Picking on Moderates

Articles here at the Spittoon tend to be quite controversial. For this we make no apologies. Normally this provokes the ire of members of Hizb ut-Tahrir, Jamaat-e-Islami and other Islamist groups, but on one particular occasion I guest posted a piece written by ‘Al-Qanaas Al-Masri’. It investigated links between the City Circle and IIIT, a group whose US branch is closely linked to the Muslim Brotherhood, and was entitled ‘The City Circle – Not So Moderate After All?’

This sent certain individuals into a tailspin. Not because of what was suggested by the article (none of its many critics attempted a refutation of the points it made) but because its author had the audacity to pick on moderates. These critics missed the point. The post was not a bitter attempt to blacken the name of people doing good work, rather it sought to point out to a moderate organisation that some of its allies were letting the side down.

The point is, we all make mistakes. If we do not criticise our friends when they make mistakes then what do our values mean? If you disagree with the arguments made in any article at the Spittoon then you have an immediate right of reply in the comments (which largely go unmoderated) or, if you feel very strongly (and can string a few sentences together coherently), we’d be happy to give you a guest post. And if we have made any factual errors then we are always glad to correct them.

Which is a very long preface for the post I was intending to write.

The Home Office and FCO funded (pdf) Radical Middle Way describes itself as “a revolutionary grassroots initiative aimed at articulating a relevant mainstream understanding of Islam that is dynamic, proactive and relevant to young British Muslims.” Although it has had its wobbles in the past, this is pretty right on stuff. They organise events involving a variety of speakers including Abdal Hakim Murad (Timothy Winters). His excellent writings are available online. Also Tariq Ramadan and Usama Hasan. All of these speakers provide interesting and valuable contributions to a developing modern British/European Muslim identity. I would not want to detract from their efforts.

There are other speakers though, like Jamal Badawi and Kemal Helbawy.

Jamal Badawi often gives the impression of being a moderate, but there are legitimate doubts about his moderate credentials. Here he is trying to clear up misunderstandings about jihad and terrorism.

A military act or violent act [which] violate[s] those principles laid down in the Qur’an and Sunnah it is non-Islamic no matter what title he give[s] to it. Call it jihad, Islamic, it has nothing to do with the true jihad. Nothing to do with Islam. [...]

But I must add also that these cruel acts, such as hijacking airplanes, bombarding them, carbombs that destroy the lives of many innocent bystanders did not just come from thin air.

Some of the other things Badawi which stands for are not exactly easy to reconcile with Radical Middle Way’s goal of creating a modern, youthful, British Islam. Here he is defending polygamy.

The question is, however, far more than the inherent flexibility of Islam; it also is frank and straightforward approach of Islam in dealing with practical problems. Rather than requiring hypocritical and superficial compliance, Islam delves deeper into the problems of individuals and societies, and provides for legitimate and clean solutions that are far more beneficial than would be the case if they were ignored. There is no doubt that the second wife legally married and treated kindly is better off than a mistress without any legal rights or security. There is no doubt also that the legitimate child of a polygamous father, born in the “full light of the day, ” and who enjoys all the rights and privileges of a son or daughter, is far better off than the wanted or unwanted illegitimate child (especially if it is a girl).

He has also written arguing that a Muslim man has a right to strike his wife if she misbehaves.

There are cases, however, in which a wife persists in deliberate mistreatment and expresses contempt of her husband and disregard for her marital obligations. Instead of divorce, the husband may resort to another measure that may save the marriage, at least in some cases. Such a measure is more accurately described as a gentle tap on the body, but NEVER ON THE FACE, making it more of a symbolic measure then a punitive one. Following is the related Qur’anic text:

And that suicide bombers can, at times, be considered martyrs.

Not every martyr is a “suicide” bomber. As indicated earlier, a person who is killed in the battlefield is also a martyr; also a woman who dies in a difficult child birth is also a martyr (of a lower degree).

Not every “suicide” bomber is a martyr if that action violates any of the conditions detailed in [a previous question on the same page].

Here he is discussing exactly when it is legitimate to kill an apostate [UPDATE: Link Corrected].

There are scholars who distinguish between apostasy on a personal level, which is not punishable by death, and apostasy that is accompanied by what we call today high treason, in which case the punishment is for high treason, not for apostasy.

However, some scholars do not distinguish between the two types.

Such immoderate views from Badawi, in the context of Radical Middle Way, are highly surprising. But they should not be for he has strong connections to the Muslim Brotherhood and, in particular, its Jew-bashing, female circumcision-justifying, spiritual leader Yusuf al-Qaradawi – who, like Badawi, would allow a man to beat his wife . For example, they taught together at the Islamic American University and Badawi set up the Muslim American Society, an organisation which has been revealed as a Muslim Brotherhood offshoot.

Kemal Helbawy has even stronger links to the Muslim Brotherhood. He joined at an early age and then proceeded to set up the Muslim Association of Britain and the Muslim Council of Britain. He also has some quite shocking views about Jews.

Oh Brothers, the Palestinian cause is not of conflict of borders and land only. It is not even a conflict of human ideology and not over peace. Rather, it is an absolute clash of civilizations, between truth and falsehood. Between two conducts – one satanic, headed by Jews and their co-conspirators – and the other is religious, carried by Hamas, and the Islamic movement in particular, and the Islamic people in general who are behind it.

And Israeli children.

Dr. Kamal Al-Hilbawi: “I condemn the targeting of any civilian, but incidentally, I believe that every Israeli civilian is a future soldier.”

Interviewer: “He is what?”

Dr. Kamal Al-Hilbawi: “A future soldier.”

Interviewer: “Even if he is two years old?”

Dr. Kamal Al-Hilbawi: “Even if he is a child. A child born in Israel is raised on the belief that [the Arabs] are like contemptible sheep, and that this is a land without a people, and they are a people without a land. They have very strange concepts. In elementary school, they pose the following math problem: ‘In your village, there are 100 Arabs. If you killed 40, how many Arabs would be left for you to kill?’ This is taught in the Israeli curriculum. What would you say about that? Should a child studying this be considered a civilian? He is a future soldier.”

Quite apart from the unpleasantness of the views expressed by these two Radical Middle Way speakers, it is deeply concerning that they should have such strong links to the Muslim Brotherhood, the global Islamist movement which Egyptian press recently reported retains a secret armed wing.

So what has the Radical Middle Way been doing? Whilst Kemal Helbawy no longer appears on RMW’s website – possibly a good sign that RMW has seen sense – why do they maintain their association with Badawi when they clearly know a wide array of speakers with far more moderate views?