From Silence to Dialogue

Rethinking Free Speech, Cultural Engagement, and Progressive Change in the Middle East

Last Updated: August 01, 2023

Foreword

The tumultuous events unfolding across the globe serve as a stark reminder of the ongoing and urgent need to bridge the yawning chasm between cultural norms and attitudes towards free speech. Recent incidents involving Quran burnings in Sweden and Denmark, resulting in fierce protests in Iraq and other Muslim nations, underline the profound disparities that exist between different cultures' views on freedom of speech and what constitutes respect or insult towards religious beliefs.

In July 2023, hundreds of demonstrators stormed the main gates of the Swedish embassy in Baghdad after police in Stockholm sanctioned another planned burning of the Muslim holy book, the Quran. Following the incident, the Iraqi government called on European countries to "reconsider" their laws on freedom of expression and right to protest. Such incidents highlight the cultural clash between a Western interpretation of freedom of speech, where even religious texts are not exempt from critique or desecration, and the vehement responses they evoke in societies where such acts are perceived as egregious affronts to faith and identity.

This cultural collision extends beyond just freedom of expression in religious matters. In February 2023, TikTokers in Iraq were jailed for publishing content deemed "decadent" by state standards. According to the Interior Ministry, this campaign aimed to purge social media platforms of content that breached Iraqi "mores and traditions," and such content was described as "no less dangerous than organized crime". This signifies the policing of individual expression in a way that most Western societies might find an affront to personal freedoms, further demonstrating the deep cultural divide in our understanding and application of free speech.

These incidents compelled us to write this essay and, more broadly, highlight the pressing need for dialogue on this topic. The impetus was not just the events themselves, but the reactions they provoked, and the underlying beliefs and attitudes they revealed. This essay is an attempt to explore the historical, cultural, and political dynamics that have shaped such attitudes in the Middle East, while also illustrating how these attitudes impact the region's aspirations for democratic reform, and freedom of speech and expression.

In the face of these tensions and contradictions, the path forward may seem uncertain. Yet, it is in traversing this challenging landscape that we hope to make our most significant contribution. As the UN Human Rights Council grapples with complex issues concerning religious hatred, freedom of speech, and cultural respect, we too must confront these issues head-on. It is through understanding, dialogue, and empathy that we can hope to bridge the cultural chasm that exists, creating a world where the coexistence of diverse beliefs and the right to express them freely becomes a shared global standard.

Introduction

In the heart of the cradle of civilization, where the imprints of the world's earliest societies are still discernible, lie the complexities and paradoxes of the modern Middle East. This region, with its rich cultural and historical tapestry, is equally filled with a plethora of pressing issues; not least of which is the prevalent culture of defensiveness that inhibits open discourse and stifles progressive thought.

Woven intricately into this fabric is a compelling narrative that has given rise to a volatile crossroads of beliefs, where modernity grapples with deep-rooted tradition. The friction of this conflict has fomented a highly reactive atmosphere that hinders the flourishing of free speech, openness, and constructive critique. The cultural defensiveness, coupled with laws that curtail non-violent expressions of dissent, often lead to disproportionate responses to perceived insults. The ramifications of this defensiveness have been especially evident in recent years, as we've witnessed a tumultuous pattern of revolt and reform, retrenchment and reticence.

The aim of this essay is to offer an enlightening exploration of the historical and cultural roots of this issue, its modern manifestations, and to shed light on its detrimental impact on social and political reform. By tracing the intricate tapestry of Arab history and understanding its influence on contemporary society, we will begin to unravel the paradoxes and contradictions that currently prevail. The essay's ultimate goal is to offer insights into the steps necessary to cultivate an atmosphere of open discourse, resilience, and progress in the Middle East, allowing for the coexistence of time-honored traditions with the imperatives of a modern, inclusive society.

Before we delve into this endeavor, it is worth noting that freedom of speech, a cornerstone of democratic societies, remains a non-negotiable principle, even, or perhaps especially, when met with violent backlash. As renowned philosopher Karl Popper expounded in his 'Paradox of Tolerance', unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. Thus, while advocating for understanding and compassion in our approach to the Middle East, this essay will also assert the unyielding stance that freedom of speech is an inalienable right that must be staunchly defended.

In the forthcoming sections, we will traverse the sands of time, unveiling the historical roots of Arab tribalism, shedding light on their present-day implications, analyzing how prevailing cultural attitudes inadvertently hinder the aspiration for reform and deepen cultural isolation, and finally, offering a blueprint for change. This change, it will be argued, can only be achieved through the relentless pursuit of open dialogue, cultural resilience, understanding, and compassion. It is a journey towards a future that respects diversity, cherishes open discourse, and fosters a culture that can weather the torrents of critique without resorting to violence or suppression, and it is a journey we must undertake together.

The Historical Roots and Modern Ramifications of Arab Tribalism

In the complex and intricate mélange of societies that make up the Middle East, Arab tribalism emerges as a fundamental, historical thread. Its roots stretch back to pre-Islamic times, embedded in the austere desert life where survival hinged upon the cohesion and cooperation of tribal groups. The structure of these tribes, primarily based on kinship and shared descent, fostered strong bonds of loyalty and an unyielding sense of honor, concepts that have seeped into the collective psyche and cultural norms of Arab societies even today.

A profound understanding of Arab tribalism helps illuminate the societal dynamics at play in modern Iraq, which continues to grapple with the vestiges of its tribal past. Iraq's tribal history has left an indelible mark on its governance and social fabric, shaping the country's political landscape in ways that continue to fuel conflicts and deepen sectarian divisions. The power struggles between tribes, coupled with the religious and ethnic fault lines, have led to the fracturing of the government and society, inciting cycles of violence that have been challenging to mitigate.

Moreover, an offshoot of this tribalistic ethos is the entrenched belief in the legitimacy of revenge, particularly in response to insults. Honor, a cornerstone of tribalism, extended beyond the personal and permeated the collective identity of the tribe. Any perceived insult or slight against a member was seen as a dishonor to the whole tribe, necessitating retribution to restore the tribe's honor. This historical underpinning has inadvertently reinforced a culture that views vengeance as a justifiable recourse to perceived insults or criticisms, a trait that proves to be a significant obstacle in cultivating a society open to dissent and critique.

In today's Arab world, these antiquated ideas persist, shaping attitudes and behaviors in ways that are often counterproductive to progress and reform. These societal norms have evolved into a highly reactive culture that perceives criticism as an affront to one's honor, warranting retaliation. The influence of this defensive mindset is far-reaching, seen not only in the realm of interpersonal relationships but extending to broader societal and political dynamics, including legislation that stifles freedom of speech.

The repercussions are multifold. From the stifling of open discourse and the suppression of dissenting voices, to the fueling of sectarian conflicts and inhibiting political reforms, the impact of this cultural defensiveness rooted in tribalism is profound and pervasive. It manifests in the often violent backlash against perceived insults, the repression of critics, and even in the support of movements like the Arab Spring, which, while advocating for political change, still retain elements of this reactive cultural disposition, particularly regarding religious and cultural norms.

Interestingly, these tenets of Arab tribalism that we explore are far from recent observations. One of the earliest scholars to scrutinize them was Ibn Khaldun, a renowned 14th-century Arab historiographer and historian. In his magnum opus, the Muqaddimah, he dissected the concept of 'Asabiyyah', which can be translated as "social solidarity with an emphasis on group consciousness and sense of shared purpose". Ibn Khaldun postulated that 'Asabiyyah is what binds a tribe together, fostering their survival and dominance. It's an allegiance extending beyond mere familial or blood ties to encompass a broader collective identity. This 'Asabiyyah, as he theorized, is a double-edged sword: while it can fortify a group internally, it can also foster a rigid sense of honor, making the tribe prone to retaliatory violence to perceived slights - much akin to the culture of vengeance we have previously noted. Ibn Khaldun's insightful analysis of Arab tribalism provides a historic foundation for understanding the pervasive influence of tribalism in Arab societies today.

Understanding the origins and implications of these deeply ingrained cultural norms is crucial in our quest to propose viable pathways towards an open and resilient society in the Middle East. In our endeavor to bridge cultural divides, foster dialogue, and advocate for the universal right to freedom of speech, we must contend with these historical and cultural realities, the echoes of which continue to reverberate in the present.

The Paradox of Aspiration and Retrenchment: The Arab Spring and Tishreen Protests

Transitioning from a tribalistic framework to a modern political system, steeped in democratic principles, is a process fraught with challenges. In the Middle East, this transition remains ongoing and complex, affected by a multitude of factors that include historical, cultural, religious, and geopolitical dimensions. The Arab Spring and the Tishreen protests in Iraq offer compelling case studies of this transition, embodying both the aspiration for democracy and the pull of traditional beliefs that foster cultural isolation and retrenchment.

Beginning in 2010, the Arab Spring sparked a wave of protests across the Middle East, driven by a collective yearning for democracy, social justice, and an end to oppressive regimes. In Iraq, these aspirations echoed in the Tishreen protests of 2019, a wide-scale protest movement demanding an end to corruption, improved public services, and greater job opportunities. These movements, at their core, embody the hope for a more open, democratic society.

However, these aspirations exist alongside powerful undercurrents of cultural isolation and retrenchment, creating a paradox that complicates the path toward democratic reform. Influential figures such as Muqtada Al-Sadr, the Shiite cleric and political leader, played crucial roles in encouraging the Tishreen protests. Yet, his political views also foster a culture of isolationism, resisting foreign influence and advocating for a return to more traditional values and structures.

Al-Sadr's influence illuminates the paradox of supporting freedom movements while simultaneously upholding beliefs that foster cultural isolation. His emphasis on traditional values and structures often aligns with tribalistic ideals and religious conservatism, values that can inadvertently undermine the progress these freedom movements aim to achieve. For example, while advocating for political change, there is often a simultaneous reinforcement of norms suppressing freedom of speech, particularly around religious and cultural mores.

In this context, the events that unfolded in Egypt following the Arab Spring serve as an enlightening case study. After a successful revolution in 2011, which ended the thirty-year reign of Hosni Mubarak, the Egyptian people were presented with a constitutional referendum in 2012. This referendum was framed as a crucial step toward establishing a democratic governance structure. However, the contents of the new constitution and the process by which it was drafted were contentious.

The constitution was hastily drafted by a committee dominated by Islamist parties, who drew heavily from traditional and religious norms to formulate the constitution. It was seen by many as a constitution that marginalized religious minorities and did not fully guarantee basic human rights. The international community and secularist and liberal Egyptians raised concerns about the limitations on freedom of speech and the potential for religious authorities to interpret the constitution's provisions.

While the constitution was approved by a majority in the referendum, the deep divisions it revealed were an unsettling reminder of the paradox at hand. It demonstrated that the push for democratic processes, such as a constitutional referendum, can sometimes lead to outcomes that conflict with universal principles of human rights, particularly when the process is influenced by traditional and religious norms.

This paradox is not exclusive to Iraq or Egypt - but permeates much of the Arab world, revealing the challenges inherent in transitioning from tribalism to modern political systems. There exists a delicate balance to strike – fostering an environment that allows for democratic reform and freedom of expression while acknowledging and respecting the deep cultural and historical roots that continue to shape these societies. It underscores the complexity of these societies and the intricate path they must navigate toward openness, resilience, and progress.

Understanding this paradox is crucial, for it informs our approach towards fostering change in the Middle East. It prompts us to address not just the political structures, but also the cultural and societal norms that influence these structures. It calls for an approach that respects cultural traditions without compromising on the universal principles of human rights, such as the right to freedom of speech. It is in this understanding that we can construct a strategy that encourages the best interests of the people who live in this region while advocating for a more democratic, open society.

Modern Day Beliefs, Laws, and the Stifling of Free Speech

As we delve into the contemporary state of the Middle East, one of the most visible and controversial issues is the restriction on free speech. Central to this issue are the blasphemy and slander laws that pervade the region. While these laws are political mechanisms, they are perpetuated and supported by prevalent cultural norms, which in turn, both fuel and are reinforced by these legal restrictions.

Blasphemy and slander laws are stringent in the Middle East, often carrying harsh penalties, including imprisonment or even death. Rooted in the historical tribal customs of avenging insult and protecting honor, these laws have evolved into an extensive legal system that restricts criticism or mockery of authority figures, religion, and the state. While their initial intent may have been to preserve social harmony, they are now being used as instruments to stifle dissent, quell opposition, and control narratives.

Blasphemy laws in Pakistan provide a stark illustration. The legislation, sections 295-B and 295-C of the Pakistan Penal Code, prescribes life imprisonment or even the death penalty for any act of perceived disrespect toward Islamic sacred texts or the Prophet Muhammad. A notable case is that of Asia Bibi, a Pakistani Christian woman accused of blasphemy in 2009 and sentenced to death, sparking international outcry (but widely supported within Pakistan). It took a decade for her to be acquitted and released.

One of the most striking developments has been the misuse of the concept of "the right to freedom from insult." Originally conceived as a protection against malicious or false information that could harm an individual's reputation, this right is being extended to ideas, beliefs, and institutions. This distortion has troubling implications. It creates an environment where any critique or satire, even when rooted in truth or expressed in jest, can be branded as an insult and become a punishable offense. It stifles free speech, suppresses creative expression, and fosters a culture of fear and self-censorship.

A particularly illustrative case of the perils of perceived insult to authority in the Middle East is that of Bassem Youssef, often referred to as "Egypt's Jon Stewart". Youssef, a heart surgeon turned comedian, hosted the wildly popular television show "Al-Bernameg" (The Program) following the 2011 Egyptian Revolution. His satirical style, sharp wit, and political commentary quickly garnered him an expansive audience, but it also attracted the ire of the authorities. In 2012, Youssef was charged with "insulting the president" and "insulting Islam" for his satirical sketches about then-President Mohamed Morsi and certain interpretations of Islam. The authorities' reaction to Youssef's satire underscored the dangerous tightrope that comedians, writers, and any others seeking to critique or satirize authority figures must navigate in such societies. Even though Youssef was released on bail, his case had a chilling effect, sending a clear message about the consequences of challenging or lampooning political authority. His story serves as a stark reminder of the stifling of free speech under the pretext of protecting the honor of leaders and religious sentiments.

Simultaneously, other laws, such as those related to cybercrimes, are often wielded as tools to suppress dissent in many Middle Eastern countries. In Saudi Arabia, for instance, these laws have been used to clamp down on critique and dissent under the guise of maintaining religious respect and social order. One prominent example is the case of Raif Badawi, a blogger who was sentenced to 10 years in prison and 1,000 lashes for "insulting Islam through electronic channels," a charge made under the country's sweeping cybercrime law. This case underscores how such laws can be manipulated to stifle free expression and dissent.

These laws, and the culture that perpetuates them, create a self-defeating cycle that impedes progress. On one hand, there are growing aspirations for democracy, reform, and freedom of expression, as evidenced by movements like the Arab Spring and Tishreen Protests. On the other hand, these aspirations are undermined by restrictive laws and societal norms that curtail the very freedoms they seek to promote.

Consider a writer satirizing a political figure or a cartoonist sketching a critique of a religious practice. In a society that values free speech, these expressions would stimulate dialogue, encouraging citizens to challenge norms, question authority, and engage in the democratic process. However, in a society that suppresses such critique, these voices are silenced, their creators punished, and a potential avenue for reform is lost.

To envision a society that truly fosters democracy, freedom, and progress, we must confront these restrictive laws and the cultural norms that uphold them. This confrontation is not merely about changing laws, but about changing attitudes. It's about fostering a culture that values critique, encourages dialogue, and is resilient in the face of potentially offensive speech. This shift may be challenging, given the region's history and cultural norms, but it is a necessary step towards a society that embraces the true spirit of democracy and freedom.

Cultural Isolation and its Effect on the Unquestionability of Certain Views

The global perception of the Middle East has long been clouded by Orientalist narratives of violence and strife. While these narratives may be grounded in reality for certain regions, they often fail to encapsulate the full diversity and complexity of Middle Eastern society. This limited perspective contributes to a state of cultural isolation, fostering a divide that perpetuates misunderstanding and conflict.

Violence, and the perceived threat of violence, play a significant role in this process. Media portrayals often focus on conflicts, political unrest, and acts of terrorism, painting the region as a volatile and dangerous place. While it is true that violence is a reality in certain parts of the Middle East, this narrative fails to account for the peaceful coexistence, intellectual discourse, and cultural richness that also characterize these societies.

This skewed perspective can alienate Westerners, who, in turn, may avoid engagement with the Middle East, fearing potential conflict or hostility. Such avoidance feeds into the cycle of cultural isolation. The fewer the interactions between the West and the Middle East, the less opportunity there is for mutual understanding and the greater the chances for reinforcing stereotypes and biases.

This cultural isolation has substantial effects on Middle Eastern societies themselves, reinforcing the idea that certain beliefs and principles are beyond critique. When a society is isolated, there is little exposure to alternative viewpoints or ideologies. Ideas go unchallenged, and dialogue is limited. This lack of dialogue and exposure to diverse views can create an environment where beliefs – political, religious, or cultural – become entrenched and unquestionable.

This societal effect is particularly problematic for free speech and intellectual freedom. Without the influence of alternative perspectives, societal norms and laws continue to suppress dissent and criticism. For example, under the weight of cultural and legal sanctions, those who may wish to challenge restrictive norms or propose reforms are often silenced. This lack of internal critique and dialogue hampers societal growth and progress.

The consequences of this isolation are further amplified by the impact of global interconnectedness and digital media. In a world that is increasingly global and connected, isolation – whether enforced by violence, legal restrictions, or cultural norms – is counterproductive and self-defeating. It restricts the potential for growth, change, and progress, inhibiting the free flow of ideas and dialogue necessary for a thriving society.

In the face of this reality, the necessity for breaking this cycle of cultural isolation and fostering an environment that values freedom of speech and open critique is clear. This task, while complex and challenging, is vital to the progress and development of Middle Eastern societies. It requires an acknowledgment of the harms of isolation, a reevaluation of entrenched beliefs, and a concerted effort to promote dialogue and mutual understanding – both within the Middle East and between the Middle East and the West.

Westerners of Good-Will: The Role of Understanding and Compassion

It is in the nexus of understanding and compassion that Westerners of good-will can make their most significant contributions to the narrative of the Middle East. It is easy to shy away from complexities and contradictions inherent to cultures different from our own. However, simplifying these complexities or viewing them solely through the prism of our own experiences hinders the potential for meaningful discourse and change.

Understanding begins with acknowledging the deep-rooted historical, cultural, and societal contexts that shape the Middle East today. Recognizing the role of tribalism, the impact of divisive politics, the aspirations of movements like the Arab Spring, and the ways these elements interact with modern society, is the first step towards meaningful engagement. It requires patience, openness, and the willingness to listen and learn from Middle Eastern voices themselves.

Compassion plays a vital role, as well. It is the ability to empathize with the challenges faced by individuals and communities in the Middle East and the willingness to stand in solidarity with them as they navigate these challenges. It is understanding that we are not just bystanders, but that our actions – or lack thereof – have an impact.

Supporting freedom of speech, for instance, is one area where understanding and compassion converge. Endorsing the right to free speech doesn’t imply approval of all expressions. There are, without a doubt, utterances that are offensive, hurtful, or divisive. However, the right to free speech is a cornerstone of democracy, ensuring the exchange of ideas, promoting dialogue, and protecting dissent. This distinction – between supporting the right to express an opinion and endorsing the content of the opinion – is crucial.

In this context, championing freedom of speech becomes even more vital when faced with violent reactions. It is in these challenging moments that the resolve to protect this freedom is truly tested. For Westerners of good-will, this means standing firmly on the principles of free speech and expression, while simultaneously demonstrating compassion and understanding towards those who may be hurt or offended.

Remember, however, that defending the right to free speech is not just about tolerating dissent or offensive speech; it's about promoting a discourse that is inclusive, respectful, and constructive. It's about cultivating an environment where different perspectives can be expressed, heard, and responded to with dignity and respect.

To support this vision, Westerners must engage empathetically with the Middle East, not just as critics or observers, but as partners in dialogue. This engagement, grounded in understanding and compassion, can help break the cycle of isolation and pave the way for a more open, inclusive, and respectful discourse.

Practical Steps Towards a Brighter Future

The road towards a more resilient Middle East, anchored in open discourse and free expression, requires strategic, focused efforts. Here, we delineate a pathway forward, discussing the need for education, the role of civil society, the importance of diplomacy, and policy advocacy, as well as recommendations for supporting economic development.

A. Education and Literacy: Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world, said Nelson Mandela. This sentiment is acutely applicable to the Middle East. In a region characterized by its youthful demographics, investing in quality education and improving literacy rates is paramount. But education should extend beyond basic literacy. It should foster critical thinking, emotional intelligence, cultural sensitivity, and an appreciation for diverse viewpoints. The long-term success of the region hinges on its ability to educate its young minds who are not just literate, but are equipped with the knowledge and skills to engage constructively with their ever-changing world.

B. Civil Society Institutions: The role of civil society institutions in fostering dialogue, promoting mutual respect, and providing a platform for diverse voices cannot be overstated. These organizations, in their myriad forms, bridge the gap between individuals and their governments. They play a critical role in advocating for reforms, promoting human rights, and facilitating dialogues among disparate groups. By empowering and strengthening these institutions, we can promote a culture of openness, respect, and democratic engagement.

C. Diplomacy and Policy Advocacy: Diplomacy and policy advocacy remain crucial tools in our arsenal for safeguarding freedom of speech and promoting open discourse. Engagement on these fronts requires courage, persistence, and tactical nuance. It requires advocating for legislation that safeguards free speech, discourages censorship, and promotes open access to information. It also involves diplomatic efforts to highlight these issues on international platforms, leveraging multilateral cooperation to effect change.

D. Economic Development: Last, but not least, is the role of economic development. A stable economy fosters societal stability and peace, creating an environment conducive to dialogue and reform. Addressing economic disparities, reducing unemployment, particularly among the youth, and fostering sustainable development practices are all critical. Economic empowerment translates into political empowerment, enabling citizens to engage more actively in their societies. This is one reason we should take a skeptical view of Western sanctions on Middle Eastern countries.

These steps, though challenging, are necessary and achievable. Each one requires dedication, collaboration, and, above all, a steadfast commitment to the principles of free speech, respect, and understanding. By focusing on these practical steps, we can contribute to building a brighter, more resilient future for the Middle East, where discourse and dialogue thrive, and where every voice is heard.

Conclusion

In this exploration, we've journeyed deep into the intertwined roots of Arab tribalism and modern Middle Eastern society, examining the threads of history, culture, and politics that have knotted into a complex web of issues. From the historical origins of Arab tribalism to its contemporary impact, from the paradox of the Arab Spring and Tishreen Protests to the stifling of free speech, we've peeled back the layers of misunderstanding and stereotypes.

We’ve identified a pressing need for a significant shift in societal attitudes, transitioning from a state of defensiveness to one of resilience and open dialogue. We have illuminated the paradoxical struggle between the aspiration for democratic reform and a retreat into isolationism and cultural preservation. We've discussed the alarming prevalence of laws that stifle free speech and expression, and the troubling reinterpretation of human rights to encompass a 'freedom from insult,' which serves to fortify an impenetrable fortress of unquestionable beliefs.

Further, we've delved into the unintended consequences of such entrenched attitudes – a self-perpetuating cycle of cultural isolation that makes certain views untouchable and beyond critique. But we've also identified potential pathways out of this quagmire, signposted by education, civil society institutions, diplomacy and policy advocacy, and economic development.

In recognizing the potential for change, the importance of understanding, compassion, and unwavering support for freedom of speech is paramount. Westerners of goodwill have a significant role to play. By standing in solidarity with those who strive for change and by offering support where it is needed, we can contribute to a more tolerant and open society.

Yet, the responsibility does not rest solely with Westerners. Middle Easterners, too, must rise to the occasion, challenging age-old norms and taking brave steps towards a more open, tolerant, and resilient society. Freedom of speech, after all, is not just a Western value – it is a universal human right.

In the end, it is this shared responsibility that will shape the future. A future where every individual in the Middle East can voice their opinion without fear. A future where dialogue and discourse are not just permitted but celebrated. A future where understanding bridges cultural divides, and compassion overcomes hostility. The path may be challenging, but it is one that we must walk together, towards a brighter future for all.