At yesterday’s State Dept. briefing, the question of the Afghan man being charged with converting to Christianity (previous post here) came up, briefly:

QUESTION: On Afghanistan, there are some reports that an Afghan Muslim man who converted to Christianity is on trial and could be punished to death for betraying Islam. Are you worried that this is a problem with registration freedom in the country? Now that the Taliban is gone you thought that there would be more democracy and improved human rights.

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, it’s a case that we’re following very closely and it’s important, we believe, that the Afghan authorities conduct this trial and any proceedings that lead up to it in as transparent a manner as possible. Our view, certainly, as you know, and has been stated here as well as others places many, many times, is that tolerance, freedom of worship is an important element of any democracy and these are issues as Afghan democracy matures that they are going to have to deal with increasingly. I think that right now there’s in Afghanistan some differing interpretations of the Afghan constitution. These issues rightfully should get resolved through the court system but they need to be resolved through — resolved in a transparent manner and according to the rule of law. It is a case that we are going to following quite closely, though.

At this point, that kind of statement is probably all that can be expected of the U.S. administration in a public way. The independence of the judicial system in Afghanistan is something that, clearly, is still going about being established. The last thing that is needed for the sake of its credibility within that country is any sense that the courts can be influenced by pressure from a foreign government. Yet, it will be crucial to see how their constitution is interpreted at this crucial precedent-setting stage, with regard to this issue of religious freedom, and I don’t think it’s stating it too dramatically to say that the support of many in the U.S., who have heretofore been staunchly in favor of the broad democratization effort in the Islamic world, is now hanging in the balance.

That includes many people who haven’t heard about this case as yet, but will surely hear about it if it should culminate in the execution of a man — by a democratic state that Americans sacrificed their lives to help establish — for saying, “I believe in Jesus Christ.”

….

Addendum 11:10 a.m.: It’s notable that during President Bush’s hour-long news conference this morning, not one question was asked about the possibility of Abdul Rahman facing execution in Afghanistan for his conversion to Christianity. It demonstrates the complete tone deafness of the mainstream media, if such demonstration were still necessary. If they realized what a potential wedge issue this was, in terms of breaking off hardcore supporters of President Bush’s democratization agenda, they would have been gleefully jumping all over it.

President Bush himself gave what was probably the best new conference performance of his career-to-date. He made the best arguments for the war that he has yet made in such a setting. It was good to see. He shows no signs of being tired of the fight.

Addendum 11:44 a.m.: Via Michelle Malkin, there is this story in the Chicago Tribune, which makes things look extremely bleak for Abdul Rahman, and which indicates that a decision may come down a lot sooner than the two months initially expected, and that the judge has already essentially made up his mind:

Judge Ansarullah Mawlawizada, who is handling the case, said he normally takes two months to decide on cases. But because this case is so serious, he expected to hold another hearing within the next week and make a decision.

Mawlawizada, who kept Rahman’s green Bible on his desk, said he respected all religions. He emphasized that he did not favor the aggressiveness of the Taliban, who cut the hands and feet off criminals in a soccer stadium. But he said Rahman had to repent.

“If he doesn’t regret his conversion, the punishment will be enforced on him,” the judge said. “And the punishment is death.”

Michelle also provides contact information for the White House, the Embassy of Afghanistan and the U.S. State Department, which I reproduce here:

White House phone number:
202-456-1111.

Afghan Embassy:

Ambassador Said T. Jawad
Embassy of Afghanistan
2341 Wyoming Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20008
info@embassyofafghanistan.org

State Department:

U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20520

Main Switchboard:
202-647-4000

Addendum 1:53 p.m.: Good for the Italians, and we need to see more of this: Italy summons Afghan envoy over Christian convert.

The Italian government summoned the Afghan ambassador to Rome on Tuesday to express its concern over reports that a man in Afghanistan faces the death penalty because he has converted to Christianity.

Foreign Minister Gianfranco Fini said if the reports proved true, Italy would raise the issue with European Union leaders in an effort to save the man.

….

Former Italian President Francesco Cossiga has written an open letter to Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi urging him to withdraw Italian troops from Afghanistan if he fails to win assurances from Kabul over Rahman’s safety.

“It is not acceptable that our soldiers should put themselves at risk or even sacrifice their life for a fundamentalist, illiberal regime,” Cossiga wrote.

Addendum 3:35 p.m.: Germans also stirring (Abdul Rahman apparently lived in Germany for some years and is believed to have converted to Christianity while there). The Catholic Church in Germany reacting too:

Germany’s top Catholic prelate, Cardinal Karl Lehmann, described the case against Rahman as “an alarming signal”.

“The German Bishops’ Conference solemnly demands that Christians in Afghanistan be able to practice their faith openly and freely and that conversion to Christianity must be possible without any disadvantages,” he said in a statement.

“German bishops will try to ensure Christians in Islamic countries enjoy the same rights as Muslims have in our country.”

Christians have few rights in some Islamic countries, notably Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. This has become an increasingly sore point in Europe, where Muslim communities are growing rapidly and demanding rights and respect.

The all important and galvanizing distinction here, of-course, is that — to put it bluntly — Christians have died to bring democracy and progress to Afghanistan. Whatever may happen as a matter of long standing barbaric practice in places like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, it is completely unacceptable that the new legal institutions of Afghanistan should treat belief in Christ as a crime.

It should be clear that the best result would not be for the Afghans to have apparently caved in after international bludgeoning, but rather to have lived up to the better angels of their own constitution, which does explicitly guarantee religious freedoms, while also giving a fundamental role to Islam in the law. There is a conflict there that was waiting to happen. It might have been nicer to put it off for some while longer, but, guess what: it’s arrived. And it is a pivotal moment.

While it would be much better, for the sake of precedent, for Abdul Rahman to be saved by the legal process, rather than by an extraordinary intervention, what is beyond doubt is that he must be saved.

Addendum 3:44 p.m.: Reader Chris emails with an excellent point: “If that poor Afghani guy was on trial for his life for claiming to be an atheist you’d probably hear a lot more outcry from the Western press.”

Addendum 5:52 p.m.: State Department briefing today:

QUESTION: Do you feel that that’s all it’s appropriate for the U.S. Government to do is just to hope the court case goes –

MR. MCCORMACK: At this point, we have raised it with the Foreign Minister and we’re going to continue to watch the case very closely.

QUESTION: But I guess my question is: Are you raising the fact that you want the court case to go transparently or raise the fact that there should even be a legal question?

MR. MCCORMACK: I think that the concerns that I have expressed in public are the ones that we have expressed to the Foreign Minister.

QUESTION: Isn’t there something wrong with the constitution of Afghanistan if it’s — I mean, the Secretary of State goes around, you know, telling countries which have, you know, bad human rights records to respect the freedom to worship, and here’s a country where America has gone in and tried to help, has been praised by the President, praised by the Secretary of State for its democratic progress, and here it is persecuting somebody because they’ve converted to another faith.

MR. MCCORMACK: Jonathan, as I said, this is right now — it’s a constitutional matter so it’s a legal question. So what that tells you is that there are two sides to this. There are those that believe that this is absolutely this person’s right within Afghanistan, Afghans who believe that. So right now this is — I believe certainly this is the first case that I have heard of of this type. So it is a test of the Afghan constitution. It’s a test of Afghanistan’s democracy. And so as I said, we will watch the case very closely. We have raised it with the Foreign Minister.

And from Nicholas Burns, also at the State Dept., via Reuters

“We hope that the Afghan constitution is going to be upheld and in our view, if it’s upheld, then of course he’ll be found to be innocent,” said Nicholas Burns, the State Department’s third-ranked diplomat.

Of-course what matters to Mr. Abdul Rahman is not the high-minded talk from diplomats, so much as the apparently blood-thirsty desires of his current captors. One hopes that Hamid Karzai will shortly be on top of this like … well, to give due deference to the inspiration behind this web site, like a mattress on a bottle of wine.

...................
Share this!

Posts which might be related to this one based on a mysterious algorithm:

• More Reactions to the Case of Abdul Rahman
• Going, Going, Gone
• Abdul Rahman and Afghanistan’s Test