Je Suis Human

John Prescott writes:

The murders of the journalists and artists at Charlie Hebdo magazine were rightly condemned around the world.

They led to a mass demonstration by millions in solidarity against such expression of violence.

The Paris march was led by leaders from many countries, expressing their support for “free speech” – though many of them who proclaimed “Je Suis Charlie” actually have a poor record of allowing such freedoms back home.

It reminded me of the time when, as Deputy Prime Minister, I joined other world leaders at a march protesting against the Madrid train bombings in 2004.

The ­explosions, carried out by radical Islamic ­terrorists, killed 121 people and injured 2,000.

Many people of Muslim and other faiths marched in protest with us.

We also lived through the 7/7 attacks in London and the 9/11 atrocity which claimed thousands of lives in America.

They understandably led to greater resources and powers being given to the authorities to ­counteract terrorist acts.

The Charlie Hebdo shootings are prompting calls for more powers.

But there’s a fine line between countering terrorism and breaching civil liberties.

My concern is that the shootings are being presented as an attack on free speech.

Freedom of speech is not absolute and exists within the rule of law.

For example, in France the law makes it illegal for expressions of denial of the Holocaust and anti-Semitism.

In Britain it’s clear that claiming free speech won’t stop you being taken to court for libel, discrimination or racism.

Freedom of speech is not a licence to say anything to anyone.

It is a balance between the rights of the individual and the expression of views.

And it is possible cartoons ridiculing the Prophet Mohammed led to ­insecurity, fear and retaliatory action.

I have my differences with the British press. But I congratulate our editors for not reprinting the Charlie Hebdo cartoons.

Not necessarily because they might be illegal, but because they offend many Muslims passionate about their religion.

We shouldn’t demand that Muslims acknowledge “free speech” even if what’s printed offends them.

The first Charlie Hebdo magazine after the shootings featured a cartoon of a Muslim woman wearing a burka half raised over her naked body revealing stockings and suspenders.

In a previous edition, a cartoonist depicted the black female justice minister Christiane Taubira as a monkey.

What’s so funny about those?

This isn’t freedom of speech. It’s freedom to offend.

The magazine sacked veteran cartoonist Maurice Sinet for making an allegedly anti-Jewish remark.

So it appears that at Charlie Hebdo, when it comes to insulting people some are more equal than others. Intolerance and prejudice are wrong, whatever your race, creed or colour.

We also have to understand why many Muslims are offended by this.

Our interventions in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria were “justified” by Western concepts of democracy, like “freedom of speech”.

The so-called Arab Spring actually led to the Muslim Brotherhood being democratically elected in Egypt only for it to be deposed by Western-backed generals.

You can have democracy. As long as it’s OUR kind of democracy.

Our interventions haven’t ­introduced democracy or ended the violence between rival groups.

But they have displaced millions because of the insecurity we helped to introduce and stoked the flames of Islamophobia.

We need less arrogance, less military action and less concern with imposing Western values on others.

This world would be a far better place if we displayed greater solidarity in helping Muslim countries develop in their own way.

So no, je ne suis pas Charlie.

Je suis human.