when Western governments and the
Muslim establishment limit Muslim
political activism. Ali Al-Arian | 19 Jan 2016 14:09 GMT | Islam, Media, Europe, US & Canada, Middle East Muslims gather in Paris in September 2014
to pay a tribute to Herve Goudel, a
mountain guide beheaded by fighters
affiliated to the Islamic State of Iraq and the
Levant [YOAN VALAT/EPA] RELATED FEATURED ” here is very little effort ade to distinguish tween 'extreme' and oderate' Muslim entities or ople when it comes to rveillance and infiltration. he assumption on the part large parts of the telligence community is at anything 'Islamic' - oups or individuals - are herently suspect and in ed of monitoring. enn Greenwald, Journalist Get Flash Player ” ollowing the November 13
aris attacks, when the mes of the terrorists were
ginning to be known, the edia presented them with rases like 'of Moroccan igin, with French tionality' to avoid saying at these terrorists are rench. This underlines the termination to exclude is category of the pulation. i Saad , French sociologist and media
itic Less than 2 percent of all
politically motivated acts of
violence committed in Europe
are carried out by Muslims . Yet, the media narrative of a
crisis with "radical Islam" and
"radicalised Muslims" reaches
new heights after each major
attack in a Western country. Meanwhile, rational analysis of
what constitutes Muslim
"radicalism" fails to inform public
discourse, which is instead
driven largely by sloppy
presuppositions connecting religiosity or conservatism to a
propensity for violence - despite
any credible evidence linking the
two. Promoted by networks of well- funded Islamophobic hate groups , the hazy logic underlying this understanding of
extremism is at the centre of
Western efforts to moderate
Islam. It is pervasive in government
policies and, critics say, it is
actively undermining the ability
of Muslim communities to
confront radicalism by stifling
their freedom to openly participate in the democratic
processes of civic life, including
free expression of political
opinions. The dubious link between
conservatism and extremism The profiles of the vast majority
of documented attackers,
including the September 11
hijackers and those involved in the recent Paris attacks,
clearly diverge from mainstream
Muslim communities, with
lifestyles - featuring the use of
illicit drugs, sex, and alcohol -
that would be considered anathema by conservative Muslims. In spite of the lack of a clear connection with violent extremism, Muslims who adopt
conservative or traditional
perspectives - on gender roles,
styles of dress, and even the
permissibility of music and
alcohol - are now considered by some governments to be on the
path toward violence . Following the Charlie Hebdo
attacks in Paris last January, the
French government released a
flyer that pointed out the
supposed signs of Muslim
"radicalisation" , including a Muslim who stops listening to
music, stops participating in
organised sports activities, or
changes the way he or she
dresses. It was reminiscent of the
American writer Asra Nomani's claim that a Muslim saying "inshallah", an Arabic phrase
commonly used by Muslims and
non-Muslims alike and meaning
"God willing", is a "red flag". However, even prominent global
news agencies sometimes fall
into the trap of equating Islamic
piety with a propensity for
violence. Recently, the AFP
casually described one Saudi billionaire as a "devout but moderate Muslim ", explicitly implying that one's piety is
normally at odds with one's
"moderation". Of course, these are just a few
examples of how adhering to
even the most basic Islamic
beliefs and practices can spur
suspicions of violent
radicalisation. Hence, a "good Muslim"
becomes one who is least
identifiable as Muslim. Making an industry out of
Islamophobia The media narrative of a crisis with
"radical Islam" and "radicalised Muslims"
reaches new heights after each major
attack in a Western country [Thierry
Chesnot/Getty Images] However, the development of a
media and political culture that
instinctively sees Islam as an
ideological threat to Western
liberal values, and equates its
conservatism with violent extremism, is no accident,
according to author and
researcher Nathan Lean. Lean, who wrote the book The Islamophobia Industry , told Al Jazeera that the massive
multimillion-dollar industry began
booming following the
September 11, 2001 attacks,
when "a cadre of bloggers,
pseudo-scholars, religious leaders, and activists emerged
touting special knowledge of
Islam and Muslims". Individuals, such as Pamela
Geller , Robert Spencer, Daniel Pipes and others "transformed internet activism
into on-the-ground action such
that by 2010, under the banner
of their group, the American
Freedom Defense Initiative , they led protests against the Park 51 Islamic Community
Center in Manhattan", he added. READ MORE: The belief
system of the Islamophobes Spencer and Geller are known
to have inspired Anders Breivik, the right-wing
Norwegian gunman who, citing them in his manifesto , bombed and shot dead 77
people in a mass attack in 2011
in protest against the alleged
"Muslim takeover" of Europe. Indeed, Lean told Al Jazeera
that Islamophobia in Europe has
seen "the tentacles of European
groups like the Quilliam
Foundation [begin] to emerge.
Quilliam, which sent McCarthy- esque lists of Muslims to the British government, helped develop software that spied on UK schoolkids, and whose
leaders cavort with the likes of
the Clarion Fund [which produced the anti-Muslim film,
Obsession], has cunningly branded itself as a counter- radicalisation group that is
concerned with Islamism". "Ultimately, the goals of these
various groups are not
necessarily the same, though
the obvious thread that connects
them is their desire to see Islam
and Muslims represented and discussed in an expressly
negative way," Lean said. Fear in Western countries has
become so extreme that Muslim
citizens are being forced off planes , are facing a skyrocketing number of Islamophobic incidents - including massive local opposition to the building of mosques and community
centres - and are regular victims
of fire-bombings and other life-threatening attacks . European far-right parties have called
refugees streaming into the region a
'ticking timebomb', a Muslim 'invasion' that
will bankrupt nations and undermine the
continent's Christian roots. The words on
the T-shirt read: 'Anti-Islam militia. Stop Islamization' [Marcin Stepien/Reuters] Such events have most recently
been shrouded in a
fearmongering discourse about the acceptance and integration of specifically Muslim
refugees . But the social pressures and
what researchers like Lean have
referred to as the Transatlantic
"Islamophobia industry", cannot
be divorced from government
policies in Western countries that have actively sought to
crack down on, target and
control Muslim communities. Eliminating Muslim political
action In 2007, the RAND Corporation,
a US government and
corporate-financed think-tank
that provides reports to the US
army, published one titled "Building Moderate Muslim
Networks" . It sought to advise the US government on
who its Muslim partners should
be. While the report used Western
social values as an indicator of
"moderation", it also emphasised
a political dimension. Muslim
secularists and "moderate"
Sufis, along with largely apolitical "spiritual" Muslims, are
shown to be natural allies
against those Islamists seen by
RAND to be infusing their
religion with a political agenda. There is a trend among Western
policymakers to use any form of
civil, political activism among
Muslims as an indicator of
"radicalisation". According to Scotland Yard
police commander Mak Chishty,
Muslims in the UK advocating
for the boycott of Marks &
Spencer, a corporate chain that
has been accused of providing support for Israel's occupation
of Palestine, could be on the verge of radicalisation . He linked the boycott, a method
of protest with a long history of
non-violent movements, to
attackers shooting 80 people in
a concert hall based on the mere
fact that both groups are Muslim. Aside from involvement
in social justice causes
important to many Muslim
communities, even increased
personal adherence to the basic
tenets of the faith, such as abstaining from alcohol, is a sign
for Chishty that the Muslims in
question are potential "jihadists". The UK has recently come
under fire over its Prevent programme , with a letter signed by hundreds of prominent academics, lawyers and public
officials who claim that under
British law, "growing a beard,
wearing a hijab or mixing with
those who believe Islam has a
comprehensive political philosophy are key markers
used to identify 'potential'
terrorism". 'Targets and suspects at the
same time' Glenn Greenwald, the Pulitzer
Prize-winning journalist known
for writing on Edward
Snowden's NSA leaks and
cofounding The Intercept news site, explained to Al Jazeera that "there is very little
effort made to distinguish
between 'extreme' and
'moderate' Muslim entities or
people when it comes to
surveillance and infiltration. The assumption on the part of large
parts of the intelligence
community is that anything
'Islamic' - groups or individuals -
are inherently suspect and in
need of monitoring". In 2014, Greenwald released a
list of Muslim-American
community leaders and activists under surveillance by the US government. According to him: "The five
Muslim-American leaders whom
we revealed to be surveillance
targets had one thing in common
beyond their Muslim heritage:
They had expressed criticism of US foreign policy. "Notably, one of them was a
former Bush Homeland Security
official and GOP congressional
candidate who had largely
agreed with the GOP foreign
policy agenda, and another was a scholar who was integrated
into the highest levels of the US
foreign policy community. But
even general agreement with US
government policy does not
insulate Muslim-Americans from suspicion if they utter any
critiques at all," he told Al
Jazeera. Hatem Bazian, a professor at
UC-Berkeley and a Muslim-
American activist, agreed with
Greenwald's assessment: "The
government is operating with a
similar strategy that was deployed in the 1960s civil rights
era with the [FBI programme]
COINTELPRO, which targeted
leaders and groups deemed
then to be politically
objectionable, be [it] directly or indirectly, with the hope of
disrupting, redirecting or
otherwise neutralising their
work. "The hope of this is to solicit
cooperation among some that
can be utilised as a voice to
support government policies
domestically and internationally,"
Bazian told Al Jazeera. In addition to the surveillance of
Muslim-American community
leaders, mosques, and even
Muslim university students , the government has also
undertaken initiatives under the
headline of "Countering Violent
Extremism", popularly known as
CVE. CVE has received much
criticism, as one organisation
affiliated with New York
University's School of Law accuses it of focusing "only on Muslims, stigmatising them
as a suspect community. These
programmes have further
promoted flawed theories of
terrorist radicalisation which lead
to unnecessary fear, discrimination, and unjustified
reporting to law enforcement." According to Bazian, "The core
problem with CVE is that it
problematises Muslim normative
conduct [and] religious
behaviour and attempts to
govern ideas and identity markers rather than criminal
[and] terrorist intent or
behaviour. "The key factors that are listed
have nothing to do with criminal
intent, and the key markers in
the programme point to praying
five times a day, having [a] long
beard, frequent complaints about US foreign policy, and
expressing [an] opinion about
[the] Israeli occupation and
Palestinian suffering," he added. Thus, along with the secret-but-
not-so-secret government
surveillance and crackdown on
Muslim-American spaces, CVE
represents a public
governmental outreach meant to pressure Muslims into steering
clear of political activity in a
manner that could challenge
government policy. "If [the] safety of society is the
goal, which is something that
Muslims badly need in the US
and across the world, then they
are victims of terrorism and
victims of counterterrorism because, in each way, they are
treated as targets and suspects
at the same time," Bazian
explained. Little effort is made to distinguish between
'extreme' and 'moderate' Muslims [Michael
Reynolds/EPA] Security of the majority
through stigmatisation of the
minority Such policies are not limited to
the US. French police operate
under a special emergency law
subjecting thousands of homes , mosques, and Muslim- owned businesses to regular raids and intimidation . Several mosques have been shut down permanently after the French state determined
them to be too "conservative". In addition to the government's
crackdown on anything deemed
too Islamic, social stigmatisation
in France continues to rise
unchecked. According to Marwan
Muhammad, a European activist
and former spokesperson for
the Collective Against
Islamophobia in France,
"Muslims in France currently live in a state of permanent tension
and anxiety. They realise that
the 'feeling of security', as a
political signal sent to the
masses, is going to be achieved
through their ongoing stigmatisation as a group. "[French] Prime Minister
[Manuel] Valls explained in a
speech he gave a few years
ago that he 'does not fear the
Muslim vote', and later on, in a
mainstream radio interview, confirmed his views about
Muslims: 'The fight against the
headscarf is an essential battle
for the Republic.' In saying so,
he confirms the idea that Muslim
communities, mainly living in economically and socially
deprived areas, do not constitute
a political force." The internalisation of
collective Muslim guilt While the media - and
government - created a
distinction between "good" and
"bad" Muslims, and the topic has
been written on extensively, there has been less discussion
about how Muslim institutions
play into that dichotomy. Although prominent Muslim
institutions and community
leaders are often criticised by leftists and right-wingers alike for supposedly not doing enough to condemn groups such as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant
group, they have consistently
done so after every single major attack since 9/11. The actual problem, some
suggest, is these institutions'
overzealous support for
governmental policies that have
increased the threat of terrorism
and created the perfect conditions for radical groups to
recruit disenfranchised
individuals. Many Muslim-American
institutions have gone to great
lengths to distance themselves
from the "bad Muslims", while
presenting themselves as the
"good Muslim" alternative and finding favour with Western
governments. READ MORE: Tariq
Ramadan: The West,
terrorism and Islam Critics say that this internal
enforcement of Muslim
"moderation" - as defined by
Western governments - has
isolated those members of the
community who might otherwise have found a space to voice
their political and social
frustrations with governmental
policies and societal
marginalisation. In the US, some organisations,
such as the Muslim Public
Affairs Council (MPAC), have
even championed the
government's CVE initiative.
MPAC also founded the Safe Spaces Initiative , and has received much criticism for its attempt to "root out
extremism in Muslim
communities" through this
programme, which accepts at
face value many of the
discredited arguments regarding the "signs of radicalisation". Indeed, Muslim-American
institutions, in a panic to
establish themselves as
representatives of "good,
moderate" Islam in a climate of
Islamophobia, often adopt positions that are controversial
in the very communities they are
supposed to represent. For example, many Americans
objected to the US' extrajudicial
killing of Osama bin Laden in
May 2011 on the grounds that it
violated the basic human right to
due process and a fair trial. Yet, it was reflexively celebrated
in press releases by Muslim-
American organisations, with
one group saying they "welcome the elimination of Osama bin
Laden ". Many who condemn Bin Laden, but also object to
their government carrying out an
extrajudicial killing, criticised
these organisations for
obfuscating the ethically
grounded criticisms some Muslim-Americans have of their
government. Furthermore, some of the
largest Muslim-American
organisations have been
criticised for repeatedly
releasing statements and
holding press conferences that succumb to the pressure of
being politically acquiescent and
apologetic or which demonstrate
an aloofness with regards to
sociopolitical realities. For example, in the midst of the
massive #BlackLivesMatter
protests in Baltimore following
the police killing of Freddie
Gray, the Islamic Society of
North America (ISNA) was criticised for inserting itself into the debate by expressing its
disapproval of "rioting" without
having issued any
condemnation of the shooting or
a call for justice. Similarly, the Council on
American-Islamic Relations
(CAIR), within mere hours of the
San Bernardino shooting, before
any confirmation from police that
the criminals were Muslim, held a live press conference
condemning the attack. The
hastily organised event was
criticised as "cringeworthy " for featuring a visibly shocked family member of the
suspected perpetrators to
express his condolences. Many Muslims saw this as a
desperate move to "frame the story as something it is not ", effectively indicting the entire
Muslim community by
presuming to speak on behalf of
Muslim-Americans. Such
actions, critics contend, only
serve to underline the idea that the community carries a unique
responsibility to publicly
denounce the acts of their co-
religionists. Nihad Awad, CAIR's executive
director, rejected the criticism
and told Al Jazeera that "hosting
a press conference, nationally
covered live on all major news
networks, got the family [of the suspected perpetrators of the
San Bernardino attack] and
community ahead of the story,
rather than steamroll[ing] by it". But as Zareena Grewal, a
professor of American Studies
and Religious Studies at Yale
University, wrote in her book Islam is a Foreign Country : "By accepting responsibility for 'bad Muslims' in the public
sphere, Muslim-American
spokespeople's defensive
postures not only treat terrorism
and fundamentalism as
synonyms, they link the rehabilitative strategies
necessary for salvaging Islam
[their own reform projects] to the
project of mainstreaming
Muslims in the US." Indeed, such positions
unintentionally play into the idea
that Muslims are a
monochromatic entity. 'Rehabilitated' imams Establishment imams who are
well-connected with US security
officials, such as the extremely
popular Muslim-American
preacher Hamza Yusuf, who
advised the Bush administration, have helped to smear Muslim
social and political activism,
where it does not suit an
establishment agenda - by
linking it to the extremism of
ISIL. In a 2014 lecture in Malaysia,
Yusuf blamed those who had
protested against autocratic
governments during the 2011 Arab uprisings for the rise of
ISIL. Yusuf preached an
obedient political quietism,
counselling the audience: "You
need to rectify yourselves. But
your rulers, you have to obey them … You see what
revolutions do? Look at the
result of revolutions." His efforts to associate Muslim
participation in civil disobedience
against tyranny with ISIL did not
stop there. In an episode of Al Jazeera's UpFront which first aired in November 2015, Yusuf lumped
a centuries-long tradition of
Reformist Islamic thought -
which includes a wide range of
modernists, conservatives,
Sufis, and various other orientations - with the violent
movement many would instead
argue sprang from the ashes of
the US-led invasion of Iraq. Speaking to those calling for a
religious reformation to counter
ISIL, Yusuf said of the group:
"These are the reformists; this is
the fruit of reformation." To some, Yusuf has become
a prime example of "rehabilitation" - as a laudatory New York Times profile frames his shift from a "history of anti-American
rhetoric" - into a "moderate"
Muslim. 'Controlling Muslims' Meanwhile, in France, the only
Muslim organisation recognised
by the state, CFCM, has called
for Muslim preachers to be
licensed by the state in order to
operate legally in mosques - despite the fact that no "radicalisation" has been
documented in mosques . According to Marwan
Muhammad, the European
activist, many French Muslims
have criticised CFCM as well as
the government for only
recognising an institution they do not feel represents them. "This institution was founded by
former President Nicolas
Sarkozy, and ever since, has
been mainly aligned with the
government's positions, which
still deals with Muslims by means of 'control'," Muhammad
told Al Jazeera. "The situation is even made
worse by how mainstream
media represent Muslims, by
often inviting 'native informants',
who will then be used to promote
anti-Muslim stereotypes, with the excuse that they 'speak
from within the community',
while they are massively
rejected by this very
community," he said. Hassen Chalghoumi is one
imam who is given plenty of air
time on French media despite the heavy criticism he receives from the French Muslim community . Chalghoumi heads the
Conference of Imams, an
organisation he founded. But
most importantly, he has spent
much time reinforcing the
moderate/radical and good/bad Muslim dichotomy in France and
abroad. In an op-ed written for the Israeli
newspaper Haaretz,
Chalghoumi supported the
French interior ministry's
decision to shut down mosques deemed to be Salafist
or "Muslim Brotherhood-
supported" in an apparent
attempt to connect them with the
so-called roots of radicalisation, A naturalised French citizen who
studied Islamic studies in Syria
and Pakistan, Chalghoumi also
bizarrely called for the creation
of a training structure "free from
foreign sources" that would determine the interpretations of
Islamic teachings Muslim
preachers in France are allowed
to follow. He has also demanded that the
government deport preachers who do not follow what he defines as "moderate Islam" and
that it close Muslim spaces and mosques he deems to be "places of hate". The shrinking space for
Muslim activism Alienating moves undertaken by
Muslims' own institutions in
countries such as the US and
France, including those listed
above, have led several
commentators and activists, such as Bazian, to say that "the
community is still missing a
strategic vision, a goal-oriented
plan, and a cohesive
representative body that could
put pressure to extract the community's interest nationally
and regionally. "Proximity to DC, the White
House and state department
seems to be the only scope that
Muslim organisations are
considering as the limits of their
constitutional and civil rights horizons," Bazian added. Grewal told Al Jazeera that
although "particular individuals,
such as Hamza Yusuf, and
organisations, CAIR for example
… have earned an enormous
amount of goodwill in American- Muslim mosque communities ...
as they align themselves with
the government, religious
leaders and organisations risk
losing their street credibility." Indeed, as Muslims continue to
become ever more stigmatised
in the US and France, many of
their leaders have only
proceeded to demonstrate what
the model "good Muslim" must appear to be at the risk of
adequately addressing the roots
of their disfranchisement. "Much of the 'war on terror' has
been about disciplining Muslim
spaces such that they are
depoliticised, or that the politics
that is allowed to be expressed
is extremely narrow - basically flag-waving patriotism and very
mild criticism of the
government," Grewal said. "Muslim-Americans are taught
that they cannot or should not
express radical political views
as if anything that is radical is
automatically terrorist - which, of
course, it is not," she added. The threat that such a politically
and socially numbing policy -
imposed upon Muslim
communities by governments in
conjunction with Muslim
establishment institutions - poses to the premise of political
and religious freedom in
Western countries is clear. But
even this sacrifice, apparently
for the safety and security of
Western nations, quite likely achieves the exact opposite. The constructed dichotomy of
the "moderate" Muslim (as either
apolitical and accommodating to
power, or "spiritual" within a
"private" realm) in opposition to
the "extremist" Muslim (which includes anyone challenging
government discourse or
identified as too "conservative"
or "traditional") leaves little room
for Muslims to explore their own
political and social consciousness, as well as their
personal (and public)
relationship to their religion and
standard of ethics.
| Posted: at | |
TRENDING GISTS 
2027 Elections: APGA Adopts Tinubu As Its Sole Presidential Candidate
Police Arrest 228 Suspects In Enugu
Fan Gushes As MC Oluomo’s Daughter Gets Engaged
VIDEO; "Davido Gifted My Girlfriend ₦10 Million For Supporting Me" - Rapper, Odumodublvck
Mayor Of Boston Celebrates Nigerian Singer, Rema’s Role In Championing Afrobeat Worldwide
PHOTOS: Troops Arrest Four Suspected Terrorists, Recover Arms And Ammunition In Taraba