turnout on their polls, but that this suddenly changed after Wednesday 7 January. From leaning to 47,6%, the party in the next few days went down to 39,7, while Høgre and Frp went up noticeably.
Whether it is the terrorist attack itself or Støre's role in the political debate afterwards, it may seem as if the last week has not been marked by the Labor Party. Støre did not have the right to comment on the case to Ny Tid this week.
Luminous lighthouse
Nor has the Norwegian press gone free from sharp criticism in the wake of the Paris terror. Under the hard-hitting title "- Could Stopped Terror" in the Class Fight on Saturday, January 10, cultural and debate editor Hilde Sandvik in Bergens Tidende went out against Norwegian editors in their caricature fight. According to the newspaper, Sandvik thought that the attack on Charlie Hebdo might never have found the city if more mediums had been out faster by printing the caricatures in 2005-2006.
To Ny Tid, she says that she asked questions about what would have happened if more media had done as Charlie Hebdo and printed the cartoons in 2006.
- One can at least imagine it. There was an occasional printing of the caricatures in various newspapers, but Magazinet and Jyllandsposten became clearly shining lighthouses, says Sandvik when Ny Tid asks her to deepen her statement.
Among those who responded to Sandvik's statements in the Class Fight are commentator in Aftenbladet and former tenant of the Norwegian Journalist Team, Sven Egil Omdal.
- Firstly, it is difficult to see how the Norwegian editors chose to do when they could change the attitudes of individuals in France in 2015. Secondly, it is strange to think that such a massive front, a group feels excluded and despised, should have made the tensions less, says Omdal to Ny Tid. We ask the debate editor in Bergens Tidende again:
Sandvik, is there no danger that a mass publication would then have appeared even more provocative and thus made the situation even more polarized?
- It can never be known, and it is clear that it is impossible to offset the event. My point was that it was an editor's responsibility, and in the first round I was the one who chose to print the standing att as extreme, says Sandvik.
- Omdal in Aftenbladet reacts to your statement, and says it is strange to think that a group that already feels excluded, should react less to such an action.
- Again, I will turn it on my head. There are as many who want to practice the principle of freedom of speech, which is itself the basis of democracy. Then we can go in to discuss other relevant issues, judging if I have departed from the idea that everyone can push forward and get opportunities. In my view, there is no contradiction between that and holding onto the core values that have been fought hard for, Sandvik says.
Another debate
While the bourgeoisie in Paris is broken, several environmentalists have spontaneously picked on the Charlie Hebdo case. On Monday, January 12, more than 200 people took part in demonstration trains in Oslo, against Islamic influence and immigration to European countries. Behind were people claiming to be the Norwegian chapter of the right-wing German organization PEGIDA, which since last year has had numerous demonstrations in German cities.
Omdal meiner me must be careful not to let the terrorist attack in Paris shape the public vocabulary in Norway.
Showed Charlie's true face
Last week's New Time cover by free-town cartoonist Arifur Rehman showed both the Jesus and Muhammad cartoons of Charlie Hebdo. It must be the first time on a Norwegian front page. "Religion exists for people, people do not exist for religions," says Rehman.
BY KIM BREDESEN kim@nytid.no
Interview. The front page of the previous issue of Ny Tid (16 January) was designed with a view to the debate on freedom of expression and caricature in Norway in the wake of Al-Qaida's terrorist attack in Paris on 7 January.
The caricature on the front page is designed by Ny Tids artist Arifur Rahman, has several layers of opinion, framed one after the other. We see Labor leader Jonas Gahr Støre and Dagen editor Vebjørn Selbekk each holding their own Charlie Hebdo caricature: The former holds a caricature of the Virgin Mary giving birth to Jesus, with God in the background (from Charlie Hebdo's latest issue before the terrorist attack). Selbekk holds a caricature of the Muslims' last prophet, Mohammed, who says in French: "100 lashes if you do not die of laughter".
It will be the first time a Norwegian newspaper has printed Charlie Hebdo's Jesus and Muhammad caricatures on the front page at the same time. In general, it has been the Islamic caricatures that have been shown, but left-wing and secular Charlie Hebdo has hit a large number of religions, such as Christianity in the latest issue before January 7 (NB! New Time has not printed the most provocative and offensive Charlie Hebdo caricatures for Christians, as these are too far removed from the limits of decency and objectivity of the New Age, the editor remarks).
Rehman is a Muslim born himself and has had to flee his home country of Bangladesh after threats. He now lives in Stavanger, where he has been given the status of freelancer
- You got a lot of positive reactions on your front page from a number of Ny Tid readers, such as from minority voices and Muslims in the Norwegian public. It is just emphasized that you bring out new nuances in Charlie's critique of religion. Was the reaction as expected?
- It is so good that readers have reacted positively. I want readers in the future to both tolerate and accept that caricatures are a natural part of our art and cultural life. This must be a free art form, no matter how it confronts a particular theme.
- The characters you have drawn both practice freedom of speech towards two monotheistic religions. What can humor say about human behavior that debates cannot?
- On the front page I have shown that Charlie Hebdo not only makes caricatures of Muhammad, but also of Jesus. There are many types of readers, some like to make fun of Muhammad, but not of Jesus. But others like caricatures of Jesus, but not of Muhammad. Comics are a visual art form that can be used to explain one's own story or views. Because of religion, this can be dangerous, because some religious denominations do not accept that you do, and are offended. I think this is an excuse, they would rather not have anyone criticize them at all.
- The Russian literary scholar Mikhail Bakhtin has written about the carnivalesque in the Middle Ages: Back then, it was a popular spectacle where people dressed up and parodied high-ranking figures. That way, the lowest could get a channel to vent their frustration and feel that they could also express themselves critically. What can we do to protect the carnivalesque and free-spirited line in Norway?
- Yes, I agree that the French cartoonists in many ways still have such a tradition. We must maintain the freedom of expression we have in Norway. If we allow ourselves to be influenced by Islamic laws and religions, we will be able to lose our freedom of speech.
- Displays a new page
Social debater and medical student Mina Adampour, former Ny Tid columnist – now Aftenposten columnist, believes the front page of the previous issue of Ny Tid was an important step forward in the Norwegian caricature debate. She believes it led to Norwegian Muslims gaining a better understanding that Charlie Hebdo kicks in all directions, not just against Muslims.
- How did you react when you saw the front page of Ny Tid in the previous issue?
- I thought that here there were some who choose to do something very original, by showing a greater depth in the case, which also helps to tell how a minority in Europe experiences being a vulnerable group in society. The front page also says that Charlie Hebdo's work is not an attack on them. I would argue that this led to Norwegian Muslims getting a different impression than what other newsrooms have helped to form. The front page shows that Charlie Hebdo's editorial staff is part of a long tradition that has kicked in all directions here in Europe. Those who try to make this seem like the West against Islam, as a totalitarian ideology, have failed to show Charlie Hebdo from its very best side, as if they have a strength in being consistent. Vebjørn Selbekk and Dagen, on the other hand, have both been in favor of a blasphemy clause and said he did not want to caricature Christianity, which he later went back on after a stormy debate.
The mother reacted positively
- You recently wrote on twitter that your mother, born in Iran, had reacted positively to the Ny Tid front page – what was it she noticed?
- She is a believing, religious person, like her children. Of course, it hurts us when we respect both Jesus and Muhammad as we do. But what we think as Muslims is that innocent people have been killed, both Jews, journalists and policemen, including a Muslim. Then we become part of this by being asked what we think about the mockery of the Prophet Muhammad. My mother reacts positively to this Ny Tid cover because she sees that Charlie Hebdo is an editorial team that is exposed to a terrorist attack, but they have been brave in the sense that they have not looked like a single minority. They have treated everyone equally. It is not obvious for Muslims in Europe now, who have experienced demonstrations against Muslims that have resulted in people being killed in France, England and Germany. The front page of Ny Tid helps to create a further understanding of the debate, instead of an unvarnished front between "them" and "us". Values can be abused where someone advocates, or implies, that they are in opposition to the existence of Muslims. It is obvious that Norwegian Muslims also love freedom of speech, freedom of religion and Norway, says Adampour.
- Do you think it would have been easier to create an understanding that for hundreds of years there has been a tradition of political caricatures in Europe – if one shows the full breadth of Charlie Hebdo's publications?
- Absolutely, concludes Mina Admpour.
