‘This focus on the niqab is a distraction’ – Salma Yaqoob on the veil ‘debate’

Salma addressing rallyThis focus on the niqab is a distraction

By Salma Yaqoob

Morning Star, 30 October 2006

THE debate on Muslim integration continues unabated. Since Home Secretary John Reid’s comments about mythical Muslim “no-go” areas over a month ago, the Muslim community have been the subject of an avalanche of commentary from politicians and the media. Overwhelmingly negative and one-sided, most of this “debate” is thinly disguised Muslim bashing.

I was pleased, therefore, to be approached by the Morning Star to give my thoughts on a more genuine debate that has taken place on the issue of the veil in the letters page. Given the Star’s impeccable record of opposition to US imperialism and racism, I know that whatever the differences that may arise, I am having a conversation with friends.

Most of those who have written in support of Jack Straw’s comments have no time for either his record as foreign minister or his opportunism. But they do think the wearing of the veil is a legitimate topic for discussion. What is wrong with having a debate about religious strictures regarding Islamic dress for women, especially when such strictures have been used as a tool for women’s oppression?

To a significant degree, I agree with them. There is nothing wrong with having an informed discussion or critical debate about the veil or any other aspect of Muslim life. Indeed, how can non-Muslims understand lived Islam without such a dialogue? And how can Muslims and, especially, Muslim women, tackle the abuses of Islam within the community without such discussion and debate?

Continue reading

Muriel Grey on ‘Enlightenism’

Muriel Grey joins the massed ranks of those defending the Enlightenment against religious belief in general and Islam in particular. Apparently, Enlightenment values are compatible with describing the Aishah Azmi case in the following terms: “some woman (we think – for all we know it could have been Paul Gascoigne under that niquab [sic]) was claiming her right to mumble lessons at children while wearing a bag over her head.”

Sunday Herald, 29 October 2006

Continue reading

‘BBC deputy chief refuses to rule out letting a woman read news in a veil’ shock

One of the BBC’s most senior executives has defended the corporation against accusations that it is “crammed full of soft liberals” obsessed with pushing a politically correct agenda. In an exclusive interview, Mark Byford, the deputy director-general, has hit back at suggestions that the broadcaster is too sensitive to the feelings of Muslim viewers and that it has an inbuilt anti-Christian bias.

Sunday Telegraph, 29 October 2006

Mark Byford may be ambiguous about the possibility of the BBC hiring a niqab-wearing woman newsreader, but his boss Mark Thompson explicitly rules it out. See Mail on Sunday, 29 October 2006

Women who wear the niqab are the same as terrorist bombers, says Hirsi Ali

Ayaan Hirsi AliAnother plug for the provocateur Ayaan Hirsi Ali, currently pursuing her career in a right-wing US think-tank. She offers the following helpful contribution to the “debate” over the veil:

“… what increasingly alarms me is the emergence of a post 9/11 generation of young women in the West who are out to make a statement by wearing the niqab. They enjoy all the western freedoms but choose to flaunt the veil. They are the female equivalent of the radical young men who travel to Pakistan and come back wanting to blow up trains.”

Sunday Times, 29 October 2006

Right wing Christians and secularists join in condemnation of Rowan Williams

Anger Over Church BackingThe Archbishop of Canterbury prompted anger yesterday by putting Muslim veils on an equal footing with Christian crosses.

Britain’s most senior churchman, Dr Williams, said talk of banning the full-face niqab reminded him of China, where the state controls all religious life. He said: “The ideal of a society where no visible public signs of religion would be seen – no crosses around necks, no sidelocks, turbans or veils – is a politically dangerous one.”

But Stephen Green, the national director of fundamentalist group Christian Voice, said Dr Williams appeared to be ranking Islam alongside Christianity. He said: “We Christians should be more ready to stand up and be counted. We have to say that our faith is a world view and it’s not just something we do on a Sunday.”

Alison Ruoff, a member of the CofE General Synod, said: “The Archbishop should be standing up for the Christian faith in a much more visible way. He should be making a more public stand for Christianity and not for other religions.” Roy McCloughry, director of evangelical think-tank the Kingdom Trust, said: “The veil is not a religious issue – it is a cultural issue.”

Terry Sanderson, vice-president of the National Secular Society, which campaigns against all religious interference in non-believers’ lives, said: “Minority religions are now demanding a place at the table. Dr Williams is using phony arguments. Comparing ministers’ criticism of veils in Britain with what goes on in China is ridiculous. He’s running a hare that does not exist. There is no ban on veils in this country.”

Daily Express, 28 October 2006

Did Italian right-winger take inspiration from Maryam Namazie?

Daniela SantancheBritain and Australia are not the only countries where debate is raging over the Islamic veil. In Italy, the issue burst into the news this week after the interior ministry ordered round-the-clock police protection for an MP, believing she had been threatened for expressing her views on the subject.

Daniela Santanche, an MP for the formerly neo-fascist National Alliance, clashed in a TV chat show with the imam of a mosque near Milan. After Ms Santanche insisted that the Qur’an did not call for women to wear a veil, the other guest, Ali Abu Shwaima, angrily replied: “I am an imam and I will not permit those who are ignorant to speak of Islam. You are ignorant of Islam and do not have the right to interpret the Qur’an.”

The ministry said it had been advised that the words used by the imam might amount to a coded death sentence – which the imam has vigorously denied.

Continue reading

Why Labour should reject Jack Straw’s comments on veil

Muslims under siege

Owen Jones, Poplar & Limehouse Constituency Labour Party, surveys the responses to Jack Straw’s comments on the niqab.

Labour Left Briefing, November 2006

“Ministers caught telling the truth!” announced the BNP on their website on 15th October as they hailed “a series of statements which show that some of our rulers are capable of speaking the truth and acknowledging commonsense after all.” No wonder the BNP feels vindicated. Over the past month, the already besieged Muslim community has faced a barrage of denunciations from the British political establishment.

The increasingly thuggish John Reid fired the opening shots in east London on 20th September by haranguing Muslim parents to spy on their own children “before their hatred grows and you risk losing them forever.” This carefully choreographed political stunt was followed by a further tirade at Labour Party Conference in which he pledged that Islamist terrorism would have “no no-go areas”. David Cameron momentarily forgot his cuddly rhetoric and pledged “break up Muslim ghettos.”

However, it was Jack Straw who opened the floodgates of the current deluge of anti-Muslim hysteria. His description of the niqab – a full body veil worn by a tiny minority of Muslim women – as a “sign of separation and difference” was music to the ears of the right wing media. “Ban the veil!” screeched the Daily Express, revealing that 98% supported such a ban in order to “safeguard racial harmony”.

In The Times, Simon Jenkins suggested that if Muslim women were unable to understand why a “westerner” might be offended by the veil, “it is reasonable to ask why they want to live in Britain.” Jon Gaunt in The Sun offered the nuanced argument that “no group has been such a pain in the burka as some of the Muslims in recent years…” Others took the opportunity to declare open season on the Muslim population. “Muslim cabbie bans guide dog” was the almost farcical Evening Standard headline.

Continue reading

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