The world's biggest controversy of the moment is misguided.

The firestorm of protests surrounding the printing of 12 cartoons depicting Muhammad has become a maelstrom of anger and misunderstanding that is quickly losing control and focus.

As many know by now, a series of caricatures printed by the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, and subsequent reprints in other European periodicals, have sent much of the Muslim world into an increasingly blind rage over the perceived apathy towards Muslim sentiment in the West.

As such, the controversy has largely been regarded as a struggle between Western democratic tenets such as freedom of speech and sensitivity regarding important religious taboos. Yet, to frame the controversy as merely an issue between the press and religion ignores the direction that many of the recent protests have been trending and the potential impact on future international relations.

While the reactions in the Muslim world have been front-page news for several days, what has been slightly overlooked is an explanation for the disparity between the current eruptions and the original dates of publication.

The cartoons were originally published in September, yet the brunt of the reaction, and its most aggressive occurrences, only began in late January and are still intensifying. Many credit this to a movement by radical Danish clerics to stir anger and garner attention to their cause. Due to a lack of resources, this caused a lag between the worldwide reaction and the original publication dates.

Yet, the immediate intensification of protests cannot be blamed wholly on radical clerics. What is most disconcerting about this issue is the role that many state actors have played in furthering this controversy and the potential ramifications of these acts on future diplomatic relations.

While all of the heads of Muslim states have denounced the cartoons as offensive and intolerant, there are still several states that have not tried to stymie the occurrences of violent protests. Recently, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice criticized the reactions of Iran and Syria towards protests in their countries.

"Iran and Syria have gone out of their way to inflame sentiments and to use this to their own purposes," said Ms. Rice at a Feb. 8 press conference.

While this tactic has undoubtedly been used previously, in this especially tenuous environment between the United States and Iran, the increased political capital that the Iranian government can lever has serious consequences. Iran's position on its nuclear program can now become even more intransigent due to increased nationalistic and Islamic pride that is being promulgated by the Iranian government.

The anger felt by Muslims has left them susceptible to manipulation by those bent on turning their solidarity into an important political gain for radical or state-centered movements. With signs boasting such slogans as "Death to America, Death to Israel," protests that are ostensibly for the purpose of expressing grievances about the publication of offensive cartoons are taking a surprising detour towards the typical anti-Western tirades of radical Islamists.

The effect of such misguided actions is a loss for both Islam and the West. By cloaking their well-deserved sense of anger in needless and nonsensical anti-Western sentiment, many Muslims are eliminating the prospects of a truly effective dialogue on the issue. This furthers the divide between understanding the outrage of Muslims and reconciling it with the freedoms Western governments and publications are so strenuously defending.

Regardless of the efforts of the governing bodies of extremist Muslim states, some time this century Islam will be forced to meet the modern world, and state-enforced ignorance will only exacerbate the current disparities to an even more incomprehensible degree. Thus, it is necessary for state actors to refrain from needlessly inflaming negative sentiments and to help focus attention on realistic opportunities for compromise. This is imperative, because if violent protests spread to new areas, it will be a disservice for both the West and Islam.

Mike Skelly ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in finance and political science.