|
'The day is coming
when British Muslims form a state within a state'
By Alasdair
Palmer
(Filed: 19/02/2006)
For the past two weeks, Patrick Sookhdeo has been canvassing the opinions of Muslim
clerics in Britain on
the row over the cartoons featuring images of Mohammed that were first
published in Denmark
and then reprinted in several other European countries.
"They think they have won the debate,"
he says with a sigh. "They believe that the British Government has
capitulated to them, because it feared the consequences if it did not.
|
|

|
|
Dr Patrick Sookhdeo
|
"The cartoons, you see, have not been
published in this country, and the Government has been very critical of
those countries in which they were published. To many of the Islamic
clerics, that's a clear victory.
"It's confirmation
of what they believe to be a familiar pattern: if spokesmen for British
Muslims threaten what they call 'adverse consequences' - violence to the
rest of us - then the British Government will cave in. I think it is a
very dangerous precedent."
Dr Sookhdeo adds that
he believes that "in a decade, you will see parts of English cities
which are controlled by Muslim clerics and which follow, not the common
law, but aspects of Muslim sharia law.
"It is already starting to happen - and
unless the Government changes the way it treats the so-called leaders of
the Islamic community, it will continue."
For someone with such strong and uncompromising
views, Dr Sookhdeo is a surprisingly gentle and
easy-going man. He speaks with authority on Islam, as it was his first
faith: he was brought up as a Muslim in Guyana,
the only English colony in South America,
and attended a madrassa there.
"But Islamic instruction was very different
in the 1950s, when I was at school," he says. "There was no
talk of suicide bombing or indeed of violence of any kind. Islam was very
peaceful."
Dr Sookhdeo's family emigrated to England when he was 10. In
his early twenties, when he was at university, he converted to
Christianity. "I had simply seen it as the white man's religion, the
religion of the colonialists and the oppressors - in a very similar way,
in fact, to the way that many Muslims see Christianity today.
" Leaving Islam was not easy. According to the literal interpretation of
the Koran, the punishment for apostasy is death - and it actually is
punished by death in some Middle Eastern states. "It wasn't quite
like that here," he says, "although it was traumatic in some
ways."
Dr Sookhdeo continued
to study Islam, doing a PhD at London
University on the
religion. He is currently director of the Institute for the Study of
Islam and Christianity. He also advises the Army on security issues
related to Islam.
Several years ago, Dr Sookhdeo
insisted that the next wave of radical Islam in Britain
would involve suicide bombings in this country. His prediction was
depressingly confirmed on 7/7 last year.
So his claim that, in the next decade, the
Muslim community in Britain will not be integrated into mainstream
British society, but will isolate itself to a much greater extent,
carries weight behind it. Dr Sookhdeo has
proved his prescience.
"The Government, and Tony Blair, the Prime
Minister, are fundamentally deluded about the nature of Islam," he
insists. "Tony Blair unintentionally revealed his ignorance when he
said, in an effort to conciliate Muslims, that he had 'read through the
Koran twice' and that he kept it by his bedside.
"He thought he was saying something which
showed how seriously he took Islam. But most Muslims thought it was a
joke, if not an insult. Because, of course, every Muslim knows that you
cannot read the Koran through from cover to cover and understand it.
The chapters are not written to be read in that
way. Indeed, after the first chapter, the chapters of the Koran are
ordered according to their length, not according to their content or
chronology: the longest chapters are first, the shorter ones are at the end.
"You need to know which passage was
revealed at what period and in what time in order to be able to
understand it - you cannot simply read it from beginning to end and
expect to learn anything at all.
"That is one reason why it takes so long to
be able to read and understand the Koran: the meaning of any part of it
depends on a knowledge of its context - a
context that is not in the Koran itself."
The Prime Minister's ignorance of Islam, Dr Sookhdeo contends, is of a piece with his
unsuccessful attempts to conciliate it. And it does indeed seem as if the
Government's policy towards radical Islam is based on the hope that if it
makes concessions to its leaders, they will reciprocate and relations
between fundamentalist Muslims and Tony Blair's Government will then turn
into something resembling an ecumenical prayer meeting.
Dr Sookhdeo nods in
vigorous agreement with that. "Yes - and it is a very big mistake.
Look at what happened in the 1990s. The security services knew about Abu Hamza and the preachers like him. They knew that London was becoming
the centre for Islamic terrorists. The police knew. The Government knew.
Yet nothing was done.
"The whole approach towards Muslim
militants was based on appeasement. 7/7 proved that that approach does
not work - yet it is still being followed. For example, there is a book,
The Noble Koran: a New Rendering of its Meaning in English, which is
openly available in Muslim bookshops.
"It calls for the killing of Jews and
Christians, and it sets out a strategy for killing the infidels and for
warfare against them. The Government has done nothing whatever to
interfere with the sale of that book.
"Why not? Government ministers have
promised to punish religious hatred, to criminalise
the glorification of terrorism, yet they do nothing about this book,
which blatantly does both."
Perhaps the explanation is just that they do not
take it seriously. "I fear that is exactly the problem," says
Dr Sookhdeo. "The trouble is that Tony
Blair and other ministers see Islam through the prism of their own
secular outlook.
They simply do not realise
how seriously Muslims take their religion. Islamic clerics regard
themselves as locked in mortal combat with secularism.
"For example, one of the fundamental
notions of a secular society is the moral importance of freedom, of
individual choice. But in Islam, choice is not allowable: there cannot be
free choice about whether to choose or reject any of the fundamental
aspects of the religion, because they are all divinely ordained. God has
laid down the law, and man must obey.
'Islamic clerics do not believe in a society in
which Islam is one religion among others in a society ruled by basically
non-religious laws. They believe it must be the dominant religion - and
it is their aim to achieve this.
"That is why they do not believe in
integration. In 1980, the Islamic Council of Europe laid out their
strategy for the future - and the fundamental rule was never dilute your presence. That is to say, do not
integrate.
"Rather, concentrate Muslim presence in a
particular area until you are a majority in that area, so that the
institutions of the local community come to reflect Islamic structures.
The education system will be Islamic, the shops will serve only halal food, there will be no advertisements showing
naked or semi-naked women, and so on."
That plan, says Dr Sookhdeo,
is being followed in Britain.
"That is why you are seeing areas which are now almost totally
Muslim. The next step will be pushing the Government to recognise sharia law for
Muslim communities - which will be backed up by the claim that it is
"racist" or "Islamophobic"
or "violating the rights of Muslims" to deny them sharia law.
"There's already a Sharia
Law Council for the UK.
The Government has already started making concessions: it has changed the
law so that there are sharia-compliant
mortgages and sharia pensions.
"Some Muslims are now pressing to be
allowed four wives: they say it is part of their religion. They claim
that not being allowed four wives is a denial of their religious liberty.
There are Muslim men in Britain
who marry and divorce three women, then marry a fourth time - and stay
married, in sharia law, to all four.
"The more fundamentalist clerics think that
it is only a matter of time before they will persuade the Government to
concede on the issue of sharia law. Given the
Government's record of capitulating, you can see why they believe
that."
Dr Sookhdeo's vision
of a relentless battle between secular and Islamic Britain seems hard to
reconcile with the co-operation that seems to mark the vast majority of
the interactions between the two communities.
"Well, it isn't me who says Islam is at war
with secularisation," he says.
"That's how Islamic clerics describe the situation."
But isn't it true that most Muslims who live in
theocratic states want to get out of them as quickly as possible and live
in a secular country such as Britain or America? And that most Muslims
who come to Britain
adopt the values of a liberal, democratic, tolerant society, rather than
insisting on the inflexible rules of their religion?
"You have to distinguish between ordinary
Muslims and their self-appointed leaders," explains Dr Sookhdeo. "I agree that the best hope for our
collective future is that the majority of Muslims who have grown up here have
accepted the secular nature of the British state and society, the
division between religion and politics, and the importance of allowing
people to choose freely how they will live.
"But that is not how most of the clerics
talk. And, more significantly, it is not how the 'community leaders' whom
the Government has decided represent the Muslim community think either.
"Take, for example, Tariq
Ramadan, whom the Government has appointed as an adviser because
ministers think he is a 'community leader'. Ramadan sounds, in public,
very moderate. But in reality, he has some very extreme views. He attacks
liberal Muslims as 'Muslims without Islam'. He is affiliated to the
violent and uncompromising Muslim Brotherhood.
"He calls the education in the state
schools of the West 'aggression against the Islamic personality of the
child'. He has said that 'the Muslim respects the laws of the country
only if they do not contradict any Islamic principle'. He has added that
'compromising on principles is a sign of fear and weakness'."
So what's the answer? What should the Government
be doing? "First, it should try to engage with the real Muslim
majority, not with the self-appointed 'community leaders' who don't
actually represent anyone: they have not been elected, and the vast
majority of ordinary Muslims have nothing to do with them.
"Second, the Government should say no to
faith-based schools, because they are a block to integration. There
should be no compromise over education, or over English as the language
of education. The policy of political multiculturalism should be
reversed.
"The hope was that it would to ensure
separate communities would soften at the edges and integrate. But the
opposite has in fact happened: Islamic communities have hardened. There
is much less integration than there was for the generation that arrived
when I did. There will be much less in the future if the present trend
continues.
"Finally, the Government should make it
absolutely clear: we welcome diversity, we welcome different religions -
but all of them have to accept the secular basis of British law and
society. That is a non-negotiable condition of being here.
"If the Government does not do all of those
things then I fear for the future, because Islamic communities within Britain
will form a state within a state. Religion will occupy an ever-larger
place in our collective political life. And, speaking as a religious man
myself, I fear that outcome."
Publishers wishing to reproduce photographs on
this page should phone 44 (0) 207 538 7505 or e-mail syndication@telegraph.co.uk
|