Michael Mumisa on the Muslim 'Civil War' |
|
|
|
| Thursday, 02 December 2010 16:37 | |||||||||
He said: “On November 8 2006, in the aftermath of the 7/7 bombings, I shared a platform with the then Secretary of State for the Home Office, John Reid, and Ruth Kelly at a conference held at the British Academy. I warned that if the fragmented nature of the Muslim communities in Britain was overlooked the government’s strategy would end up funding a ‘civil war’ between Muslims, and that a secular government should not be drawn into the debate on how Islam is interpreted or which Islamic theological school should be promoted. Unfortunately, this appears to have been the unintended outcome of the previous strategy for preventing violent extremism.” “There has since been an assumption that Muslims can easily be divided into two crude categories: the good ‘moderate Muslim’ and the bad ‘extremist’ Muslim, and that the problem of extremism can be solved by pouring money on the ‘good Muslim’ in order to neutralize the ‘bad Muslim’. The announcement in October 2007 that £70 million would be spent by the government on preventing violent extremism over three years unleashed a gold rush among the different and opposing Muslim sects in Britain. Since then each sect has been presenting itself as the ‘moderate’ voice of Islam while demonising its rivals as the ‘extremists’.” “It is tempting to view Sufi Islam as the cuddly and apolitical expression of Islam that should be promoted among all Muslims in Britain as a strategy of dealing with the problem of violent extremism. Such an approach is dangerous. It can be argued that the religious quietism adopted by Sufis (both within the Barelvi and Deobandi communities) is what is driving young Muslims into the hands of extremists. Anyone who has studied religious quietism in different faiths knows that it always produces more radical expressions of the faith.” “Not wanting to be accused of promoting extremist ideas, soon after the 7/7 bombings most Sunni Mosque committees across the UK imposed a total ban on political discussions in the Mosques. This means that young Muslims are now without an open and safe platform where they can express their political views and have such views examined or challenged by others. They have instead retreated into their bedrooms to search for answers on extremist internet forums.” Mumisa’s analysis that it is not for the government to be drawn into the debate on how Islam is interpreted or which Islamic theological school should be promoted is correct. Unfortunately, this is the direction to which government attitudes have been heading. Recently, Education Secretary Michael Gove was reported to be working with Khalid Mahmood (MP for Birmingham, Perry Bar), setting up a series of workshops in inner-city Birmingham schools, “teaching students about Sufi music, which is inspired by poets who practiced Sufism, a mystical tradition within Islam.” Mr Mahmood said the aim was to “teach young people about the true nature of Islam.” Painting some organisations and individuals as the moderate voice within the Muslim community at the expense of alienating other that have a track record of engagement and support with the community has been a favourite policy among both the Labour and the Conservative-led coalition government. Unfortunately it is those who do not criticise UK foreign policy and the adverse impact that it has had on the security in Britain that are given the title “moderates”, while those organisations that do are smeared with the all-encompassing term, “Islamist.”
Powered by !JoomlaComment 3.26
3.26 Copyright (C) 2008 Compojoom.com / Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved." |
Find out when ENGAGE will be in your local area giving a presentation on media awareness and political participation. 
View the ENGAGE diary here.
Please register below to make posts in the discussion forum and receive ENGAGE updates.
Download the ENGAGE Pocket Guide to Media & Politics here