Major book from Qaradawi reviewed

Qaradawi and Mayor 2“Yusuf al-Qaradawi, probably the single most influential living Sunni Islamist figure, has just written a major book entitled Fiqh al-Jihad (The Jurisprudence of Jihad) which decisively repudiates al Qaeda’s conception of jihad as a ‘mad declaration of war upon the world’.

“At the same time, he strongly rejects what he calls efforts to remove jihad completely from Islam, and strongly reaffirms the duty of jihad in resisting the occupation of Muslim lands, specifically mentioning Israel as the arena of legitimate resistance.

“Qaradawi’s intervention has thus far received no attention at all in the English-language media. It should, because of his vast influence and his long track record as an accurate barometer of mainstream Arab views….

Fiqh al-Jihad stakes out the centrist (wasatiyya) ground where Qaradawi has always comfortably resided (he has authored dozens of books about wasatiyya concept). He rejects two trends: those who seek to eliminate jihad completely from the Muslim world, stripping it of its power and its ability to resist (which is how he sees the project of much of so-called moderate Islam or secularists); and those who apply it indiscriminately in a mad campaign of killing of all with whom they disagree (like al-Qaeda)….

“Qaradawi also offers an intriguing broadening of the concept of jihad, away from violence to the realm of ideas, media, and communication – which he calls the ‘jihad of the age’. The weapons of this jihad should be TV, the internet, email and the like rather than guns. Persuading Muslims of the message of Islam and the importance of this jihad in the path of God should be the first priority, he argues: ‘the jihad of the age, a great jihad, and a long jihad’. He also goes into great detail about the different forms of jihad, the need for pragmatism, and the diverse nature of possible relations between Muslims and non-Muslims.”

Marc Lynch’s blog, 9 July 2009

Maajid Nawaz and Qaradawi

We should have posted on this earlier, but last week’s Any Questions on Radio 4 featured an exchange over Yusuf al-Qaradawi, when Maajid Nawaz of the Quilliam Foundation was invited by the chair, Jonathan Dimbleby, to have a go at Ken Livingstone over the welcome he gave to Qaradawi back in 2004.

“That man justifies suicide bombing”, Nawaz asserted. “… He justifies killing women and children in market places in Israel. And that is absolutely unacceptable. There is no justification for targeting women and children.”

Which only goes to show that in this, as in much else, the Quilliam Foundation merely echoes the lies of anti-Muslim propagandists. As indeed do the “left” Islamophobes at Shiraz Socialist, who have hailed Nawaz’s “impressive performance“.

For an answer to the charge that Qaradawi supports the targeting of Israeli civilians by suicide bombers, see here.

Brian Whitaker on Islamism

I’m generally an admirer of former Guardian Middle East editor Brian Whitaker – he recently wrote an effective demolition of the government’s stupid decision to bar Ibrahim Moussawi from entering the UK, and anyone who is prepared to have a go at MEMRI and Yigal Carmon is OK by me. But Whitaker’s latest post at Comment is Free (“Should faith override the will of the people?“) is an ill-informed piece that repeats and reinforces misleading cliches about political Islam.

Whitaker’s article is written in response to an earlier CiF piece by Bob Lambert and Jonathan Githens-Mazer (“The demonisation of British Islamism“) which criticised the government for its hostility towards, and current refusal to work with, mainstream Islamists like Daud Abdullah of the Muslim Council of Britain.

Whitaker takes exception to the definition of Islamists, cited by Lambert and Githens-Mazer from the Oxford Dictionary of Islam, as Islamic political or social activists. Whitaker dismisses this as “the broadest possible definition”. He prefers a much narrower one: “Islamists are not simply politicised Muslims but Muslims who view their religion as the basis for a political system – as an ‘ideology that guides society as a whole’ where ‘law must be in conformity with the Islamic sharia’.”

The fact is that a broad definition is used by analysts of Islamism because they need a term that embraces a highly diverse movement. For example, in The Future of Political Islam, Graham E. Fuller writes:

“In my view an Islamist is one who believes that Islam as a body of faith has something important to say about how politics and society should be ordered in the contemporary Muslim World and who seeks to implement this idea in some fashion. The term ‘political Islam’ should be neutral in character, neither pejorative nor judgmental in itself; only upon further definition of the specific views, means and goals of an Islamist movement in each case can we be critical of the process.”

Fuller continues: “I prefer this definition because it is broad enough to capture the full spectum of Islamist expression that runs the gamut from radical to moderate, violent to peaceful, democratic to authoritarian, traditionalist to modernist.”

Whitaker rejects this approach because he wants define Islamism as an ideology that is incompatible with democracy, on the grounds that it seeks to establish a state based on religious principles. He writes:

“One of the basic requirements for freedom in politics is that sovereignty belongs to the people. Power may be delegated to representatives but the people should remain the ultimate arbiters. Islamists, no matter how they try to dress up their ideology, do not accept this key point…. Some aspire to a full-blooded theocracy while others envisage a degree of popular decision-making – at least up to the point where it conflicts with the ‘principles of Islam’.”

Continue reading

Another MEMRI-inspired witch-hunt of Qaradawi

Qaradawi and Neturei KartaThe television network al-Jazeera has been criticised by MPs for broadcasting the sermons of a Muslim cleric in which he celebrates the Holocaust and prays for the killing of all Jews.

John Whittingdale, chairman of the House of Commons Media Select Committee, urged al-Jazeera yesterday to apologise for broadcasting the messages of Yusuf al-Qaradawi and to ban the cleric, one of the network’s top hosts, from appearing on screen. “I would hope that anybody who watches it or is aware of it may change their attitude towards al-Jazeera,” he told The Times. “I would’ve thought it is very damaging. Al-Jazeera should apologise.”

Andrew Dismore, the Labour MP for Hendon, condemned al-Jazeera for associating itself with Sheikh al-Qaradawi – who hosts one of its most popular segments, Shariah and Life – saying the network should not use live coverage as a means of justifying the broadcast of the sheik’s comments. “If they put on somebody who has known racist views they should not be surprised what comes out at the other end,” he said.

The Board of Deputies of British Jews said: “These sermons represent hatred in its purest form and epitomise the worst of Islamist anti-Semitism.” The complaints relate to a sermon and a lecture by Sheikh al-Qaradawi in which he described the Holocaust as a “divine punishment” and prayed to Allah to kill Jews “down to the very last one”.

Times, 7 February 2009


And what is the source for this latest attack on Qaradawi? Yes, you probably guessed, it’s another cut-and-paste job by the Middle East Media Research Institute. For Qaradawi’s actual views on the Jewish community, see for example here and here.

Update:  Needless to say, MEMRI’s attack on Qaradawi has been endorsed by Harry’s Place, a self-proclaimed “left-wing” blog with a close affinity for extreme right-wing Zionists. However, not all of Harry’s Place readers buy this. We reproduce the following post from the comments section:

I don’t think the issue is as clear-cut as you say, because Qaradawi has made many moderate, pluralistic statements that show a tremendous desire for peaceful coexistence of the three Abrahamic faiths.

For example, he has opposed the idea of Muslim supremacy over other religions:

“The Koran states that [religious] disagreement exists because God [himself] wills it … that people will have different religions. After all, if God had wanted everyone to have the same religion and the same path, he would have created Man differently … the [believing Muslim] does not try to pass judgment upon those who disagree [with his religion] in this world. God is the one who will pass judgment on the day of resurrection…”

He highlights the universalist and progressive message of Mohammed that all are equal in the eyes of God:

Islam honors Man as such, regardless of gender, religion, color, language, geographic region, or status … [People] said to God’s Messenger: ‘This is the funeral of a Jew. That coffin belongs to a Jew, not a Muslim.’ He answered: ‘Is this not a soul [too]? Is the Jew not a human soul?’

Perhaps what infuriates some Western opinion about Qaradawi is that he pins the blame for modern anti-Semitism where it belongs – on Europe’s long history of intolerance:

“We did not invent this hostility [towards the Jews]. Jews lived among Muslims for centuries, even when Europe persecuted them and expelled them… They found a safe haven in Muslim territory and Muslim homelands. This is because Islam considers the Jews to be People of the Book … This is how the Koran views the Jews, and this is how they lived in the countries of the Muslims. They have the protection [dhimma] of Allah, His Messenger, and of all the Muslims.”

Relationships between Muslims and Jews have been poisoned by Zionism and the criminal occupation of Muslim lands:

“The battle between us and the Jews began when they occupied the land of Palestine, expelled its residents, and perpetrated all their deeds. They are the ones who started the hostility, not us… There is a difference between Judaism as a religion and Zionism as a political movement with aspirations and goals.”

Qaradawi does something that Western Islamophobes often claim is never done amongst Islamic scholars – he historically contextualizes the controversial parts of the Koran which it is claimed make Islam a violent religion:

“This verse [Koran 5:82] talks about an historical position. Islam accepted the Jews with open arms and welcomed [the Muslims’] relations with them, since they are People of the Book … Here [in the verse], Islam is talking about those that did this [i.e. who violated the pact with Muhammad]. However, Islam welcomes those who believe in the [Jewish] religion. Moreover, the Jews are probably the closest to Muslims in terms of faith and law, even more than Christians.”

Qaradawi argues that minorities would have nothing to fear in a Muslim-majority state:

“Respect for the dictations of [other] religions and faiths is one of the most fundamental things for us. We don’t get involved in their affairs… Islam is at the top of the tolerance scale; it allows one to do what is forbidden to Muslims, if it is permitted [in one’s owns religion], such as eating pork and drinking wine… Protecting the ahl al-dhimma is a duty incumbent upon the Muslims. They must protect them before they protect Muslims. Muslim clerics have said that harming a dhimmi is worse than harming a Muslim. Slandering a dhimmi is worse than slandering a Muslim, since he is considered to be under the Muslims’ charge.”

Now, I understand that you may not like the man. Certainly he has said some pretty objectionable things about the Holocaust. But you must recognise him as a moderating influence with many good and progressive things to say about the possibility of peaceful coexistence between the West and the Muslim world. That is why he was invited to London by the far-seeing Ken Livingstone, and why we must listen to him today, with politeness and genuine good will, understanding that sometimes the kernel of truth that he states can be temporarily obscured, alas, by the shell of bitterness and resentment at the hideous oppression of his people by Israel and the West.

Islamophobe backs Boris

A decision by the new London administration not to continue with a Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Advisory Panel formed by former Mayor Ken Livingstone has been attacked by a leading gay Muslim activist. Pav Akhtar branded the decision “extremely concerning”. On the eve of Pride London on Saturday, where Mayor of London Boris Johnson led the parade, Mr Akhtar issued a statement. “Boris Johnson’s attempts to woo the LGBT community rings hollow given his disbanding of the Mayor’s Lesbian and Gay Advisory group,” he said.

Pink News, 8 July 2008

But Johnson has at least one admirer in the LGBT community, who is evidently happy to ignore the abolition of the Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Advisory Panel, not to mention Johnson’s earlier bigoted remarks about homosexuality. On the Pink Triangle blog George Broadhead of the Gay and Lesbian Humanist Organisation is quoted as saying, in connection with the Mayor’s Pride London reception at City Hall: “I thought Boris did very well, and was a refreshing change from Ken Livingstone who badly blotted his copy book by warmly welcoming that frightful homophobic Islamic cleric Yusuf al-Qaradawi.”

Broadhead was one of the contributors to the notorious “Sick Face of Islam” issue of the now thankfully defunct Gay and Lesbian Humanist magazine, where he wrote: “There are two terms that, increasingly, annoy us: Islamophobia and moderate Muslims. What we’d like to know is, first, what’s wrong with being fearful of Islam (there’s a lot to fear); and, second, what does a moderate Muslim do, other than excuse the real nutters by adhering to this barmy doctrine?”

Update:  Pink News reports that “Outrage! backs Boris over abolition of gay advisory panel“. Peter Tatchell’s sidekick Brett Lock is quoted as saying: “Instead of negatively sniping at the Mayor, LGBT groups should concentrate on presenting Boris with practical and constructive policy ideas for the benefit of LGBT Londoners.”

‘A Caledonian caliphate’ – Mad Mel warns against the Islamisation of Scotland

Mad Mel“Alex Salmond, leader of the Scottish National Party, has been spectacularly canny and effective as Scotland’s first minister, moving his nationalist pieces across the British constitutional chessboard with stealth and skill.

“But there’s a dimension to this that has so far passed below the radar – the scimitar slung around the kilt.

“Tomorrow, the Scottish Islamic Foundation will be launched in Edinburgh in Salmond’s presence. But as the invaluable Centre for Social Cohesion tells us, the  leading members of this group and many of those who lead its events are closely linked to the Muslim Brotherhood, whose aim is the Islamisation of Britain and Europe.

“Its chief executive Omar [sic] Saeed, who has worked as Salmond’s researcher and is the SNP’s parliamentary candidate for Glasgow Central, is an Islamist and leading light in the Brotherhood front the Muslim Association of Britain. Saeed follows the usual Brotherhood line of promoting certain limited moderate positions, such as calling for an end to forced marriages or opposing terrorism in Britain, thus enabling him to pass himself off as a moderate while he slips and slides over issues such as sharia. But he is of course an unequivocal supporter of the Brotherhood leader Yusuf Qaradawi who endorses terrorist mass murder in Israel and Iraq – support which inescapably identifies the holder of such a view as an extremist and terrorist sympathiser….

“The Salmond/Saeed axis is not merely a disturbing sign of Salmond’s own prejudices. It has a potential strategic significance that goes beyond Scotland. The Brotherhood’s strategy for Britain is to promote separate Islamic development, declare sharia-only enclaves and infiltrate mainstream institutions as a springboard for Islamising the entire society. Since Salmond’s aim is to make Scotland independent from the rest of the United Kingdom, with one leap the Brothers could achieve an Islamised country on England’s border. Scottish voters might be getting more than they bargained for: a Caledonian caliphate.”

Melanie Phillips’s blog, 25 June 2008

“The scimitar slung around the kilt”? “With one leap the Brothers could achieve an Islamised country on England’s border”? Surely it can’t be long before the men in white coats arrive for Mel.

See also Douglas Murray’s “Alex Salmond cosies up to Muslim Brotherhood” at ConservativeHome.

Qaradawi slams Pakistan bombing

Qaradawi2DOHA — Renowned Doha-based Islamic scholar Dr Yusuf Al Qaradawi has denounced the bombing at the Danish embassy in Islamabad on Monday to protest against the blasphemous cartoons on Prophet Mohammed (Peace Be Upon Him).

In a statement issued in the wake of the blast that killed two people and injured several others, Qaradawi said such violent protests will only help tarnish the image of Islam all over the world.

“We condemn what was done in the Danish embassy in Pakistan. We have been urging Muslims to protest peacefully against the blasphemous Danish cartoons. It is the duty of Muslims to protect the lives of people who live in their country as their guests,” said Qaradawi.

The scholar, who heads the International Union of Islamic Scholars, said the union has already denounced the Danish cartoons as a deliberate attempt to provoke Muslims all over the world and hurt their sentiments.

Peninsular, 4 June 2008

Zionists against Islamism

Mad Melanie Phillips tells us that there is no principled difference between Al-Qaeda and mainstream Islamists like the Ikhwan, it’s all just a division of labour in the campaign to destroy western civilisation:

“… there are Islamists who oppose al Qaeda and terrorist action in the UK as a tactical mistake but nevertheless subscribe to the same strategic goal – to restore the medieval Caliphate, overturn British and western society and institute the rule of Islam instead. This is because there are two arms to the jihadi pincer: terrorist attack and cultural attack; and the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamists use either or both depending on circumstances and upon differing strategic points of view between groups under the same jihadi umbrella.”

And over at Democratiya, we find two members of the Community Security Trust making the same point, assuring us that “Qaradawi condemned the suicide bombings in London on 7/7, but it does not appear that this was based on a principled objection to the methods or goals of the global jihadist movement”.

Which would come as something of a surprise to the Al-Qaeda leadership. As one commentator recently observed in an analysis of a statement by Ayman al-Zawahiri: “Zawahiri’s condemnation of Yusuf al-Qaradawi is particularly protracted and probably demonstrates how threatening he considers the popular Muslim Brotherhood scholar to be.”

Ed Husain accuses Muslim critics of ‘intimidation’

Quilliam FoundationThe Quilliam Foundation, the think tank devoted to promoting harmony in West/Islam relations, is facing the withdrawal of its financial backers.

The foundation was set up by former Hizb ut-Tahrir members Maajid Nawaz and Ed Husain in April with the explicit aim of freeing Western Muslims from “the cultural baggage of the Indian subcontinent and the political burdens of the Arab world”. Its work has already been feted by such figures as Michael Gove, the Conservative Shadow Secretary for Children, Schools and Families, and socialite Muslim Jemima Khan. But now its financial backers, based in the Gulf, have cut off funding because they are incensed at its criticism of Ken Livingstone’s favourite Islamist, Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi.

Continue reading

Building churches allowed: Qaradawi

Qaradawi 5DOHA — Prominent scholar Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi approves building churches for Christian citizens of or residents in Muslim countries to meet their needs just as Muslims are being allowed to build mosques in the West. The fatwa came in response to a question regarding the building of the first-ever church in the Gulf emirate of Qatar.

Qaradawi, the president of the International Union for Muslim Scholars (IUMS), said the presence of a Christian minority, whether it was of a local community or of expatriates, justifies this. “It is completely permissible that they should be allowed to have churches.” Qaradawi based his view on the Muslim principle of equal treatment. “Just like they allow Muslims in their countries to build mosques for prayers.”

Islam Online, 21 May 2008

Perhaps Patrick Sookhdeo of the Barnabas Fund, who has made a speciality of condemning the persecution of Christians in Muslim-majority countries, will now acclaim Qaradawi’s intervention on this issue? Don’t hold your breath.