By Piers Akerman
July 31, 2007 12:00am
THE civil liberties' lobby and its fellow travellers are trying to portray Dr Mohamed Haneef as the new David Hicks, conveniently glossing over the fact Hicks was a self-confessed al-Qaeda trainee whose own father believed he was a terrorist.
That was before the hand-wringers airbrushed all mention of their martyr's terrorist training and his love letters to global Islam out of the picture because they were inconvenient to the real cause: Fighting the Howard Government.
Hyperbolic claims are being made in a frenzied blame game in the pre-election atmosphere but they need to be examined through the prism of reality.
It is therefore notable that Bangalore police will meet Dr Haneef in the next few days to talk to him about any knowledge he may have of a December 2005 terrorist attack on the Indian Institute of Science in India's IT capital.
According to the Hindustan Times, a scientist died in the attack, which police believe was the work of the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) - one of the groups Hicks trained with before going to Afhganistan for al-Qaeda finishing school.
Not that Dr Haneef is suspected of any involvement, but the Bangalore police are still exploring every lead in their fight against terror - as authorities are doing the world over - and with good reason.
A week ago Italian police raided what they called a "bomb school" at a mosque in Perugia in central Italy, arresting three and presenting evidence of training in explosives and poisons and instructions on flying a Boeing 747.
Cultural Institute of the Italian Islamic Community director Sheik Abdul Adid Palazzi told the BBC he was not surprised to hear of the arrests because "like in the rest of Western Europe, most mosques are controlled by pro-terror organisations - 90 per cent of mosques. And I think the percentage is more or less the same in Italy, Britain, France and Germany."
While Australia's handling of the Haneef case will no doubt be used by enemies of the nation to encourage the erroneous perception Australia is a racist redoubt that goes after people like Dr Haneef just because he's Muslim, it's worth recalling that prominent Indian journalist Barkha Dutt used the issue to explore inadequacies in India's treatment of terrorist suspects.
"In a case eerily similar to Haneef's, didn't our investigating agencies almost put an innocent man on death row?" Dutt wrote in the Hindustan Times.
"The Pota court trying the case in its early stages convicted a Delhi-based college teacher along with the other accused and sentenced him to death.
"The entire case against Professor S.A.R. Geelani was based on the fact he had some telephonic contact with the prime accused in the days before the attack. It was left to the Supreme Court to throw out the case against the professor and acquit him of all charges.
"Even today, intelligence officials and investigating officers insist their case against him was foolproof and they had been let down by the courts. I don't remember any public outrage defining the national response to the Professor Geelani case."
As it happens, a gaggle of the hate-Australia brigade met at a rally in the Sydney suburb of Bankstown organised by the global Islamist movement Hizb ut-Tahrir to express outrage at the lack of support shown by the Muslim community for Sydney men arrested in the nation's biggest counter-terrorism sweep, Operation Pendennis.
Former Liberal prime minister Malcolm Fraser, who had promised them a written statement to be read out to the crowd but withdrew his message, came in for some flack but local lawyer Adam Houda sent a message in which he made the preposterous claim Muslims had become targets of the anti-terror laws and scapegoats for political ends.
Hizb ut-Tahrir is banned in several European nations but not the UK or Australia, though an investigation into the organisation is under way.
There is no doubt aspects of the Haneef matter ill serve the nation's interests but it must also be noted Dr Haneef's father-in-law Ashafaq Ahmed Ahmed has expressed remorse for booking a one-way ticket to India for Dr Haneef, saying that factor added to the Australian police's suspicions.
Dr Haneef appears to have emerged unscathed, albeit richer after selling an interview.
How much more compensation he should receive is a moot point but the Australian public deserves an explanation from Queensland's Premier Peter Beattie and Police Commissioner Bob Atkinson of the leaks that seem to have come from the state police.
Similarly, Federal Police Commissioner Mick Keelty and Federal DPP Damian Bugg appear at odds about evidence (and non-evidence) that was to support the case against Dr Haneef and question remain about the material Immigration Minister Kevin Andrews was shown before he cancelled Dr Haneef's visa.
That there was no terrorist threat proven does not mean we will be any safer but, in the interests of transparency, to restore faith in our system and to ensure better co-ordination, an explanation of the flawed process should be provided and revision of the system conducted.
Tuesday 31 July 2007
Opium stash, extremist leaflets of Hizb ut-Tahrir discovered near Bishkek
Bishkek, July 31, Interfax - Agents of the Kyrgyz Drug Control Agency have discovered a cache of Hizb ut-Tahrir extremist organization near the Bishkek-Kant highway.
"The cache contained 1,478 grams of opium, 26 radical religious leaflets and 39 7.62-mm caliber cartridges," Interfax was told at the agency on Tuesday.
The contraband was discovered under fragments of a concrete panel three kilometers away from the Russia's Kant airbase, a spokesman said.
"The cache contained 1,478 grams of opium, 26 radical religious leaflets and 39 7.62-mm caliber cartridges," Interfax was told at the agency on Tuesday.
The contraband was discovered under fragments of a concrete panel three kilometers away from the Russia's Kant airbase, a spokesman said.
SCO PREPARES LIST OF BANNED RADICAL GROUPS
By Roger McDermott
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
Radical groups operating within the Shanghai Cooperation Organization member states will be placed on a new, common list of banned organizations. On July 24 Toygonbek Kalmatov, from the Kyrgyz government agency for religious, confirmed that SCO representatives recently held a closed meeting in order to list international “religious extremist” organizations currently banned within member states. The criteria for placing groups on this new list have not been made public, nor has the list itself. Interestingly, Kalmatov refused to comment on the precise nature of the list, preferring to reinforce the message that the SCO member states face threats from banned organizations, either directly or indirectly, and confirming that additional investigations are underway in connection with designating these groups as outlawed.
His comments highlight the complex and often politicized nature of threat assessments in Central Asian security thinking. Moreover, given China’s increased diplomatic security activity ahead of the SCO summit in Bishkek in August, it suggests a possible widening of the scope for placing certain groups under scrutiny, while the actual “threat” posed by these groups remains unclear. Will such a list serve as a focal point to guide the collaborative work of the regions intelligence agencies? Critics believe it may simply serve to supply and exaggerate de facto justification for political repression in the SCO countries.
Kalmatov did reveal that the list involves several well known and lesser known groups including: the Ul-Shura Higher Military Majilis of the United Forces of Mujahideen of the Caucasus, Al-Qaeda, Al-Jihad, the Muslim Brothers, Hizb-ut-Tahrir, Lashkar-i-Taiba, the Islamic Party of Turkestan, and the Taliban. He commented that the number of banned groups varies among the member states; there are 17 in Russia, six in China, and 24 in Uzbekistan (Akipress, July 24).
Multiple Kazakh media sources have reported rising militant activity in Central Asia, although their reports concentrate on neighboring Kyrgyzstan. Hizb-ut-Tahrir is singled out, buoyed by allegedly empowering the impoverished, poorly educated Kyrgyz youth. The message is clear: radical ideology is gaining ground and becoming an established, growing network in the region (Khabar Television, July 23).
Kyrgyzstan's intelligence agencies have allegedly observed that religious extremist organizations operating within the country have become more active. However, evidence appears sporadic, including leaflets containing extremist calls for the forcible overthrow of the government, which are typical of extremist propaganda throughout the region. What appear new, however, are the locations involved, spreading from southern Kyrgyzstan to almost every part of the country. Arrests have led to the seizure of weapons, triggering fears that militants could be planning to take action.
Local residents in southern Kyrgyzstan have noted increasing activity from Hizb-ut-Tahrir since the militant incursion into southern Kyrgyzstan in 2006. “We are all frightened. We fear that militants might come here at any moment. When they said that they were in the mountains here, we got afraid very much. In fact nobody knows for sure. They might be there even now,” explained one anxious Kyrgyz resident.
Indeed, members of Hizb-ut-Tahrir were detained on July 25 in Kyrgyzstan’s northern Chuy region. Leaflets were seized at a traffic checkpoint and, on the same day, 20 leaflets were seized during the arrest of two Hizb-ut-Tahrir activists in the village of Chuy (Kabar, July 25).
Kazakhstan may well be pushing its own security agenda by drawing attention to the weaknesses of the Kyrgyz security agencies, while denying that these problems are as extensive within Kazakhstan. Astana is placing itself at the forefront of an approach stimulating greater inter-regional cooperation while displaying its own regional leadership, but it also acknowledges Beijing’s own security agenda. Alik Shpekbayev, Kazakhstan’s deputy interior minister, and the Chinese ambassador to Kazakhstan, Zhang Xiyun, have discussed the prospects for cooperation in the fight against transnational crime: “We want to strengthen our international relations with foreign colleagues, especially in those regions where we share borders with China, Russia, and countries of the Central Asian region. We are raising the issue of improving these relations,” Shpekbayev noted. Kazakhstan wants more access to Chinese police training for its own officers, knowing this will be cost effective and demonstrate Astana’s commitment to strong bilateral security relations. “I fully agree with the deputy minister that both traditional and new threats are common to our countries,” the Chinese ambassador said. Beijing also wants more joint activities between the Kazakh and Chinese police.
Zhang praised the level of bilateral security cooperation between the two countries. China’s Ministry of Public Security has provided “no-strings” technical aid worth $396,000 to Kazakhstan’s Ministry of Internal Affairs. “It is worth expressing a high opinion about cooperation between the police of Kazakhstan and China in the field of fighting crime and extremism. As a sign of gratitude for establishing good and lively contacts, the Chinese Ministry of Public Security has taken a decision to hand this technical equipment over to the Kazakh Interior Ministry,” Zhang explained.
China provided four all-terrain vehicles, two sets of scanners, five surveillance devices, 40 sets of equipment for crime detection, 30 cameras and video cameras, 30 notebooks, as well as communications equipment and office equipment. The materials will be distributed to police departments in Almaty and Eastern Kazakhstan, which borders China. Beijing has a vested interest in Kazakh security, and can deliver equipment quickly once a decision has been made, cutting through unnecessary bureaucracy (Interfax, July 20).
The emergence of a commonly agreed list of banned organizations encompassing the SCO member states may in fact betray an eastward drift in the security strategies and thinking within the security agencies of the region. SCO dynamics may play a key role in determining the groups and individuals regarded as “radical” and by definition subject to the scrutiny of the region’s security agencies. Nonetheless, the SCO will have to produce more than just a list of banned extremist groups in order to establish its security credentials among its critics.
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
Radical groups operating within the Shanghai Cooperation Organization member states will be placed on a new, common list of banned organizations. On July 24 Toygonbek Kalmatov, from the Kyrgyz government agency for religious, confirmed that SCO representatives recently held a closed meeting in order to list international “religious extremist” organizations currently banned within member states. The criteria for placing groups on this new list have not been made public, nor has the list itself. Interestingly, Kalmatov refused to comment on the precise nature of the list, preferring to reinforce the message that the SCO member states face threats from banned organizations, either directly or indirectly, and confirming that additional investigations are underway in connection with designating these groups as outlawed.
His comments highlight the complex and often politicized nature of threat assessments in Central Asian security thinking. Moreover, given China’s increased diplomatic security activity ahead of the SCO summit in Bishkek in August, it suggests a possible widening of the scope for placing certain groups under scrutiny, while the actual “threat” posed by these groups remains unclear. Will such a list serve as a focal point to guide the collaborative work of the regions intelligence agencies? Critics believe it may simply serve to supply and exaggerate de facto justification for political repression in the SCO countries.
Kalmatov did reveal that the list involves several well known and lesser known groups including: the Ul-Shura Higher Military Majilis of the United Forces of Mujahideen of the Caucasus, Al-Qaeda, Al-Jihad, the Muslim Brothers, Hizb-ut-Tahrir, Lashkar-i-Taiba, the Islamic Party of Turkestan, and the Taliban. He commented that the number of banned groups varies among the member states; there are 17 in Russia, six in China, and 24 in Uzbekistan (Akipress, July 24).
Multiple Kazakh media sources have reported rising militant activity in Central Asia, although their reports concentrate on neighboring Kyrgyzstan. Hizb-ut-Tahrir is singled out, buoyed by allegedly empowering the impoverished, poorly educated Kyrgyz youth. The message is clear: radical ideology is gaining ground and becoming an established, growing network in the region (Khabar Television, July 23).
Kyrgyzstan's intelligence agencies have allegedly observed that religious extremist organizations operating within the country have become more active. However, evidence appears sporadic, including leaflets containing extremist calls for the forcible overthrow of the government, which are typical of extremist propaganda throughout the region. What appear new, however, are the locations involved, spreading from southern Kyrgyzstan to almost every part of the country. Arrests have led to the seizure of weapons, triggering fears that militants could be planning to take action.
Local residents in southern Kyrgyzstan have noted increasing activity from Hizb-ut-Tahrir since the militant incursion into southern Kyrgyzstan in 2006. “We are all frightened. We fear that militants might come here at any moment. When they said that they were in the mountains here, we got afraid very much. In fact nobody knows for sure. They might be there even now,” explained one anxious Kyrgyz resident.
Indeed, members of Hizb-ut-Tahrir were detained on July 25 in Kyrgyzstan’s northern Chuy region. Leaflets were seized at a traffic checkpoint and, on the same day, 20 leaflets were seized during the arrest of two Hizb-ut-Tahrir activists in the village of Chuy (Kabar, July 25).
Kazakhstan may well be pushing its own security agenda by drawing attention to the weaknesses of the Kyrgyz security agencies, while denying that these problems are as extensive within Kazakhstan. Astana is placing itself at the forefront of an approach stimulating greater inter-regional cooperation while displaying its own regional leadership, but it also acknowledges Beijing’s own security agenda. Alik Shpekbayev, Kazakhstan’s deputy interior minister, and the Chinese ambassador to Kazakhstan, Zhang Xiyun, have discussed the prospects for cooperation in the fight against transnational crime: “We want to strengthen our international relations with foreign colleagues, especially in those regions where we share borders with China, Russia, and countries of the Central Asian region. We are raising the issue of improving these relations,” Shpekbayev noted. Kazakhstan wants more access to Chinese police training for its own officers, knowing this will be cost effective and demonstrate Astana’s commitment to strong bilateral security relations. “I fully agree with the deputy minister that both traditional and new threats are common to our countries,” the Chinese ambassador said. Beijing also wants more joint activities between the Kazakh and Chinese police.
Zhang praised the level of bilateral security cooperation between the two countries. China’s Ministry of Public Security has provided “no-strings” technical aid worth $396,000 to Kazakhstan’s Ministry of Internal Affairs. “It is worth expressing a high opinion about cooperation between the police of Kazakhstan and China in the field of fighting crime and extremism. As a sign of gratitude for establishing good and lively contacts, the Chinese Ministry of Public Security has taken a decision to hand this technical equipment over to the Kazakh Interior Ministry,” Zhang explained.
China provided four all-terrain vehicles, two sets of scanners, five surveillance devices, 40 sets of equipment for crime detection, 30 cameras and video cameras, 30 notebooks, as well as communications equipment and office equipment. The materials will be distributed to police departments in Almaty and Eastern Kazakhstan, which borders China. Beijing has a vested interest in Kazakh security, and can deliver equipment quickly once a decision has been made, cutting through unnecessary bureaucracy (Interfax, July 20).
The emergence of a commonly agreed list of banned organizations encompassing the SCO member states may in fact betray an eastward drift in the security strategies and thinking within the security agencies of the region. SCO dynamics may play a key role in determining the groups and individuals regarded as “radical” and by definition subject to the scrutiny of the region’s security agencies. Nonetheless, the SCO will have to produce more than just a list of banned extremist groups in order to establish its security credentials among its critics.
Kazakhstan to start trying members of banned Islamic organization
Karaganda, July 31, Interfax - The trial of 30 members of the Hizb ut-Tahrir organization, which is considered extremist and is banned in Kazakhstan, will start in Karaganda, a regional center in central Kazakhstan, on Wednesday.
The trial will be held in camera at a pretrial detention facility, Judge Marat Ibrayev, the judge to preside in the hearings, told Interfax on Tuesday.
"I have ruled to hold the hearings behind closed doors, as the criminal case contains classified materials," he said.
The regional department of the Kazakh National Security Committee said in a statement that the defendants were detained on suspicion of affiliation with Hizb ut-Tahrir in December 2006. They have been charged with setting up an organized criminal group on Kazakh territory, fuelling ethnic and religious discord, and running a banned extremist organization.
The trial will be held in camera at a pretrial detention facility, Judge Marat Ibrayev, the judge to preside in the hearings, told Interfax on Tuesday.
"I have ruled to hold the hearings behind closed doors, as the criminal case contains classified materials," he said.
The regional department of the Kazakh National Security Committee said in a statement that the defendants were detained on suspicion of affiliation with Hizb ut-Tahrir in December 2006. They have been charged with setting up an organized criminal group on Kazakh territory, fuelling ethnic and religious discord, and running a banned extremist organization.
Uzbek Prisoner Dies In Unclear Circumstances
July 31, 2007 (RFE/RL) -- An Uzbek prisoner has died in jail under suspicious circumstances.
The body of 39-year-old Inomjon Yoqubov was given to his family and the burial took place on July 19 in the eastern Uzbek city of Margilon.
Yoqubov's sister, Nazokat, told RFE/RL's Uzbek Service today that there were several wounds on the body.
In 1998, Yoqubov was sentenced to 18 years in jail for membership in a banned Islamist group, Hizb ut-Tahrir.
The family says Yoqubov also suffered from tuberculosis he contracted in jail.
The body of 39-year-old Inomjon Yoqubov was given to his family and the burial took place on July 19 in the eastern Uzbek city of Margilon.
Yoqubov's sister, Nazokat, told RFE/RL's Uzbek Service today that there were several wounds on the body.
In 1998, Yoqubov was sentenced to 18 years in jail for membership in a banned Islamist group, Hizb ut-Tahrir.
The family says Yoqubov also suffered from tuberculosis he contracted in jail.
Friday 27 July 2007
Haneef lawyer backs out of rally
The lawyer for accused terror suspect Mohamed Haneef has backed out of a rally organised by an extremist Islamic group with alleged links to the British car-bomb terror suspects.
Peter Russo and Haneef's visiting relative Imran Siddiqui were named as speakers at the Sydney rally organised by Hizb ut-Tahrir for Sunday.
But after Mr Russo was tipped off about the involvement of the extremist group he decided against attending.
A spokesman for Mr Russo told The Australian newspaper he had never confirmed the appearance and that Hizb ut-Tahrir had been premature in listing him as a speaker.
"He was concerned that his name had been listed without confirmation," the spokesman said.
But the spokesman declined to comment on whether Hizb ut-Tahrir was a factor in Mr Russo's decision not to attend the rally.
The group's Australian spokesman Wassim Doureihi told The Australian that Mr Russo and Mr Siddiqui had accepted the invitation to speak at the rally in the full knowledge Hizb ut-Tahrir was organising it.
He said on Thursday night that Mr Russo had called to say he was too busy too attend.
Hizb ut-Tahrir has dismissed links to the London attacks and denied supporting or sponsoring terrorism.
Haneef, an Indian national and a Gold Coast hospital registrar, is charged with providing support to a terrorist organisation by giving a SIM card to a relative later linked to the failed plot to bomb central London and Glasgow airport.
Brought to you by AAP
© AAP 2007
Peter Russo and Haneef's visiting relative Imran Siddiqui were named as speakers at the Sydney rally organised by Hizb ut-Tahrir for Sunday.
But after Mr Russo was tipped off about the involvement of the extremist group he decided against attending.
A spokesman for Mr Russo told The Australian newspaper he had never confirmed the appearance and that Hizb ut-Tahrir had been premature in listing him as a speaker.
"He was concerned that his name had been listed without confirmation," the spokesman said.
But the spokesman declined to comment on whether Hizb ut-Tahrir was a factor in Mr Russo's decision not to attend the rally.
The group's Australian spokesman Wassim Doureihi told The Australian that Mr Russo and Mr Siddiqui had accepted the invitation to speak at the rally in the full knowledge Hizb ut-Tahrir was organising it.
He said on Thursday night that Mr Russo had called to say he was too busy too attend.
Hizb ut-Tahrir has dismissed links to the London attacks and denied supporting or sponsoring terrorism.
Haneef, an Indian national and a Gold Coast hospital registrar, is charged with providing support to a terrorist organisation by giving a SIM card to a relative later linked to the failed plot to bomb central London and Glasgow airport.
Brought to you by AAP
© AAP 2007
Tuesday 24 July 2007
PAKISTANI ISLAMIC MISSIONARY GROUP ESTABLISHES A STRONG PRESENCE IN CENTRAL ASIA
Igor Rotar 7/23/07
Pakistan’s recent slide toward political instability could have important repercussions for Central Asian states. One of Pakistan’s most fervent Islamic groups, Tablighi Jamaat, also happens to be among the most active in proselytizing in Central Asia.
In Islamabad, the military government of Gen. Pervez Musharraf is coming under increasing pressure from Islamic political forces inside the country from one side, and the Bush administration from the other. Accordingly, the Pakistani president’s room for maneuver seems to be shrinking. Domestically, a government crackdown on religious extremist groups, underscored by security force’s attack on a radical mosque in Islamabad in early July, seems to have accelerated the erosion of Musharraf’s support base.
On the foreign front, Musharraf is being harangued for not doing enough to contain Islamic militancy. US officials have declared that terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden is alive and in hiding in Pakistan’s tribal areas, near the border with Afghanistan, and have dropped strong hints that Washington is considering a military raid inside Pakistani territory. Pakistan has angrily denied that bin Laden is using the country as a safe haven.
Lost amid the deterioration of security conditions is the spreading influence of the Tablighi Jamaat in Central Asia. Shamsibek Zakirov, an advisor of the head of the State Agency for Religious Affairs under the Kyrgyz Government stated that "it is not a secret that Islamic radicals from Pakistan are actively working among the Muslims in Central Asia, especially in Kyrgyzstan. The Tablighi Jamaat is the most active organization of all foreign Islamic missionaries."
The Tablighi Jamaat, which roughly translates as the Society for Spreading Faith, was founded in the late 1920’s in India. It was originally intended as a vehicle for the promoting a revival of Islamic piety, and, as such, it placed a heavy emphasis on missionary activity among its membership. The group has traditionally eschewed politics and concentrated its efforts on reinforcing the faith of Muslims, not trying to win converts. Today, it is based in the Pakistani city of Raiwind, near Lahore.
The first Tablighi missionaries visited Central Asia not long after the Soviet collapse in 1991. At first they targeted what were perceived as the least pious areas of Central Asia – northern Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan. Over time, Tablighi missionaries expanded their activities to include every state in the region, except Turkmenistan. The Ferghana Valley is now a particular object of missionary attention. Virtually all of the Tablighi members active in Central Asia are locals who have undergone training in either India or Pakistan.
The composition of the Tablighi Jamaat in Kyrgyzstan differs markedly from those of other Islamic organizations operating in the region, especially the underground radical group Hizb-ut-Tahrir. Most members of Hizb-ut-Tahrir in Kyrgyzstan are ethnic Uzbeks, whereas most Tablighi members are Kyrgyz, according to Shamsibek Zakirov, an official with the State Agency for Religious Affairs.
While Zakirov admitted that all available evidence indicates that the Tablighi Jamaat continues to adhere to an apolitical stance, he nevertheless adopted a skeptical stance toward the group. "Their views are, to put it mildly, not typical to modern Kyrgyzstan," Zakirov said. "Many Tablighi members are uneducated and very fanatical. I don’t think that importing the Pakistani version of Islam will promote the stabilization of Central Asia."
Ibragim Nurmuhamedov, a resident of Osh and a Tablighi missionary, said members of the group are instructed to discuss only religious topics, and are expected to do a fair amount of traveling. "In the evenings, we gather in the Al-Biruni mosque in Osh. We discuss different philosophical topics. We travel for three days every month. During these [trips], we preach Islam among the population. Each Tablighi member has to experience this sort of traveling," Nurmuhamedov said. "We avoid politics and discuss only general theological topics. "
"Members of Hizb-ut-Tahrir tried to establish contact with us. But we politely explained to them that we do not interfere in politics," Nurmuhamedov continued.
Sainbadji Kalykov, a top cleric in Osh oblast, estimated that there are about 10,000 Tablighi members in active in Kyrgyzstan today. "I don’t see anything negative in their activities," Kalykov said. "The only thing that provokes misunderstandings occasionally and threatens people is the outward appearance of Tablighi members. They look very exotic to Central Asian Muslims because of their long beards and traditional Pakistani clothes with turban on their heads".
Political and religious leaders in other Central Asian states are not as tolerant toward the Tablighi Jamaat as those in Kyrgyzstan. In Uzbekistan, President Islam Karimov has classified the group as an "extremist organization." Meanwhile, in Kazakhstan, Tablighi members are frequently subjected to fines and other official sanctions for their illegal preaching, and authorities sometimes resort to force to break up their meetings. "Although Tablighi members claim that they converse only about God, we are not certain that they are not agitating our youth to go to Iraq and Pakistan for battle," said a Kazakhstani security official, speaking on condition of anonymity.
The Tablighi do not appear to be very active in Tajikistan. "There are very few Tablighi members in our country and they maintain a very low level of activity," said Muhiddin Kabiri, head of the Islamic Revival Party of Tajikistani. "Authorities are quite suspicious of their activity and try to keep them under control."
Editor’s Note: Igor Rotar is the Central Asian correspondent for EurasiaNet
Posted July 23, 2007 © Eurasianet
http://www.eurasianet.org
Pakistan’s recent slide toward political instability could have important repercussions for Central Asian states. One of Pakistan’s most fervent Islamic groups, Tablighi Jamaat, also happens to be among the most active in proselytizing in Central Asia.
In Islamabad, the military government of Gen. Pervez Musharraf is coming under increasing pressure from Islamic political forces inside the country from one side, and the Bush administration from the other. Accordingly, the Pakistani president’s room for maneuver seems to be shrinking. Domestically, a government crackdown on religious extremist groups, underscored by security force’s attack on a radical mosque in Islamabad in early July, seems to have accelerated the erosion of Musharraf’s support base.
On the foreign front, Musharraf is being harangued for not doing enough to contain Islamic militancy. US officials have declared that terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden is alive and in hiding in Pakistan’s tribal areas, near the border with Afghanistan, and have dropped strong hints that Washington is considering a military raid inside Pakistani territory. Pakistan has angrily denied that bin Laden is using the country as a safe haven.
Lost amid the deterioration of security conditions is the spreading influence of the Tablighi Jamaat in Central Asia. Shamsibek Zakirov, an advisor of the head of the State Agency for Religious Affairs under the Kyrgyz Government stated that "it is not a secret that Islamic radicals from Pakistan are actively working among the Muslims in Central Asia, especially in Kyrgyzstan. The Tablighi Jamaat is the most active organization of all foreign Islamic missionaries."
The Tablighi Jamaat, which roughly translates as the Society for Spreading Faith, was founded in the late 1920’s in India. It was originally intended as a vehicle for the promoting a revival of Islamic piety, and, as such, it placed a heavy emphasis on missionary activity among its membership. The group has traditionally eschewed politics and concentrated its efforts on reinforcing the faith of Muslims, not trying to win converts. Today, it is based in the Pakistani city of Raiwind, near Lahore.
The first Tablighi missionaries visited Central Asia not long after the Soviet collapse in 1991. At first they targeted what were perceived as the least pious areas of Central Asia – northern Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan. Over time, Tablighi missionaries expanded their activities to include every state in the region, except Turkmenistan. The Ferghana Valley is now a particular object of missionary attention. Virtually all of the Tablighi members active in Central Asia are locals who have undergone training in either India or Pakistan.
The composition of the Tablighi Jamaat in Kyrgyzstan differs markedly from those of other Islamic organizations operating in the region, especially the underground radical group Hizb-ut-Tahrir. Most members of Hizb-ut-Tahrir in Kyrgyzstan are ethnic Uzbeks, whereas most Tablighi members are Kyrgyz, according to Shamsibek Zakirov, an official with the State Agency for Religious Affairs.
While Zakirov admitted that all available evidence indicates that the Tablighi Jamaat continues to adhere to an apolitical stance, he nevertheless adopted a skeptical stance toward the group. "Their views are, to put it mildly, not typical to modern Kyrgyzstan," Zakirov said. "Many Tablighi members are uneducated and very fanatical. I don’t think that importing the Pakistani version of Islam will promote the stabilization of Central Asia."
Ibragim Nurmuhamedov, a resident of Osh and a Tablighi missionary, said members of the group are instructed to discuss only religious topics, and are expected to do a fair amount of traveling. "In the evenings, we gather in the Al-Biruni mosque in Osh. We discuss different philosophical topics. We travel for three days every month. During these [trips], we preach Islam among the population. Each Tablighi member has to experience this sort of traveling," Nurmuhamedov said. "We avoid politics and discuss only general theological topics. "
"Members of Hizb-ut-Tahrir tried to establish contact with us. But we politely explained to them that we do not interfere in politics," Nurmuhamedov continued.
Sainbadji Kalykov, a top cleric in Osh oblast, estimated that there are about 10,000 Tablighi members in active in Kyrgyzstan today. "I don’t see anything negative in their activities," Kalykov said. "The only thing that provokes misunderstandings occasionally and threatens people is the outward appearance of Tablighi members. They look very exotic to Central Asian Muslims because of their long beards and traditional Pakistani clothes with turban on their heads".
Political and religious leaders in other Central Asian states are not as tolerant toward the Tablighi Jamaat as those in Kyrgyzstan. In Uzbekistan, President Islam Karimov has classified the group as an "extremist organization." Meanwhile, in Kazakhstan, Tablighi members are frequently subjected to fines and other official sanctions for their illegal preaching, and authorities sometimes resort to force to break up their meetings. "Although Tablighi members claim that they converse only about God, we are not certain that they are not agitating our youth to go to Iraq and Pakistan for battle," said a Kazakhstani security official, speaking on condition of anonymity.
The Tablighi do not appear to be very active in Tajikistan. "There are very few Tablighi members in our country and they maintain a very low level of activity," said Muhiddin Kabiri, head of the Islamic Revival Party of Tajikistani. "Authorities are quite suspicious of their activity and try to keep them under control."
Editor’s Note: Igor Rotar is the Central Asian correspondent for EurasiaNet
Posted July 23, 2007 © Eurasianet
http://www.eurasianet.org
PAKISTANI ISLAMIC MISSIONARY GROUP ESTABLISHES A STRONG PRESENCE IN CENTRAL ASIA
Igor Rotar 7/23/07
Pakistan’s recent slide toward political instability could have important repercussions for Central Asian states. One of Pakistan’s most fervent Islamic groups, Tablighi Jamaat, also happens to be among the most active in proselytizing in Central Asia.
In Islamabad, the military government of Gen. Pervez Musharraf is coming under increasing pressure from Islamic political forces inside the country from one side, and the Bush administration from the other. Accordingly, the Pakistani president’s room for maneuver seems to be shrinking. Domestically, a government crackdown on religious extremist groups, underscored by security force’s attack on a radical mosque in Islamabad in early July, seems to have accelerated the erosion of Musharraf’s support base.
On the foreign front, Musharraf is being harangued for not doing enough to contain Islamic militancy. US officials have declared that terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden is alive and in hiding in Pakistan’s tribal areas, near the border with Afghanistan, and have dropped strong hints that Washington is considering a military raid inside Pakistani territory. Pakistan has angrily denied that bin Laden is using the country as a safe haven.
Lost amid the deterioration of security conditions is the spreading influence of the Tablighi Jamaat in Central Asia. Shamsibek Zakirov, an advisor of the head of the State Agency for Religious Affairs under the Kyrgyz Government stated that "it is not a secret that Islamic radicals from Pakistan are actively working among the Muslims in Central Asia, especially in Kyrgyzstan. The Tablighi Jamaat is the most active organization of all foreign Islamic missionaries."
The Tablighi Jamaat, which roughly translates as the Society for Spreading Faith, was founded in the late 1920’s in India. It was originally intended as a vehicle for the promoting a revival of Islamic piety, and, as such, it placed a heavy emphasis on missionary activity among its membership. The group has traditionally eschewed politics and concentrated its efforts on reinforcing the faith of Muslims, not trying to win converts. Today, it is based in the Pakistani city of Raiwind, near Lahore.
The first Tablighi missionaries visited Central Asia not long after the Soviet collapse in 1991. At first they targeted what were perceived as the least pious areas of Central Asia – northern Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan. Over time, Tablighi missionaries expanded their activities to include every state in the region, except Turkmenistan. The Ferghana Valley is now a particular object of missionary attention. Virtually all of the Tablighi members active in Central Asia are locals who have undergone training in either India or Pakistan.
The composition of the Tablighi Jamaat in Kyrgyzstan differs markedly from those of other Islamic organizations operating in the region, especially the underground radical group Hizb-ut-Tahrir. Most members of Hizb-ut-Tahrir in Kyrgyzstan are ethnic Uzbeks, whereas most Tablighi members are Kyrgyz, according to Shamsibek Zakirov, an official with the State Agency for Religious Affairs.
While Zakirov admitted that all available evidence indicates that the Tablighi Jamaat continues to adhere to an apolitical stance, he nevertheless adopted a skeptical stance toward the group. "Their views are, to put it mildly, not typical to modern Kyrgyzstan," Zakirov said. "Many Tablighi members are uneducated and very fanatical. I don’t think that importing the Pakistani version of Islam will promote the stabilization of Central Asia."
Ibragim Nurmuhamedov, a resident of Osh and a Tablighi missionary, said members of the group are instructed to discuss only religious topics, and are expected to do a fair amount of traveling. "In the evenings, we gather in the Al-Biruni mosque in Osh. We discuss different philosophical topics. We travel for three days every month. During these [trips], we preach Islam among the population. Each Tablighi member has to experience this sort of traveling," Nurmuhamedov said. "We avoid politics and discuss only general theological topics. "
"Members of Hizb-ut-Tahrir tried to establish contact with us. But we politely explained to them that we do not interfere in politics," Nurmuhamedov continued.
Sainbadji Kalykov, a top cleric in Osh oblast, estimated that there are about 10,000 Tablighi members in active in Kyrgyzstan today. "I don’t see anything negative in their activities," Kalykov said. "The only thing that provokes misunderstandings occasionally and threatens people is the outward appearance of Tablighi members. They look very exotic to Central Asian Muslims because of their long beards and traditional Pakistani clothes with turban on their heads".
Political and religious leaders in other Central Asian states are not as tolerant toward the Tablighi Jamaat as those in Kyrgyzstan. In Uzbekistan, President Islam Karimov has classified the group as an "extremist organization." Meanwhile, in Kazakhstan, Tablighi members are frequently subjected to fines and other official sanctions for their illegal preaching, and authorities sometimes resort to force to break up their meetings. "Although Tablighi members claim that they converse only about God, we are not certain that they are not agitating our youth to go to Iraq and Pakistan for battle," said a Kazakhstani security official, speaking on condition of anonymity.
The Tablighi do not appear to be very active in Tajikistan. "There are very few Tablighi members in our country and they maintain a very low level of activity," said Muhiddin Kabiri, head of the Islamic Revival Party of Tajikistani. "Authorities are quite suspicious of their activity and try to keep them under control."
Editor’s Note: Igor Rotar is the Central Asian correspondent for EurasiaNet
Posted July 23, 2007 © Eurasianet
http://www.eurasianet.org
Pakistan’s recent slide toward political instability could have important repercussions for Central Asian states. One of Pakistan’s most fervent Islamic groups, Tablighi Jamaat, also happens to be among the most active in proselytizing in Central Asia.
In Islamabad, the military government of Gen. Pervez Musharraf is coming under increasing pressure from Islamic political forces inside the country from one side, and the Bush administration from the other. Accordingly, the Pakistani president’s room for maneuver seems to be shrinking. Domestically, a government crackdown on religious extremist groups, underscored by security force’s attack on a radical mosque in Islamabad in early July, seems to have accelerated the erosion of Musharraf’s support base.
On the foreign front, Musharraf is being harangued for not doing enough to contain Islamic militancy. US officials have declared that terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden is alive and in hiding in Pakistan’s tribal areas, near the border with Afghanistan, and have dropped strong hints that Washington is considering a military raid inside Pakistani territory. Pakistan has angrily denied that bin Laden is using the country as a safe haven.
Lost amid the deterioration of security conditions is the spreading influence of the Tablighi Jamaat in Central Asia. Shamsibek Zakirov, an advisor of the head of the State Agency for Religious Affairs under the Kyrgyz Government stated that "it is not a secret that Islamic radicals from Pakistan are actively working among the Muslims in Central Asia, especially in Kyrgyzstan. The Tablighi Jamaat is the most active organization of all foreign Islamic missionaries."
The Tablighi Jamaat, which roughly translates as the Society for Spreading Faith, was founded in the late 1920’s in India. It was originally intended as a vehicle for the promoting a revival of Islamic piety, and, as such, it placed a heavy emphasis on missionary activity among its membership. The group has traditionally eschewed politics and concentrated its efforts on reinforcing the faith of Muslims, not trying to win converts. Today, it is based in the Pakistani city of Raiwind, near Lahore.
The first Tablighi missionaries visited Central Asia not long after the Soviet collapse in 1991. At first they targeted what were perceived as the least pious areas of Central Asia – northern Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan. Over time, Tablighi missionaries expanded their activities to include every state in the region, except Turkmenistan. The Ferghana Valley is now a particular object of missionary attention. Virtually all of the Tablighi members active in Central Asia are locals who have undergone training in either India or Pakistan.
The composition of the Tablighi Jamaat in Kyrgyzstan differs markedly from those of other Islamic organizations operating in the region, especially the underground radical group Hizb-ut-Tahrir. Most members of Hizb-ut-Tahrir in Kyrgyzstan are ethnic Uzbeks, whereas most Tablighi members are Kyrgyz, according to Shamsibek Zakirov, an official with the State Agency for Religious Affairs.
While Zakirov admitted that all available evidence indicates that the Tablighi Jamaat continues to adhere to an apolitical stance, he nevertheless adopted a skeptical stance toward the group. "Their views are, to put it mildly, not typical to modern Kyrgyzstan," Zakirov said. "Many Tablighi members are uneducated and very fanatical. I don’t think that importing the Pakistani version of Islam will promote the stabilization of Central Asia."
Ibragim Nurmuhamedov, a resident of Osh and a Tablighi missionary, said members of the group are instructed to discuss only religious topics, and are expected to do a fair amount of traveling. "In the evenings, we gather in the Al-Biruni mosque in Osh. We discuss different philosophical topics. We travel for three days every month. During these [trips], we preach Islam among the population. Each Tablighi member has to experience this sort of traveling," Nurmuhamedov said. "We avoid politics and discuss only general theological topics. "
"Members of Hizb-ut-Tahrir tried to establish contact with us. But we politely explained to them that we do not interfere in politics," Nurmuhamedov continued.
Sainbadji Kalykov, a top cleric in Osh oblast, estimated that there are about 10,000 Tablighi members in active in Kyrgyzstan today. "I don’t see anything negative in their activities," Kalykov said. "The only thing that provokes misunderstandings occasionally and threatens people is the outward appearance of Tablighi members. They look very exotic to Central Asian Muslims because of their long beards and traditional Pakistani clothes with turban on their heads".
Political and religious leaders in other Central Asian states are not as tolerant toward the Tablighi Jamaat as those in Kyrgyzstan. In Uzbekistan, President Islam Karimov has classified the group as an "extremist organization." Meanwhile, in Kazakhstan, Tablighi members are frequently subjected to fines and other official sanctions for their illegal preaching, and authorities sometimes resort to force to break up their meetings. "Although Tablighi members claim that they converse only about God, we are not certain that they are not agitating our youth to go to Iraq and Pakistan for battle," said a Kazakhstani security official, speaking on condition of anonymity.
The Tablighi do not appear to be very active in Tajikistan. "There are very few Tablighi members in our country and they maintain a very low level of activity," said Muhiddin Kabiri, head of the Islamic Revival Party of Tajikistani. "Authorities are quite suspicious of their activity and try to keep them under control."
Editor’s Note: Igor Rotar is the Central Asian correspondent for EurasiaNet
Posted July 23, 2007 © Eurasianet
http://www.eurasianet.org
Saturday 21 July 2007
Muslim radical shows moderation, or at least tact
IHT
By Hassan M. Fattah
Friday, July 20, 2007
TRIPOLI, Lebanon: There was a time when Omar Bakri Mohammed embodied every stereotype of the jihadi extremist. From his perch in London, he threw around words like "kafir" - infidel - to describe Christians and Jews and openly praised the bombers of Sept. 11, 2001.
But sitting recently in his new library overlooking Mount Lebanon in this northern city, with a bloody battle raging between the Lebanese Army and the Qaeda-inspired Fatah al Islam at a Palestinian refugee camp a few kilometers away, Bakri presented himself as a changed man. Whether the shift is as meaningful as he asserts is an open question.
He speaks of peace, decrying the unnecessary use of violence and emphasizing the sanctity of life.
The death of innocents, he says, has to be curtailed.
"I want to support Muslims by saving their blood and their life," Bakri said, as he began outlining his efforts to help negotiate a settlement to the confrontation in the camp. "My job is to calm the fighting and to open a dialogue."
Bakri grew to infamy after the suicide bombings of London's subway system in 2005, when he and a group of other radical imams who had been preaching in mosques became lightning rods for the creeping extremism of some young British Muslims.
He had co-founded the radical group Al Muhajiroun - disbanded in 2004 - which sought to restore and expand the Muslim caliphate, an empire whose "foreign policy is to conquer the whole world by jihad," he said.
He also helped found the British branch of Hizb-ut-Tahrir, a like-minded political party that seeks a more peaceful, political route to the caliphate, before falling out with the group for theological reasons, he said.
Charismatic but never afraid of acrimony, Bakri embraced controversy.
In a newspaper interview in April 2004, he warned that "a very well-organized" London-based group, Al Qaeda Europe, was "on the verge of launching a big operation." He vowed that if Western governments did not change their policies, Muslims would give them "a 9/11, day after day after day."
When the London bombings occurred, however, the whole formula changed. British authorities were no longer willing to tolerate his speech, and public outrage increased.
When he left London for Beirut two years ago, the British government banned him permanently. He had last stepped foot in Lebanon more than 30 years ago, when he escaped the civil war, he said. Now he is starting anew, insisting that it is against his beliefs to be in Britain if he cannot preach his brand of Islam.
Nonetheless, his wife and children remain there, wards of its welfare state.
Bakri was briefly arrested after arriving in Beirut but soon began working to build a network here. He initially sought to open an Islamic college but was denied a permit. The mufti of Lebanon, the highest Sunni authority in the country, was against him, he says.
He then sought to open an institute to teach Arabic to Western converts of Islam, he says. But after a brief period when many of his former students in Britain came to attend, the Lebanese authorities closed the center amid what he says was British pressure.
This year he opened a public library, equipped with computers and Islamic texts, in addition to a lecture hall where he preaches. He also travels to various mosques.
Bakri has grown more rotund, less bellicose and more tactful to those of other faiths. But he attributes that tact to the environment in Lebanon.
"What has changed about me is I now live with people who respect Islam," Bakri said, as young men trickled into his library to listen in. "They have given me big space to speak out, to speak in the media, on national TV and in newspapers."
In return, he too has shown more respect. He no longer calls the Arab Christians around him infidels. He has preached for dialogue and sought to temper the growing tide of sectarianism, he says, and has called all of his followers to eschew collecting arms. And he has instructed his small but growing band of followers to stay out of politics.
But Bakri's apparent moderation may be less a matter of change than of contrast.
Here in Tripoli, arch-conservative Sunni Muslims and extremists of all stripes operate unhindered. Inside the Palestinian camps, armed men, some of whom have returned from the insurgency in Iraq, continue to resort to violence. The siege of the nearby camp, Nahr al Bared, is only the worst of many fights. Groups like Hizb-ut-Tahrir have offices and operate freely with little trepidation.
Now Bakri calls himself simply a Salafist, differentiating himself from jihadi Salafists like Fatah al Islam who aim to build a Muslim nation even through violent means. His goal remains unchanged, but he insists he favors only peaceful means.
He says his work is easier in Lebanon because he is reaching out to Muslims born into the faith, and has to spend much less time teaching the basics.
His reputation helped him quickly build a following and ties within the community.
"I was much more active before but was less productive," he said. "Now, I have less activity but am much more productive."
Most of all, though, he does not apologize for anything in the past. Instead, Bakri says, he has been misunderstood, misquoted and harassed. He asserts there is a Western media effort against him and derides the British government for what he says is a campaign against Muslims in general.
He has also been connected to Internet postings calling on Muslims to attack other Muslims who join the armed forces.
Perhaps most surprising, he blames moderate Muslims for being the real cause of the London bombings and similar violence. Moderates, he says, are impressionable and do not learn their Islamic law from scholars. As they surf the Internet, he says, they are open to manipulation.
"How come the moderate Muslims, not Omar Bakri do this?" he demands. "Because of Sheik Google," he quips, referring to the use of the Internet to learn Islamic principles.
Nonetheless, he has been linked to numerous incendiary Internet postings, British newspapers have reported.
When his phone rang at 3 a.m. on May 20 with news of an impending showdown between the Lebanese Army and militants, the call was a testament to his newfound prominence here.
A colleague of his was frantically looking for another sheik who had been part of earlier negotiations with Fatah al Islam, warning that the group was planning to strike Lebanese forces at Nahr al Bared if they did not cease an attack on it elsewhere in Tripoli.
Hours later, Fatah al Islam attacked the army, decapitating four soldiers and killing scores of others. By day's end 23 soldiers were dead.
Bakri says that the violence was needless and that it violated Islam. He has worked to prod clerics in the area to persuade Fatah al Islam to end the confrontation.
"They keep saying the army is a force of apostates," Bakri said of Fatah al Islam. "We say, both of you, sort it out between you, but don't you dare try to apply the case of Iraq here."
By Hassan M. Fattah
Friday, July 20, 2007
TRIPOLI, Lebanon: There was a time when Omar Bakri Mohammed embodied every stereotype of the jihadi extremist. From his perch in London, he threw around words like "kafir" - infidel - to describe Christians and Jews and openly praised the bombers of Sept. 11, 2001.
But sitting recently in his new library overlooking Mount Lebanon in this northern city, with a bloody battle raging between the Lebanese Army and the Qaeda-inspired Fatah al Islam at a Palestinian refugee camp a few kilometers away, Bakri presented himself as a changed man. Whether the shift is as meaningful as he asserts is an open question.
He speaks of peace, decrying the unnecessary use of violence and emphasizing the sanctity of life.
The death of innocents, he says, has to be curtailed.
"I want to support Muslims by saving their blood and their life," Bakri said, as he began outlining his efforts to help negotiate a settlement to the confrontation in the camp. "My job is to calm the fighting and to open a dialogue."
Bakri grew to infamy after the suicide bombings of London's subway system in 2005, when he and a group of other radical imams who had been preaching in mosques became lightning rods for the creeping extremism of some young British Muslims.
He had co-founded the radical group Al Muhajiroun - disbanded in 2004 - which sought to restore and expand the Muslim caliphate, an empire whose "foreign policy is to conquer the whole world by jihad," he said.
He also helped found the British branch of Hizb-ut-Tahrir, a like-minded political party that seeks a more peaceful, political route to the caliphate, before falling out with the group for theological reasons, he said.
Charismatic but never afraid of acrimony, Bakri embraced controversy.
In a newspaper interview in April 2004, he warned that "a very well-organized" London-based group, Al Qaeda Europe, was "on the verge of launching a big operation." He vowed that if Western governments did not change their policies, Muslims would give them "a 9/11, day after day after day."
When the London bombings occurred, however, the whole formula changed. British authorities were no longer willing to tolerate his speech, and public outrage increased.
When he left London for Beirut two years ago, the British government banned him permanently. He had last stepped foot in Lebanon more than 30 years ago, when he escaped the civil war, he said. Now he is starting anew, insisting that it is against his beliefs to be in Britain if he cannot preach his brand of Islam.
Nonetheless, his wife and children remain there, wards of its welfare state.
Bakri was briefly arrested after arriving in Beirut but soon began working to build a network here. He initially sought to open an Islamic college but was denied a permit. The mufti of Lebanon, the highest Sunni authority in the country, was against him, he says.
He then sought to open an institute to teach Arabic to Western converts of Islam, he says. But after a brief period when many of his former students in Britain came to attend, the Lebanese authorities closed the center amid what he says was British pressure.
This year he opened a public library, equipped with computers and Islamic texts, in addition to a lecture hall where he preaches. He also travels to various mosques.
Bakri has grown more rotund, less bellicose and more tactful to those of other faiths. But he attributes that tact to the environment in Lebanon.
"What has changed about me is I now live with people who respect Islam," Bakri said, as young men trickled into his library to listen in. "They have given me big space to speak out, to speak in the media, on national TV and in newspapers."
In return, he too has shown more respect. He no longer calls the Arab Christians around him infidels. He has preached for dialogue and sought to temper the growing tide of sectarianism, he says, and has called all of his followers to eschew collecting arms. And he has instructed his small but growing band of followers to stay out of politics.
But Bakri's apparent moderation may be less a matter of change than of contrast.
Here in Tripoli, arch-conservative Sunni Muslims and extremists of all stripes operate unhindered. Inside the Palestinian camps, armed men, some of whom have returned from the insurgency in Iraq, continue to resort to violence. The siege of the nearby camp, Nahr al Bared, is only the worst of many fights. Groups like Hizb-ut-Tahrir have offices and operate freely with little trepidation.
Now Bakri calls himself simply a Salafist, differentiating himself from jihadi Salafists like Fatah al Islam who aim to build a Muslim nation even through violent means. His goal remains unchanged, but he insists he favors only peaceful means.
He says his work is easier in Lebanon because he is reaching out to Muslims born into the faith, and has to spend much less time teaching the basics.
His reputation helped him quickly build a following and ties within the community.
"I was much more active before but was less productive," he said. "Now, I have less activity but am much more productive."
Most of all, though, he does not apologize for anything in the past. Instead, Bakri says, he has been misunderstood, misquoted and harassed. He asserts there is a Western media effort against him and derides the British government for what he says is a campaign against Muslims in general.
He has also been connected to Internet postings calling on Muslims to attack other Muslims who join the armed forces.
Perhaps most surprising, he blames moderate Muslims for being the real cause of the London bombings and similar violence. Moderates, he says, are impressionable and do not learn their Islamic law from scholars. As they surf the Internet, he says, they are open to manipulation.
"How come the moderate Muslims, not Omar Bakri do this?" he demands. "Because of Sheik Google," he quips, referring to the use of the Internet to learn Islamic principles.
Nonetheless, he has been linked to numerous incendiary Internet postings, British newspapers have reported.
When his phone rang at 3 a.m. on May 20 with news of an impending showdown between the Lebanese Army and militants, the call was a testament to his newfound prominence here.
A colleague of his was frantically looking for another sheik who had been part of earlier negotiations with Fatah al Islam, warning that the group was planning to strike Lebanese forces at Nahr al Bared if they did not cease an attack on it elsewhere in Tripoli.
Hours later, Fatah al Islam attacked the army, decapitating four soldiers and killing scores of others. By day's end 23 soldiers were dead.
Bakri says that the violence was needless and that it violated Islam. He has worked to prod clerics in the area to persuade Fatah al Islam to end the confrontation.
"They keep saying the army is a force of apostates," Bakri said of Fatah al Islam. "We say, both of you, sort it out between you, but don't you dare try to apply the case of Iraq here."
Thursday 19 July 2007
Hizb ut-Tahrir wants a Caliphate
THE debate over Hizb ut-Tahrir has proven to be nothing more than a poorly scripted melodrama.
Hizb ut-Tahrir is a global Islamic political party working to re-establish the Islamic Caliphate within the Muslim world.
Since its inception in 1953, Hizb ut-Tahrir has been subject to the severest of repression by tyrants in the Muslim world. Our members have been consistently persecuted, imprisoned, tortured and murdered.
Despite operating under the most horrendous conditions, Hizb ut-Tahrir continues to oppose all forms of tyranny and dictatorship exclusively through intellectual and political means and in fact considers violence a violation of Islamic law.
Hizb ut-Tahrir's courageous stance in mobilising public opinion in the Muslim world has earned it the universal support of Muslim masses and caused widespread consternation among its opponents.
Hizb ut-Tahrir is now being targeted in the West for three primary reasons: The party continues to courageously expose the crimes of Western governments to a global audience; it unrelentingly challenges the West's neo-liberal interventionist policies in the Muslim world and it works to present Islam as an ideological alternative to Western secular capitalism as a model of governance in the Muslim world.
Critics of Hizb ut-Tahrir are desperately seeking to suppress debate. Our opposition to the illegal state of Israel, for instance, is howled down as anti-Semitism, our displeasure at the West's foreign policy labelled subversion, our challenge to Western-backed dictators characterised as rebellion, our work to generate political awareness described as radicalisation and our call for the affairs of the Muslim world to be governed by Islam branded as extremism.
Governments have even lent sympathetic ears to opportunistic individuals parroting the established government narrative by seeking to draw spurious and unfounded links between Hizb ut-Tahrir and recent events in London and Glasgow.
In the last century, Western governments conducted a brutal and unashamedly interventionist policy in the Muslim world which wreaked havoc on local populations through military occupation, economic exploitation and political repression.
But despite the concerted effort to demonise and silence Hizb ut-Tahrir, we will continue a serious and open debate on the way forward for the Muslim world.
* Wassim Doureihi is the media representative of Hizb ut-Tahrir Australia
Hizb ut-Tahrir is a global Islamic political party working to re-establish the Islamic Caliphate within the Muslim world.
Since its inception in 1953, Hizb ut-Tahrir has been subject to the severest of repression by tyrants in the Muslim world. Our members have been consistently persecuted, imprisoned, tortured and murdered.
Despite operating under the most horrendous conditions, Hizb ut-Tahrir continues to oppose all forms of tyranny and dictatorship exclusively through intellectual and political means and in fact considers violence a violation of Islamic law.
Hizb ut-Tahrir's courageous stance in mobilising public opinion in the Muslim world has earned it the universal support of Muslim masses and caused widespread consternation among its opponents.
Hizb ut-Tahrir is now being targeted in the West for three primary reasons: The party continues to courageously expose the crimes of Western governments to a global audience; it unrelentingly challenges the West's neo-liberal interventionist policies in the Muslim world and it works to present Islam as an ideological alternative to Western secular capitalism as a model of governance in the Muslim world.
Critics of Hizb ut-Tahrir are desperately seeking to suppress debate. Our opposition to the illegal state of Israel, for instance, is howled down as anti-Semitism, our displeasure at the West's foreign policy labelled subversion, our challenge to Western-backed dictators characterised as rebellion, our work to generate political awareness described as radicalisation and our call for the affairs of the Muslim world to be governed by Islam branded as extremism.
Governments have even lent sympathetic ears to opportunistic individuals parroting the established government narrative by seeking to draw spurious and unfounded links between Hizb ut-Tahrir and recent events in London and Glasgow.
In the last century, Western governments conducted a brutal and unashamedly interventionist policy in the Muslim world which wreaked havoc on local populations through military occupation, economic exploitation and political repression.
But despite the concerted effort to demonise and silence Hizb ut-Tahrir, we will continue a serious and open debate on the way forward for the Muslim world.
* Wassim Doureihi is the media representative of Hizb ut-Tahrir Australia
Central Asia: Hizb Ut-Tahrir Gains Support From Women
July 11, 2007 (RFE/RL) -- While female participation in political life is generally low in Central Asia, a glimpse into Hizb ut-Tahrir (Party of Liberation) activities suggests the group might enjoy more support among women than registered parties get.
A court in the Uzbek capital Tashkent gave suspended sentences to seven women on July 9 for their alleged membership in the banned religious group Hizb ut-Tahrir. Another Uzbek woman, found guilty of similar charges, was sentenced to three years in prison.
Women Arrested
And in neighboring Tajikistan, Mutabar Bobojonova -- a woman who lives in the northern village Isfisor -- was arrested in June on suspicion of supporting the banned Hizb ut-Tahrir.
"I think you cannot change a person by sentencing him to lengthy prison terms. Change should come from inside the person."Experts in Central Asia point out that Hizb ut-Tahrir has been trying to recruit more women in the region and that compared to other political parties -- those both officially registered and underground groups -- it has been successful on that front.
Hizb ut-Tahrir is officially banned in all Central Asian countries, though the U.S. State Department does not consider it a terrorist organization.
Top political leaders and senior officials in law-enforcement agencies in Central Asia -- especially in Uzbekistan -- have severely criticized the group, branding it a terrorist organization that threatens the stability of the whole region.
Hundreds of alleged supporters of the group have reportedly been arrested, tortured, and sentenced to lengthy prison terms in Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, according to Amnesty International, the human-rights watchdog.
Not Suspicious
Sanya Sagnaeva, a senior analyst at the regional office of the International Crisis Group in Osh, Kyrgyzstan, says that since it is deemed an illegal group it is easier for Hizb ut-Tahrir to continue with the help of female supporters because the authorities do not usually suspect women of being involved in political campaigns.
"Women's interest in this party might be linked to the fact that the party itself puts emphasis on working with women, and that is because -- according to Central Asian traditions -- there is a lower possibility of women being prosecuted [by the state]," she says.
There are no official statistics on the exact number of members in the underground group living in Central Asia.
Experts put the number of Hizb ut-Tahrir supporters in the region at up to 15,000. However, the group itself claims that it has hundreds of thousand of members and supporters, including many women.
The group says its campaign is entirely peaceful.
Islamic Caliphate
Law-enforcement agencies in Central Asia say they usually confiscate Hizb ut-Tahrir's booklets and other literature, which usually call on people to overthrow their government and create an Islamic caliphate in Central Asia.
Most of the women imprisoned for alleged Hizb ut-Tahrir membership were found guilty of distributing the leaflets and trying to recruit more members.
Ikbal Mirsaidov, an expert at the Presidential Center for International Strategic Studies in the Kyrgyz capital Bishkek, says that with thousands of people being arrested and imprisoned for alleged membership in Hizb ut-Tahrir over the past decade, it is inevitable that the group would find support among women.
That is because, Mirsaidov says, most of the female supporters of Hizb ut-Tahrir are family members of those who have been imprisoned by authorities.
"Most of these women who have now become politically active have seen their husbands, brothers, or fathers being prosecuted for Hizb ut-Tahrir membership," she says. "This is why they are reacting to their family member's imprisonment by law-enforcement authorities."
The leader of the Social Democratic Party in Tajikistan's northern Sughd region, Dilbar Samadova, says that while government authorities claim that there are thousands of followers of Hizb ut-Tahrir operating in the country, officially registered political parties are having difficulty gaining support among the population.
Samadova says Tajiks, especially women, are becoming more indifferent to politics altogether and mistrust both the government and the opposition.
Alone And Poor
Samadova says she suspects the Hizb ut-Tahrir is taking advantage of widespread poverty and the fact that hundreds of thousands of men have left for seasonal work in Russia, leaving their wives as the head of the household and their families during their husbands' absence.
According to Samadova, Hizb ut-Tahrir -- which reportedly gets financial support from some foreign countries -- might provide money to the women in order to win their support.
"Women carry most of the burden of their family's everyday lives," she said. "The women's social and economic situation is appalling."
An Uzbek woman convicted of being a member of Hizb ut-Tahrir, who did not want to give her name, said she was released from a Tajik prison under the presidential amnesty in June. She said she had been sentenced to five years in prison and lived among "convicted criminals." But despite this experience, she said her time in prison she did not change her beliefs.
"I think you cannot change a person by sentencing him to lengthy prison terms," she said. "Change should come from inside the person."
Banned In Central Asia
According to experts, imprisoned Hizb ut-Tahrir members have been using prisons as a place to spread their beliefs and attract new supporters.
Officially recognizing Hizb ut-Tahrir and allowing it to participate in elections would spare many people from being imprisoned and keep the wives and daughters of jailed men from turning against the authorities.
But it seems unlikely that any governments in Central Asia would be willing to officially recognize Hizb ut-Tahrir anytime soon.
In fact, the office of the Dushanbe city prosecutor suggested last week to include Hizb ut-Tahrir on the official list of terrorist groups.
The Osh-based analyst Sagnaeva says Hizb ut-Tahrir will be around for many more years, operating in Central Asia secretly and attracting support from both men and women.
(Soljida Djakhfarova, the director of RFE/RL's Uzbek Service, contributed to this report.)
A court in the Uzbek capital Tashkent gave suspended sentences to seven women on July 9 for their alleged membership in the banned religious group Hizb ut-Tahrir. Another Uzbek woman, found guilty of similar charges, was sentenced to three years in prison.
Women Arrested
And in neighboring Tajikistan, Mutabar Bobojonova -- a woman who lives in the northern village Isfisor -- was arrested in June on suspicion of supporting the banned Hizb ut-Tahrir.
"I think you cannot change a person by sentencing him to lengthy prison terms. Change should come from inside the person."Experts in Central Asia point out that Hizb ut-Tahrir has been trying to recruit more women in the region and that compared to other political parties -- those both officially registered and underground groups -- it has been successful on that front.
Hizb ut-Tahrir is officially banned in all Central Asian countries, though the U.S. State Department does not consider it a terrorist organization.
Top political leaders and senior officials in law-enforcement agencies in Central Asia -- especially in Uzbekistan -- have severely criticized the group, branding it a terrorist organization that threatens the stability of the whole region.
Hundreds of alleged supporters of the group have reportedly been arrested, tortured, and sentenced to lengthy prison terms in Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, according to Amnesty International, the human-rights watchdog.
Not Suspicious
Sanya Sagnaeva, a senior analyst at the regional office of the International Crisis Group in Osh, Kyrgyzstan, says that since it is deemed an illegal group it is easier for Hizb ut-Tahrir to continue with the help of female supporters because the authorities do not usually suspect women of being involved in political campaigns.
"Women's interest in this party might be linked to the fact that the party itself puts emphasis on working with women, and that is because -- according to Central Asian traditions -- there is a lower possibility of women being prosecuted [by the state]," she says.
There are no official statistics on the exact number of members in the underground group living in Central Asia.
Experts put the number of Hizb ut-Tahrir supporters in the region at up to 15,000. However, the group itself claims that it has hundreds of thousand of members and supporters, including many women.
The group says its campaign is entirely peaceful.
Islamic Caliphate
Law-enforcement agencies in Central Asia say they usually confiscate Hizb ut-Tahrir's booklets and other literature, which usually call on people to overthrow their government and create an Islamic caliphate in Central Asia.
Most of the women imprisoned for alleged Hizb ut-Tahrir membership were found guilty of distributing the leaflets and trying to recruit more members.
Ikbal Mirsaidov, an expert at the Presidential Center for International Strategic Studies in the Kyrgyz capital Bishkek, says that with thousands of people being arrested and imprisoned for alleged membership in Hizb ut-Tahrir over the past decade, it is inevitable that the group would find support among women.
That is because, Mirsaidov says, most of the female supporters of Hizb ut-Tahrir are family members of those who have been imprisoned by authorities.
"Most of these women who have now become politically active have seen their husbands, brothers, or fathers being prosecuted for Hizb ut-Tahrir membership," she says. "This is why they are reacting to their family member's imprisonment by law-enforcement authorities."
The leader of the Social Democratic Party in Tajikistan's northern Sughd region, Dilbar Samadova, says that while government authorities claim that there are thousands of followers of Hizb ut-Tahrir operating in the country, officially registered political parties are having difficulty gaining support among the population.
Samadova says Tajiks, especially women, are becoming more indifferent to politics altogether and mistrust both the government and the opposition.
Alone And Poor
Samadova says she suspects the Hizb ut-Tahrir is taking advantage of widespread poverty and the fact that hundreds of thousands of men have left for seasonal work in Russia, leaving their wives as the head of the household and their families during their husbands' absence.
According to Samadova, Hizb ut-Tahrir -- which reportedly gets financial support from some foreign countries -- might provide money to the women in order to win their support.
"Women carry most of the burden of their family's everyday lives," she said. "The women's social and economic situation is appalling."
An Uzbek woman convicted of being a member of Hizb ut-Tahrir, who did not want to give her name, said she was released from a Tajik prison under the presidential amnesty in June. She said she had been sentenced to five years in prison and lived among "convicted criminals." But despite this experience, she said her time in prison she did not change her beliefs.
"I think you cannot change a person by sentencing him to lengthy prison terms," she said. "Change should come from inside the person."
Banned In Central Asia
According to experts, imprisoned Hizb ut-Tahrir members have been using prisons as a place to spread their beliefs and attract new supporters.
Officially recognizing Hizb ut-Tahrir and allowing it to participate in elections would spare many people from being imprisoned and keep the wives and daughters of jailed men from turning against the authorities.
But it seems unlikely that any governments in Central Asia would be willing to officially recognize Hizb ut-Tahrir anytime soon.
In fact, the office of the Dushanbe city prosecutor suggested last week to include Hizb ut-Tahrir on the official list of terrorist groups.
The Osh-based analyst Sagnaeva says Hizb ut-Tahrir will be around for many more years, operating in Central Asia secretly and attracting support from both men and women.
(Soljida Djakhfarova, the director of RFE/RL's Uzbek Service, contributed to this report.)
Local Hizb ut-Tahrir leader detained in southern Kyrgyzstan
Bishkek, July 17, Interfax - One of the local leaders of the Hizb ut-Tahrir extremist organization, Alisher Iminzhanov, has been detained in the south of Kyrgyzstan, the republic's Interior Ministry said on Tuesday.
"The man was detained in the city of Osh. He was a senior member of this extremist organization. Iminzhanov was earlier prosecuted for inciting religious hatred. An investigation is underway," the ministry said.
"A special purpose operation is currently being conducted in the capital ahead of the SCO summit due on August 16," the Bishkek police department told Interfax.
These efforts "are intended to dismantle the activities of extremist organizations and to prevent illegal migration on the territory of Bishkek," the department said.
Underground extremist organizations could have up to 5,000 supporters in Kyrgyzstan, according to specialists of the country's security services.
"The man was detained in the city of Osh. He was a senior member of this extremist organization. Iminzhanov was earlier prosecuted for inciting religious hatred. An investigation is underway," the ministry said.
"A special purpose operation is currently being conducted in the capital ahead of the SCO summit due on August 16," the Bishkek police department told Interfax.
These efforts "are intended to dismantle the activities of extremist organizations and to prevent illegal migration on the territory of Bishkek," the department said.
Underground extremist organizations could have up to 5,000 supporters in Kyrgyzstan, according to specialists of the country's security services.
Thursday 12 July 2007
Glasgow bombs: the doctor I knew
Shiraz Maher
Published 05 July 2007
12 comments Print version Listen RSS How did Dr Bilal Abdulla, a medic from Paisley hospital, come to be one of Britain's prime terror suspects? Here is the testimony of a former Islamic radical who knew him well, written exclusively for the NS
When I saw Bilal Abdulla's name in the news, I recognised it immediately, though it took me a while to be completely sure it was the man I remembered. It wasn't long before I was certain. This was the same Bilal whom I had known closely when I was a student at Cambridge.
I was born in Birmingham, although my parents were originally from Pakistan. When I was three months old my family moved to Saudi Arabia, where my dad had got a job as an accountant, but when I was 14 they sent me back to Britain to give me a better education. I attended Solihull School and lived with my grandparents.
In September 2000 I went to Leeds University to study history. I was a pretty sociable student and I enjoyed life. Then some of my friends began encouraging me to attend mosque, at least on Fridays. When 9/11 happened I had already started praying and going to mosque more regularly, rediscovering my faith. I remember thinking about the attacks: "This changes everything." I was confused about it. I didn't know what Islam made of it. Part of me thought they must be justified.
Nobody was offering me direction. I already knew about Hizb ut-Tahrir, so I talked to one of their guys at Leeds Grand Mosque who was in charge of the area. He took me back to his house where, I remember, we drank mint tea. He said America would use these events to colonise the Muslim world, to humiliate us, to attack Islam. I was convinced there would be war in Afghanistan. He brought me into the organisation within days. He was my cell leader and I rose through the ranks swiftly. By the end of my second year at university, I was looking after the whole area stretching from Leeds to Newcastle and Durham, and sat on the regional committee for the north of England. Our job was to liaise with cell leaders, to pressurise them to recruit more people. They were breathing down our necks. There was so much pressure on us to recruit.
After graduating I moved to Cambridge in September 2004 to start a PhD in history. I was living in a rented house on Milton Road and I had been in Cambridge only a matter of hours when the local rep of Hizb ut-Tahrir arrived at the house. He gave me a hand unpacking boxes and settling in. Once we'd done this it was a case of getting down to business. The guy was a friend. All of us in the party, as we called the organisation, knew each other well. Over a cup of tea he filled me in on the situation in my new town, regarding the dawah, the strategy. We went through a list of people identified as potential recruits. One of these was Bilal Abdulla.
Bilal struck me as very warm and affable. He was someone who knew about Islam. Even though he wore western clothes, he was very religious. His recitation of the Quran was very good. If he attended, he would always lead prayers.
Bilal had grown up in Baghdad. He told me how he hated Saddam Hussein, how even after the American invasion his extended family stayed there. All were of the same ideological persuasion. All believed in Wahhabi ideology. He didn't see himself as being radical: he saw himself as following Islam. He developed a vitriolic hatred for the Shias after one of his closest friends at university in Iraq was killed by a Shia militiaman. He would say they needed to be massacred. He called them kafirs, disbelievers who insulted the Prophet.
Bilal said he had come to Britain to better his life, but did speak about returning home. When I first met him he was preparing to take the medical conversion course that would have allowed him to work as a doctor here. In the meantime, he worked behind the till at the local Staples stationery store.
I remember one incident well. Bilal lived above a Bengali restaurant. The other guy in his flat used to sing and play guitar, diabolically out of tune. I went round one day to Bilal's and heard this guy singing and wailing. I said, "What's this?" Bilal called him a "waster" and boasted to me that a few days earlier he had brought the guy into his bedroom. He sat him down and told him he needed to pray. He told him: "If you ever play again I'm going to smash the guitar." He then put on a video of al-Zarqawi beheading one of the hostages in Iraq. "If you think I'm messing about, this is what we do. This is what our people do - we slaughter." Bilal laughed when he recounted the story. I laughed with him, although I remember thinking the word slaughter was a bit disproportionate.
Hard hearts for non-believers
Bilal didn't have a TV and kept his distance from people he considered were not true Muslims. He refused to frequent the local halal takeaway in Cambridge because the Turkish guys there didn't attend mosque. He used to say to me: "We should have soft hearts for the believers and hard hearts for the non-believers." He epitomised this. He was very humble and polite and had an endearing and distinctive belly laugh. He spent his time reading the Quran and looking at Arabic-language or jihadi websites. I remember during Ramadan that year, 2004, on the 27th and most holy night, we all went down to London to the Regent's Park Mosque. It happened that was the night the Americans launched the massive assault on Fallujah. Bilal spent the whole night on his prayer mat. His stamina was something to behold.
By the end we would link up once a week. Some of the time he would come round to my place. Mostly we met in the cultural centre, the Islamic Academy on Gilbert Road. It was within walking distance of where both Bilal and I lived. It had a prayer hall downstairs and three bedrooms upstairs. One of those rooms was rented by the Hizb guy and, because of its location and Islamic setting, this became the main focal point where we would socialise, meet and discuss things. You could say all our activities in Cambridge orbited around the Islamic Academy.
Bilal talked about the validity of jihad, about expelling American and British troops. He described jihad as the highest pinnacle of Islam. He worked to the same endgame that we were all working to. There was no difference between us at the time. He would laugh when we talked about a particular bomb attack in Iraq. We all rejoiced then. And yet even I didn't think that he would take action himself.
Like myself, Bilal didn't have any non-Muslim friends and the circle of Muslims he chose to socialise with was small and selective. But he certainly trusted and respected us. I think this was solely because he recognised that we shared the same ultimate vision as him for Iraq and the wider Muslim world. In that sense our views were virtually identical. We only differed over our choice of method.
And so it was through my involvement with Hizb ut-Tahrir and its ideology of extremist political Islam that I came to befriend Bilal, the would-be bomber. That's why I believe it's wrong to distinguish between "extremism" and "violent extremism" as the government has been doing in recent months. The two are inextricably intertwined. Without movements such as Hizb creating the moral imperatives to justify terror, people like Bilal wouldn't have the support of an ideological infrastructure cheering them on. And, I believe, it's a fallacy to suggest that the culpability of agitators and cheerleaders is any less than for those who actually carry out acts of terror.
I didn't complete my PhD, as I didn't get funding. In July 2005 I left Cambridge and moved back to Birmingham. That was a few days before 7/7. Bilal and I lost touch. I left Hizb ut- Tahrir and had never heard of him since - until last week.
Next week Shiraz Maher writes about why he left radical Islam behind him
Published 05 July 2007
12 comments Print version Listen RSS How did Dr Bilal Abdulla, a medic from Paisley hospital, come to be one of Britain's prime terror suspects? Here is the testimony of a former Islamic radical who knew him well, written exclusively for the NS
When I saw Bilal Abdulla's name in the news, I recognised it immediately, though it took me a while to be completely sure it was the man I remembered. It wasn't long before I was certain. This was the same Bilal whom I had known closely when I was a student at Cambridge.
I was born in Birmingham, although my parents were originally from Pakistan. When I was three months old my family moved to Saudi Arabia, where my dad had got a job as an accountant, but when I was 14 they sent me back to Britain to give me a better education. I attended Solihull School and lived with my grandparents.
In September 2000 I went to Leeds University to study history. I was a pretty sociable student and I enjoyed life. Then some of my friends began encouraging me to attend mosque, at least on Fridays. When 9/11 happened I had already started praying and going to mosque more regularly, rediscovering my faith. I remember thinking about the attacks: "This changes everything." I was confused about it. I didn't know what Islam made of it. Part of me thought they must be justified.
Nobody was offering me direction. I already knew about Hizb ut-Tahrir, so I talked to one of their guys at Leeds Grand Mosque who was in charge of the area. He took me back to his house where, I remember, we drank mint tea. He said America would use these events to colonise the Muslim world, to humiliate us, to attack Islam. I was convinced there would be war in Afghanistan. He brought me into the organisation within days. He was my cell leader and I rose through the ranks swiftly. By the end of my second year at university, I was looking after the whole area stretching from Leeds to Newcastle and Durham, and sat on the regional committee for the north of England. Our job was to liaise with cell leaders, to pressurise them to recruit more people. They were breathing down our necks. There was so much pressure on us to recruit.
After graduating I moved to Cambridge in September 2004 to start a PhD in history. I was living in a rented house on Milton Road and I had been in Cambridge only a matter of hours when the local rep of Hizb ut-Tahrir arrived at the house. He gave me a hand unpacking boxes and settling in. Once we'd done this it was a case of getting down to business. The guy was a friend. All of us in the party, as we called the organisation, knew each other well. Over a cup of tea he filled me in on the situation in my new town, regarding the dawah, the strategy. We went through a list of people identified as potential recruits. One of these was Bilal Abdulla.
Bilal struck me as very warm and affable. He was someone who knew about Islam. Even though he wore western clothes, he was very religious. His recitation of the Quran was very good. If he attended, he would always lead prayers.
Bilal had grown up in Baghdad. He told me how he hated Saddam Hussein, how even after the American invasion his extended family stayed there. All were of the same ideological persuasion. All believed in Wahhabi ideology. He didn't see himself as being radical: he saw himself as following Islam. He developed a vitriolic hatred for the Shias after one of his closest friends at university in Iraq was killed by a Shia militiaman. He would say they needed to be massacred. He called them kafirs, disbelievers who insulted the Prophet.
Bilal said he had come to Britain to better his life, but did speak about returning home. When I first met him he was preparing to take the medical conversion course that would have allowed him to work as a doctor here. In the meantime, he worked behind the till at the local Staples stationery store.
I remember one incident well. Bilal lived above a Bengali restaurant. The other guy in his flat used to sing and play guitar, diabolically out of tune. I went round one day to Bilal's and heard this guy singing and wailing. I said, "What's this?" Bilal called him a "waster" and boasted to me that a few days earlier he had brought the guy into his bedroom. He sat him down and told him he needed to pray. He told him: "If you ever play again I'm going to smash the guitar." He then put on a video of al-Zarqawi beheading one of the hostages in Iraq. "If you think I'm messing about, this is what we do. This is what our people do - we slaughter." Bilal laughed when he recounted the story. I laughed with him, although I remember thinking the word slaughter was a bit disproportionate.
Hard hearts for non-believers
Bilal didn't have a TV and kept his distance from people he considered were not true Muslims. He refused to frequent the local halal takeaway in Cambridge because the Turkish guys there didn't attend mosque. He used to say to me: "We should have soft hearts for the believers and hard hearts for the non-believers." He epitomised this. He was very humble and polite and had an endearing and distinctive belly laugh. He spent his time reading the Quran and looking at Arabic-language or jihadi websites. I remember during Ramadan that year, 2004, on the 27th and most holy night, we all went down to London to the Regent's Park Mosque. It happened that was the night the Americans launched the massive assault on Fallujah. Bilal spent the whole night on his prayer mat. His stamina was something to behold.
By the end we would link up once a week. Some of the time he would come round to my place. Mostly we met in the cultural centre, the Islamic Academy on Gilbert Road. It was within walking distance of where both Bilal and I lived. It had a prayer hall downstairs and three bedrooms upstairs. One of those rooms was rented by the Hizb guy and, because of its location and Islamic setting, this became the main focal point where we would socialise, meet and discuss things. You could say all our activities in Cambridge orbited around the Islamic Academy.
Bilal talked about the validity of jihad, about expelling American and British troops. He described jihad as the highest pinnacle of Islam. He worked to the same endgame that we were all working to. There was no difference between us at the time. He would laugh when we talked about a particular bomb attack in Iraq. We all rejoiced then. And yet even I didn't think that he would take action himself.
Like myself, Bilal didn't have any non-Muslim friends and the circle of Muslims he chose to socialise with was small and selective. But he certainly trusted and respected us. I think this was solely because he recognised that we shared the same ultimate vision as him for Iraq and the wider Muslim world. In that sense our views were virtually identical. We only differed over our choice of method.
And so it was through my involvement with Hizb ut-Tahrir and its ideology of extremist political Islam that I came to befriend Bilal, the would-be bomber. That's why I believe it's wrong to distinguish between "extremism" and "violent extremism" as the government has been doing in recent months. The two are inextricably intertwined. Without movements such as Hizb creating the moral imperatives to justify terror, people like Bilal wouldn't have the support of an ideological infrastructure cheering them on. And, I believe, it's a fallacy to suggest that the culpability of agitators and cheerleaders is any less than for those who actually carry out acts of terror.
I didn't complete my PhD, as I didn't get funding. In July 2005 I left Cambridge and moved back to Birmingham. That was a few days before 7/7. Bilal and I lost touch. I left Hizb ut- Tahrir and had never heard of him since - until last week.
Next week Shiraz Maher writes about why he left radical Islam behind him
Radical group faces ban
The Australian
Natalie O'Brien and Peter Wilson
July 07, 2007
ATTORNEY-General Philip Ruddock will ask security agencies to reinvestigate the radical Muslim group Hizb ut-Tahrir after revelations that the British men arrested over the foiled car bomb plot were closely linked to members of the group in London.
Mr Ruddock said yesterday he would pass on "any information that comes to my attention about organisations where it is suggested that consideration should be given to proscription" to Australian Federal Police commissioner Mick Keelty as well as relevant organisations.
The test of whether a group should be banned was "not embarked upon lightly", Mr Ruddock said. "It's one in which I must be satisfied, on advice, that the organisation is directly or indirectly engaged in preparing, planning or assisting, or fostering a terrorist act."
Mr Ruddock's comments came as Commissioner Keelty revealed that officers were searching through 31,000 documents in relation to the British terror attacks, and had spread their investigation to Western Australia.
Hizb ut-Tahrir, which claims to have about 200 Australian members, has been previously criticised by John Howard and twice investigated by ASIO.
Its radical agenda has prompted NSW Premier Morris Iemma to call for it to be proscribed.
Mr Ruddock said in the past that there had not been enough evidence to designate it as a terrorist organisation.
Four of the seven London suspects, including the two men who rammed a car into a terminal building at Glasgow Airport last Saturday, spent time working or studying in the university town of Cambridge, where some of them socialised and prayed with members of Hizb ut-Tahrir.
Bilal Abdulla, the 27-year-old passenger in the car, fellow doctor Mohammed Asha, 26, and his wife, Dana, worked together at Addenbrooke's Hospital in Cambridge in 2005.
Kafeel Ahmed, the driver of the car at the airport who is now in a Glasgow hospital close to death with major burns, studied as an engineer at Anglia Ruskin University in Cambridge at that time and is now believed to have made the group's failed bombs.
Dr Ahmed's brother Sabeel, who was arrested in Liverpool, visited him in Cambridge and met his friends there. The Ahmeds are cousins of Mohamed Haneef, who was seized at Brisbane airport on Monday night.
Hizb ut-Tahrir has been banned in Europe, China and Saudi Arabia but is active in Britain and Australia, advocating the establishment of an international caliphate, or Muslim government, to run countries with a majority Muslim population under sharia, Islamic law.
A spokesman for Hizb ut-Tahrir in Britain last night denied that those arrested over the London and Glasgow attacks had been members of the group.
But Shiraz Maher, a former Hizb ut-Tahir member, told the BBC's Newsnight program that the men seized at Glasgow airport shared Hizb ut-Tahrir's main ideals and actively associated with its members in Cambridge.
Other ex-members of Hizb ut-Tahrir have accused the group of inciting violence among its supporters, and of grooming them as terrorists.
One disaffected member in Britain, Ed Husain, has told The Weekend Australian that Hizb ut-Tahrir often deliberately withheld formal membership from some of its associates so it could deny that they were members if they were to get into trouble with the law.
British Opposition Leader David Cameron this week demanded that the Brown Government ban Hizb ut-Tahrir, saying it "was poisoning the minds of young people and has said that Jews should be killed wherever they are found".
Mr Maher said that when he was active in Hizb ut-Tahrir in Cambridge, he was a personal friend of both Abdulla and Kafeel Ahmed.
Hizb ut-Tahrir has been described as a "warm-up track" for terrorists, and a threat to Australia.
Research has found that the group takes advantage of Australian tolerance to launch propaganda attacks on the country and that its adherents are primed to take the next step to jihad, if called upon to do so.
The propaganda of the group encourages a level of religious hatred that could convince its followers to carry out terrorist acts, according to the Australian Strategic Policy Institute.
A paper released earlier this year by the think-tank's Anthony Bergin and Jacob Townsend said that although Hizb ut-Tahrir did not advocate the use of terror, it used the same radical terminology as al-Qa'ida.
The paper warned that the group's Australian operations needed to be closely monitored and could be a "warm-up track for violent radicals".
"Hizb ut-Tahrir advocates a revolutionary change to our social and political system," the paper said. "It encourages indirectly and sometimes more directly political violence by its inciting propaganda.
"It uses Australian tolerance to promote radical propaganda even against Australia itself."
The group held a conference in Sydney in late December and early January calling for all Muslims in Australia to work towards forming a pan-global Islamic state. The meeting featured controversial Indonesian cleric Ismail Yusanto as a speaker.
Additional reporting: Selina Mitchell, Sanna Trad
Natalie O'Brien and Peter Wilson
July 07, 2007
ATTORNEY-General Philip Ruddock will ask security agencies to reinvestigate the radical Muslim group Hizb ut-Tahrir after revelations that the British men arrested over the foiled car bomb plot were closely linked to members of the group in London.
Mr Ruddock said yesterday he would pass on "any information that comes to my attention about organisations where it is suggested that consideration should be given to proscription" to Australian Federal Police commissioner Mick Keelty as well as relevant organisations.
The test of whether a group should be banned was "not embarked upon lightly", Mr Ruddock said. "It's one in which I must be satisfied, on advice, that the organisation is directly or indirectly engaged in preparing, planning or assisting, or fostering a terrorist act."
Mr Ruddock's comments came as Commissioner Keelty revealed that officers were searching through 31,000 documents in relation to the British terror attacks, and had spread their investigation to Western Australia.
Hizb ut-Tahrir, which claims to have about 200 Australian members, has been previously criticised by John Howard and twice investigated by ASIO.
Its radical agenda has prompted NSW Premier Morris Iemma to call for it to be proscribed.
Mr Ruddock said in the past that there had not been enough evidence to designate it as a terrorist organisation.
Four of the seven London suspects, including the two men who rammed a car into a terminal building at Glasgow Airport last Saturday, spent time working or studying in the university town of Cambridge, where some of them socialised and prayed with members of Hizb ut-Tahrir.
Bilal Abdulla, the 27-year-old passenger in the car, fellow doctor Mohammed Asha, 26, and his wife, Dana, worked together at Addenbrooke's Hospital in Cambridge in 2005.
Kafeel Ahmed, the driver of the car at the airport who is now in a Glasgow hospital close to death with major burns, studied as an engineer at Anglia Ruskin University in Cambridge at that time and is now believed to have made the group's failed bombs.
Dr Ahmed's brother Sabeel, who was arrested in Liverpool, visited him in Cambridge and met his friends there. The Ahmeds are cousins of Mohamed Haneef, who was seized at Brisbane airport on Monday night.
Hizb ut-Tahrir has been banned in Europe, China and Saudi Arabia but is active in Britain and Australia, advocating the establishment of an international caliphate, or Muslim government, to run countries with a majority Muslim population under sharia, Islamic law.
A spokesman for Hizb ut-Tahrir in Britain last night denied that those arrested over the London and Glasgow attacks had been members of the group.
But Shiraz Maher, a former Hizb ut-Tahir member, told the BBC's Newsnight program that the men seized at Glasgow airport shared Hizb ut-Tahrir's main ideals and actively associated with its members in Cambridge.
Other ex-members of Hizb ut-Tahrir have accused the group of inciting violence among its supporters, and of grooming them as terrorists.
One disaffected member in Britain, Ed Husain, has told The Weekend Australian that Hizb ut-Tahrir often deliberately withheld formal membership from some of its associates so it could deny that they were members if they were to get into trouble with the law.
British Opposition Leader David Cameron this week demanded that the Brown Government ban Hizb ut-Tahrir, saying it "was poisoning the minds of young people and has said that Jews should be killed wherever they are found".
Mr Maher said that when he was active in Hizb ut-Tahrir in Cambridge, he was a personal friend of both Abdulla and Kafeel Ahmed.
Hizb ut-Tahrir has been described as a "warm-up track" for terrorists, and a threat to Australia.
Research has found that the group takes advantage of Australian tolerance to launch propaganda attacks on the country and that its adherents are primed to take the next step to jihad, if called upon to do so.
The propaganda of the group encourages a level of religious hatred that could convince its followers to carry out terrorist acts, according to the Australian Strategic Policy Institute.
A paper released earlier this year by the think-tank's Anthony Bergin and Jacob Townsend said that although Hizb ut-Tahrir did not advocate the use of terror, it used the same radical terminology as al-Qa'ida.
The paper warned that the group's Australian operations needed to be closely monitored and could be a "warm-up track for violent radicals".
"Hizb ut-Tahrir advocates a revolutionary change to our social and political system," the paper said. "It encourages indirectly and sometimes more directly political violence by its inciting propaganda.
"It uses Australian tolerance to promote radical propaganda even against Australia itself."
The group held a conference in Sydney in late December and early January calling for all Muslims in Australia to work towards forming a pan-global Islamic state. The meeting featured controversial Indonesian cleric Ismail Yusanto as a speaker.
Additional reporting: Selina Mitchell, Sanna Trad
Ed Husain - Chilling similarities
July 10, 2007 12:30 PM
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/ed_husain/2007/07/chilling_similarities.html
Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Fuhrer
One Nation, One State, One Caliph
Sound familiar? Hizb ut-Tahrir's slogans, reiterated by members during the 1990s - and continued today throughout the Middle East - bear a chilling resemblance to that of the German Nazi party. The similarities don't end there: ideological totalitarianism, expansionist foreign policy, the designation of women to the private realm, the rejection of democracy, concepts of relationship between party and state, notions of the master race, education system as indoctrination and anti-semitism are all features they both share.
The Nazis realised their aims, while Islamists from Hizb ut-Tahrir remain desperate to bring about their state. Yes, I call them Islamists and I make no apology for doing so. Islamism is not Islam, as Zionism is not Judaism. Hizb ut-Tahrir and others in Britain may wish to continue to blur the lines between Islam and Islamism, but their Jordan-based global leader, Ata bin Khalil Abu Rishta, freely deploys "Islamism" and "Islamists" in his Arabic writings. The Arab press is full of references to this political ideology: so why can we not use Islamism to refer to them in Britain? We should and we must if we are to separate ordinary Muslims from political ideologues.
Abu Rishta's candour does not stop there. He relishes the use of language such as "the cursed Jews" and "occupying kuffar". Under the threat of a ban, Hizb ut-Tahrir in Britain may wish to claim that they are not anti-semitic. That the leaflets which contain calls for killing Jews are for Palestine (so that makes it acceptable?), but I ask why Hizb ut-Tahrir gave me and hundreds of other young British Muslims leaflets in throughout the 1990s to distribute in Britain which were entitled: "The only meeting place between a Muslim and a Jew is in the battlefield."
Richard Littlejohn's excellent television documentary, in most parts, last night exposed the results of that discourse: a British Jewish community under siege and living in fear, compelled to hire security guards to attend synagogues; al-Muhajiroun Islamists at demonstrations openly speaking against Jews.
In my secret cell meetings, the weekly halaqah, Hizb ut-Tahrir taught us to deny the Holocaust: it was a Zionist conspiracy to help create the "bastard state of Israel". In Ilford, as well as other parts of London, the Hizb organised activists to attend Jewish public meetings and intimidate Jews. On university campuses across Britain, Hizb ut-Tahrir deliberately sought confrontation with Jewish and Israeli student societies.
The well-rehearsed media representatives of Hizb ut-Tahrir in Britain today may claim that they are not anti-Jewish, but let's hear that from the rank-and-file activists of the Hizb. Why is there a gag on ordinary shabab, party activists, from speaking to the media or other public bodies? More importantly, will their leader Abu Rishta from Jordan stop attacking Jews? Will he stop promising annihilation of the state of Israel? Unless Hizb ut-Tahrir in Britain apologise for their horrendous conduct in the 1990s, their creation of an evil al-Muhajiroun, and publicly distance themselves from their current Arab leadership, then we must consider Hizb ut-Tahrir a subversive fifth column in our midst, awaiting instructions from a coming caliph before they turn to mass suicide bombings.
Hizb ut-Tahrir are not a "non-violent political party". The discourse of peaceful political change comes from great people like Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King, and Aung Sun Su Chi. Violence is not an option in their methods. The Hizb constitution describes France, Britain, US and Russia as "potentially belligerent states" and a "state of war" would be assumed in the case of Israel on day one of their Islamist State.
Remember, the only difference between Islamists from Hizb ut-Tahrir and jihadists is that the former are waiting for their state and caliph before they commence jihad, while the latter believes the time for jihad is now, vigilante action, without state-driven leadership. We ignore Hizb ut-Tahrir at our peril.
We can wait for their state to come about and then confront them as we did the Nazis, at a very late stage and at a high human cost, or we can stop appeasing Hizb ut-Tahrir and its offshoots and demand: either change, or perish. We cannot continue to turn a blind eye.
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/ed_husain/2007/07/chilling_similarities.html
Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Fuhrer
One Nation, One State, One Caliph
Sound familiar? Hizb ut-Tahrir's slogans, reiterated by members during the 1990s - and continued today throughout the Middle East - bear a chilling resemblance to that of the German Nazi party. The similarities don't end there: ideological totalitarianism, expansionist foreign policy, the designation of women to the private realm, the rejection of democracy, concepts of relationship between party and state, notions of the master race, education system as indoctrination and anti-semitism are all features they both share.
The Nazis realised their aims, while Islamists from Hizb ut-Tahrir remain desperate to bring about their state. Yes, I call them Islamists and I make no apology for doing so. Islamism is not Islam, as Zionism is not Judaism. Hizb ut-Tahrir and others in Britain may wish to continue to blur the lines between Islam and Islamism, but their Jordan-based global leader, Ata bin Khalil Abu Rishta, freely deploys "Islamism" and "Islamists" in his Arabic writings. The Arab press is full of references to this political ideology: so why can we not use Islamism to refer to them in Britain? We should and we must if we are to separate ordinary Muslims from political ideologues.
Abu Rishta's candour does not stop there. He relishes the use of language such as "the cursed Jews" and "occupying kuffar". Under the threat of a ban, Hizb ut-Tahrir in Britain may wish to claim that they are not anti-semitic. That the leaflets which contain calls for killing Jews are for Palestine (so that makes it acceptable?), but I ask why Hizb ut-Tahrir gave me and hundreds of other young British Muslims leaflets in throughout the 1990s to distribute in Britain which were entitled: "The only meeting place between a Muslim and a Jew is in the battlefield."
Richard Littlejohn's excellent television documentary, in most parts, last night exposed the results of that discourse: a British Jewish community under siege and living in fear, compelled to hire security guards to attend synagogues; al-Muhajiroun Islamists at demonstrations openly speaking against Jews.
In my secret cell meetings, the weekly halaqah, Hizb ut-Tahrir taught us to deny the Holocaust: it was a Zionist conspiracy to help create the "bastard state of Israel". In Ilford, as well as other parts of London, the Hizb organised activists to attend Jewish public meetings and intimidate Jews. On university campuses across Britain, Hizb ut-Tahrir deliberately sought confrontation with Jewish and Israeli student societies.
The well-rehearsed media representatives of Hizb ut-Tahrir in Britain today may claim that they are not anti-Jewish, but let's hear that from the rank-and-file activists of the Hizb. Why is there a gag on ordinary shabab, party activists, from speaking to the media or other public bodies? More importantly, will their leader Abu Rishta from Jordan stop attacking Jews? Will he stop promising annihilation of the state of Israel? Unless Hizb ut-Tahrir in Britain apologise for their horrendous conduct in the 1990s, their creation of an evil al-Muhajiroun, and publicly distance themselves from their current Arab leadership, then we must consider Hizb ut-Tahrir a subversive fifth column in our midst, awaiting instructions from a coming caliph before they turn to mass suicide bombings.
Hizb ut-Tahrir are not a "non-violent political party". The discourse of peaceful political change comes from great people like Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King, and Aung Sun Su Chi. Violence is not an option in their methods. The Hizb constitution describes France, Britain, US and Russia as "potentially belligerent states" and a "state of war" would be assumed in the case of Israel on day one of their Islamist State.
Remember, the only difference between Islamists from Hizb ut-Tahrir and jihadists is that the former are waiting for their state and caliph before they commence jihad, while the latter believes the time for jihad is now, vigilante action, without state-driven leadership. We ignore Hizb ut-Tahrir at our peril.
We can wait for their state to come about and then confront them as we did the Nazis, at a very late stage and at a high human cost, or we can stop appeasing Hizb ut-Tahrir and its offshoots and demand: either change, or perish. We cannot continue to turn a blind eye.
Bin Laden's Army
Bin Laden's Army
A one-time jihadi looks at why so many radical Islamic groups include doctors and engineers—and how their involvement threatens the religion itself.
By Ed Husain
Newsweek
Updated: 12:27 p.m. ET July 10, 2007
July 10, 2007 - Britain is a nation in shock. Two years ago, homegrown Islamist terrorists carried out suicide bombings on London's mass transit network, killing 52 people, and now, foreign medical workers working in British hospitals have been arrested in connection with the London and Glasgow plots aimed at inflicting death and mayhem on innocent people. Unlike most Brits, I am not surprised that most of the terror suspects are doctors.
Story continues below ↓
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
advertisement
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a teenager, I attended extremist Islamist meetings with tens of medical students at the Royal London Hospital. Islamists in almost every British medical school held similar meetings. At Britain's most prestigious engineering colleges, including Brunel University and Imperial College, fanatical Islamists with a worldview of separatism and violence recruited without impediment—yesterday's Islamists are today's terrorists. Right from the very top of the terrorist hierarchy, Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri downward(Bin Laden's Egyptian deputy); the soldiers of extremism have all traveled a similar path: past membership of the Muslim Brotherhood, a secular education, rejection of mainstream Muslims, a hatred for the West and ultimately taking up arms against peoples and governments.
The rank-and-file of Islamist organizations, the precursors to terrorism, are filled with activists with a technical education. The instructor of my first secret cell in Hizb ut-Tahrir in London was a town planner; my second cell-leader was a medical doctor. Even today, medical doctors manage the British arm of Hizb ut-Tahrir-a global Islamist political party working for the re-establishment of an Islamic caliphate: doctors Nasim Ghani, Abdul Wahid, and Nazreen Nawaz. Globally, the central leader of Hizb ut-Tahrir is a Jordan-based engineer, Abu Rishta. The story of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood is similar. When Islamists graduate to jihadist terrorism the profile is equally chilling.
RELATED CONTENT
Q&A: Husain on His Rejection of Radical Islam
Osama bin Laden ran a construction company in Saudi Arabia and later, the Sudan. His deputy, Dr Ayman al-Zawahiri, is a Cairo-trained paediatrician. The mastermind behind the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, is a mechanical engineer who studied at North Carolina University. The lead hijacker, Mohammed Atta, was a student of urban planning in Hamburg.
Without exception, Islamist movements attract urbanites with a secular,
technical educational background. Medical and engineering colleges across the world only accept the most intelligent students, the highest of academic achievers. In the Arab world, the parental and social pressures on young people to pursue medical and engineering careers only compounds the misery of creative young minds, forced to study subjects under duress. Thousands of undergraduates seek greater meaning in life, an experience beyond the mundane necessities of medicine, and a purpose that occupies their free time. Islamist networks neatly slot into this void.
As a teacher at the University of Damascus in Syria, I listened to the frustrations of my students who yearned to study subjects that interested them: literature, philosophy, theology, history, or art. But becoming a doctor was the only way to please their parents, attain high social status and in many cases escape the Arab world and live in the West. Sadly, often that "escape" radicalizes young Arabs.
RELATED CONTENT
Q&A: Husain on His Rejection of Radical Islam
When in Britain, for example, they become misfits among English cultural exclusivity and develop their own socio-religious networks. Suddenly there appears a need to display their being excessively Muslim: beards grow longer, trousers shorter, music condemned, confrontational politics advocated and the company of women shirked. The terror suspects arrested in Britain all manifested these traits. This turning to Wahhabi Islam, an austere form of Saudi religiosity, combined with political Islamism, has proven to be a lethal cocktail. What we call 'Al Qaeda' is only one manifestation of that mindset.
In the past, Muslims did not pronounce on religious matters without the endorsement of trained theologians, the ulama. The ulama were the bastion of religious knowledge that operated in an informal yet consensual method of intellectual plurality, interpretational elasticity, and maintained a centuries-old chain of transmission of sacred knowledge, known as the ijaza. Before modern-day terrorists turned to destroying buildings and killing innocents, they violently rejected this millennium-old Muslim tradition of learning. The founder of the Wahhabi school killed scholars who disagreed with him in Najd, and as late as the 1980s Islamists assassinated leading ulama in Egypt and Syria. Free from the constraints of traditional learning and the learned, Wahhabi-Islamists developed their theology of terror: those who disagree must be killed. What started as intolerance, ended up as justification for mass killing.
Islamists and jihadist networks lack the support of the ulama. Just as their bombing techniques are amateur and desperate, often destined to failure, so is their reading of scripture and warped justification for suicide bombings and killing humans. They approach the Qu'ran as though it were an engineering manual, with instructions for right and wrong conduct. Literalism and ignorance dominates their readings. This flaw is deepened by the haughty mindset of the engineer or medical doctor that academic achievement, a place at a university, now qualifies him to approach ancient scripture without the guidance of the ulama. To the Islamist engineer, centuries of context, nuance, history, grammar, lexicon, scholarship, and tradition are all lost and redundant. The do-it-yourself (DIY) attitude to religious texts, fostered by doctors and engineers of secular colleges, produces desperate, angry suicide bombers devoid of spiritual guidance.
The DIY attitude to Islamic sources not only produces terrorism, it has the potential to destroy 1,400 years of cumulative knowledge, the bedrock of civilizations from Spain to China. The modern Islamism of doctors and engineers threatens Islam and Muslims before it unleashes itself in the West in the form of suicide and car bombs. The almost daily carnage in Baghdad, Muslim killing Muslim, is the outcome of the Wahhabi theology of terror that considers Shi'a Muslims as infidels.
A one-time jihadi looks at why so many radical Islamic groups include doctors and engineers—and how their involvement threatens the religion itself.
By Ed Husain
Newsweek
Updated: 12:27 p.m. ET July 10, 2007
July 10, 2007 - Britain is a nation in shock. Two years ago, homegrown Islamist terrorists carried out suicide bombings on London's mass transit network, killing 52 people, and now, foreign medical workers working in British hospitals have been arrested in connection with the London and Glasgow plots aimed at inflicting death and mayhem on innocent people. Unlike most Brits, I am not surprised that most of the terror suspects are doctors.
Story continues below ↓
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
advertisement
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a teenager, I attended extremist Islamist meetings with tens of medical students at the Royal London Hospital. Islamists in almost every British medical school held similar meetings. At Britain's most prestigious engineering colleges, including Brunel University and Imperial College, fanatical Islamists with a worldview of separatism and violence recruited without impediment—yesterday's Islamists are today's terrorists. Right from the very top of the terrorist hierarchy, Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri downward(Bin Laden's Egyptian deputy); the soldiers of extremism have all traveled a similar path: past membership of the Muslim Brotherhood, a secular education, rejection of mainstream Muslims, a hatred for the West and ultimately taking up arms against peoples and governments.
The rank-and-file of Islamist organizations, the precursors to terrorism, are filled with activists with a technical education. The instructor of my first secret cell in Hizb ut-Tahrir in London was a town planner; my second cell-leader was a medical doctor. Even today, medical doctors manage the British arm of Hizb ut-Tahrir-a global Islamist political party working for the re-establishment of an Islamic caliphate: doctors Nasim Ghani, Abdul Wahid, and Nazreen Nawaz. Globally, the central leader of Hizb ut-Tahrir is a Jordan-based engineer, Abu Rishta. The story of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood is similar. When Islamists graduate to jihadist terrorism the profile is equally chilling.
RELATED CONTENT
Q&A: Husain on His Rejection of Radical Islam
Osama bin Laden ran a construction company in Saudi Arabia and later, the Sudan. His deputy, Dr Ayman al-Zawahiri, is a Cairo-trained paediatrician. The mastermind behind the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, is a mechanical engineer who studied at North Carolina University. The lead hijacker, Mohammed Atta, was a student of urban planning in Hamburg.
Without exception, Islamist movements attract urbanites with a secular,
technical educational background. Medical and engineering colleges across the world only accept the most intelligent students, the highest of academic achievers. In the Arab world, the parental and social pressures on young people to pursue medical and engineering careers only compounds the misery of creative young minds, forced to study subjects under duress. Thousands of undergraduates seek greater meaning in life, an experience beyond the mundane necessities of medicine, and a purpose that occupies their free time. Islamist networks neatly slot into this void.
As a teacher at the University of Damascus in Syria, I listened to the frustrations of my students who yearned to study subjects that interested them: literature, philosophy, theology, history, or art. But becoming a doctor was the only way to please their parents, attain high social status and in many cases escape the Arab world and live in the West. Sadly, often that "escape" radicalizes young Arabs.
RELATED CONTENT
Q&A: Husain on His Rejection of Radical Islam
When in Britain, for example, they become misfits among English cultural exclusivity and develop their own socio-religious networks. Suddenly there appears a need to display their being excessively Muslim: beards grow longer, trousers shorter, music condemned, confrontational politics advocated and the company of women shirked. The terror suspects arrested in Britain all manifested these traits. This turning to Wahhabi Islam, an austere form of Saudi religiosity, combined with political Islamism, has proven to be a lethal cocktail. What we call 'Al Qaeda' is only one manifestation of that mindset.
In the past, Muslims did not pronounce on religious matters without the endorsement of trained theologians, the ulama. The ulama were the bastion of religious knowledge that operated in an informal yet consensual method of intellectual plurality, interpretational elasticity, and maintained a centuries-old chain of transmission of sacred knowledge, known as the ijaza. Before modern-day terrorists turned to destroying buildings and killing innocents, they violently rejected this millennium-old Muslim tradition of learning. The founder of the Wahhabi school killed scholars who disagreed with him in Najd, and as late as the 1980s Islamists assassinated leading ulama in Egypt and Syria. Free from the constraints of traditional learning and the learned, Wahhabi-Islamists developed their theology of terror: those who disagree must be killed. What started as intolerance, ended up as justification for mass killing.
Islamists and jihadist networks lack the support of the ulama. Just as their bombing techniques are amateur and desperate, often destined to failure, so is their reading of scripture and warped justification for suicide bombings and killing humans. They approach the Qu'ran as though it were an engineering manual, with instructions for right and wrong conduct. Literalism and ignorance dominates their readings. This flaw is deepened by the haughty mindset of the engineer or medical doctor that academic achievement, a place at a university, now qualifies him to approach ancient scripture without the guidance of the ulama. To the Islamist engineer, centuries of context, nuance, history, grammar, lexicon, scholarship, and tradition are all lost and redundant. The do-it-yourself (DIY) attitude to religious texts, fostered by doctors and engineers of secular colleges, produces desperate, angry suicide bombers devoid of spiritual guidance.
The DIY attitude to Islamic sources not only produces terrorism, it has the potential to destroy 1,400 years of cumulative knowledge, the bedrock of civilizations from Spain to China. The modern Islamism of doctors and engineers threatens Islam and Muslims before it unleashes itself in the West in the form of suicide and car bombs. The almost daily carnage in Baghdad, Muslim killing Muslim, is the outcome of the Wahhabi theology of terror that considers Shi'a Muslims as infidels.
Telegraph: Hizb ut-Tahrir wants a Caliphate
Wednesday, 11 July 2007
Daily Telegraph (Australia)
By Wassim Doureihi
THE debate over Hizb ut-Tahrir has proven to be nothing more than a poorly scripted melodrama.
Hizb ut-Tahrir is a global Islamic political party working to re-establish the Islamic Caliphate within the Muslim world.
Since its inception in 1953, Hizb ut-Tahrir has been subject to the severest of repression by tyrants in the Muslim world. Our members have been consistently persecuted, imprisoned, tortured and murdered.
Despite operating under the most horrendous conditions, Hizb ut-Tahrir continues to oppose all forms of tyranny and dictatorship exclusively through intellectual and political means and in fact considers violence a violation of Islamic law.
Hizb ut-Tahrir's courageous stance in mobilising public opinion in the Muslim world has earned it the universal support of Muslim masses and caused widespread consternation among its opponents.
Hizb ut-Tahrir is now being targeted in the West for three primary reasons: The party continues to courageously expose the crimes of Western governments to a global audience; it unrelentingly challenges the West's neo-liberal interventionist policies in the Muslim world and it works to present Islam as an ideological alternative to Western secular capitalism as a model of governance in the Muslim world.
Critics of Hizb ut-Tahrir are desperately seeking to suppress debate. Our opposition to the illegal state of Israel, for instance, is howled down as anti-Semitism, our displeasure at the West's foreign policy labelled subversion, our challenge to Western-backed dictators characterised as rebellion, our work to generate political awareness described as radicalisation and our call for the affairs of the Muslim world to be governed by Islam branded as extremism.
Governments have even lent sympathetic ears to opportunistic individuals parroting the established government narrative by seeking to draw spurious and unfounded links between Hizb ut-Tahrir and recent events in London and Glasgow.
In the last century, Western governments conducted a brutal and unashamedly interventionist policy in the Muslim world which wreaked havoc on local populations through military occupation, economic exploitation and political repression.
But despite the concerted effort to demonise and silence Hizb ut-Tahrir, we will continue a serious and open debate on the way forward for the Muslim world.
* Wassim Doureihi is the media representative of Hizb ut-Tahrir Australia
Comments (2)
Daily Telegraph (Australia)
By Wassim Doureihi
THE debate over Hizb ut-Tahrir has proven to be nothing more than a poorly scripted melodrama.
Hizb ut-Tahrir is a global Islamic political party working to re-establish the Islamic Caliphate within the Muslim world.
Since its inception in 1953, Hizb ut-Tahrir has been subject to the severest of repression by tyrants in the Muslim world. Our members have been consistently persecuted, imprisoned, tortured and murdered.
Despite operating under the most horrendous conditions, Hizb ut-Tahrir continues to oppose all forms of tyranny and dictatorship exclusively through intellectual and political means and in fact considers violence a violation of Islamic law.
Hizb ut-Tahrir's courageous stance in mobilising public opinion in the Muslim world has earned it the universal support of Muslim masses and caused widespread consternation among its opponents.
Hizb ut-Tahrir is now being targeted in the West for three primary reasons: The party continues to courageously expose the crimes of Western governments to a global audience; it unrelentingly challenges the West's neo-liberal interventionist policies in the Muslim world and it works to present Islam as an ideological alternative to Western secular capitalism as a model of governance in the Muslim world.
Critics of Hizb ut-Tahrir are desperately seeking to suppress debate. Our opposition to the illegal state of Israel, for instance, is howled down as anti-Semitism, our displeasure at the West's foreign policy labelled subversion, our challenge to Western-backed dictators characterised as rebellion, our work to generate political awareness described as radicalisation and our call for the affairs of the Muslim world to be governed by Islam branded as extremism.
Governments have even lent sympathetic ears to opportunistic individuals parroting the established government narrative by seeking to draw spurious and unfounded links between Hizb ut-Tahrir and recent events in London and Glasgow.
In the last century, Western governments conducted a brutal and unashamedly interventionist policy in the Muslim world which wreaked havoc on local populations through military occupation, economic exploitation and political repression.
But despite the concerted effort to demonise and silence Hizb ut-Tahrir, we will continue a serious and open debate on the way forward for the Muslim world.
* Wassim Doureihi is the media representative of Hizb ut-Tahrir Australia
Comments (2)
RFE: Central Asia: Hizb ut-Tahrir Gains Support From Women
While female participation in political life is generally low in Central Asia, a glimpse into Hizb ut-Tahrir (Party of Liberation) activities suggests the group might enjoy more support among women than registered parties get.
A court in the Uzbek capital Tashkent gave suspended sentences to seven women on July 9 for their alleged membership in the banned religious group Hizb ut-Tahrir. Another Uzbek woman, found guilty of similar charges, was sentenced to three years in prison.
Women Arrested
And in neighboring Tajikistan, Mutabar Bobojonova -- a woman who lives in the northern village Isfisor -- was arrested in June on suspicion of supporting the banned Hizb ut-Tahrir. "I think you cannot change a person by sentencing him to lengthy prison terms. Change should come from inside the person."
Experts in Central Asia point out that Hizb ut-Tahrir has been trying to recruit more women in the region and that compared to other political parties -- those both officially registered and underground groups -- it has been successful on that front.
Hizb ut-Tahrir is officially banned in all Central Asian countries, though the U.S. State Department does not consider it a terrorist organization.
Top political leaders and senior officials in law-enforcement agencies in Central Asia -- especially in Uzbekistan -- have severely criticized the group, branding it a terrorist organization that threatens the stability of the whole region.
Hundreds of alleged supporters of the group have reportedly been arrested, tortured, and sentenced to lengthy prison terms in Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, according to Amnesty International, the human rights watchdog.
Not Suspicious
Sanya Sagnaeva is a senior analyst at the Regional Office of the International Crisis Group in Osh, Kyrgyzstan.
She says that since it is deemed an illegal group it is easier for Hizb ut-Tahrir to continue with the help of female supporters because the authorities do not usually suspect women of being involved in political campaigns.
"Women's interest in this party might be linked to the fact that the party itself puts emphasis on working with women, and that is because -- according to Central Asian traditions -- there is a lower possibility of women being prosecuted [by the state]," she said.
There are no official statistics on the exact number of members in the underground group living in Central Asia.
Experts put the number of Hizb ut-Tahrir supporters in the region at up to 15,000. However, the group itself claims that it has hundreds of thousand of members and supporters, including many women.
The group says its campaign is entirely peaceful.
Islamic Caliphate
Law-enforcement agencies in Central Asia say they usually confiscate Hizb ut-Tahrir's booklets and other literature, which usually call on people to overthrow their government and create an Islamic caliphate in Central Asia.
Most of the women imprisoned for alleged Hizb ut-Tahrir membership were found guilty of distributing the leaflets and trying to recruit more members.
Ikbal Mirsaidov is an expert at the Presidential Center for International Strategic Studies in the Kyrgyz capital Bishkek. He says that with thousands of people being arrested and imprisoned for alleged membership in Hizb ut-Tahrir over the past decade, it is inevitable that the group would find support among women.
That is because, Mirsaidov says, most of the female supporters of Hizb ut-Tahrir are family members of those who have been imprisoned by authorities.
"Most of these women who have now become politically active have seen their husbands, brothers, or fathers being prosecuted for Hizb ut-Tahrir membership," she said. "This is why they are reacting to their family member's imprisonment by law-enforcement authorities."
Dilbar Samadova is the regional leader of the Social-Democrat Party based in Tajikistan's northern Sughd region. She says that while government authorities claim that there are thousands of followers of Hizb ut-Tahrir operating in the country, officially registered political parties are having difficulty gaining support among the population.
Samadova says Tajiks, especially women, are becoming more indifferent to politics altogether and mistrust both the government and the opposition.
Alone And Poor
Samadova says she suspects the Hizb ut-Tahrir is taking advantage of widespread poverty and the fact that hundreds of thousands of men have left for seasonal work in Russia, leaving their wives as the head of the household and their families during their husbands' absence.
According to Samadova, Hizb ut-Tahrir -- which reportedly gets financial support from some foreign countries -- might provide money to the women in order to win their support.
"Women carry most of the burden of their family's everyday lives," she said. "The women's social and economic situation is appalling."
An Uzbek woman convicted of being a member of Hizb ut-Tahrir, who did not want to give her name, said she was released from a Tajik prison under the presidential amnesty in June. She said she had been sentenced to five years in prison and lived among "convicted criminals." But despite this experience, she said her time in prison she did not change her beliefs.
"I think you cannot change a person by sentencing him to lengthy prison terms," she said. "Change should come from inside the person."
Banned In Central Asia
According to experts, imprisoned Hizb ut-Tahrir members have been using prisons as a place to spread their beliefs and attract new supporters.
Officially recognizing Hizb ut-Tahrir and allowing it to participate in elections would spare many people from being imprisoned and keep the wives and daughters of jailed men from turning against the authorities.
But it seems unlikely that any governments in Central Asia would be willing to officially recognize Hizb ut-Tahrir anytime soon.
In fact, the office of the Dushanbe city prosecutor suggested last week to include Hizb ut-Tahrir on the official list of terrorist groups.
The Osh-based analyst Sagnaeva says Hizb ut-Tahrir will be around for many more years, operating in Central Asia secretly and attracting support from both men and women.
(Soljida Djakhfarova, the director of RFE/RL's Uzbek Service, contributed to this report.)
A court in the Uzbek capital Tashkent gave suspended sentences to seven women on July 9 for their alleged membership in the banned religious group Hizb ut-Tahrir. Another Uzbek woman, found guilty of similar charges, was sentenced to three years in prison.
Women Arrested
And in neighboring Tajikistan, Mutabar Bobojonova -- a woman who lives in the northern village Isfisor -- was arrested in June on suspicion of supporting the banned Hizb ut-Tahrir. "I think you cannot change a person by sentencing him to lengthy prison terms. Change should come from inside the person."
Experts in Central Asia point out that Hizb ut-Tahrir has been trying to recruit more women in the region and that compared to other political parties -- those both officially registered and underground groups -- it has been successful on that front.
Hizb ut-Tahrir is officially banned in all Central Asian countries, though the U.S. State Department does not consider it a terrorist organization.
Top political leaders and senior officials in law-enforcement agencies in Central Asia -- especially in Uzbekistan -- have severely criticized the group, branding it a terrorist organization that threatens the stability of the whole region.
Hundreds of alleged supporters of the group have reportedly been arrested, tortured, and sentenced to lengthy prison terms in Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, according to Amnesty International, the human rights watchdog.
Not Suspicious
Sanya Sagnaeva is a senior analyst at the Regional Office of the International Crisis Group in Osh, Kyrgyzstan.
She says that since it is deemed an illegal group it is easier for Hizb ut-Tahrir to continue with the help of female supporters because the authorities do not usually suspect women of being involved in political campaigns.
"Women's interest in this party might be linked to the fact that the party itself puts emphasis on working with women, and that is because -- according to Central Asian traditions -- there is a lower possibility of women being prosecuted [by the state]," she said.
There are no official statistics on the exact number of members in the underground group living in Central Asia.
Experts put the number of Hizb ut-Tahrir supporters in the region at up to 15,000. However, the group itself claims that it has hundreds of thousand of members and supporters, including many women.
The group says its campaign is entirely peaceful.
Islamic Caliphate
Law-enforcement agencies in Central Asia say they usually confiscate Hizb ut-Tahrir's booklets and other literature, which usually call on people to overthrow their government and create an Islamic caliphate in Central Asia.
Most of the women imprisoned for alleged Hizb ut-Tahrir membership were found guilty of distributing the leaflets and trying to recruit more members.
Ikbal Mirsaidov is an expert at the Presidential Center for International Strategic Studies in the Kyrgyz capital Bishkek. He says that with thousands of people being arrested and imprisoned for alleged membership in Hizb ut-Tahrir over the past decade, it is inevitable that the group would find support among women.
That is because, Mirsaidov says, most of the female supporters of Hizb ut-Tahrir are family members of those who have been imprisoned by authorities.
"Most of these women who have now become politically active have seen their husbands, brothers, or fathers being prosecuted for Hizb ut-Tahrir membership," she said. "This is why they are reacting to their family member's imprisonment by law-enforcement authorities."
Dilbar Samadova is the regional leader of the Social-Democrat Party based in Tajikistan's northern Sughd region. She says that while government authorities claim that there are thousands of followers of Hizb ut-Tahrir operating in the country, officially registered political parties are having difficulty gaining support among the population.
Samadova says Tajiks, especially women, are becoming more indifferent to politics altogether and mistrust both the government and the opposition.
Alone And Poor
Samadova says she suspects the Hizb ut-Tahrir is taking advantage of widespread poverty and the fact that hundreds of thousands of men have left for seasonal work in Russia, leaving their wives as the head of the household and their families during their husbands' absence.
According to Samadova, Hizb ut-Tahrir -- which reportedly gets financial support from some foreign countries -- might provide money to the women in order to win their support.
"Women carry most of the burden of their family's everyday lives," she said. "The women's social and economic situation is appalling."
An Uzbek woman convicted of being a member of Hizb ut-Tahrir, who did not want to give her name, said she was released from a Tajik prison under the presidential amnesty in June. She said she had been sentenced to five years in prison and lived among "convicted criminals." But despite this experience, she said her time in prison she did not change her beliefs.
"I think you cannot change a person by sentencing him to lengthy prison terms," she said. "Change should come from inside the person."
Banned In Central Asia
According to experts, imprisoned Hizb ut-Tahrir members have been using prisons as a place to spread their beliefs and attract new supporters.
Officially recognizing Hizb ut-Tahrir and allowing it to participate in elections would spare many people from being imprisoned and keep the wives and daughters of jailed men from turning against the authorities.
But it seems unlikely that any governments in Central Asia would be willing to officially recognize Hizb ut-Tahrir anytime soon.
In fact, the office of the Dushanbe city prosecutor suggested last week to include Hizb ut-Tahrir on the official list of terrorist groups.
The Osh-based analyst Sagnaeva says Hizb ut-Tahrir will be around for many more years, operating in Central Asia secretly and attracting support from both men and women.
(Soljida Djakhfarova, the director of RFE/RL's Uzbek Service, contributed to this report.)
Tuesday 10 July 2007
Sunday 8 July 2007
The need to ban extremist group Hizb-ut-Tahrir
David Cameron forced Gordon Brown onto the defensive during their first Prime Minister's Question Time confrontation in the Commons, when he asked why extremist group Hizb-ut-Tahrir has not been banned by the Government.
Although the Government agreed two years ago that a ban should be imposed, the new Prime Minister found himself on the back foot when the Conservative Leader demanded to know why that and not happened.
And Mr Brown surprised and dismayed some of his own MPs when he tried to hide behind the excuse that he has only been in his new job for five days.
During exchanges which concentrated on the security crisis facing the country in the wake of the latest bomb plot outrages, Mr Cameron urged the Government to speed up the review of the use of phone tap evidence in terrorist related court cases, then declared: "We need to act to address groups which are seeking to radicalise young people.
"Almost two years ago the Government said the extremist group Hizb-ut-Tahrir should be banned. We think it should be banned. Why has that not happened?"
Initially, Mr Brown sought to sidestep the question by announcing that his new Security Minister Lord West would review NHS recruitment following news that several of the weekend bomb plot suspects are doctors employed by the service.
But when Mr Cameron stepped up the pressure and demanded to know when Hizb-ut-Tahrir would be banned, "given that it is poisoning the minds of young people and has said that Jews should be killed wherever they are found", Mr Brown admitted that a prohibition order could have been imposed under prevention of terrorism legislation, but had not been. "We will look at this issue; but we need the evidence. We need to look at the details. We should approach this in a sustained and calm way without jumping to conclusions," he said.
Mr Cameron responded: "Two years have elapsed since the Government said there should be a ban. People simply won't understand why an organisation urging people to kill all Jews hasn't been banned. As well as preventing radicalisation and stopping future dangers, we need to protect ourselves from present dangers."
Although the Government agreed two years ago that a ban should be imposed, the new Prime Minister found himself on the back foot when the Conservative Leader demanded to know why that and not happened.
And Mr Brown surprised and dismayed some of his own MPs when he tried to hide behind the excuse that he has only been in his new job for five days.
During exchanges which concentrated on the security crisis facing the country in the wake of the latest bomb plot outrages, Mr Cameron urged the Government to speed up the review of the use of phone tap evidence in terrorist related court cases, then declared: "We need to act to address groups which are seeking to radicalise young people.
"Almost two years ago the Government said the extremist group Hizb-ut-Tahrir should be banned. We think it should be banned. Why has that not happened?"
Initially, Mr Brown sought to sidestep the question by announcing that his new Security Minister Lord West would review NHS recruitment following news that several of the weekend bomb plot suspects are doctors employed by the service.
But when Mr Cameron stepped up the pressure and demanded to know when Hizb-ut-Tahrir would be banned, "given that it is poisoning the minds of young people and has said that Jews should be killed wherever they are found", Mr Brown admitted that a prohibition order could have been imposed under prevention of terrorism legislation, but had not been. "We will look at this issue; but we need the evidence. We need to look at the details. We should approach this in a sustained and calm way without jumping to conclusions," he said.
Mr Cameron responded: "Two years have elapsed since the Government said there should be a ban. People simply won't understand why an organisation urging people to kill all Jews hasn't been banned. As well as preventing radicalisation and stopping future dangers, we need to protect ourselves from present dangers."
Ruddock investigates Hizb ut Tahrir
Australian Broadcasting Corporation
Broadcast: 06/07/2007
Reporter: John Stewart
The Australian Attorney-General is again investigating the Islamist group Hizb ut Tahrir after members of the group have allegedly been associated with one of the men arrested over the failed London bombing.
Transcript
VIRGINIA TRIOLI: Australia's Attorney-General is investigating whether Islamist group Hizb ut Tahrir should be banned in Australia.
Members of Hizb ut Tahrir are alleged to be associated with one of the men arrested over the failed London bombing.
Last night on Lateline, a British defector from the group warned Australian members of Hizb ut Tahrir are Muslim extremists and take direction from London.
John Stewart reports.
JOHN STEWART: Two years ago, the British Government considered banning Hizb ut Tahrir after allegations they were linked to the July 2005 London bombings.
The latest attacks have reignited the debate, with the British Opposition Leader calling for the group to be banned.
DAVID CAMERON, BRITISH OPPOSITION LEADER: We need to act against groups seek to radicalise young people. Almost two years ago the Government said it would ban the extremist group Hizb ut Tahrir. We think it should be banned. Why hasn't it happened?
JOHN STEWART: It might yet happen. There are allegations one of the men involved in the latest bomb plot is a former member of Hizb ut Tahrir.
Britain's new Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, plans to expand the watch list of potential terror groups but Islamic organisations can only be added to the list when clear links to terrorism are found.
GORDON BROWN, BRITISH PRIME MINISTER: Of course in all these details, and I have had to deal with this that Treasury when we're dealing with terrorist finance, you have to have evidence to do so.
JOHN STEWART: Hizb ut Tahrir means party of liberation. The group wants to unite all Muslims under a giant pan-Islamic state based on strict Sharia law.
In Australia, Hizb ut Tahrir are based in south-western Sydney and they've been under close scrutiny by Australian authorities.
Last night on Lateline, Ed Husain, a former member of Hizb ut Tahrir in Britain, warned that Australian members of the group were extremists and took direction from members in London.
ED HUSAIN, AUTHOR: My only criticism of the reports coming out of Australia is that you've directly identified segments within Mohabism to be a problem. Well done for doing that, but we must also remember Australia is also now home to one of the most extreme Islamist organisations - not Islamic but Islamist - organisation known as Hizb ut Tahrir.
That organisation functions in Australia and its leadership takes its call from... and its literature from the London based Hizb ut Tahrir. That's also a threat that's in the making.
JOHN STEWART: Ed Husain also warned the group attracts highly educated members including doctors.
ED HUSSAIN: On a final thought, even here, the leadership of Hizb ut Tahrir as well as the leadership of Mohabist organisations are filled with engineers and doctors.
JOHN STEWART: The Australian Government has considered banning Hizb ut Tahrir several times and today responded to the concerns expressed by Ed Husain.
PHILIP RUDDOCK, ATTORNEY-GENERAL: Last night there, was, on the Lateline program, a person who was speaking about its techniques, the way in which it conducts itself.
And I thought those comments were of interest. I've raised them today but I'm sure the relevant agencies have already seen them.
JOHN STEWART: But without proof of terrorist plans, the group will not be outlawed. Australian Muslim leaders say the group is all talk and has no links to violence and should not be banned.
AMIR ALI, REGIONAL ISLAMIC COUNCIL: It can be counterproductive. We might go into the danger of driving them underground and after that, we won't know what they are up to and it will be difficult to monitor their activities.
At the moment, we know their leadership, we know what they preach, they have a romantic attachment towards an Islamic State. That is also not in the western countries but the Muslim countries.
JOHN STEWART: Dr Ali says moderate Australian Muslims don't believe in the creation of a separate Muslim State.
Broadcast: 06/07/2007
Reporter: John Stewart
The Australian Attorney-General is again investigating the Islamist group Hizb ut Tahrir after members of the group have allegedly been associated with one of the men arrested over the failed London bombing.
Transcript
VIRGINIA TRIOLI: Australia's Attorney-General is investigating whether Islamist group Hizb ut Tahrir should be banned in Australia.
Members of Hizb ut Tahrir are alleged to be associated with one of the men arrested over the failed London bombing.
Last night on Lateline, a British defector from the group warned Australian members of Hizb ut Tahrir are Muslim extremists and take direction from London.
John Stewart reports.
JOHN STEWART: Two years ago, the British Government considered banning Hizb ut Tahrir after allegations they were linked to the July 2005 London bombings.
The latest attacks have reignited the debate, with the British Opposition Leader calling for the group to be banned.
DAVID CAMERON, BRITISH OPPOSITION LEADER: We need to act against groups seek to radicalise young people. Almost two years ago the Government said it would ban the extremist group Hizb ut Tahrir. We think it should be banned. Why hasn't it happened?
JOHN STEWART: It might yet happen. There are allegations one of the men involved in the latest bomb plot is a former member of Hizb ut Tahrir.
Britain's new Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, plans to expand the watch list of potential terror groups but Islamic organisations can only be added to the list when clear links to terrorism are found.
GORDON BROWN, BRITISH PRIME MINISTER: Of course in all these details, and I have had to deal with this that Treasury when we're dealing with terrorist finance, you have to have evidence to do so.
JOHN STEWART: Hizb ut Tahrir means party of liberation. The group wants to unite all Muslims under a giant pan-Islamic state based on strict Sharia law.
In Australia, Hizb ut Tahrir are based in south-western Sydney and they've been under close scrutiny by Australian authorities.
Last night on Lateline, Ed Husain, a former member of Hizb ut Tahrir in Britain, warned that Australian members of the group were extremists and took direction from members in London.
ED HUSAIN, AUTHOR: My only criticism of the reports coming out of Australia is that you've directly identified segments within Mohabism to be a problem. Well done for doing that, but we must also remember Australia is also now home to one of the most extreme Islamist organisations - not Islamic but Islamist - organisation known as Hizb ut Tahrir.
That organisation functions in Australia and its leadership takes its call from... and its literature from the London based Hizb ut Tahrir. That's also a threat that's in the making.
JOHN STEWART: Ed Husain also warned the group attracts highly educated members including doctors.
ED HUSSAIN: On a final thought, even here, the leadership of Hizb ut Tahrir as well as the leadership of Mohabist organisations are filled with engineers and doctors.
JOHN STEWART: The Australian Government has considered banning Hizb ut Tahrir several times and today responded to the concerns expressed by Ed Husain.
PHILIP RUDDOCK, ATTORNEY-GENERAL: Last night there, was, on the Lateline program, a person who was speaking about its techniques, the way in which it conducts itself.
And I thought those comments were of interest. I've raised them today but I'm sure the relevant agencies have already seen them.
JOHN STEWART: But without proof of terrorist plans, the group will not be outlawed. Australian Muslim leaders say the group is all talk and has no links to violence and should not be banned.
AMIR ALI, REGIONAL ISLAMIC COUNCIL: It can be counterproductive. We might go into the danger of driving them underground and after that, we won't know what they are up to and it will be difficult to monitor their activities.
At the moment, we know their leadership, we know what they preach, they have a romantic attachment towards an Islamic State. That is also not in the western countries but the Muslim countries.
JOHN STEWART: Dr Ali says moderate Australian Muslims don't believe in the creation of a separate Muslim State.
Islamic charity linked to car bomb suspect
By Adam Lusher and Jasper Copping, Sunday Telegraph
Last Updated: 12:29am BST 08/07/2007
It is an innocent looking semi-detached property in the university city of Cambridge from where an Islamic charity, dedicated to peace and interfaith friendship, operates.
The leaders of the Islamic Academy are so moderate that they were recently invited to share a platform with Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury.
Yet there are growing suspicions that this suburban house is where the origins of the suspected London and Glasgow bomb plots may lie, The Sunday Telegraph can reveal.
advertisementThe links between Bilal Abdullah, Kafeel Ahmed and others arrested in connection with the alleged plot came as shock to the unsuspecting congregation who gathered to pray at the Islamic Academy on Friday.
Security sources have confirmed to this newspaper their interest in the activities of several of the terror plot suspects in Cambridge. Sheikh Abdul Mabud, the Academy's chief executive, refused to discuss whether he had been contacted by police.
The academy's unwitting connection to these events may have begun in May 2004, with Kafeel Ahmed, 27, who is under police guard in hospital suffering from 90 per cent burns sustained in the botched Glasgow attack.
Between May 2004 and August 2005, as a PhD Student at Anglia Ruskin University in Cambridge, he rented a room above the academy's offices and prayer chamber.
In the room next door, it can be revealed, was another lodger: the Cambridge organiser for Hizb ut-Tahrir (HT), the radical Islamist movement which has caused such alarm that David Cameron, the Conservative leader, called on Wednesday for it to be banned.
Kafeel Ahmed would occasionally be visited by his brother Safeel, 26, a junior doctor who was last week arrested in Liverpool.
It is claimed, however, that a more frequent visitor to the house was Bilal Abdullah, 27, who was yesterday remanded in custody after being charged with conspiring to cause explosions. Three years ago, he is believed to have been living above a takeaway close to the academy.
The friendship, and possible radicalisation, in the house was witnessed by Shiraz Maher, a former HT member who claims that he and the group's leader would often meet with Kafeel Ahmed and Abdullah to discuss politics on the floor of the deserted, book-lined prayer room.
"The HT guys and Bilal controlled, steered and directed the conversation," Mr Maher alleged. "Kafeel listened more than he talked. He became more religious as he progressed.
"Everyone there contributed to Kafeel's radicalisation and he listened to all of us, but he and Bilal were very close. By the time I left Cambridge in July 2005, Kafeel and Bilal were probably best friends."
Mr Maher added that, with Mr Mabud often working away from his office at the academy, there was no need to disguise the radical opinions of the lodgers or their friends.
On Friday, those attending prayers at the academy, more than half of them in their twenties and many highly educated, insisted they could not remember any of the suspects.
Mr Mabud said that he remembered Sabeel Ahmed coming to visit his brother once or twice a year but insisted that he did not recognise the Kafeel Ahmed he knew in the photographs of the burned man at Glasgow Airport.
"The Kafeel Ahmed who lived here was a fine man, busy with his PhD, very polite," he said. "I would be very surprised if it turns out to be the man who was at Glasgow Airport."
Mr Mabud said that he had never seen Abdullah and did not remember the alleged HT leader. Explaining that he was the only person who regularly used the academy's offices, he added: "What more can we do? As human beings, you can only do so much."
A spokesman for HT said: "Our methodology is one of intellectual and political work and not militancy, violence or armed struggle. None of the suspects arrested were members of Hizb ut-Tahrir or had any affiliation whatsoever with Hizb ut-Tahrir."
Sejad Mekic, the imam at the Cambridge mosque which Abdullah also attended, gave a sermon on Friday condemning all acts of terror.
However, he later said he had doubts that the incident at Glasgow airport was a terrorist attack, saying it could have been a car accident.
"I still haven't made my conclusion," he said.
When it was pointed out that containers of petrol were reportedly found in the car, he said: "Maybe they used to sell petrol."
Last Updated: 12:29am BST 08/07/2007
It is an innocent looking semi-detached property in the university city of Cambridge from where an Islamic charity, dedicated to peace and interfaith friendship, operates.
The leaders of the Islamic Academy are so moderate that they were recently invited to share a platform with Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury.
Yet there are growing suspicions that this suburban house is where the origins of the suspected London and Glasgow bomb plots may lie, The Sunday Telegraph can reveal.
advertisementThe links between Bilal Abdullah, Kafeel Ahmed and others arrested in connection with the alleged plot came as shock to the unsuspecting congregation who gathered to pray at the Islamic Academy on Friday.
Security sources have confirmed to this newspaper their interest in the activities of several of the terror plot suspects in Cambridge. Sheikh Abdul Mabud, the Academy's chief executive, refused to discuss whether he had been contacted by police.
The academy's unwitting connection to these events may have begun in May 2004, with Kafeel Ahmed, 27, who is under police guard in hospital suffering from 90 per cent burns sustained in the botched Glasgow attack.
Between May 2004 and August 2005, as a PhD Student at Anglia Ruskin University in Cambridge, he rented a room above the academy's offices and prayer chamber.
In the room next door, it can be revealed, was another lodger: the Cambridge organiser for Hizb ut-Tahrir (HT), the radical Islamist movement which has caused such alarm that David Cameron, the Conservative leader, called on Wednesday for it to be banned.
Kafeel Ahmed would occasionally be visited by his brother Safeel, 26, a junior doctor who was last week arrested in Liverpool.
It is claimed, however, that a more frequent visitor to the house was Bilal Abdullah, 27, who was yesterday remanded in custody after being charged with conspiring to cause explosions. Three years ago, he is believed to have been living above a takeaway close to the academy.
The friendship, and possible radicalisation, in the house was witnessed by Shiraz Maher, a former HT member who claims that he and the group's leader would often meet with Kafeel Ahmed and Abdullah to discuss politics on the floor of the deserted, book-lined prayer room.
"The HT guys and Bilal controlled, steered and directed the conversation," Mr Maher alleged. "Kafeel listened more than he talked. He became more religious as he progressed.
"Everyone there contributed to Kafeel's radicalisation and he listened to all of us, but he and Bilal were very close. By the time I left Cambridge in July 2005, Kafeel and Bilal were probably best friends."
Mr Maher added that, with Mr Mabud often working away from his office at the academy, there was no need to disguise the radical opinions of the lodgers or their friends.
On Friday, those attending prayers at the academy, more than half of them in their twenties and many highly educated, insisted they could not remember any of the suspects.
Mr Mabud said that he remembered Sabeel Ahmed coming to visit his brother once or twice a year but insisted that he did not recognise the Kafeel Ahmed he knew in the photographs of the burned man at Glasgow Airport.
"The Kafeel Ahmed who lived here was a fine man, busy with his PhD, very polite," he said. "I would be very surprised if it turns out to be the man who was at Glasgow Airport."
Mr Mabud said that he had never seen Abdullah and did not remember the alleged HT leader. Explaining that he was the only person who regularly used the academy's offices, he added: "What more can we do? As human beings, you can only do so much."
A spokesman for HT said: "Our methodology is one of intellectual and political work and not militancy, violence or armed struggle. None of the suspects arrested were members of Hizb ut-Tahrir or had any affiliation whatsoever with Hizb ut-Tahrir."
Sejad Mekic, the imam at the Cambridge mosque which Abdullah also attended, gave a sermon on Friday condemning all acts of terror.
However, he later said he had doubts that the incident at Glasgow airport was a terrorist attack, saying it could have been a car accident.
"I still haven't made my conclusion," he said.
When it was pointed out that containers of petrol were reportedly found in the car, he said: "Maybe they used to sell petrol."
Fundamentalist group back under scrutiny
PM - Friday, 6 July , 2007 18:14:00
Reporter: Paula Kruger
MARK COLVIN: The fundamentalist Muslim group Hizb ut-Tahrir is back under the Federal Government's microscope again after a British defector from the group warned of its activities in Australia.
Hizb ut-Tahrir members are alleged to have associated with one of the men arrested over the failed London bombing.
Two years ago the Government decided not to ban Hizb ut-Tahrir in Australia, but left open the option of doing so in future.
And today, security analysts and Australian Muslim leaders have been saying that proscribing Hizb ut-Tahrir could actually encourage radicalism by forcing it underground.
Paula Kruger reports.
PAULA KRUGER: The Federal Government first considered banning the Islamist group Hizb ut-Tahrir two years ago when some European governments started outlawing similar organisations.
It was part of the security shake-up that came after the London suicide bombings.
The Australian investigations then, and since, have found the organisation has not broken the law.
As spokesman for the group Wassim Doureihi explained to PM two years ago, his is a non-violent organisation.
WASSIM DOUREIHI: We have a record. The party was established since 1653 and we've been working on some of the most horrendous conditions, where some of our members have been boiled to death, and that has not in any way altered the means by which we seek to achieve our aims. We continue to work with the people.
PAULA KRUGER: But devout Muslim and former member of a British cell of Hizb ut-Tahrir Ed Husain last night told Lateline a different story.
ED HUSAIN: That organisation functions in Australia and its leadership takes its call and its literature from the London-based Hizb ut-Tahrir. So that's also a threat in the making that I think your policy-makers and people in the media need to identify and educate the wider Australian population about.
PAULA KRUGER: The federal Attorney-General Philip Ruddock has again asked the security organisation to look into the organisation.
PHILLIP RUDDOCK: In the light of what you and I saw last night on Lateline, I've requested that those further matters be examined by them. But it is a test which is not embarked upon lightly, it's one in which I must be satisfied on advice that the organisation is directly or indirectly engaged in preparing, planning or assisting or fostering a terrorist act or advocating it.
PAULA KRUGER: Jacob Townsend is a research analyst with the Australian Strategic Policy Institute and recently co-authored a paper the Hizb ut-Tahrir presence in Australia.
He suggests there's no easy way for authorities to deal with the group.
JACOB TOWNSEND: The biggest risk from Hizb ut-Tahrir is if, and I say 'if', it acts as a conveyor belt for extremism, moving people from radicalisation and towards violence ideologies. There is only suggestive evidence, not conclusive evidence that around the world Hizb ut-Tahrir itself has ever been implicated in violence. So, we have to be careful in the sense that on the basis of evidence, 'no', Hizb ut-Tahrir does not authorise or organise violence.
PAULA KRUGER: Is that the reason why it's so difficult for governments around the world to outlaw this organisation?
JACOB TOWNSEND: Yes. I mean, in Australia for example, I believe some people are calling for it to be banned when it had its conference earlier in the year in Sydney, the Australian branch, I mean, legally it's a religious study group, essentially.
PAULA KRUGER: Would it be dangerous to actually outlaw this organisation? Does it just invigorate it in some way?
JACOB TOWNSEND: From my own experience of watching Hizb ut-Tahrir grow substantially in some of the central Asian republics, I would say there that outlawing it has definitely backfired.
PAULA KRUGER: It seems Australian authorities like their UK counterparts only have the option of monitoring organisations like Hizb ut-Tahrir.
And close monitoring of these groups is an approach that has the support of Ikebal Patel, the President of the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils.
IKEBAL PATEL: Monitoring radical organisations would probably be a better way to doing it then to outlawing because if you outlaw certain organisations then they'll just go underground which would really be a much worse outcome.
But at the same time, I have to emphasise that you have to really look at the core reasons why whether it's organisations or individuals are being radicalised. Unless we do that, we, five years later I'm sure we'll be talking about the same issues again and there'll be equally devastating bombings and traps and terrorism events, which will be of no benefit to anybody.
MARK COLVIN: President of the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils Ikebal Patel ending that report by Paula Kruger.
Reporter: Paula Kruger
MARK COLVIN: The fundamentalist Muslim group Hizb ut-Tahrir is back under the Federal Government's microscope again after a British defector from the group warned of its activities in Australia.
Hizb ut-Tahrir members are alleged to have associated with one of the men arrested over the failed London bombing.
Two years ago the Government decided not to ban Hizb ut-Tahrir in Australia, but left open the option of doing so in future.
And today, security analysts and Australian Muslim leaders have been saying that proscribing Hizb ut-Tahrir could actually encourage radicalism by forcing it underground.
Paula Kruger reports.
PAULA KRUGER: The Federal Government first considered banning the Islamist group Hizb ut-Tahrir two years ago when some European governments started outlawing similar organisations.
It was part of the security shake-up that came after the London suicide bombings.
The Australian investigations then, and since, have found the organisation has not broken the law.
As spokesman for the group Wassim Doureihi explained to PM two years ago, his is a non-violent organisation.
WASSIM DOUREIHI: We have a record. The party was established since 1653 and we've been working on some of the most horrendous conditions, where some of our members have been boiled to death, and that has not in any way altered the means by which we seek to achieve our aims. We continue to work with the people.
PAULA KRUGER: But devout Muslim and former member of a British cell of Hizb ut-Tahrir Ed Husain last night told Lateline a different story.
ED HUSAIN: That organisation functions in Australia and its leadership takes its call and its literature from the London-based Hizb ut-Tahrir. So that's also a threat in the making that I think your policy-makers and people in the media need to identify and educate the wider Australian population about.
PAULA KRUGER: The federal Attorney-General Philip Ruddock has again asked the security organisation to look into the organisation.
PHILLIP RUDDOCK: In the light of what you and I saw last night on Lateline, I've requested that those further matters be examined by them. But it is a test which is not embarked upon lightly, it's one in which I must be satisfied on advice that the organisation is directly or indirectly engaged in preparing, planning or assisting or fostering a terrorist act or advocating it.
PAULA KRUGER: Jacob Townsend is a research analyst with the Australian Strategic Policy Institute and recently co-authored a paper the Hizb ut-Tahrir presence in Australia.
He suggests there's no easy way for authorities to deal with the group.
JACOB TOWNSEND: The biggest risk from Hizb ut-Tahrir is if, and I say 'if', it acts as a conveyor belt for extremism, moving people from radicalisation and towards violence ideologies. There is only suggestive evidence, not conclusive evidence that around the world Hizb ut-Tahrir itself has ever been implicated in violence. So, we have to be careful in the sense that on the basis of evidence, 'no', Hizb ut-Tahrir does not authorise or organise violence.
PAULA KRUGER: Is that the reason why it's so difficult for governments around the world to outlaw this organisation?
JACOB TOWNSEND: Yes. I mean, in Australia for example, I believe some people are calling for it to be banned when it had its conference earlier in the year in Sydney, the Australian branch, I mean, legally it's a religious study group, essentially.
PAULA KRUGER: Would it be dangerous to actually outlaw this organisation? Does it just invigorate it in some way?
JACOB TOWNSEND: From my own experience of watching Hizb ut-Tahrir grow substantially in some of the central Asian republics, I would say there that outlawing it has definitely backfired.
PAULA KRUGER: It seems Australian authorities like their UK counterparts only have the option of monitoring organisations like Hizb ut-Tahrir.
And close monitoring of these groups is an approach that has the support of Ikebal Patel, the President of the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils.
IKEBAL PATEL: Monitoring radical organisations would probably be a better way to doing it then to outlawing because if you outlaw certain organisations then they'll just go underground which would really be a much worse outcome.
But at the same time, I have to emphasise that you have to really look at the core reasons why whether it's organisations or individuals are being radicalised. Unless we do that, we, five years later I'm sure we'll be talking about the same issues again and there'll be equally devastating bombings and traps and terrorism events, which will be of no benefit to anybody.
MARK COLVIN: President of the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils Ikebal Patel ending that report by Paula Kruger.
Cameron’s secret weapon
The Sunday TimesJuly 8, 2007
Martin Ivens meets Dame Pauline Neville-Jones
Anyone you can hire I can hire better. Gordon Brown has recruited a host of big names to his new government. To advise on the terrorist threat he has brought in Admiral Sir Alan West and Lord Stevens, the former Metropolitan police commissioner, no less, both men pompous and reassuring when in full dress uniform.
They are, however, but mere men. David Cameron trumped them in his Conservative reshuffle last week by appointing to full shadow cabinet member status two eye-catching women. The vastly experienced mandarin, Dame Pauline Neville-Jones, comes in to keep a beady eye on security matters. And a feisty Muslim woman, Sayeeda Warsi, ascends to the Lords to oversee community cohesion. Of her more later.
Neville-Jones could give Judi Dench’s M from James Bond lessons in assuming the mask of command. She was former chair-woman of the Joint Intelligence Committee and is as tart of tongue as Dench’s character.
Greg Dyke, the former BBC director-general, whom she helped to unseat in her capacity as a governor after publication of the Hutton report, called her “a grey lady”. In the flesh she is fair to yellow of hair, neat and spare in smart white-and-yellow top and black trousers. Our conversation across a formal blue-velvet covered table could be the meeting of two amicable antagonists across the diplomatic divide. All that is missing are the flags.
A history graduate of Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford, by way of Leeds girls’ high school, her mother, father (he was killed in the second world war) and stepfather were all doctors. Having got the Foreign Office, the BBC and the City under her belt, Neville-Jones, a youthful 67, says she “did not expect” her latest appointment but “if you have such longstanding interest in policy and government it is an opportunity to influence them from within” and “enrich the public debate”. Lucky us to be so enriched.
Perhaps her new post makes up for the disappointment of reaching the heights of political director of the Foreign Office only to be denied the plum post of the Paris ambassadorship. She resigned in a fury amid a welter of briefing that her manner was not “sufficiently emollient for the niceties of diplomatic life”. She was shocked by what she saw as a male chauvinist assault on her character and she came from a generation who had to give up the idea of a family life in order to succeed.
I ask her about the view that the Iraq war has “blown back” terrorism to the UK. Tony Blair spent his last years in office denying it. But she says: “The threat to this country preceded the intervention in Iraq . . . but the effect of Iraq has been to act as a recruiting sergeant . . . giving our enemies the narrative of western hostility to Islam and Muslims in general.”
Was the Iraq war illegal in international law? With some hesitation she says not: Saddam Hussein had flouted United Nations resolutions. But she adds bitingly: “The equally important issue was political legitimacy. What is dangerous in any democracy is not to have a political consensus behind you.” And now Blair’s career is behind him, too.
Of the facts on the ground she has written that “the intervention in Iraq has failed in its objectives so badly that the threat to this country is actually greater than it was before it began”.
But, as you would suspect from someone so critical of the rush to war and the twisting of intelligence to suit those ends, she does not subscribe to the neo-conservative vision of spreading democracy at the point of a gun throughout the Middle East.
She supports “democracy” but “the ballot box” is not a panacea. She prefers to build up the institutions of constitutional government slowly. Some Islamists would win an election once and then abolish democracy. “The West took centuries to build the institutions which would lead to those outcomes.” Nice if you have the time.
What does she make of the Islamic organisations in Britain that Blair once attempted to bring into formal alliance with government, most famously the Muslim Council of Britain? Blair gave up on them eventually as hopelessly anti Israel, Salman Rushdie and British foreign policy in the Middle East.
The council has (belatedly) condemned the Heathrow and Glasgow airport terror plots. Perhaps it and some ministers want to resume the dialogue. Neville-Jones smiles thinly: “I was glad to see the condemnation of the atrocities but no group [of people] in this country should work through representatives.” She wants to reach out to Muslims as individuals, not through self-appointed community leaders.
For her, as for many others, multiculturalism has stopped Muslims integrating with the host community. She doesn’t want French-style assimilation where women have to remove veils in public – but “there must be more to groups than just rubbing along”. She quotes Amartya Sen, the thinker: “The right to be involved is the right to be treated the same despite difference, not differently because of it.”
Neville-Jones shares Brown’s interest in “what it is to be British” although she thinks this is partly prompted by the prime minister’s Scottish problems postdevolution. But she seems genuinely misty-eyed about the good old days: “In the 19th century the fathers of the nation had the Children’s Reader series in the new compulsory schools” – “kings and things” taught them what “made them Brits”.
Once “we sang Rule Britannia” without embarrassment: “We have become apologetic about what it is to be British.” I can’t, somehow, see us singing Rule Britannia together.
Cameron bested Brown at prime minister’s questions on Wednesday over identity cards. Brown had cited Neville-Jones’s support for them. The Conservative leader shot back with a quote from Alistair Darling, the new chancellor, who once sneered that ID cards reduced all our lives “to a magnetic strip”.
Brown might have said, if he had been agile, that his friend had changed his mind. Has Nev-ille-Jones? Just to make this helpfully clear to David Davis, the shadow home secretary, I will repeat what she said a few years ago: “I am aware that measures raise civil liberty issues. It is a question of the citizen’s individual rights of liberty and privacy versus the rights of the public to collective security. What modern terrorism had done is to tip the balance.”
Neville-Jones concedes: “I have expressed support for them [IDs] but there are a whole series of qualifications. It is more important to know who is in the country and who is leaving.” She thinks that a border police is a greater priority.
Cameron also had fun at Brown’s expense on his hesitation about banning the Muslim extremist Hizb ut-Tahrir organisation: “If you put legislation on the statute book to put boundaries about what is permissible . . . you must enforce it.” Like her leader, Neville-Jones cites the organisation’s antisemitic pronouncements. But why not prosecute it under existing antiracist legislation, say the critics. Why resort to a ban? These are deep waters. Neville-Jones counters that if the government is satisfied that Hizb ut-Tahrir is not extremist then it should say so.
What offends her is the cascade of new antiterrorist law churning through parliament, replicating existing powers and creating new offences. It offends her sense of orderly government: “Abu Hamza was prosecuted for offences passed in the Victorian era on public order. The government is overloading the statute book.”
She defends the judges and won’t support suspending parts of the Human Rights Act on the deportation of foreign nationals suspected of terrorism to countries that practise torture. “They must produce a case,” she argues, using telephone tap intercept evidence if need be: “If the government appears to have an aggressive agenda on security, others feel they must protect rights and liberties.”
Noble sentiments but last month showed us how far terrorism can proceed before evidence can be obtained. Do we owe sanctuary to foreigners who want to kill us? The dame is hard to pin down but says she is uneasy about the concept of detention without trial: “I would like to see sunset clauses built into this legislation.”
Yet there are degrees of opposition to the government. I quote Warsi, her new colleague, on Blair’s last set of antiterror proposals: they were “enough to tip any normal young man into the realms of a radicalised fanatic”.
“We have good debates, Sayeeda and I,” says Neville-Jones with a not waving but drowning grimace.
This part of our conversation worried her Central Office minder enough to ring back later to remind me that Warsi made these remarks only about the 90 days’ detention proposal, not about all antiterror legislation. Well, here’s another interesting quote from her colleague: “If terrorism is the use of violence against civilians, then where does that leave us in Iraq?”
Warsi, 36, now insists, “I did not say Iraqis are freedom fighters”, and she backs the banning of Hizb ut-Tahrir. But she still wishes to win hearts and minds “and if that means speaking to ‘the nutters’ then that’s what we must do . . . Angry young men should be brought round the table because we have to engage with them”.
I am not sure Neville-Jones is so keen on angry young men. The combination of a Muslim woman who happily accepted an arranged marriage, and an English establishmentarian who had to surrender hope of marriage so as to advance in the old sexist Foreign Office, is one to watch.
Martin Ivens meets Dame Pauline Neville-Jones
Anyone you can hire I can hire better. Gordon Brown has recruited a host of big names to his new government. To advise on the terrorist threat he has brought in Admiral Sir Alan West and Lord Stevens, the former Metropolitan police commissioner, no less, both men pompous and reassuring when in full dress uniform.
They are, however, but mere men. David Cameron trumped them in his Conservative reshuffle last week by appointing to full shadow cabinet member status two eye-catching women. The vastly experienced mandarin, Dame Pauline Neville-Jones, comes in to keep a beady eye on security matters. And a feisty Muslim woman, Sayeeda Warsi, ascends to the Lords to oversee community cohesion. Of her more later.
Neville-Jones could give Judi Dench’s M from James Bond lessons in assuming the mask of command. She was former chair-woman of the Joint Intelligence Committee and is as tart of tongue as Dench’s character.
Greg Dyke, the former BBC director-general, whom she helped to unseat in her capacity as a governor after publication of the Hutton report, called her “a grey lady”. In the flesh she is fair to yellow of hair, neat and spare in smart white-and-yellow top and black trousers. Our conversation across a formal blue-velvet covered table could be the meeting of two amicable antagonists across the diplomatic divide. All that is missing are the flags.
A history graduate of Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford, by way of Leeds girls’ high school, her mother, father (he was killed in the second world war) and stepfather were all doctors. Having got the Foreign Office, the BBC and the City under her belt, Neville-Jones, a youthful 67, says she “did not expect” her latest appointment but “if you have such longstanding interest in policy and government it is an opportunity to influence them from within” and “enrich the public debate”. Lucky us to be so enriched.
Perhaps her new post makes up for the disappointment of reaching the heights of political director of the Foreign Office only to be denied the plum post of the Paris ambassadorship. She resigned in a fury amid a welter of briefing that her manner was not “sufficiently emollient for the niceties of diplomatic life”. She was shocked by what she saw as a male chauvinist assault on her character and she came from a generation who had to give up the idea of a family life in order to succeed.
I ask her about the view that the Iraq war has “blown back” terrorism to the UK. Tony Blair spent his last years in office denying it. But she says: “The threat to this country preceded the intervention in Iraq . . . but the effect of Iraq has been to act as a recruiting sergeant . . . giving our enemies the narrative of western hostility to Islam and Muslims in general.”
Was the Iraq war illegal in international law? With some hesitation she says not: Saddam Hussein had flouted United Nations resolutions. But she adds bitingly: “The equally important issue was political legitimacy. What is dangerous in any democracy is not to have a political consensus behind you.” And now Blair’s career is behind him, too.
Of the facts on the ground she has written that “the intervention in Iraq has failed in its objectives so badly that the threat to this country is actually greater than it was before it began”.
But, as you would suspect from someone so critical of the rush to war and the twisting of intelligence to suit those ends, she does not subscribe to the neo-conservative vision of spreading democracy at the point of a gun throughout the Middle East.
She supports “democracy” but “the ballot box” is not a panacea. She prefers to build up the institutions of constitutional government slowly. Some Islamists would win an election once and then abolish democracy. “The West took centuries to build the institutions which would lead to those outcomes.” Nice if you have the time.
What does she make of the Islamic organisations in Britain that Blair once attempted to bring into formal alliance with government, most famously the Muslim Council of Britain? Blair gave up on them eventually as hopelessly anti Israel, Salman Rushdie and British foreign policy in the Middle East.
The council has (belatedly) condemned the Heathrow and Glasgow airport terror plots. Perhaps it and some ministers want to resume the dialogue. Neville-Jones smiles thinly: “I was glad to see the condemnation of the atrocities but no group [of people] in this country should work through representatives.” She wants to reach out to Muslims as individuals, not through self-appointed community leaders.
For her, as for many others, multiculturalism has stopped Muslims integrating with the host community. She doesn’t want French-style assimilation where women have to remove veils in public – but “there must be more to groups than just rubbing along”. She quotes Amartya Sen, the thinker: “The right to be involved is the right to be treated the same despite difference, not differently because of it.”
Neville-Jones shares Brown’s interest in “what it is to be British” although she thinks this is partly prompted by the prime minister’s Scottish problems postdevolution. But she seems genuinely misty-eyed about the good old days: “In the 19th century the fathers of the nation had the Children’s Reader series in the new compulsory schools” – “kings and things” taught them what “made them Brits”.
Once “we sang Rule Britannia” without embarrassment: “We have become apologetic about what it is to be British.” I can’t, somehow, see us singing Rule Britannia together.
Cameron bested Brown at prime minister’s questions on Wednesday over identity cards. Brown had cited Neville-Jones’s support for them. The Conservative leader shot back with a quote from Alistair Darling, the new chancellor, who once sneered that ID cards reduced all our lives “to a magnetic strip”.
Brown might have said, if he had been agile, that his friend had changed his mind. Has Nev-ille-Jones? Just to make this helpfully clear to David Davis, the shadow home secretary, I will repeat what she said a few years ago: “I am aware that measures raise civil liberty issues. It is a question of the citizen’s individual rights of liberty and privacy versus the rights of the public to collective security. What modern terrorism had done is to tip the balance.”
Neville-Jones concedes: “I have expressed support for them [IDs] but there are a whole series of qualifications. It is more important to know who is in the country and who is leaving.” She thinks that a border police is a greater priority.
Cameron also had fun at Brown’s expense on his hesitation about banning the Muslim extremist Hizb ut-Tahrir organisation: “If you put legislation on the statute book to put boundaries about what is permissible . . . you must enforce it.” Like her leader, Neville-Jones cites the organisation’s antisemitic pronouncements. But why not prosecute it under existing antiracist legislation, say the critics. Why resort to a ban? These are deep waters. Neville-Jones counters that if the government is satisfied that Hizb ut-Tahrir is not extremist then it should say so.
What offends her is the cascade of new antiterrorist law churning through parliament, replicating existing powers and creating new offences. It offends her sense of orderly government: “Abu Hamza was prosecuted for offences passed in the Victorian era on public order. The government is overloading the statute book.”
She defends the judges and won’t support suspending parts of the Human Rights Act on the deportation of foreign nationals suspected of terrorism to countries that practise torture. “They must produce a case,” she argues, using telephone tap intercept evidence if need be: “If the government appears to have an aggressive agenda on security, others feel they must protect rights and liberties.”
Noble sentiments but last month showed us how far terrorism can proceed before evidence can be obtained. Do we owe sanctuary to foreigners who want to kill us? The dame is hard to pin down but says she is uneasy about the concept of detention without trial: “I would like to see sunset clauses built into this legislation.”
Yet there are degrees of opposition to the government. I quote Warsi, her new colleague, on Blair’s last set of antiterror proposals: they were “enough to tip any normal young man into the realms of a radicalised fanatic”.
“We have good debates, Sayeeda and I,” says Neville-Jones with a not waving but drowning grimace.
This part of our conversation worried her Central Office minder enough to ring back later to remind me that Warsi made these remarks only about the 90 days’ detention proposal, not about all antiterror legislation. Well, here’s another interesting quote from her colleague: “If terrorism is the use of violence against civilians, then where does that leave us in Iraq?”
Warsi, 36, now insists, “I did not say Iraqis are freedom fighters”, and she backs the banning of Hizb ut-Tahrir. But she still wishes to win hearts and minds “and if that means speaking to ‘the nutters’ then that’s what we must do . . . Angry young men should be brought round the table because we have to engage with them”.
I am not sure Neville-Jones is so keen on angry young men. The combination of a Muslim woman who happily accepted an arranged marriage, and an English establishmentarian who had to surrender hope of marriage so as to advance in the old sexist Foreign Office, is one to watch.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)