Islam's answer to the killing of US envoys in Libya

The killing of US diplomats in Libya is seen as zealous revenge for the blasphemy of a film against Islam. Muslims must assert their faith's teachings of peace and mercy as the answer to such hate.

Protesters demonstrate against the demolition of a Sufi mosque by ultra-conservative Salafis in Tripoli, Libya, August 26. Attackers bulldozed a mosque containing Sufi Muslim graves in Tripoli in what appeared to be Libya's most blatant sectarian attack since the overthrow of Muammar Qaddafi. The placard reads: "Islam respects the nonMuslim's grave, so how about the Muslim's?"

The people who killed US Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other American diplomats in Libya on Tuesday may have believed that violent revenge for blasphemy is a useful way to promote Islam.

It isn’t. And most Muslims who see Islam as a religion of peace know that.

The storming of the US Consulate in Benghazi appeared to have been triggered by news of a film made in the United States that criticizes the Islamic prophet Muhammad. Protesters also breached the US Embassy in Cairo. The diplomats were simply a convenient target for impatient Muslims eager to defend Islam, perhaps even keen to quickly restore a caliphate in the Middle East.

While Muslims worldwide may be angered by acts of religious bigotry, most know that killing in the name of Islam is hardly favorable to Islam. Most faiths are based on love, not hate, in order that humanity can honor godly commands to love one another in a spirit of individual freedom. If there is to be a global contest of beliefs, it is beliefs, not people, that can be disputed.

Yet Muslim fears of blasphemy remain strong. They first erupted on the world scene in 1989 with Iran’s death sentence against author Salman Rushdie. They were behind 9/11 and the many senseless attacks that often follow slights on Islam.

Each violent response should compel Muslims to assert Islam’s teaching of tolerance. They have a good reason. Most of those targeted for blasphemy by Muslims are actually of Muslim background, such as Shiites accusing Sunnis, say scholars of Islam. And, according to the State Department, nearly half of the world’s governments abuse religious minorities. Opposing bigotry nonviolently is a global challenge.

Many Christians, for example, see Islam as an enemy, although few resort to acts of violence on innocent Muslims. (The recent killings of Sikhs in Wisconsin may have been an attack on people who the killer misguidedly thought were Muslims.) Polls show a third of Americans are “not favorable” to Islam.

Muslim-led governments that want strict antiblasphemy laws – both in their own country and enshrined in international law – see freedom of speech as a threat to social order and a license to insult Islam. Until enough peace-minded Muslims stand up for an interpretation of Islam that sees freedom as necessary for the flourishing of faith, these governments will continue their campaigns of intolerance or wink approval at mobs of zealots.

Libya is now in a difficult transition from autocracy to democracy. Hard-line Islamists hope to restrict the country’s new freedoms and its secular governance. The killing of the Americans reflects that struggle. How the world reacts to the killings, especially Muslims’ reactions, could shape Libya’s future, as well as the image of Islam worldwide.

Asserting Islam’s qualities of mercy and peace is the best counterpoint to such violence. Islam need not be a victim of bigotry if its adherents are steadfast about the truths it stands for.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to

QR Code to Islam's answer to the killing of US envoys in Libya
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today