|
Rise of xenophobia
Harmonious relations between different communities in Britain:
Challenges and constraints
BY DAUD ABDULLAH
Introduction
For all his scientific and technological advancement,
modern man is still grappling with the challenge of how to live together
in peace and harmony. Everywhere, the social ills of intolerance and
bigotry still continue to impede human progress. That 79,000,000 perished
in the two world wars remains an enduring reminder of how much is
required. Having lived through most of the 20th century, Isaiah Berlin
admitted he only remembered it as the ‘the most terrible century in
western history’.1
In England, a ‘Toleration Act’ was passed as early as 1689
– it granted to religious dissenters freedom of worship, under certain
conditions. Yet Roman Catholics were not covered by the act. Only with the
coming of the Catholic Emancipation Act of 1829 were some of the
conditions repealed. Prejudice and suspicion towards Catholics continued
well into the 20th century, engulfing other faith communities and
non-white people.2
Although harmonious relations is often associated with the
spirit of democracy, globalisation, freedom of expression and human
rights, it is yet to materialise in most societies north and south, east
and west. Following the September 2001 attacks in New York, Muslims in the
western hemisphere have come under increasing scrutiny. In Britain, they
are very often called upon to answer a recurring question: "are you first
a Muslim or a Briton?" Whenever this loaded question is asked, it is often
accompanied by presumptions about loyalty or disloyalty. Where does
Muslims’ loyalty lie in Britain? Are they British, Asian, Muslim, African?
Which comes first? Are such questions posed to other faith communities:
Jews, Catholics or evangelicals? Muhammad Abdul Bari of the Muslim Council
of Britain (MCB) believes that faith and nationality are both important
but ultimately it is the humanity and sense of justice of the individual
that matters.3
A home office citizenship survey of 2001 indicated that
for Muslims religion was a much more important aspect of identity than
ethnicity. The survey asked participants to list the top 10 things that
would say something about themselves. For Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs the
top three were family, religion and ethnicity. For Christians religion was
seventh on the list.4
Cultural diversity and plurality of faith can be an asset
rather than a liability. This is so if they complement each other in
shaping the national fabric. British Muslims do not believe that an
expression of faith is an act of extremism or divisiveness. Actually, one
does not have to abandon his religion to become tolerant. On the contrary,
it is through religion that communities forge more harmonious relations
and understanding among themselves.
Traditionally, campaigns for harmonious relations were
always linked to religious freedoms. It has now been expanded to include
areas such as sexuality, gender and race. Part of the problem that gives
rise to intolerance is ignorance and misunderstanding. Because the
overwhelming majority of British Muslims come from an Asian background
there is a tendency to trace Islam in Britain to their origins. The fact
is that the contact between Islam and the British Isles began hundreds of
years before the modern era. The period between the eighth and 15th
centuries marks that of the earliest contacts between Islam and the
British Isles. Not surprisingly, the English language itself bears
testimony to this old relationship; as Prof Robert Devereux pointed out,
there were at least some 600 Arabic loanwords in the English language.5
After 1945, some countries in Europe, like France, adopted
a policy of assimilation in which minority cultures are absorbed into the
majority culture. Britain adopted a course of integration that was
described by the reforming home secretary, Roy Jenkins, in 1966 as "equal
opportunity, accompanied by cultural diversity, in an atmosphere of mutual
tolerance".
The British model of integration has made it unique in the
world – hence the bid for the 2012 Olympics succeeded because Lord Coe
drew on London’s diversity and harmonious community relations. He affirmed
that it was because of the efforts of the city’s mayor to engage with
diverse communities and draw them in as stakeholders that the bid was
successful. About 45 per cent of Britain’s two million Muslims live in
London and most would not exchange this for life in any other city in the
world.
Challenges and constraints
While racism on the basis of race continues to manifest
itself in various forms, the mid-1990s saw a significant shift in which
some of the traditional markers were replaced by others of a cultural and
socioreligious nature. One such form of prejudice is often referred to as
Islamophobia. The Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia which was
set up by the Runnymede Trust in 1996 is widely accredited with coining
the term after the publication of its first report, ‘Islamophobia: A
Challenge for Us All’, in 1997. There were two other follow-up reports on
issues pertaining to Islamophobia in 2001 and 2004. All these studies
confirmed the existence of widespread hostility often manifested in
prejudicial views, discriminatory policies, social exclusion and physical
attacks.6
Relatedly, a survey conducted by the BBC in 2004 found
that white "candidates" were far more likely to be given an interview than
similarly qualified black or Asian "names". Applications from six
fictitious candidates with names indicating different ethnic and religious
origins, all with the same qualifications, were submitted to 50 employees.
Only nine per cent of the Muslim applicants were offered interviews,
compared to 23 per cent of white European applicants (BBC News website,
‘Shocking racism in jobs market’, July 12, 2004). The European Union
Monitoring and Advocacy Programme attributed the ‘penalty’ for being
Muslim to a multiplicity of factors, among them, negative stereotypes,
prejudice, ignorance and hatred.7 There are other assumed reasons such as
the perception of Muslim state and non-state actors as serial violators of
human rights, very often claiming to be acting in the name of their faith.
The term Islamophobia may have gained currency in the
popular discourse in the mid-1990s but the antipathy towards Muslims and
their faith has been present in western culture for many centuries. Though
it was manifested in the past in different forms, it is now largely
informed by international relations, concerns about asylum and refugees,
integration, radicalisation, security and terrorism.
Another aspect to the phenomenon of Islamophobia often
represented in the mainstream media and official discourse is related to
the ‘clash of civilisations’ theory. Bernard Lewis, in an article entitled
‘The Roots of Muslim Rage’ written in 1990, argued that it is clear that
the West is facing a mood and a movement far transcending the level of
issues and policies and the governments that pursue them. This is no less
than a clash of civilisations – the irrational historic reaction of an
ancient rival against Europe’s Judaeo-Christian heritage, its secular
present and the worldwide expansion of both.8
Subsequently, Lewis wrote other books to develop his
theory, which included What Went Wrong?: The Clash Between Islam and
Modernity in the Middle East (2002) and The Crisis of Islam: Holy
War and Unholy Terror (2003). One of his most recent theories, in a
piece titled "Muslims about to take over Europe", was reported in The
Jerusalem Post (January 29, 2007).
The outpour of this genre of writings was hastened by the
1979 Islamic revolution in Iran. They centred on themes such as
‘fundamentalist Islam’, ‘militant Islam’, ‘resurgent Islam’, ‘political
Islam’, ‘Islamic revivalism’. Suddenly, the Red Menace had given way to
new ones, namely Muslims and occasionally, Chinese. The need for an enemy
was apparently central in order to define self-identity. The argument
asserts, ’There can be no true friends without true enemies. Unless we
hate what we are not, we cannot love what we are.’9
There is admittedly a concerted attempt on both sides of
the cultural divide to deconstruct the ‘clash of civilisations’ theory.
The Alliance of Civilisations, co-sponsored by the prime ministers of
Spain and Turkey and launched by the former UN secretary general in 2005,
attributed the tensions in our societies to the alarming imbalance and
injustices in the international system. For while the last century brought
unprecedented progress, prosperity and freedom to many it also brought
subjugation, humiliation and dispossession to others.
In its report published in November 2006, the alliance
noted that ours is a world of great inequalities and paradoxes: "where the
income of the planet’s three richest people is greater than the combined
income of the world’s least developed countries; where modern medicine
performs daily miracles and yet three million people die every year of
preventable diseases; where we know more about distant universes than ever
before yet 130 million children have no access to education; where despite
the existence of multilateral covenants and institutions, the
international community often seems helpless in the face of conflict and
genocide."
With regard to the tortuous in relations between western
and Muslim societies, the alliance report also cited the partition of
Palestine by the United Nations in 1947, and the chain of events that
followed it, as one of the primary causes of resentment and anger in the
Muslim world towards western nations.
Enter the UN
In response to an invitation from the British government,
the UN special rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief visited the
United Kingdom during the period June 4-15, 2007. Despite the overall
respect for human rights and their value in the United Kingdom, the
rapporteur noted that there were some issues of definite concern. She
expressed alarm about reports of abuse and attacks on children in Northern
Ireland on account of their perceived religious affiliation.
On the position of Muslims, the special rapporteur also
expressed concern about the framework of counterterrorism measures in
which Muslims are regularly subjected to screening, searches and arrests
solely because of their religious affiliation.1 0
The return of fascism
Perhaps one of the most ominous challenges to Britain’s
multicultural project today is that posed by the twin diseases of racism
and fascism. Their cause is largely championed by the British National
Party (BNP). Formed in 1982 by John Tyndall, the BNP is always regarded by
the public as being organically linked to the National Front which was
itself also co-founded by Tyndall in the 1960s and had a reputation for
ruthless violence against immigrants.
Under the current leadership of Nick Griffen, the BNP
speaks a language of political correctness and panders to popular
misconceptions in order to attain its goal of an all-white Britain. Hence
they do not, as a tactic, parade the black shirts, jackboots, tattoos or
skinheads that are often associated with the far right National Front
parties in Europe; instead they have chosen to give a British flavour and
character to their thought. As Griffen maintains, they must at all times
present the British public with an image of moderate reasonableness.
In reality, the BNP has never abandoned its long-term
political objective of an all-white Britain. They are however, as a matter
of tactic and expediency, quite prepared to conduct themselves in a manner
that is consistent with what appeals to the national mood.
Since the prevailing climate today is one of Islamophobia
and ‘Muslim bashing’ they have readily joined the bandwagon as a
convenient vehicle to their final destination. By polishing their image,
playing on ill-founded fears and riding the existing wave of Islamophobia,
the BNP has attracted wider electoral support in recent years.
In the 2006 local elections the British National Party
polled over 2,38,000 votes, compared to 3,000 votes in 2000, increasing
their number of councillors from 19 to 49. In the last six years the BNP
vote has increased more than 75-fold. In the previous elections in 2004
the BNP only just missed getting elected onto the Greater London Authority
by 0.1 per cent.
The vision
Most reasonable people in Britain would accept that people
should be able to be different and yet treated equally. The relentless
public invective against Muslims and Islam is clearly fuelled by a
political agenda which seeks to demonstrate that jihadist violence is
driven by a socially disconnected ideology rather than decades of western
invasions, occupation and support for dictatorship across the Muslim
world.
On their part, the British Muslim position about terrorism
or political violence has been clear and categorical. Statements by
politicians and the media which link acts of political violence by
individuals with the Muslim community more generally have led to a
deterioration of community cohesion and the rise of xenophobia.
Thus results of a survey by the international market research firm,
Harris Poll, published in the Financial Times (August 20, 2007),
said 38 per cent of Britons think the presence of Muslims in the country
is a threat to national security.
The relentless onslaught in Britain against Muslims has
been translated into violent attacks. Accordingly, the Crown Prosecution
Service confirmed that 82 per cent of convictions for identified
religiously aggravated offences in 2006 were for attacks on Muslims.
BNP leader Nick Griffin asserts that his party has adopted
a new tactic of promoting Islamophobia as a guise for their racist agenda.
It is not a question of race for now but of radical Islam and terrorism.
Thus his party has exploited the fears of the ill-informed and
simple-minded with doomsday scenarios of demographic and economic
collapse.
Similarly, a recent survey by the European Monitoring
Centre on Racism and Xenophobia found that 43 per cent of youth in British
regional towns and cities are becoming more Islamophobic – 10 per cent of
13-14 year olds supported the BNP. This has been translated into bullying
at schools. Another study presented to the British Psychological Society
notes that "children as young as 13 are displaying signs of Islamophobia
and are voicing their support of the British National Party." Despite
these disturbing trends, British Muslims have time and again affirmed
their determination to work with the authorities to create a fairer, just
and prosperous society.
As it stands, no one can deny that there are dangers and
threats that beset Britain, among them, the spread of international
terrorism. This however would only be defeated by united
communities working together and not through legislations that are
perceived as unfairly targeting Muslims and stifling legitimate debate.
Even while staring terrorism in the face, democracies can
never abandon their commitment to civil liberties and human rights.
Today many civil society and faith bodies like the MCB are
playing a constructive role in trying to bring about a society at ease
with itself, accepting its diversity forged by history yet able to
appreciate shared values, acknowledge common interests and build inclusive
communities through collective endeavour.
In order to achieve a compassionate and caring society,
one where no groups are left behind due to disadvantage and
discrimination, a genuine dialogue must commence. Through this engagement
a national identity would be forged for the fulfilment of the collective
potential while realising the strengths of diversity. Such a vibrant and
successful society requires initiative by the individual citizen in his
civic acts, in support and promotion of social harmony.
Finally
British Muslims hold a vision of a multi-faith, pluralist
society with a conscious policy of recognising that people’s cultural and
faith identities are not private matters but ones that have public
implications.
Through strong ties of faith identity that transcends
ethnic boundaries. It is the moral and ethical principles of their faith
that urge them to be concerned and responsible citizens and active
participants in the life of their nation. In many respects, the needs and
aspirations of Britain’s Muslims are no different from those of our fellow
citizens – whatever their beliefs or backgrounds. Concerns about health
and education, national prosperity, strong public infrastructure and good
public services are common to all. The values of community life, the need
to build strong communities of mutual support, are basic principles that
connect Muslims to their fellow citizens.
Britain’s minorities are determined to preserve the gains
of the 1970s. These gains were not given as gifts or concessions but were
won after decades of struggle against racism for equal pay and against
discrimination. Hence today ethnic and faith communities are forging
broader alliances with trade unions, student unions and human rights
bodies to affirm their shared belief in justice, equality and opposition
to prejudice. The mere existence of these alliances is itself a testimony
of a commitment to a more coherent, equal and fairer society.
(Dr Daud Abdullah is the deputy secretary general, Muslim
Council of Britain. Paper presented to the Global Minorities Meet, New
Delhi, March 6-9, 2008.)
Notes
1 Cited in The Quest For Sanity (MCB, London,
2002), p. 205.
2 M. Abdel Haleem, ‘Tolerance’, ibid, p. 218.
3 M. Abdul Bari, Race, Religion and Muslim Identity in
Britain (Renaissance Press, Swansea, 2005), p. 138.
4 Home Office Research Study 274, ‘Religion in England
and Wales: findings from the 2001 Home Office Citizenship Survey’, Table
3.2, cited in MCB Briefing Paper: ‘Our stand on Multiculturalism,
Citizenship, Extremism & Expectations from the Commission on Integration
and Cohesion’, 2007.
5 See R. Devereux’s ‘The Arabic Contribution to English’
in The Islamic Quarterly, London (Vol. XXVIII, No. 3, Third Quarter
1984).
6 H. Ansari, The Infidel Within (Hurst & Co,
London, 2004), p. 204.
7 European Union Monitoring and Advocacy Programme,
‘Muslims in the UK – Policies for Engaged Citizens’ (The Open Society,
Budapest, 2005), p. 221.
8 A. Al Ahsan, ‘An Alternative to the Clash of
Civilisations Scenario in the 21st Century’, Department of History and
Civilisation, International Islamic University, Malaysia, unpublished
paper.
9 Ibid.
10 A. Jahangir, ‘Promotion and Protection of All Human
Rights, Civil, Political, Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Including
the Right to Development’, Report of the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of
Religion or Belief (A/HRC/7/10/Add 3, February 7, 2008).
|
