There have recently been signs of an encouraging shift in attitudes towards Islamism within sections of the British government. Though there are still plenty of insiders claiming that "non-violent" Islamists are our best defence against the violence that their ideology inspires in others, at least the error of this has been recognised by some.
But the
shift is by no means complete, as the recent controversy surrounding the rift
between the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) and Hazel Blears, the Communities
Secretary, has shown. The MCB has long been a trusted partner of the government
on the issue of extremism, presenting itself as an "umbrella
organisation" that represents the majority of Muslims in Britain. Anyone
who cares to look at the histories of some of the people making this bold
claim, however, can see that what the MCB really represents (and always has) is
the ideology of the prototypical Islamist movements, Jamaat e-Islami and the
Muslim Brotherhood. All Ms Blears has done is to notice this.
In February,
a conference of Islamists was held in Turkey by the dubiously-titled Global
Anti-Aggression Campaign. It culminated in a jihadist proclamation now known as
the Istanbul Statement, to which Dr Daud Abdullah, deputy director-general of
the MCB, was one of 90 signatories.
When this
came to her attention, Hazel Blears gave the MCB a choice: either force Dr
Abdullah out, or forfeit its relationship with the government. The MCB
stood by their man, so Ms Blears carried out her threat. She has drawn heavy
criticism from a number of left-wing commentators, who appear not to have read
or understood the statement itself.
Here are
four extracts:
We
affirm in full conviction that the Palestinian Authority, whose mandate is
coming to an end, is not eligible to represent the Palestinian people. It
stands outside the will of its people, and has given up the choice of jihad in
the way of Allah...
We
affirm in full conviction that the so-called Arab peace initiative is a proven
betrayal of the Islamic Nation and the Palestinian cause...
[We
affirm] the obligation of the Islamic Nation to find a fair formula of
reconciliation between the sons of the Palestinian people...[that] will carry
on with the jihad and Resistance against the occupier until the liberation of
all of Palestine.
[We
affirm] the obligation of the Islamic Nation to regard everyone standing with
the Zionist entity, whether countries, institutions or individuals, as
providing a substantial contribution to the crimes and brutality of this
entity; the position towards him is the same as towards this usurping entity.
If the
message is not clear, compare it with these words:
The West
is hostile to us on account of Loyalty [to fellow Muslims] and Enmity [towards
non-Muslims], and jihad....What the West desires is that we abandon jihad. This
is the very essence of the request and desire for of us. Do the intellectuals,
then, think it's actually possible for Muslims to abandon these two
commandments simply to coexist with the West?
