This letter has been published today in The Guardian
****
We are disturbed by the visible rise, in some parts of the country, of anti-Muslim bigotry resulting in sporadic attacks on Muslims and their places of worship. We deplore this and condemn it unreservedly. However, the authors of the letter you published (Islamophobia is a threat to democracy, 25 March) are quite wrong to equate legitimate concerns about the leadership of the East London Mosque and the Islamic Forum of Europe with anti-Muslim bigotry. To do so betrays those who have genuinely suffered discrimination. The East London Mosque has frequently allowed intemperate clerics to speak on its premises, some of whom have promoted values antithetical to those required in a tolerant and progressive society.
They intimidate and bully other Muslims into accepting their contested theology as undisputed truth. Their allies and associates across south Asia have encouraged discrimination against minorities, opposed the reform of family laws and supported laws on blasphemy.
How can it be right for those of us who believe in liberal democracy to leave unchallenged those who would discriminate against religious minorities, women, homosexuals and Muslims with dissenting or heterodox views?
Criticism of incitement to religious hatred has nothing to do with excluding Muslims from the political process, as the supporters of the East London Mosque and Islamic Forum of Europe suggest. There are many impeccably non-sectarian Muslims active in political life, including in parliament, who are capable of opposing both racism and fundamentalism.
The greatest threat to democracy comes from reactionary and sectarian political groupings. We are disturbed by the rise of confessional identity politics in this country. Those who would promote such politics deserve robust scrutiny. To combat them is a moral duty.
Ansar Ahmed Ullah Nirmul Committee
Gita Sahgal Women Against Fundamentalism
Monjulika Jamali Cultural activist in east London,
Denis MacShane MP,
Dr Ghayasuddin Siddiqui Trustee, British Muslims for Secular Democracy,
Nigel Fountain,
Saikat AcharjeeLawyer,
Amanda Sebestyen,
Tehmina Kazi Director, British Muslims for Secular Democracy,
Sandra M Kabir BRAC UK,
Tahmima Anam Novelist,
Amina Ali Gender equality campaigner in East London,
Murad Qureshi London assembly member,
Aisha Shaheed Women Living Under Muslim Laws,
Dr Ahmed Zaman President, Communist Party of Bangladesh UK Branch,
Harunor Rashid President, Soytten Sen School of Performing Arts,
Darren Johnson London assembly member, Green party parliamentary candidate, Lewisham Deptford,
Keith Angus Lib Dem parliamentary candidate, Hackney North and Stoke Newington,
Rayhan Rashid War Crimes Strategy Forum-WCSF, activists’ coalition,
Waliur Rahman Workers Party of Bangladesh,
Peter TatchellOutRage,
Syed Enamul IslamFormer MEP candidate for London with the NO2EU: Yes to Democracy coalition,
Dr Irfan Al Alawi International director, Centre for Islamic Pluralism,
Dr Rafikul Hasan Khan President, Bangladesh Udichi Shilpi Gosthi UK Branch based in east London,
Prof Tom Gallagher Department of Peace Studies, University of Bradford,
Prof Nira Yuval Davis Centre for Research on Migration, Refugees and Belonging, UEL,
Cassandra Balchin,
Sujit Sen Bangladesh International Foundation,
Syed Neaz Ahmad Academic and author,
Harunur Rashid JSD,
Zoe Fairbairns Novelist,
Carolyn Hayman,
Brigitte Istim, James Bethell Nothing British about the BNP,
Jenny Harris Theatre administrator, founder of the Albany, formerly of National Theatre,
Marieme Helie Lucas Secularism is a Women’s Issue,
Victor Sebestyen,
Syeda Nazneen Sultana Gender equality campaigner in east London,
Dr Nowrin Tamanna University of Reading,
Pragna Patel Southall Black Sisters
15 Comments
Bravo! Well done to everyone involved with this initiative.
Hats off! For those of us who think and believe differently must stand up and be counted. Islam stands for peace, care and love but some preachers seem to advocate nothing but hate and chaos.
I pray to God that one day they may see, appreciate and apply the principles of Islam as was preached by Prophet Muhammad.
Rina – I thought that was exactly what these men were preaching – the principles of Islam as preached by the Prophet.
After all the Prophet’s ideas were indeed antithetical to those required by a modern tolerant society where human rights are the norm.
This is all partisan stuff hailing from stupid archaic Bangladeshi party politics that most ppl don’t care about in the diaspora.
Basically, the East London mosque is associated with Jamaat i Islami Bangladesh and Bangladesh Nationalist Party while many signatory’s petitioning here are associated with the ruling Awami League.
This is just a shabby (but public) fight between difèrent groups in securing Tower Hamlets council funding. Nothing more.
“This is just a shabby (but public) fight between difèrent groups in securing Tower Hamlets council funding. Nothing more.”
With respect, that’s a bogus comment. This is much bigger than a turf war in Tower Hamlets.
This is a statement by both muslims and non-mulsims who are saying one simple thing: It is possible to be both anti-Islamophobia and anti-Islamist at the very same time.
Those who dismiss this as a “partisan” reaction are usually those who cannot walk and chew gum together. They benefit from the conflation that criticism of the East London Mosque and the IFE is “Islamophobic” thereby closing down any criticism of its homophobia, antisemetism, anti-human rights and other dodgy details. Which is why the original statement was signed by stakeholders of the ELM, IFE and George Galloway and Ken Livingstone.
By the same token, Galloway dismisses the pro-democracy Green Movement of Iran as ‘partisan Royalists”. Galloway of course shills for Peace TV, the Islamic Republic’s propaganda media outlet in the UK.
And Livingstone would have us believe that the Muslim Brotherhood and the Hamas should be supported because he believes all Muslims kiss Yusuf Qaradawi’s ring, just because he has.
You misunderstand my point. I agree that it is possible to be secular and support the rights of religious minorities. However, one should not uncritically support community groups and individuals just because they use the secular (or Islamic for that matter) label.
Many of the Bengali petitioners on the above letter and the ones in the previous letter from ELM/IFE are representatives of Bangladesh-based party politics and all the hatreds, rivalries, divisions and corrupt practicesare this implies. For example, the Nirmul Committee is basically an Awami League front organisation targetting Jamaat i Islami members for war crimes trials in Bangladesh. This is fantastically controversial and is simply not an issue for Britain. This is the mirror image of ELM/IFE connections to Jamaat.
The argument for secularism amongst British Bangladeshis should not refer to staples of Bangladeshi politics ie. 1971, war crimes trials, language movement etc. These are issues used to deflect people in Bangladesh from real everyday issues. The superiority of secularism over political Islam should be based on real arguments relevant to Britain eg. superior provision of basic services, social welfare, equality before the law and respect for religious beliefs etc etc.
You will note that elected and prospective candidates of Sylheti Bengali origin in Britain have not involved themselves in either of these letters. This is because they recognise that the Secularism v. Islam argument as put forth by these usual (unelected) Bengali suspects is a red herring more at home in Bangladesh than the UK.
We live in Britain. Not Bangladesh.
“We live in Britain. Not Bangladesh.”
If that is your main bugbear, it is surprising that you have not taken that up most strongly with the ELM/LMC/IFE axis which are so thoroughly Jamaat in their organisational hierarchy as to be an identi-kit operation transplanted directly from Bangladesh.
Instead, you leap up to shout down the signatories of this counter-letter which has been produced in response to the IFE/Galloway/Livingstone effort, whose endeavours are very much interested in importing Bangladeshi politics, Jamaat-e-Islam stylee, from Bangladesh into the corridors of Tower Hamlets council.
The Nirmul Committe is a fringe secular political movement which exists with little or no state patronge, as opposed to the MCB-aligned bodies of the IFE who are well organised and well sponsored by state and non-state institutions, both here and in Saudi Arabia. To equate the two as equally opposite forces shows lack of a sense of proportion on your part. In terms of size and scale of sponsorship that secular groups receive in comparison to that of the ELM/LMC, the latter win by a very long shot!
There are many stakeholders and residents who are signatory to this letter who are of Sylheti Bangali origin but who oppose their representation in this country by political forces articulated in Islamist overtones. They also happen to be ordinary Muslims who are not secular fundamentalists or raging atheists. They are simply ordinary Bangladeshi Muslims, most of them of Sylheti Bangali origin. This letter is speaking on their behalf, since their voices are often shouted down in the bustle of Islamist to and fro in Tower Hamlets. And also by so-called “balanced” voices which only oppose “Bangladeshi” style politics when they happen to criticise religious identity politics in over Tower Hamlets, but remain strangely silent when specifically Bangladeshi Islamist political groups write letters to the Guardian, undersigned by left-wing heavyweights.
Han incorrecly asserts that no elected or prospective candidates of Syhleti Bangladeshi origin have ‘involved themseleves with either of these letters’ – in fact one elected Labour member of the Greater London Assembly of said origin (Murad Qurehsi) HAS signed the letter criticising the great, good and not so great of the British Left of the earlier letter for ‘equating legitimate concerns about the leadership of the East London Mosque and IFE’ with Islamaphobia.
As an ally and close colleague of Ken Livingstone it is significant that he dissociates himself from the earlier letter – in one respect this is the same as fellow Green Assembly member Darren Johnson and prominent Green Tatchell dissociating themselves from their own Green political colleagues (Lucas and Jenny Jones) who signed the earlier letter. But as the only elected candiate of Bangladeshi hertiage (and Syhleti for that matter) involved in these letters and being from a generation that is not directly involved with purely Bangladeshi politics, it is surely significant that he is critical of the earlier letter.
If anyone wants to do a signatory v signatory count, there is no doubt that even after excluding Galloway and his cronies, the earlier letter does contain more famous names from the British Left (Livingstone, Lucas, Woodley et al) but the letter criticising them has far more Muslim and Bangladeshi signatories, many of whom have some Sylheti heritage.
Approximate count would be first letter – 2 Bangladeshi Muslims from organisations (ELM and IFE) directly criticised by Dispatches (who would say that wouldn’t they) and 4 other non-Bengali Muslims all of whom bar Lord Ahmed are closely associated with George Galloway in some form (Salma Y/Altrikiti etc)
By contrast, in addition to Murad Qureshi, there are c.16 Muslim Bangladeshis signing the second letter (including six women) not all of whom are first and foremost secular activists alone, plus one Bangladeshi Hindu activist and half a dozen non Bengali Muslim names.
It is noteworthy that both letters agree that Islamaphobia is a bad thing – the pertinent point (and main reason for the second letter) is that by equating the legitimate concerns publicised by Dispatches with Islamaphobia, the great and good signatories of the earlier letter do a disservice to all the residents of Tower Hamlets.
Two added points – the criticisms highlighted by Dispatches are basically about secrecy and clique forming – it does not detract from the rights of people who want to lobby for public funding of Islamic as oppossed to secular groups. They are free to do so openly and likewise their oppenents are free to bring up their associations (which like it or not do include an element of Bangladeshi politics relating to war crimes committed in the 1971 war)
Secondly, another reason for favouring the second letter which poitical Islamists may not like to be reminded of, is that one signatory of the second letter alone (Amanda Sebestyn) did a lot more in the 1990s to campaign for the rights of (often Muslim) vicitms of ethnic cleansing in the former Yugoslavia than some of the left wing signatories of the first letter (Bruce Kent for instance).
an excellent response, asif. and i see things have not been idle here while i’ve been on my passover break.
b’shalom
bananabrain
Yes I agree with bananabrain, solid response by AsifB.
Do the communist party of Bangladesh, national socialist party (JSD) and Workers party of Bangladesh sound like groups who support tolerance and democracy? These people lose their deposits at election. Jamaat at least got millions of votes.
This is like the BNP calling Respect extremists. Take no notice of it.
no, they don’t sound that charming, do they? however, the bnp would be right if it called respect extremists, just as it would be right if it said the sky was blue or that george galloway is a paid apologist for clerical fascism, being as how he’s on the payroll for press tv and all. i think the salient point here is probably that we don’t need the bnp in order to have the feckin’ obvious stated, but if it’s not immediately obvious that jamaat are an unpleasant organisation, then insight into this is welcome, providing the insights are valid and not otherwise obtainable.
b’shalom
bananabrain
Who are the extremists?
East London mosque that runs literacy drive like the Big Read and anti substance abuse sessions to help the community or people from Dhaka who always look back to dredge up topics for Bangalee nationalism like alleged war crimes from 1971 ? What good will come from this for Tower Hamlets?
It’s called social justice.