Why? Did he draw the cartoons or publish them?
I could accept a thin argument that Governments, especially in democracies are supposedly representative [in reality, of course, we know that's not true] but a newspaper? In what sense does a newspaper represent someone who is Danish or French or any other nationality?
As someone who has told us you are British, do you take responsibility for what's printed in the newspapers here? If the cartoons were published here, that would be just as much your fault as mine, no? i.e not our fault at all afaict [unless you happen to work for a newspaper, I certainly don't] Do you think Tony Blair should have control over them - is he responsible for what's published in them?
I note some Danish people have been advised to flee certain countries, but Danish muslims are just as Danish aren't they? Are they at risk? If not, how do you decide [or those people that might put Danish people in danger] which of the Danish are at fault?
Or the converse, do you accept responsibility for the actions of people who might fit into some neat group, like pianists, men, muslims or kurds or Brits...if you are any of those things, does that make you responsible for what other men, pianists, muslims, kurds or brits do?
Wow! - that's a whole lot of questions - but they're very valid ones, without a doubt.
I can at least understand the principle under which some people might want or hope for such an apology from the Danish Prime Minister, insofar as that those who claim to have been offended and might demand such an apology on the (albeit misleading) assumption that he is - or should be - ultimately responsible for what does or does not appear in the newspapers, to the extent that he has some responsiblity for upholding the law in Denmark. However, no one in Denmark has suggested that the Danish newspaper has actually broken the laws of Denmark by publishing the cartoons, so such an expectation would indeed be unrealistic, if not actually fatuous.
In the so-called free so-called democratic society in which most of us the West live, each individual is supposed to be responsible for his/her own actions and companies for their corporate actions, subject to the laws of the land concerned. In such circumstances, any public apology from anyone - including a Prime Minister - for the actions of another individual or company will not be worth the paper on which it's written; it would be no more valid or useful than an apology from me that Sorabji didn't write ten piano symphonies.
While on the subject of who is supposed to be resonsible for what and who can apologise meaningfully for their own actions or omissions in such a Western society - and since Tony Blair has been mentioned - in UK, Her Majesty the Queen does technically have the ultimate overall power to dismiss her government, although the likelihood of her ever doing so is as remote as a distant galaxy.
No, it won't do. Only those who have published items can apologise for their having done so, if they so choose. Even if they were to do so, however, such apology will achieve nothing if the offended parties will accept nothing less than an apology from the Danish Prime Minister, however pointless such an apology from him would be.
The right to freedom of speech is, in my view, worthy to be defended at all costs, but it does not obligate everyone to open their mouths all the time, regardless of the potential consequences of what might fall out of them when they do. It's a bit like some of the arguments about copyright, which, as I have had cause to remark on several occasions, also confers copy resonsibility. If the right to freedom of speech is to remain wholly defensible and credible, its responsible use will surely support its continued validity.
The question of whether and where Danish muslims or non-muslims living in muslim countries might risk being put in danger may not, however, be amenable in practice in those countries to the kind of logic that nevertheless persuades us that these people are not personally responsible for the actions of Danish newspaper staff in Denmark itself; it must therefore be a matter for each such individual to try to assess that potential risk, if any and then act accordingly in the interests of personal safety.
Best,
Alistair
Topic: Flap over the Cartoons . . .