Debate on veil shows how West is turning on Islam, scholar warns

Tariq_RamadanA leading Muslim scholar has said the debate on women wearing veils highlights a growing “global polarisation” between the West and the Islamic world.

Tariq Ramadan, a visiting professor at Oxford University told an interfaith conference in London yesterday that the debate sparked by Jack Straw, who said the veil hampered integration, was part of a global phenomenon in which a “them versus us” attitude was being fostered between Muslims and non-Muslims.

“The atmosphere has deteriorated in the last year or so,” Professor Ramadan said. “It’s not only a British reality, but European and American. To nurture this polarisation is the easiest way for politicians when we don’t have social policy. The most dangerous thing is the normalisation of this discourse.”

Independent, 27 October 2006

Veil hang-ups may pass

“For years I worked in a school where a number of memorable parents wore the niqab, a full veil. These women taught me a lot about Islam. They also challenged my understanding of inclusion. However strange I felt in our first encounters, I now remember their faces with fondness. Aisha Azmi’s tribunal, coming in the wake of Jack Straw’s discomfort over veil-wearing, challenges our society from the top down.

“When government minister Phil Woolas calls for her sacking, saying she ‘can’t do her job’ I have to ask whether he’s taken any time out of publicity-seeking to explore alternatives. If not, can I call for his sacking?

“When Mr Straw clumsily complains that veils make him ‘uncomfortable’, I can’t help but wonder if the key to community relations really is to keep men like him comfy. Would he like us to fetch his slippers as well? … And when the Prime Minister refers to the veil as ‘a mark of separation’, I have to point out that he usually wears a tie. If ever a silly piece of clothing reinforced separatism it’s that absurd, class-bound strip of silk.”

Huw Thomas in the TES, 27 October 2006

Why this fear of Islam?

“It’s fashionable nowadays for Britain’s politicians to complain about immigrants who refuse to assimilate. The more right wing among them infer that the presence of a large Muslim community threatens ‘our way of life’ without going into details as to what that way of life actually entails. Not surprising when Britain has become such an eclectic multiethnic melting pot. There no longer is a stereotypical British way of life other than in the pages of an Agatha Christie or a P.G. Wodehouse novel.

“It’s interesting, too, that those who feel intimidated or threatened in the presence of a woman wearing the veil don’t appear to be concerned by the sight of a nun’s habit, Hassidic garb or side locks, Sikh turbans or the shaved heads and orange robes of Hare Krishna devotees.

“Moreover the current ministerial focus on Muslim assimilation is having the opposite effect. Moderate Muslim leaders resented being told by John Reid, the home secretary, to monitor their children for signs of hate. And reports state that since Jack Straw’s comments on the veil, more and more young women are adopting the niqab in protest – a predictable reaction.

“Indeed, the British government appears to be going out of its way to foment an enemy within in keeping with Blair’s struggle against what he calls an evil ideology. It’s no wonder that British Muslims are beginning to feel demonized and marginalized when their own government calls for mosques, faith schools, community centers and Islamic bookshops to be monitored.

“If British Muslims tend to live in close proximity to one another it isn’t the only community to do so. London’s Stamford Hill was and is more reminiscent of Mea Sharim in Israel than a British city suburb. Brick Lane resembles a corner of Bangladesh while Soho is predominantly Chinese. These ghettoized areas aren’t new. They’ve existed for more than half-a-century in some cases and nobody seemed to mind.

“The governmental message is further having an effect on the attitudes of ordinary people. Reports of Muslim women wearing the hijab being insulted in the streets or suffering the indignity of having their head scarves pulled from their heads are rife. In short, Muslims have become fair game for racists and bigots.”

Linda Heard in iViews, 25 October 2006

‘My years in a habit taught me the paradox of veiling’

Karen Armstrong (3)“I spent seven years of my girlhood heavily veiled – not in a Muslim niqab but in a nun’s habit. We wore voluminous black robes, large rosaries and crucifixes, and an elaborate headdress: you could see a small slice of my face from the front, but from the side I was entirely shielded from view. We must have looked very odd indeed, walking dourly through the colourful carnival of London during the swinging 60s, but nobody ever asked us to exchange our habits for more conventional attire.

“When my order was founded in the 1840s, not long after Catholic emancipation, people were so enraged to see nuns brazenly wearing their habits in the streets that they pelted them with rotten fruit and horse dung. Nuns had been banned from Britain since the Reformation; their return seemed to herald the resurgence of barbarism. Two hundred and fifty years after the gunpowder plot, Catholicism was still feared as unassimilable, irredeemably alien to the British ethos, fanatically opposed to democracy and freedom, and a fifth column allied to dangerous enemies abroad.

“Today the veiled Muslim woman appears to symbolise the perceived Islamic threat, as nuns once epitomised the evils of popery.”

Karen Armstrong in the Guardian, 26 October 2006

‘Fury as BA says it would allow Muslim veil but not cross’

“British Airways has been accused of appalling double standards after admitting Muslim staff may be allowed to wear veils – just weeks after it sent a Christian home for wearing a cross. Check-in worker Nadia Eweida has been on unpaid leave for a month after the airline banned her from wearing her tiny cross on a necklace over her uniform…. She demanded to know why she had to hide her faith from the public when Muslims and Sikhs can openly display theirs by wearing hijabs, turbans, and possibly a full-face veil.”

Daily Mail, 26 October 2006

Of course, the answer is that Muslim women who wear the hijab or Sikh men who wear a turban do so because they believe it is a requirement of their faith. So far as I know, no Christian denomination requires its adherents to display a cross.

Nevertheless, BA’s stupidity in denying Nadia Eweida the right to do so has simply opened the door for racists in the right-wing press to take up the refrain about favours being granted to minority ethno-religious groups that are supposedly denied to the white Christian majority.

Rowan Williams capitulates to Islamist reaction, Leo McKinstry claims

“The Church of England used to be known as the Tory Party at prayer. Today it is the liberal establishment on its knees. Terrified of giving offence to any minority cause, obsessed with Marxist notions about race and wealth, its leadership has all but given up as a serious force for Christianity.

“Rather than standing up for the faith that built this country, Anglican leaders prattle on about Islamophobia and multiculturalism in a spirit of hand-wringing self-abasement, always demanding that our national traditions be subverted or abandoned in order to accommodate other religions, especially Islam…. Despite the threat of Muslim terrorism since 9/11, which is primarily directed against Judaeo-Christian civilisation, Dr Williams has consistently refused to attack Islamic fundamentalism….”

Leo McKinstry has a go at the Archbishop of Canterbury in the Daily Express, 25 October 2006

McKinstry adds: “The veil is a mark of oppression against women, a reflection of misogynistic determination to keep them isolated from the mainstream of society, as senior Labour figures like Jack Straw and Harriet Harman have pointed out, showing far more moral bravery than Dr Williams has ever done.”

Unite against Islamophobia in Glasgow

Glasgow demoAround 300 people rallied in Glasgow’s George Square last Saturday to unite against Islamophobia and protest at the wave of racist attacks on Muslims since Jack Straw’s comments about the veil earlier this month.

Glasgow Stop the War Coalition and the Muslim Association of Britain organised the protest at short notice following a brutal assault on an imam at a Glasgow mosque.

It attracted a broad turnout, including many young Muslim women and families. Syma Ismail and her friend Nailah Din are students at Dundee University who had travelled down for the protest. “We’re standing against Islamophobia,” said Nailah. “Jack Straw started this. We’re supposed to have freedom of speech and freedom of expression. If Muslim women want to wear the veil, why shouldn’t they be allowed to?”

Many non-Muslims were also at the rally to show solidarity. “The issue is racism,” said Barrie Levine from Scottish Jews for a Just Peace. “It is important that Muslims and non-Muslims stand shoulder to shoulder against Islamophobia.”

Socialist Worker, 28 October 2006

Yet another ‘Ban the Veil’ headline in the Express

Schools Told Ban the VeilA city with one of the country’s largest Muslim populations is to ask schools to ban veils in the classroom.

Education leaders yesterday confirmed that they are drawing up guidelines stating that both teachers and pupils must not wear them during lessons. The school chiefs claim that veils – called niqabs – could stop teachers identifying troublesome children.

They also fear that they could even lead to health and safety problems in Bradford, where around 15 per cent of the 470,000 population are Muslim. Spokesman Anthony Mugan said: “We would advise against the wearing of veils in schools because of reasons which will be listed in new guidelines.

“These will include the problems they could cause in identifying pupils, possible problems with communication and health and safety issues. However, it is up to individual schools to make the final decision as it is with the schools’ uniform policies.”

The new guidelines are being hammered out between Bradford City Council and a private contractor, Education Bradford, which runs the West Yorkshire city’s schools.

Bradford is the neighbouring local authority to Kirklees, where teaching assistant Aishah Azmi was suspended from a school in Dewsbury for refusing to remove her veil in class.

The move comes after a Daily Express telephone poll in which more than 99 per cent of readers supported the call for Britain to follow the lead of many Muslim countries, including Turkey and Egypt, and ban the veil.

Continue reading

Sun backs Trevor Phillips

“Prejudice is a worm that thrives in the dark and shrivels in the daylight. So says Trevor Phillips, head of the Commission for Racial Equality.

“What he’s rightly saying is that the only solution to the tensions between Muslims and non-Muslims – and the bloody riots he predicts may come – is an open debate. A debate unfettered by the political correctness that stops people on either side speaking boldly about our differences – how to resolve them or live with them.

“He has a point: A poll reveals nearly three-quarters of Britons won’t speak their minds over veils in case they cause offence. Which is mainly because many Muslims over-react to the slightest criticism of their religion. Such hypersensitivity impedes progress.”

Editorial in the Sun, 23 October 2006

Veil debate ‘has fuelled far right’

Veil debate ‘has fuelled far right’

By Louise Nousratpour

Morning Star, 23 October 2006

Anti-racism campaigners welcomed Labour deputy leadership candidate Jon Cruddas’s warning on Sunday that the debate around the Muslim veil has “emboldened the far right.”

The Dagenham MP said that friends of his who live in the Muslim community felt “hunted” and that hysteria over the issue had reinforced a sense of isolation and insecurity. “I think it has had a terrible effect. It will embolden the far right, no doubt about it, and I know that for a fact locally,” Mr Cruddas warned in an interview with GMTV.

He stressed that the government must go about dealing with community segregation in a “much more systematic way” in terms of public policy about the labour market, housing and health inequalities.

“They should be the terms of debate, rather than a really dangerous bidding war about who can be so muscular around issues of minorities, asylum and immigration, because that just feeds the far right and the centre of gravity just moves off that way,” Mr Cruddas insisted.

A debate about Muslim women wearing full-face veils erupted after Cabinet Minister Jack Straw said that he asked women to remove them when they came to see him in his constituency. The Prime Minister has also branded the veils a “mark of separation.”

In contrast to Mr Cruddas’s comments, Commission for Racial Equality chairman Trevor Phillips defended Mr Straw’s right to air his views about the veil and attacked the Muslim community for turning “the most neutral of comments into yet another act of persecution.”

Continue reading