It depends on how you interpret what was said. I don't see the statements as apologizing for American liberties but for the insults of the film and there is a big difference.

[en.wikipedia.org]

"An 1898 American legal textbook on defamation provides definitions of libel and slander...

For certain criminal charges of libel, such as seditious libel, the truth or falsity of the statements was immaterial, as such laws were intended to maintain public support of the government and the truth of the statements merely eroded public support more thoroughly. Instead, libel placed specific emphasis on the result of the publication. Libelous publications tended to "degrade and injure another person" or "bring him into contempt, hatred or ridicule." "

It is obvious the film fulfilled that result and is therefore libelous.

As far as it being a mid-eastern attitude of seeing an apology as a sign of weakness you're wrong, that is definitely not unique to their culture.