Tuesday, July 19, 2005
A LITTLE EDUCATION MIGHT HELP
The BBC reports:
What are the big problems those Muslim leaders identify?:
That being "generally underachieving" helps foster "high rates of unemployment" one would think goes without saying. More importantly:
The British Labour government is determined to claim otherwise, probably mostly to try to fend off those who are obsessed with viewing the liberation of Iraq as a mistake.
That aside, I am one who does believe Britain's support for the liberation of Iraq, as well as its support for the more general War on Terror have made it a target just like the U.S. After all, if one is going to face an enemy rather than simply cower and give in to all demands, one is likely to incur that enemy's wrath until that enemy is subdued. Think tank studies are hardly necessary to clarify such.
Look at it another way. If Britain hadn't declared war on Nazi Germany on September 3, 1939, the Luftwaffe would not have launched the Blitz in mid-1940. So, it might indeed have been "better" from that perspective, of course, for Britain to have sat on its hands and instead done nothing.
Imagine this in a similar "report", released as the bombs were falling on London in September 1940:
But Mr Bunglawala's main point appears to be this: that Britain's foreign policy, especially its support for freedom and democracy in Iraq, ought to be altered because "generally underachieving" -- far better description: ignorant -- British Muslim youth (who are, interestingly, mostly of Pakistani and other non-Iraqi origins) oppose such policies.
Oh, yes, now that is the best way forward. . .
David Aaronovitch notes in the Times:
One of those who "don't count", Democracy in Iraq blogger Husayn writes today:
He seems to be one Iraqi who isn't aching for British Muslims to carry out suicide bombings in London "in his name".
Some education of the ignorant is clearly going to be key. The BBC's Andrew North writes:
The BBC reports:
Prime Minister Tony Blair is to meet Muslim leaders and community workers from across Britain at No 10 to discuss how to respond to the London bombings.
Along with opposition leaders, who are also attending, he will ask how young Britons became suicide bombers and how best to tackle teachers of extremism. . .
Along with opposition leaders, who are also attending, he will ask how young Britons became suicide bombers and how best to tackle teachers of extremism. . .
What are the big problems those Muslim leaders identify?:
. . . Muslim Council of Britain representative Inayat Bunglawala - one of those attending the Downing Street meeting - told GMTV that there had been a "clear increase in disenchantment" among Muslim youths.
"Muslim youths are generally underachieving with high rates of unemployment," he said. . .
"Muslim youths are generally underachieving with high rates of unemployment," he said. . .
That being "generally underachieving" helps foster "high rates of unemployment" one would think goes without saying. More importantly:
Mr Bunglawala also referred to a report published by UK think-tank Chatham house, which said the Iraq war had made it easier for al-Qaeda to exploit a sense of grievance among the Muslim community.
"It's fair the Government should ask itself whether policies such as those involving the Iraq war have contributed to this," he said. . .
"It's fair the Government should ask itself whether policies such as those involving the Iraq war have contributed to this," he said. . .
The British Labour government is determined to claim otherwise, probably mostly to try to fend off those who are obsessed with viewing the liberation of Iraq as a mistake.
That aside, I am one who does believe Britain's support for the liberation of Iraq, as well as its support for the more general War on Terror have made it a target just like the U.S. After all, if one is going to face an enemy rather than simply cower and give in to all demands, one is likely to incur that enemy's wrath until that enemy is subdued. Think tank studies are hardly necessary to clarify such.
Look at it another way. If Britain hadn't declared war on Nazi Germany on September 3, 1939, the Luftwaffe would not have launched the Blitz in mid-1940. So, it might indeed have been "better" from that perspective, of course, for Britain to have sat on its hands and instead done nothing.
Imagine this in a similar "report", released as the bombs were falling on London in September 1940:
Moving on. Mr Bunglawala and others might begin to take note: Unless supporting freedom and democracy is wrong, the current British foreign policy overall is correct.The UK is at particular risk because it was the closest ally of France, has deployed armed forces in the military campaigns to help the governments of Poland, Norway, the Netherlands, Denmark, Belgium and Luxembourg, and has taken a leading role in international intelligence. . .
. . . The government had been conducting anti-Nazi policy 'shoulder to shoulder' with the French, not in the sense of being an equal decision maker, but rather as pillion passenger compelled to leave the steering to the ally in the driving seat.
There is no doubt that the situation over Poland and Western Europe has imposed particular difficulties for the UK, and for the wider coalition against Nazism. . .
But Mr Bunglawala's main point appears to be this: that Britain's foreign policy, especially its support for freedom and democracy in Iraq, ought to be altered because "generally underachieving" -- far better description: ignorant -- British Muslim youth (who are, interestingly, mostly of Pakistani and other non-Iraqi origins) oppose such policies.
Oh, yes, now that is the best way forward. . .
David Aaronovitch notes in the Times:
. . . last weekend, Azzam Tamimi, of the Muslim Association of Britain, told a rally in London: “My heart bleeds, I condemn it, yes, but I did not make those boys angry. I did not send those bombs to Iraq. I do not keep people locked in Guantanamo Bay and I do not have anything to do with Abu Ghraib, except to denounce it. Politicians, see what you have done to this world.” It’s not me, it’s not us, it’s them. They keep doing bad things to us.
This was brilliantly, if somewhat inadvertently, expressed in The Guardian by Madeleine Bunting. She pointed out the Kashmiri links of most British Muslims, and added: “One of the things they brought with them was the perception of a long history of dispossession and marginalisation.” This “narrative of dispossession” was made worse in the recessions of the Seventies and Eighties. And then, she added: “The more recent oppression and humiliation of Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan would have resonated powerfully with these collective memories of Yorkshire Muslims . . .”
Note how the “more recent oppression” is supposed just to be a fact. And we know to whom it refers and to whom it doesn’t. The elected Government in Iraq, the Shia majority, the new fact of Kurdish rights in that country, don’t count. All these peoples are de-Muslimified for the purposes of victimology. And that happens because they simply don’t fit the narrative. The Sunnis of Iraq are imagined to be “us”, but the Shia and the Kurds aren’t. The bombed villagers of Afghanistan are “us”, the liberated women aren’t. The Kosovan Muslims aren’t, either, though you can bet they would have been had Nato not intervened to save them. As it is, they too have disappeared from Muslimhood. . .
This was brilliantly, if somewhat inadvertently, expressed in The Guardian by Madeleine Bunting. She pointed out the Kashmiri links of most British Muslims, and added: “One of the things they brought with them was the perception of a long history of dispossession and marginalisation.” This “narrative of dispossession” was made worse in the recessions of the Seventies and Eighties. And then, she added: “The more recent oppression and humiliation of Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan would have resonated powerfully with these collective memories of Yorkshire Muslims . . .”
Note how the “more recent oppression” is supposed just to be a fact. And we know to whom it refers and to whom it doesn’t. The elected Government in Iraq, the Shia majority, the new fact of Kurdish rights in that country, don’t count. All these peoples are de-Muslimified for the purposes of victimology. And that happens because they simply don’t fit the narrative. The Sunnis of Iraq are imagined to be “us”, but the Shia and the Kurds aren’t. The bombed villagers of Afghanistan are “us”, the liberated women aren’t. The Kosovan Muslims aren’t, either, though you can bet they would have been had Nato not intervened to save them. As it is, they too have disappeared from Muslimhood. . .
One of those who "don't count", Democracy in Iraq blogger Husayn writes today:
. . . The bombings in London are important though beacause they show that my religion is being molested by evil forces who use religion for their own agenda. The same fanatical mindset that causes so called "mujahideen", which means holy warriors, but which are in reality nothing of the sort, to blow up Iraqi children, this mindset has clearly spread to the rest of the world, even in the Unitd Kingdom.
I was distressed to learn that the bombers in the UK were born there, but I am no longer surprised. The tentacles of bin Laden and his brothers are very long, and the entire world must do what it takes to not only cut them off, but to destroy the center of the growth. It is like a tumor, one branch is cut off, yet others keep growing. . .
I was distressed to learn that the bombers in the UK were born there, but I am no longer surprised. The tentacles of bin Laden and his brothers are very long, and the entire world must do what it takes to not only cut them off, but to destroy the center of the growth. It is like a tumor, one branch is cut off, yet others keep growing. . .
He seems to be one Iraqi who isn't aching for British Muslims to carry out suicide bombings in London "in his name".
Some education of the ignorant is clearly going to be key. The BBC's Andrew North writes:
Afghan President Hamid Karzai plans to take a high-profile stand against militant Islamic beliefs during a trip to London this week, less than two weeks after multiple suicide bombings in the capital.
In a message aimed at Muslims worldwide as well as in Britain, President Karzai aims to confront directly the appeal of Osama Bin Laden and his al-Qaeda network, a senior Afghan official told the BBC in Kabul.
"Before they follow Osama Bin Laden's ideas, they should look at what happened to Afghanistan," he said, describing some of the Afghan leader's thinking. . .
. . . But what could turn into the centrepiece of his trip is an address to worshippers at a mosque. It is still not clear who is invited, but the audience is expected to include several UK Muslim leaders. . .
. . . "We warned him of the risk of some confrontation," he said. "But the president said that's what he wants. He wants to challenge these misguided perceptions face to face."
Mr Karzai wants to tell UK Muslims, the official continued, "that these atrocities committed in our name, which gives their religion a bad name, must be stopped.". . .
¶ by Robert, Tuesday, July 19, 2005In a message aimed at Muslims worldwide as well as in Britain, President Karzai aims to confront directly the appeal of Osama Bin Laden and his al-Qaeda network, a senior Afghan official told the BBC in Kabul.
"Before they follow Osama Bin Laden's ideas, they should look at what happened to Afghanistan," he said, describing some of the Afghan leader's thinking. . .
. . . But what could turn into the centrepiece of his trip is an address to worshippers at a mosque. It is still not clear who is invited, but the audience is expected to include several UK Muslim leaders. . .
. . . "We warned him of the risk of some confrontation," he said. "But the president said that's what he wants. He wants to challenge these misguided perceptions face to face."
Mr Karzai wants to tell UK Muslims, the official continued, "that these atrocities committed in our name, which gives their religion a bad name, must be stopped.". . .
