U.S. Mission to the European Union
http://eu.usmission.gov/

STATE'S FRIED DISCUSSES CARTOON VIOLENCE WITH EU, DANISH, MUSLIM LEADERS

February 14, 2006

Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Daniel Fried discussed the Danish cartoon protests; the role of democracy in reconciling the values of tolerance, respect, sensitivity, freedom – including freedom of expression – and justice; and the election of Hamas during a media briefing in Brussels, Belgium, on February 14.

After a stop to express solidarity with his Danish counterparts in Copenhagen, Fried traveled to Brussels for talks with European Union officials and leaders of Belgium’s Muslim community on dealing with the reaction generated by the cartoon. " [W]e the Americans want to work with Europe and with reformers and those in the broader Middle East who want to work with us to resolve this issue in ways that respect everyone’s values, as well as the value of freedom," he said during the briefing.

View the video or listen to the podcast of the press briefing with Assistant Secretary Fried.

Below is the transcript of the media briefing:

U.S. Department of State
Daniel Fried
Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs

Brussels, Belgium
February 14, 2006

Assistant Secretary Fried: Thank you. And thank you for coming. I came, I and a delegation came here to Europe yesterday with Farah Pandith of the National Security Council staff, and Rob Danin, who may join us later, from the State Department.

We came to Europe to consult and listen and work with our allies on the issues raised in the wake of the cartoon controversy. Our first stop was Copenhagen where we went first, frankly, to express solidarity with Denmark, which does not deserve the threats, the attempts at intimidation, the boycotts and the pressure it has been under. No country deserves to have embassies burned and personnel threatened.

Much has been written about the cartoons and I’m not here to go over all of that ground but I want to posit three principles with which the United States Government has approached these issues, and these are principles that I’ve shared.

The first is that the cartoons were offensive, and this is actually widely recognized. They were offensive because they showed a lack of respect for Islam. Jyllands Posten has apologized. The Danish government has properly not apologized because it, the Danish government, didn’t publish the cartoons. But the Danish government has recognized that the cartoons gave offense. Most American newspapers have not published, mainly for that reason. Some American newspapers have decided to publish.

This is, in any event, a decision for newspapers, not a decision for governments, which is my second principle - that the principles of a free press and freedom of expression cannot be compromised. Governments don’t tell or shouldn’t tell newspapers what to publish. My government hasn’t, the Danish government hasn’t. In free societies newspapers work this out on their own.

A third principle is that in free societies protests are legitimate, but violence, boycotts, threats, and intimidation cannot be excused or explained away or accepted.

Now all of these three principles have been discussed, but there’s a fourth principle which, I think, is applicable as we deal with the longer term consequences of this problem, which is that democracy, and not the various forms of dictatorship which are unfortunately prevalent in most of the Middle East -- democracy is the system best equipped to bring together and reconcile the values of tolerance, respect, sensitivity, freedom – including freedom of expression – and justice. These values are essential in a pluralistic world. In fact these values are vital in the sense that we cannot live without them in a world of different peoples, different religions.

Democracy, and not dictatorship, is the way in which these values can be brought together.

Now this is a controversial position not because we in Europe don’t accept democracy, but because Islamists and dictators in the Middle East are arguing that, in fact, only dictatorship can provide the proper respect for Islam. This is wrong. This is wrong, and states based on intolerance of all but one faith or all but one ideology are not states which are going to help the world deal with problems in the twenty-first century.

I’m a government bureaucrat. Government bureaucrats are not equipped, nor are they entitled, to decide where the boundaries are between the secular and the sacred. How one goes about practicing sensitivity. How one practices openness and satire. We’re not the people who should decide about the candid versus the hurtful. That’s not for government bureaucrats. But democratic societies debate these issues every day. These are debated every day in the United States. They’re debated every Christmas season in the United States. How much religion explicitly in the public square? What does secularism mean? What does tolerance mean? Democratic societies debate these issues and democracies learn as they go. That’s why democracies are the best ways to bring together these different values, which is why as a conclusion, I’ll posit that the United States and Europeans -- including Europeans of the Muslim faith -- and reformers throughout the broader Middle East need to unite in the wake of this crisis to defend and promote the indivisible values of democracy, freedom, and respect.

This was the message that my delegation and I brought. We listened a lot. This morning we met with a group of leaders of Belgium’s Muslim community and I must say I found that discussion quite heartening because these are people who are dealing with these issues of freedom and respect and in all cases, all the speakers recognized and applauded the values of freedom of expression. When they talked about the need for sensitivity they also made clear that they did not have in mind censorship or repression. I frankly found that a heartening discussion.

I don’t have an operational answer. I just wanted to share with Europeans some thoughts and listen to theirs about the way ahead. I’ve met with officials of the European Union, as well as Danish officials, about these issues, and we want to work, we the Americans want to work with Europe and with reformers and those in the broader Middle East who want to work with us to resolve this issue in ways that respect everyone’s values, as well as the value of freedom.

Let me stop there. I’m happy to take any questions.

Q: Two questions. Some of your best friends in the Middle East are dictatorships, Egypt and Saudi Arabia. And secondly, democracy in the Middle East has led to the emergence of Hamas, which you and the Europeans classify as a terrorist organization. How would you reconcile democracy, justice, freedom, tolerance with these policies that you have in the Middle East? Thank you.

Assistant Secretary Fried: First of all, my Administration has come out clearly, unambiguously, for democracy and for reform in the broader Middle East. The question has been put to us pretty much as you did. It’s all very well for you Americans to say so now, but why don’t you go say so to your Egyptian friends?

So Secretary Rice went to Cairo University and saidx exactly that. In Cairo.

It doesn’t mean that we believe in revolution, but we do believe in reform, and we do believe that our weight should be on the side of those in the region who strive for reform.

A second question is well, it’s all very well to talk about elections, but suppose “the wrong people win”, which was sort of your question about Hamas.

I’ll answer that question starting with another question - which is “Was the status quo so satisfactory?”

President Bush pointed out in a speech in London a couple of years ago that for sixty years the West had ignored democracy in the broader Middle East and simply not pursued it as an objective. We had sacrificed democracy in exchange for stability and, as a result, got neither. That’s a paraphrase, not a quote, but I think it’s close.

Democracy brings, ultimately, a greater stability than dictatorship. Now that doesn’t mean the process is neat and clean and triumphant steps toward inevitably happy futures. We all know better, and we must be clear and visionary – we, supporters of democracy, must be clear and visionary about what we seek, but very realistic about the difficulties and what we can accomplish in any given country in any given year. That’s easier to say than it is to do. But the status quo, for example in the Palestinian territories, had not been very good for the Palestinian people. It may be that democracy accelerates history there in ways that are good. Obviously, we’re going to have some tough decisions to make, but Hamas’s decisions and Hamas’s choices are tougher. Hamas must choose what it wants for the Palestinian people. Whether it wants to lead them by into more dysfunctionality, bloodshed, and a future of no hope, or whether it wants to lead them to a state with Israel, living in peace and security side by side with Israel, which is possible and possible not in the distant future. But it will take leadership.

That’s a decision for Hamas to make, and it may be that the accelerated political process will bring about and force those decisions.

Q: Straying from your main point, but following up on my colleague… Do you have any reaction to the New York Times piece today, in the New York Times newspaper, that said that the U.S. and Israel had agreed to destabilize Hamas by making sure that no funds lent by international donors or collected by the Israeli government be used to pay the Palestinian authorities bills as soon as Palestinian deputies take office?

Assistant Secretary Fried: Well, happily or unhappily, you have the advantage of me because I haven’t read the New York Times. Therefore, I don’t have to comment on the article that I haven’t read.

But it is clear as we’re thinking through – we, the United States and Europe, are thinking through how we deal with the future government of the Palestinian Authority. We have set out conditions that are quite clear and can be met. It’s not up to us to visit or revisit these conditions; it’s up to Hamas to decide what it wants to do, what it is going to do.

So the challenge is before Hamas and it is Hamas’s responsibility to decide how it will respond to the international community’s clear message.

Q: The international community’s message hasn’t been so clear since Russia invited Hamas to visit Moscow, invited Hamas leaders to visit Moscow. Do you think this was a helpful initiative?

Assistant Secretary Fried: Well, it was certainly a surprise. We now, as my government has said, we certainly expect the Russians to respect the commitments they made as part of the Quartet and in any contacts they choose to have with Hamas to convey those clear messages, that Hamas must renounce terrorism and violence, must recognize Israel, and must accept the obligations the Palestinian Authority has made including with respect to the Road Map. That’s pretty clear. And we expect the Russians will maintain their commitments.

Q: Amr Moussa, the head of the Arab League. I believe he’s made some comments today that he fully supports the Hamas government.

Secretary Fried: Well, we stand, we the Quartet, we, the United States and Europe, have a very clear position. It’s the right position and we stand by it.

Q: I have a question. You made it very clear that the clash is between the newspapers in the East and the newspapers in the West and that the Danish government has apologized but they can’t claim any responsibility because it’s the responsibility of the press in their country for publishing the newspaper. So democracy is obviously a form of government. How do you come about to democracy and its installation as vital as the solution to the problem?

Assistant Secretary Fried: How does democracy come about? Democracy comes from within. It is a natural form of government because people will naturally want to live in countries where their rights are respected, where they have freedom, where they have influence over their government and a choice in those who will govern them.

Dictatorship is imposed, and we know this because dictators impose it with secret police and arrests and threats and sometimes terror.

How does democracy come about? Over time. Often with difficulty. But there are voices throughout the broader Middle East, many of them, who are demanding the rights inherent in democracies and we should be supporting them.

Q: I guess my question would be the clash right now seems to be between the Danish publication of the cartoons and the proposed Iranian cartoon contest of the Holocaust.

Assistant Secretary Fried: That is a rather disgraceful kind of a contest. I wouldn’t put it that way.

I would say that the Iranian regime is attempting to exploit this issue in a cynical fashion and with this so-called contest about the Holocaust, a rather ugly one.

Syria, of course, we have to hold the Syrians responsible for the violent attacks on the Danish and Norwegian embassies because demonstrations in Damascus don’t happen without government complicity.

With respect to Iran, we’ve become accustomed, I fear, to depressing and often shocking statements by their leadership which are revealing to the world the character of that regime.

Now I referred to the regime, not to the Iranian people. We do not regard the regime as representative of the people. It wasn’t elected in anything like a free election as we recognize it, and I don’t think it fair to the Iranian people to saddle them with the responsibility for the outrageous statements which appear to be a weekly, if not daily, feature of Tehran’s official life.

Q: You referred to this as a crisis and to it being exploited by Iran and there was complicity going on in Syria. What happens if this tour of solidarity that you’re embarking on at the moment and the other reaffirmations of general democratic principles do not work and do not [inaudible] this crisis? What other initiatives can you undertake then?

Secretary Fried: You mean about the business with the cartoons?

Q: As a response to the crisis with the cartoons.

Assistant Secretary Fried: Well I think this is going to take a while to resolve because the issues are not simple ones. The cartoons triggered off a reaction and I think the solution is going to be longer term.

There are a lot of thoughtful Europeans who are thinking of ways to discuss the issues of tolerance, respect, and freedom, including press freedom. I think it is a mistake to allow the conversation to be dominated by voices of irresponsible extremism, such as we hear from the Iranian regime.

I was struck by the sophistication and the thoughtfulness that Belgian Muslim leaders brought to bear on this problem. This is a minority community. They are well aware of the issues of sensitivity, but also of freedom. It was very clear listening to them that they greatly value Europe’s democratic values. They regarded them ultimately as nurturing for their own tradition. At the same time they seemed to be calling for respect and sensitivity.

That is the basis for a good conversation, it seems to me. These are Europeans. They’re a European minority which is finding its voice. I think it is far better to discuss the issues in those terms than in the terms raised by the Iranian press or various non-democratic governments who seem to have no problem with offensive cartoons appearing in their government-controlled newspapers on a practically daily basis. Those kind of regimes have very little to teach us, but thoughtful Muslims with a commitment to democracy have the right to be listened to and respected.

Q: You expressed solidarity with the statement of the Danish government, but as you know it took the government a couple of months really to get involved in this. They refused to meet ambassadors from Muslim countries and argued initially that this wasn’t really an issue. So my question to you is, do you think they acted soon enough? Because a number of people believe they let this escalate domestically.

And if I may, just on a point of clarification, you argued earlier that boycotts were unacceptable. Did you mean government-sponsored boycotts or are you including in that spontaneous consumer boycotts? If so, what’s wrong with that?

Assistant Secretary Fried: I’m certainly not going to criticize the Danish government. By the way, I’m not sure that it’s true to say that the Danish government refused to meet with ambassadors. I think the Foreign Minister did meet with them, which is pretty high level. But in any event, I’m not going to criticize the Danish government. I do note that Prime Minister Rasmussen met with Danish Muslim community leaders I think yesterday. That meeting took place after I left so I didn’t hear about it.

Boycotts. I don’t think that boycotts are warranted in this case, and I’m not sure if these boycotts can be called. I don’t know how much of it is officially inspired and how much is popular. But I think that certainly Denmark does not deserve the violence directed against its mission, threats against its personnel.

Denmark – One newspaper published some cartoons and it has apologized. That’s a matter of public record. The Danish government has recognized that the cartoons caused offense. That is also a matter of public record.

I don’t think that it’s fair to hold Denmark responsible for any of this. I think they certainly don’t deserve it. Denmark is a world leader in terms of per capita foreign assistance. They have a wonderful record of support for development, including in the Muslim world. It is certainly sad to see Denmark in this situation and I certainly have no hesitation about expressing solidarity with Denmark and the Danish people under these circumstances.

Again, I note that Jyllands Posten has apologized. It’s a matter of public record. An apology is an apology. That ought to be noted and that right conclusion drawn.

Q: Has this crisis made the United States and Europe think they should back the reformers in these countries more? And if so, because that’s what I understood at the beginning. And if so, how are you going to back them more?

Assistant Secretary Fried: Well, the United States and Europe have for a couple of years now agreed to work for reform and with reformers throughout the broader Middle East. This is taking place in a number of ways. It’s taking place through the Forum for the Future. Your Foreign Minister [the Spanish Foreign Minister] was there at the last meeting, and Spain has contributed to some of the Forum’s initiatives. It’s taking place through the Barcelona Process that your government has led.

I notice President Zapatero and Prime Minister Erdogan of Turkey have issued I think a very useful and helpful statement in this regard. There are a lot of things that Europe and the United States can do, things we have done. Do I think we should do more of it? Yes, actually, I think we should. I think our response, one of our responses in this case should be to do more to support democracy, reform and reformers, and not let it be thought that the only voices in the Middle East in response to these cartoons are the voices of thoughtless, cynical, or manipulative extremism, because I am convinced they are not.

Q: Yesterday Mr. Solana in Turkey met with some Muslim leaders and one of his interlocutors said there was Islamaphobia in Europe. Do you think there is Islamaphobia at a popular level in your society or in our society? If so, what can the governments do to help alleviate it?

Assistant Secretary Fried: I said earlier that democracies were the best form of government for dealing with the issues of respect, tolerance, as well as freedom. American history can be described as, in one sense, as our efforts as a nation to deal with these issues; and sometimes we have done so, let us say, very imperfectly. We learned through trial and error, and a lot of error in our history. I’m talking about our history of slavery and the aftermath, but in the end I’m proud of my country’s record at becoming a nation of all nations. I’m proud of that record. That’s why you have people of all faiths and all nationalities serving in the American government and exercising their right as citizens.

America’s Muslim community or communities, since I’m not sure they are one community, is growing very rapidly. Since September 11th, oddly enough, maybe not oddly, the U.S. Government has taken steps to reach out to that community. One interesting example are the now-annual Iftar dinners hosted in the White House and the State Department.

I do not believe that Muslim prayers were ever heard in the White House before, but now they are heard on an annual basis. When Muslim clerics are invited in and they do say the prayer at sundown for the Iftar dinners. Similarly prayers are heard in the State Department. And although I don’t know, I suspect that this tradition will continue. We’re all rather used to it now and it’s a good thing. I rather look forward to it.

This is an example, a small example, of how governments can reach out to minority populations. I think Europe is multi-religious. That’s a fact. And I think that Europe’s Muslim communities can be a force for great good because these communities will over time come to value the democratic freedoms that surround them. I think this is a good thing. That doesn’t mean that they’re not individual extremists. These are communities that are going to be in Europe and I think it’s important to reach out and I think that process is getting underway.

Q: You were saying that a solution for this crisis can only be long term. Is there anything more immediate that can be done between European and U.S. on a day-to-day basis right now, seeing that the violence is still escalating?

Assistant Secretary Fried: I think that clear messages to governments in the region to behave responsively are important. I welcome Javier Solana’s mission to the region. I think the statements by various leaders are very helpful at this time. I mentioned Primer Minister Erdogan and Prime Minister Zapatero, for example. In the immediate term there is a need for leadership to put this in perspective and not deal in incitement. There’s also a need to recognize and call to account the governments who are inciting violence, as Secretary Rice suggested. So there are steps that can be done immediately.

I was talking to my counterparts in the Danish government and the European Union. Tonight I’m going on to Berlin. I’m anxious to hear what my German counterparts have to say in their approach because I don’t doubt that they’ll have some very good ideas as well.

Q: The question of respect in the case of the Palestinians -- Hamas gained the election with a democratic, a very democratic process. But European Union and United States reacted to that by threatening to stop the development aid to these people.

On one hand, European Union is financing this democratic process; on the other, European Union and United States are threatening to stop the process because it would destabilize the next government.

My political question, the leadership of Hamas made a number of statements this week. Did you see any positive political signal from them when they went to Cairo, to Sudan and then --

Assistant Secretary Fried: Hamas appears to be on a bit of a charm offensive, but it is up to them to meet the very clear and very reasonable conditions which the United States, the European Union, United Nations, and Russia have expressed.

Hamas won a democratic election. Hamas will have responsibility, more than it has had before, for the future of the Palestinian people. President Bush has made very clear that the United States supports a Palestinian state at peace with itself, at peace with its neighbors, living in security, democracy and prosperity, and at peace with Israel.

It is up to the Palestinian leadership, current and emerging, whether it will take this opportunity not to talk about a state, not to dream of a state, not to demand a state, but to actually achieve it. This is now possible. It was not possible in, and I’m not talking about possible in a hundred years or twenty years or a generation, possible soon; but the leadership of the Palestinian people must decide whether it will take this opportunity. To take this opportunity it needs to stop terrorism and violence. It needs to recognize Israel, which will be the neighbor of the Palestinian state, and it needs to recognize that the Palestinian Authority has undertaken certain commitments with respect to the Road Map.

This is not a negative message, this is a positive message, because at the end of the road, if the Palestinian leadership makes the right decisions, is, in fact, a state. So the challenge is theirs. Will they take this opportunity? Or will they continue the path of failed leadership, bloodshed, corruption, hopelessness, which has unfortunately characterized Palestinians for two generations at least. It is their challenge to reach this hopeful future which is possible and more possible now than it has ever been. It is their challenge and they’ve got to take it.

Q: What happens if they don’t seize this opportunity?

Assistant Secretary Fried: We’ve seen the frankly wretched and unfortunate lives of so many Palestinians. We know what the future will be, which will be more of what we’ve seen in past years, which is not what we want to see. And they will be responsible for missing this opportunity.

Q: Sorry, a different subject. But one area where Europe and America are not seeing eye-to-eye so much is on the alleged CIA rendition flights and possible detention centers. The European Parliament has now asked for U.S. officials to come and attend hearings. Senior U.S. officials. Is that a request that America is likely to accommodate? And at what level?

Assistant Secretary Fried: I don’t want to have to get into that issue right now. I think Secretary Rice spoke to that quite clearly and convincingly.

The United States and Europe and much of the world is threatened by terrorism. We have a responsibility to protect our people against terrorism, but in a way which is consistent with our legal obligations and our values. And it is the intent of my government to do that, working with Europe.

We have had some intense conversations with our European allies, including just recently, intense and very good discussions between the State Department’s Legal Adviser John Bellinger and some of his European Union counterparts. I think there is now greater understanding in many European capitals as to what we are doing and I look forward to continuing to discuss these issues with thoughtful Europeans.

Thank you.