The Case of Jim Fitzpatrick and the Muslim wedding

This article jolted me to pick up my keyboard again. Not only for the very personal reason that I myself had my walima function (segregated) at the LMC nearly four years ago to the day, but that this story has all the now sadly common elements of Muslim bashing we are beginning to expect from our media and main stream politicians.

Firstly to the central point that segregated weddings are an affront to the cultural sensibilities of the British people. If a couple decides to celebrate their wedding at the LMC (basically an extension to the East London Mosque) it can only be expected that as for prayers, men and women guests will be entertained and dined in separate rooms. As well as my own walima, I have been invited to dozens of weddings which have been organised in this way as well as many that have not. This is entirely the choice of the families involved and the religious and cultural custom they wish to follow. There is no difference in this from orthodox Jewish customs and religious ceremonies followed by other religions.

As an MP in a diverse community, Jim Fitzpatrick should have been aware of the arrangements of this Muslim event. Perhaps his hosts should have made this clear to him and was negligent in not doing so. I remember being open with my non-Muslim guests as to the arrangements and this was fine with them.  Nobody walked out and all enjoyed the event. This follow up article indicates that the family went to some lengths to accomodate their guests.

What is more concerning is not his apparent ignorance but willingness to descend to the levels of the gutter press and twist the special day of a young couple (whom, according to the press article he didn’t even know) as a further and unwarranted side-swipe on Muslims, their customs and beliefs. Its fair game on Muslims at the moment and he’s apparently made his political calculations that he needs to boost his profile and attraction to the white working class of his constituency by appealing to latent racism and xenophobia. If George Galloway is standing in opposition to him at the next election, he may have decided that trying to vie for the votes of his Muslim community is a lost cause. In any case it’s a far cry from the honourable stand of traditional union activists who stood up for the marginalised and disempowered. His actions will no doubt provide succour to the likes of English Defence League who rampaged through Birmingham last week. Perhaps he would like to see similar demonstrations outside the LMC? So much for community cohesion.

The insidious attempts to malign the positive work of the ELM in its efforts to play a part in the local community by smearing it as an extremist institution, merely parrots the unfounded rants and lazy association beloved of the neo-con web sphere. It seems that if you try to engage within the society in which you operate you are branded as ‘political’ or the dirty word of the moment, ‘Islamist’, and if you don’t you are isolationist, rejectionist and not willing to integrate. It’s almost a lose-lose scenario.

As a new resident in East London, I marvel at the diversity and vibrancy of this area. Sure there are problems and I’ll elaborate on the challenges and opportunities that face the local community later. However, Jim Fitzpatrick’s flat footed contribution to the current hysteria provides no useful basis to progress the debate.

 

Preventing Violent Extremism

Panorama’s recent programme, provocatively titled ‘Muslim first, British second’, raised some serious allegations over the government’s Preventing Violent Extremism policy. If true, this marks a serious low point in relations with UK Muslims and points to a disastrous loss of trust. (Of course this presupposes that much existed in the first place which in recent years is difficult to imagine).

 

Her Majesty’s Government has pursued an overt policy of by-passing established Muslim institutions and community based groups in an attempt to reach out directly to ‘ordinary Muslims’. As a tactic this has many ramifications, many of which are still being played out. Here we are not talking about those organisations considered by the establishment radical and as such beyond the pale such as al-Muhajiroon as well as the non-violent (but separatist) HT but bodies such as MCB and MAB amongst many others which have positively engaged with civic society on many levels. Lumped together and dismissed as Islamists, the government has sought alternative partners and is actively procuring associates to promote its programme.

 

HMG, specifically the Department of Communities and Local Government currently headed by Hazel Blears, launched its Preventing Violent Extremism strategy as part of a multi-agency programme back in 2007. Since then, it has announced intentions to provide grants of £70m to a number of organisations and government institutions and allocated much of its budget. Nothing wrong with that you might say, particularly as these funds are directed at such innocuous projects as youth centres, teaching English and strengthening community leadership.  How the success of these funds will be measured will an interesting question to ask.

 

However the Panorama programme confirmed underlying suspicion that these projects were being used as Trojan horses to infiltrate the Muslim community. Making such a statement a couple of years ago would have left you open to accusations of paranoia and of having a persecution complex.

 

But we shouldn’t be surprised and it is naive to have expected otherwise.

 

What is more worrying is that not only does this leave those well intentioned public-minded citizens who are willing to devote themselves to their communities left open to accusations of espionage (it now seems reasonably founded), but it completely undermines any residual veneer of trust.

 

The programme goes on to allege that the government has been collating the names of every Muslim who has expressed public views against foreign policy. Coupled with proposals to monitor travel patterns, force ID cards on an unconvinced population and the power of modern database technology, this has the potential to monitor those with these views as enemies. Some Muslims already feel frustrated that their views are not being taken seriously and will take this as further evidence of the futility of political engagement if this will effectively put you on a secret service black list and in effect criminalises thoughts contrary to government policy.

 

Another central thrust of the programme (supported by an alleged leak of Contest 2 in the Guardian) is that the governement also seeks to isolate Muslims who hold traditional doctrinal views. This will extend the definition of E in PVE to those who believe that, for example, homosexuality is a sin. So the government will be left appealing to a totally unrepresentative officially anointed crew that will be considered tame enough to be deserving of an audience, grants and commendations.

 

If the aim of the PVE agenda is to change Islamic beliefs and traditions, then it is well advised now that this will fail and no further taxpayer’s money should be wasted. It will only serve to reinforce existing distrust with all government initiatives vis a vis the Muslim community and demoralise those who are willing to work with them on the basis of shared values and mutual respect. The government will risk being left talking to a pre-endorsed rump which does not honestly articulate the beliefs of the majority of the Muslims.

 

It will be interesting to see development of these policies over the next few years but I suspect much money, effort and goodwill will be wasted.

 

Veiled Threats

The blessed month of Ramadan is now over all too quickly as usual. It does seem that every year that it slips by faster than the last one and one hopes that you live to see another one. With Eid now celebrated (with the now customary moon sighting dispute) it seems appropriate to reflect over some of the hysterical media reporting that blighted last month’s spiritual exercises.

From stories about policemen not guarding embassies, cabbies not letting guide dogs in vehicles, pharmacists not dispensing pills, teachers wearing veils, Muslims against the Olympics (apparently it will clash with Ramadan!), potential race riots (thanks Trevor), university lecturers to spy on Asian looking students, prison officers to spy on Asian/African/convert prisoners, ‘hot-spots’ identified by Ruth Kelly all topped of by the a Pope’s speech, you wonder why some people are beginning to feel a little victimised. And that’s just some of the negative news stories I picked up on.

It’s not that Muslims should not be open to sincere debate but the vitriolic nature of unbalanced (and uninformed) editorial opinion pieces, hours and hours of phone-in radio programmes and the pandering to the basest instincts of human nature can only, at the very least have a severe polarising effect. At worst, political acquiescence to some these views has given them a credence not previously enjoyed and released expressions of bigotry and hate which are entering the public discourse as being perfectly acceptable to be held by rational and reasonable people. Sadly this has already led to increasing incidences of verbal and physical assaults on Muslims.

The issue that seems to have dominated the majority of air waves and news print and exorcised angst is over the veil. This is only worn by a tiny minority of Muslim women in the UK but has been picked out as amongst other things a symbol of male subjugation of women, a throw back to pre-medieval society, a slap in the face for a generation of bra-burning feminists or political expression of a pro-terrorist agenda (the latter view seriously espoused by Melanie Phillips on Radio 4’s The Moral Maze).

What is glossed over is that it is actually overwhelmingly a personal choice for these women who see this as essentially a religious observance and mark of their piety. Islamic edicts differ in opinion on whether the veil is obligatory or merely permissible (unlike the hijab which is considered obligatory by all orthodox schools of thought). So although it is not viewed as compulsory (from a religious perspective), the fact that women choose to wear this is mainly a demonstration of free will.

Now whether you approve or not is not really an issue. I may not like tattoos, facial piercing, blue hair or inappropriate exposure of flesh but if people choose to express themselves in this way so be it. With these choices do, I acknowledge come consequences, some of which will include limitations in the way you can interact with society in general. Given that over 60% of women in general are not economically active anyway, why should the choice of a minute number of women to wear the veil and not ‘fully participate’ in society matter so much?

 

Honoured Guest

A week in to my bachelor status and things are falling in to a routine. You’ll all be glad to know that I’m not wasting away here on my own. Arabs are renown for the hospitality shown to guests and this has been liberally applied. I’ve noticed that many people from the east know how to honour their guests and it reminds me of Michael Palin’s comments after returning back to Blightly after his 80 days around the world trip that people were less gracious and caring in the UK more than anywhere else (or words to that effect).

A conversation in a Middle Eastern/Sub Continental/African/Central Asian/Far Eastern household between a guest and host might go something like this:

Host: Would you like something to drink?
Guest: No thank you, I’m fine.
Host: Really, tell me its no trouble, I insist?
Guest: No honestly its fine, I’m OK.
Host: Well how about some water then, at least that?
Guest: No need really.
Host: Please you would insult me otherwise?
[And so on for about five minutes until…]
Guest: Some water will be great, but only if its no trouble, thank you.
[Host goes to kitchen and wheels out a five course meal made up of the freshly sacrificed goats, exotic specialities and the best food in the house, including jelly.]

A similar scenario in the UK might be slightly shorter:

Host: Would you like some tea?
Guest: No thank you.
Host: OK [and goes to make himself a cup and drinks in front of guest]

I do of course exaggerate slightly, there have been plenty of times I’ve not even been offered tea! The honouring of the guest or traveller is greatly praised in many cultures, and the Islamic tradition is no exception to this as can be seen from the following translation of a verse from Quran and narration.

Allah says, “Has the story reached you of the honoured guests of Ibrahim? When they entered his dwelling and said, ‘Peace! ‘He said, ‘Peace! O people unknown to us.’ So he slipped off to his household and brought a fattened calf. He offered it to them. He exclaimed, ‘Do you not then eat?'” (51:24-27)

Abu Hurayra reported that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, “Anyone who believes in Allah and the Last Day should honour his guest. Anyone who believes in Allah and the Last Day, should maintain ties of kinship. Anyone who believes in Allah and the Last Day, should speak well or be silent.” [Agreed upon]

Anyway this tradition is keeping me well looked after although on the converse side there are etiquettes of being a good guest and not being a burden to ones hosts. At the moment I don’t think I’m near that threshold but I would like to buy a present for them to show gratitude – any ideas anyone?