Why did only the Danish

controversy escalate
into a global conflict?
Why did the Danish and
Swedish people follow
different strategies?

In answering the first question, I would like to
highlight three interconnected factors.
Initial framing of the publication by the

respective newspapers
The level of certification of Muslims claims

making by political elites

The process of cross context

The above three are dependent on in the

national philosophy of integration.


Certification of Muslim claims by political
elites
These difference were confirmed and reinforced by

the reaction of political elite, all are interconnected

Danish case

Danish prime minister refused to comment for a long

time, until 2006, he said that he personally will not

create such drawing and this is not the policy of his
government
Swedish case

He expressed his sadness and he was offended by

the publication, but he has nothing to do with

freedom of press .unlike the prime minister of
Danish who said that it is not his government
policy, Swedish prime minster said that is his
personality to keep mutual respect and peaceful co
existence of Muslim and others
 

 
 Important differences
between the two
newspapers is in the
message accompanying
the publication and in the
circumstances preceding
the publication

  
1-Posten newspaper order the illustrator
to draw 1
1-Allahenda, published only what is already

exist and it is for different purposes


They differ in the level of deliberate planning
.regarding the actual content, the main difference
where in the degree of criticism of local Muslim and
in the level of explicit intent to mock.
Example, Face of Mohammed, editorial, describe

Muslims as uncivilized, representative e of dark

middle Ages, hypersensitive. The publication is
meant to teach them a lesson.
Unlike, allemande which framed its publication in

quite different manner, the fundamental of the

editorial was that liberal societies should be able to
do two things at the same time; it is not the sole
responsibility to of local Muslims to learn to accept
mocking their religious figures.
This was a absent in posten ,allaland seems siding

with Danish Muslim .

  
Why did the Danish and Swedish Muslim follow
different strategies?
Prime ministers view points

Danish prime minster refused to hold a diplomatic

meeting with Muslim ambassador in Denmark, refused

to meet with Danish Muslim representative and ignored
an invitation to visit a mosque
Swedish did all that, on his own initiative .this effect

significantly in controlling Muslim claims making

Swedish Muslim after all this was unified , against
demonstration and there is not reason to demonstrate
any more.
In Denmark the government reaction divide the

population into two equally groups.

One proving the strategy of inaction

The other believing that the government was

responsible for deepening the crises.

Swedish Prime Minister Take benefits of what his
Danish counterpart has made regarding the
crisis
The two view point toward integration has result

in the two different actions, paths

Danish Muslim should not be given any special

treatment they should adapt to the situation

Swedish .the majority society should adapt

though cooperation and dialogue.

Local Muslim mobilization claims making Danish

writing of Muslim were 147 in one newspaper

Swedish wrote only 24 three newspapers
Government reactions toward publication help
create different chances for Muslim claims
making in the two countries
Danish Muslim representative pursue righty

though other means, imam delegation, in order

not to lose face with people whom they
represent
Swedish, the Muslim representative work toward

scaling down the conflict without being

accused form within of not standing up to
defend the prophet of Islam
The reaction of the Danish Muslim were

individually not unified

Swedish organization took the responsibility of
making decision