Government suspends links with Muslim Council of Britain over Gaza

[Uthman]

Move comes after body refuses to sack senior member over statements urging Muslims to resist Israeli military.

Read Hazel Blears's letter (pdf)

The government has suspended ties with Britain's largest Muslim group and demanded that one of its leaders should be removed from office for allegedly supporting violence against Israel.

The news comes on the eve of the launch of a major government strategy aimed at fostering closer ties with Muslims to help counter the threat of Islamist terrorism.

The launch tomorrow of Contest 2, the government's revised counter-terrorism strategy, comes after ministers decided to stop engaging with the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB).

The council's deputy secretary-general, Daud Abdullah, signed a declaration last month that the government and critics of the MCB have interpreted as calling for violence against Israel and condoning attacks on British troops.

The declaration followed a meeting in Istanbul of clerics and other Muslim leaders from around the world to discuss strategy after Israel's attacks on Gaza.

Hazel Blears, secretary of state for communities and local government, wrote to the MCB saying Abdullah should be asked to "resign his post" for signing a statement that supported Hamas and celebrated its "victory" against "this malicious Jewish Zionist war over Gaza".

Muslims who are sceptical of government anti-terror plans say they cannot think of any other occasion where a cabinet minister has tried to dictate to a religious group about the composition of its leadership.

Abdullah, speaking for the first time about the row, told the Guardian he would not be standing down.

He said of his views: "If British troops were to engage in a breach of international law, it is up to the people of the territory to decide what to do. But as I understand it, under international law, it is their right to resist."

He defended signing the statement, saying: "It made no specific mention of attacks on British troops. The statement does say if foreign troops enter Gaza's territorial waters, it is the duty of Muslims to resist, as it would be seen as assisting the siege."

Later, in an email, Abdullah said: "I did not and do not condone calls for attacks on British troops.

"The British government has not deployed troops to the territorial waters of Gaza and I do not believe it or our parliament would endorse any breach of international law.

"Any discussions about what should or would happen is hypothetical and I cannot speculate."

Blears demanded that the MCB remove Abdullah from office and demanded to know what its leaders planned to do by today.

In her letter, dated 13 March , Blears wrote: "In light of the MCB's unequivocal stance on violence, it would seem that Dr Abdullah's position as the deputy secretary-general would be incompatible with his recent actions."

Blears's letter notes that the MCB would be investigating the matter, but says she was breaking links with the group, which was once seen as vital by the government to building better relations with British Muslims: "Whilst your investigation is ongoing and the matter remains unresolved I feel that it is only appropriate for us to suspend our engagement with the Muslim Council of Britain pending its outcome."

In a statement, the communities and local government department said: "We ... are very concerned that the statement from the event calls for direct support for acts of violence in the Middle East and beyond.

"We are concerned that the MCB have so far not recognised the gravity of this situation. If it is proven that the individual concerned had been a signatory, we would expect them to ask him to resign and for the MCB to confirm their opposition to acts of violent extremism."

An MCB spokesman today condemned the government for trying to interfere in its internal affairs and said the cabinet minister's demand would be ignored: "The MCB is a democratic organisation, with its own affiliates, and they decide who its representatives are, and not Ms Blears."

The Istanbul declaration said: "The obligation of the Islamic Nation [is] to regard the sending of foreign warships into Muslim waters, claiming to control the borders and prevent the smuggling of arms to Gaza, as a declaration of war, a new occupation, sinful aggression, and a clear violation of the sovereignty of the Nation. This must be rejected and fought by all means and ways."

During the Gaza conflict, Gordon Brown suggested sending forces to help stop weapons smuggling into Gaza.

Source

[Amadeus85]

Thats a big issue in UK I guess.

[Uthman]

Thats a big issue in UK I guess.

I would say it's pretty significant, yes!

[Uthman]

Comment by Brian Whitaker:

Alienating British Muslims

Labour's actions against the Muslim Council of Britain destroy any credibility its engagement policy might have had.

Following the recent muddle over Hezbollah, the British government continues to dig itself deeper into the mire with its "anti-extremism" policy.

Hazel Blears, secretary of state for communities and local government, is trying to engineer the resignation of Daud Abdullah, deputy secretary general of the Muslim Council of Britain. She may not like Abdullah or agree with his views but, frankly, it's none of her business. The MCB is not a government body and can appoint whoever it wants as its deputy secretary general.

This sort of government interference is condemned by human rights organisations when it happens under dictatorial regimes such as that in Egypt where authorities vet the board members of NGOs and even tell them how they must conduct their meetings.

Of course, the government can choose whether or not to talk to the MCB but, by choosing not to, it will seriously undermine its own policy of engaging with the British Muslim community.

The MCB is an umbrella organisation that claims the support of more than 500 affiliated national, regional and local organisations, mosques, charities and schools. By definition it needs to include as many strands of British Muslim opinion as possible. In the past it has been criticised for not being representative enough, and now Blears seems determined to make it less representative as a condition of being recognised by the government.

Abdullah's "offence" is that he signed a declaration in Istanbul last month at a meeting called in response to the Israeli bombing of Gaza. This has been interpreted by the government and critics of the MCB as calling for violence against Israel and condoning attacks on British troops.

Whether or not we approve of the Istanbul declaration's content, there is little doubt that it represents a significant strand of Muslim opinion, in Britain and elsewhere. By refusing to acknowledge this and instead bestowing its favours on cuddly but marginal Sufi organisations, the government is destroying whatever credibility its policy of engagement might have had.

This comes against a background of ever-widening government definitions of "extremism" which, as Inayat Bunglawala has pointed out, are counterproductive because they risk alienating the majority of British Muslims. The latest example is the daft – sorry, draft – counterterrorism strategy known as Contest 2 which, among other things, counts as extremists those who believe in "armed resistance, anywhere in the world", or "argue that Islam bans homosexuality and that it is a sin against Allah".

Muslim attitudes towards homosexuality are certainly a problem, but why single out Islam in that respect? If we're going to go down that road, shouldn't Blears also be calling for the pope's resignation and refusing to engage with "extremist" Catholics and evangelicals?

Similarly with violence. Muslim organisations are required to condemn violence while Jewish organisations that aid and abet Israel's warmongering policies don't receive letters of complaint from Hazel Blears or threats to exclude them from meetings with the government.

Part of the problem here is that Israel's propagandists have succeeded in portraying Hamas, Hezbollah and al-Qaida as peas from the same pod, when in fact there are important differences. Unlike al-Qaida, neither Hamas nor Hezbollah poses a global threat, and certainly not a threat to Britain. They have both killed Israeli civilians, though on nothing like the scale of Israel's killing of civilians in Lebanon and Gaza.

One does not have to be a supporter of Hezbollah or Hamas to realise that large numbers of British Muslims are likely to see double standards and injustice here, especially amid the growing evidence of Israeli war crimes in Gaza, and that having their views dismissed out of hand by the government will only increase their sense of alienation.

Source

Brian Whitaker has done a variety of jobs at the Guardian including, most recently, seven years as Middle East editor. He is currently an editor on Comment is Free.

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[Muezzin]

Thats a big issue in UK politics I guess.

Fixed.

As they say on the Internet.

Also, I like the name change. Amadeus, Amadeus! :D

[nocturnal]

It is significant in the UK, but it won't have any tangible impact in terms of social cohesion, because matters are pretty fraught anyway. Even moves to set up Muslim advisory bodies were probably ill-judged given that most Muslims were already implacably dissatisfied over the government's intransigence in foregin policy matters.

This decision to decisively disengage just confirms their intent to push on and implement the neo-con agenda that they're so pitifully subordinate to.

[Uthman]

Muslim attitudes towards homosexuality are certainly a problem, but why single out Islam in that respect?

Slightly off-topic, but I'm not sure that the part I highlighted is actually true.

[nocturnal]

Slightly off-topic, but I'm not sure that the part I highlighted is actually true.

It seems a reasonable thing to say. Homosexuality is proscribed in Islam, and we're living in a society where many Muslims are deeply resentful of the notion of integrating into British society, let alone engage with Homosexuals.

It is a problematic scenario to say the least.

[Uthman]

It seems a reasonable thing to say. Homosexuality is proscribed in Islam, and we're living in a society where many Muslims are deeply resentful of the notion of integrating into British society, let alone engage with Homosexuals.

It is a problematic scenario to say the least.

Good point actually.

[Whatsthepoint]

Osman, you seem to be the resident poster of bad news for Muslims. Can I ask you what you feel about the future, are you perhaps afraid the tensions may increase, that bad things can happen?

[Whatsthepoint]

Fixed.

As they say on the Internet.

Also, I like the name change. Amadeus, Amadeus! :D

Chopin, Chopin!:raging:

[Amadeus85]

Chopin, Chopin!:raging:

Obama inspired me, talking about Change all the time, Change here, Change there.
Yes we can. :D

[Whatsthepoint]

Obama inspired me, talking about Change all the time, Change here, Change there.
Yes we can. :D

Why choose a deranged Austrian when you have one of the most incredibly talented composers in your own country?

[Muezzin]

Perhaps we should get back to the topic before it becomes derailed, chaps?

Especially since I arguably started this particular off-topic tangent...

[Uthman]

Hi Whatsthepoint,

Osman, you seem to be the resident poster of bad news for Muslims. Can I ask you what you feel about the future, are you perhaps afraid the tensions may increase, that bad things can happen?

To be fair, I do post positive news whenever it crosses me! Unfortunately, it just so happens that there tends to be more bad news than good.

Coming on to your question, I think the future is uncertain. Tensions may well increase in the event of another major terrorist attack (Allah forbid). On a political level, people also question the loyalties of Muslims who voice their opposition to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and label them as extremists which is another problem.

One thing that I have been consistent on is that I don't believe it is possible for a practising/active Muslim to ever successfully integrate into mainstream British society since certain Islamic values and the Islamic way of life differ fundamentally from traditional British culture and some British values. This lack of integration can only lead to distrust and alienation. Some British tabloids such as the Daily Express and Daily Mail don't help either by fuelling further distrust of the Muslim community and boy do they have some dedicated readers. I have come to the realisation that Britain really isn't the place for the practising Muslim.

[Uthman]

Come to think of it, I post lots of positive news for Muslims! Check out some of my recent threads. :)

[Whatsthepoint]

Hi Whatsthepoint, To be fair, I do post positive news whenever it crosses me! Unfortunately, it just so happens that there tends to be more bad news than good.

Coming on to your question, I think the future is uncertain. Tensions may well increase in the event of another major terrorist attack (Allah forbid). On a political level, people also question the loyalties of Muslims who voice their opposition to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and label them as extremists which is another problem.

One thing that I have been consistent on is that I don't believe it is possible for a practising/active Muslim to ever successfully integrate into mainstream British society since certain Islamic values and the Islamic way of life differ fundamentally from traditional British culture and some British values. This lack of integration can only lead to distrust and alienation. Some British tabloids such as the Daily Express and Daily Mail don't help either by fuelling further distrust of the Muslim community and boy do they have some dedicated readers. I have come to the realisation that Britain really isn't the place for the practising Muslim.

I know, but you can't deny you have a thing for news.
Thats good, I saw you said you anted to move out as soon as possible. Not that I ant you out or anything, but better that than preaching how Britain would make a fine caliphate.

[Whatsthepoint]

Come to think of it, I post lots of positive news for Muslims! Check out some of my recent threads. :)

Haha, sorry I aid anything.
Don't worry be happy!

[Uthman]

I know, but you can't deny you have a thing for news.

You noticed? :X

Thats good, I saw you said you anted to move out as soon as possible. Not that I ant you out or anything, but better that than preaching how Britain would make a fine caliphate.

Absolutely. Being 17 years old, it will take a while to become financially independent though and it will take some guts to go ahead and actually do it. Another thing, I'm not sure which country is the most appropriate at this time for the "True Muslim" ™.

[Whatsthepoint]

You noticed? :X

Absolutely. Being 17 years old, it will take a while to become financially independent though and it will take some guts to go ahead and actually do it. Another thing, I'm not sure which country is the most appropriate at this time for the "True Muslim" ™.

Were you thinking a Muslim majority country or a more toelrant country, say Sweden?

[Amadeus85]

Lets not give up Osman, You are open minded and inteligent person. Why You would leave UK at all, one of the best places to live.

[nocturnal]

Thats a key point about the effect of the press actually. They exert enormous influence, and some of theme are so patently Islamophobic. The likes of the Mail, Sun, Express etc. They instill this irrational fear of pervasive radicalisation and some sort of imminent Muslim invasion of the UK.

It is good, that we have on the other hand, newspapers such as the Guardian and Independent, which always expose such unfounded accusations made by jingoistic publications, and even in isolated examples where radicalisation has occured, the left-wing press argues correctly that it is the only recourse that many disaffected young Muslims have in an era when the Muslim world is under a sustained onslaught from almost every quarter of the supposedly "civilized" world, whether political or military.

Also, sometimes if you ever happen to watch BBC Parliament, and when they deliberate the Gaza bombardment, you notice how vehemently, especially in the House of Lords, the pro-Israel lobby defends the malicious actions and seeks to rationalize such inhumance massacres.

Perhaps when someday, we are able to collectively vote in more conscientous MPs, such as George Galloway and Clare Short, who are not afraid of speaking the truth, can we then have a real alteration in British foreign policy.

[Uthman]

Comment by Hazel Blears:

Our shunning of the MCB is not grandstanding

The MCB deputy secretary general has signed a declaration supporting violence against troops and Jewish communities.

Over the past two weeks the government has been privately engaging with the Muslim Council of Britain through meetings and correspondence to establish whether one of their senior members attended the Global Anti-Aggression conference in Istanbul, and if so, whether he also signed the Istanbul declaration that calls for violence against troops and Jewish communities. This is not grandstanding. The government would be shirking its duty if it fails to investigate any potential threat to the security of our troops and communities. We must take this extremely seriously.

That is why we have been asking the MCB to find out whether their deputy secretary general, Dr Abdullah, attended the conference and signed the statement. The MCB has now confirmed he did attend and did sign the declaration. A declaration that supports violence against foreign forces – which could include British naval personnel – as the prime minister has offered British naval support to stop the smuggling of weapons to Gaza; and advocating attacks on Jewish communities all around the world.

Speculation that the government intended to use our counter-terrorism strategy (Contest) to widen the definition of extremism is categorically wrong. As we have consistently set out, Contest is grounded in our shared values which we will protect, respect and promote – at home and abroad – and that includes freedom of speech and the right for people to express views about foreign policy and the situation in the Middle East. We will continue to challenge those who reject, or seek to undermine them and those who advocate violence against our troops and against particular communities.

I would urge the MCB to accept the serious nature of this issue and work with us to resolve it so that we can continue in partnership to build the safe, strong, cohesive communities in which we all want to live.

This will be published as a letter in the Guardian on March 26th 2009

Source

Hazel Blears is Labour MP for Salford.

[Uthman]

Comment by Daud Abdullah:

My reply to Hazel Blears

The communities minister has now moved from concerns about British troops to claims of attacks on Jews.

In her misguided and ill-advised attempt to exercise control on the affairs of the largest independent Muslim organisation, the MCB, which has steadfastly and with honesty represented the views of Muslims over the years, Hazel Blears has used my attendance at the Global Anti-Aggression Campaign conference and the signing of a position document as the peg to hang her coat on. Her latest claim as stated in a letter on her behalf to our secretary-general and published in the Guardian today is that I signed a document "advocating attacks on Jewish communities all around the world". She had not raised this allegation before yesterday and it is entirely untrue.

The official communiqué of the Global Anti-Aggression Campaign conference thanked the Turkish government for its political stand towards the war on Gaza and allowing the conference to be convened in Istanbul. Despite his public condemnation of the war, prime minister Tayeb Erdogan's government maintained its strong diplomatic ties with Israel. On several occasions during and after the war he reaffirmed that his government would not tolerate any acts of antisemitism in Turkey. Contrary to Hazel Blears, the Turkish government did not interpret the Istanbul declaration to advocate attacks on Jews.

In her letter to the MCB, Blears wrote: "We have particular concerns around paragraphs II.7 and II.8. Although the wording of these paragraphs is not exact, it is clear that the intention behind them is to call for attacks on Jews throughout the world and to retaliate against any action which could be taken by the British government in sending naval forces to prevent arms smuggling into Gaza. While the wording is not specific, both the tone and content of these paragraphs call for violence."

Although the letter to the MCB from the government says the wording of the document is "not exact" and "not specific", Blears affirms in her letter to Guardian with astounding certainty that it "advocates attacks on Jewish communities all around the world".

We have arrived at the stage where the secretary of state is now attributing an "intention" which in fact does not exist. While it is true that dictators often persecute their people for what they assume their intention is and not their actions, this has never been a feature of life in a mature democracy.

The focus of Blears' latest sudden concerns is item 7 of the document which talks about the political "position" towards those who support the Israeli ("Zionist entity") crimes – and they are crimes, as Israel is committing actions which are illegal and contrary to international law. The paragraph does not suggest in any way how to react to those who support Israel. More importantly, it refers to those who support Israeli crimes in general including Arabs and Muslims, as was clear from other parts of the statement which criticised the Arab regimes more than anyone else. However, none of these autocratic regimes interpreted this statement as a call for violence or attack on them or anyone else.

For the purposes of clarity, my position remains as follows:

1. I did not call for or support attacks on British troops anywhere in the world. As a British citizen, I have the right to criticise and campaign against government political decisions that embroil young British soldiers in illegal occupations and interventions. One of the reasons I joined the demonstrations against the war in Iraq was to prevent the sacrifice of young soldiers in an illegal war. For this reason I was the first to go to Baghdad in 2004 to seek the release of the British hostage, Ken Bigley, despite threats to my life in Iraq and here in the UK after I returned. This move was welcomed by the government at the time, but it seems some have a short memory.

2. Unlike his predecessor, prime minister Brown has promised that any such future intervention would only be carried out after it is endorsed by parliament. All the assertions made by the secretary of state are based on conjecture and totally hypothetical scenarios.

3. I am absolutely opposed to any attack or violence directed against innocent persons of any faith or no faith anywhere in the world. To claim that I call for attacks on Jewish communities throughout the world is completely false and an inflammatory and malicious assault on my beliefs, words and actions.

4. The Palestinians have the right to resist Israel's illegal occupation, a right supported by international law and the Charter of the UN. In the same way as it is a common British value to respect international law and support justice and freedom of oppressed people, I, along with the Muslim community and large sections of the wider British society, support the rights of the Palestinians.

5. If anything good is to emerge from this saga it should be the affirmation of the independence of MCB. However much Hazel Blears may dislike or disagree with its views she should respect this independence and deal with its representatives as equal citizens, just as it deals with the representatives of other communities.

I have no intention of bowing to the pressure from Hazel Blears to resign. The MCB will continue to make its positive contributions toward a just and fair society.

Source

Daud Abdullah is deputy secretary general of the Muslim Council of Britain.

[Uthman]

Muslim Council of Britain accuses government of undermining independence

[Uthman]

Were you thinking a Muslim majority country or a more toelrant country, say Sweden?

I would be inclined to say a Muslim majority country but as we very well know, sometimes a Non-Muslim country can be more 'Islamic' than a Muslim majority one. I really don't know, but I would prefer a country which shares the most values with Islam.

[Amadeus85]

If this Muslim Council of Britain really persuaded to kill brittish troops, suspending links with them by the Govt is the smallest penalty.

[transition?]

You noticed? :X

Absolutely. Being 17 years old, it will take a while to become financially independent though and it will take some guts to go ahead and actually do it. Another thing, I'm not sure which country is the most appropriate at this time for the "True Muslim" ™.

That's come to be a real obstacle for so many Muslims. Many Muslims are already moving back to the Middle East, in hope of advocating new (less-corrupt) leadership there. InshaAllah, I planning the same!

[Amadeus85]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ed-deaths.html

[Uthman]

Government moves to isolate Muslim Council of Britain with cash for mosques

[Uthman]

Muslim leader sues Blears on Gaza

A leading member of the Muslim Council of Britain is suing cabinet minister Hazel Blears for defamation, following a row over the Israeli bombing of Gaza.

Dr Daud Abdullah, who is the MCB deputy secretary-general, is seeking damages.

Ms Blears said a document which Dr Abdullah signed on hostilities in Gaza had advocated attacks on UK military personnel and on Jews around the world.

Ms Blears made the claim in a letter to the Guardian last week, but Dr Abdullah has vehemently denied it.

The document is known as the Istanbul Declaration and was signed by 90 Muslim leaders in response to the three-week Israeli offensive in Gaza, in December and January.

We are concerned with those articles which appear to call for violence and Dr Abdullah's repeated unwillingness to distance himself from [them]

Statement, Department for Communities and Local Government

The minister said the declaration supported violence against foreign troops, including British naval forces and advocated "attacks on Jewish communities all around the world".

Ms Blears, who is Communities Secretary, said Dr Abdullah needed to make his own position clear.

Dr Abdullah has in turn accused Ms Blears of "crude bullying". He said the declaration did not represent an attack on Jewish people and that he did not call for or support attacks on British troops anywhere in the world.

Private dialogue

After the legal action was launched a spokesperson for the Department for Communities and Local Government confirmed it had received correspondence from Dr Daud Abdullah's solicitors.

"We have been in dialogue with the MCB since 6 March, seeking clarification of the actions taken by Dr Abdullah in relation to the serious issues raised by the articles in the Istanbul Declaration.

What I do advocate is the right of all British citizens to agree or disagree with government policy and to use all lawful means to democratically make their voices heard.

Dr Daud Abdullah

"We are concerned with those articles which appear to call for violence and Dr Abdullah's repeated unwillingness to distance himself from those articles specifically.

"The legal route that Dr Abdullah has chosen to take despite our offer of further private dialogue with the MCB to resolve the matter means this will now be taken forward by solicitors."

The UK government has said it is concerned with the following articles of the declaration:

• "The obligation of the Islamic Nation to regard everyone standing with the Zionist entity, whether countries, institutions or individuals, as providing a substantial contribution to the crimes and brutality of this entity; the position towards him is the same as towards this usurping entity."

• "The obligation of the Islamic Nation to regard the sending of foreign warships into Muslim waters, claiming to control the borders and prevent the smuggling of arms to Gaza, as in effect a declaration of war, a new occupation, sinful aggression, and a clear violation of the sovereignty of the Nation, that must be rejected and fought by all means and ways."

Responding to Ms Blears with his own letter to the Guardian, Dr Abdullah said: "I do not advocate attacks on any religious community, including Jewish communities, and I do not advocate attacks on British military forces.

"What I do advocate is the right of all British citizens to agree or disagree with government policy and to use all lawful means to democratically make their voices heard.

"A government which tries to suppress discussion of such views by the kind of crude bullying to which Hazel Blears unfortunately stoops will have little moral support, not only in the Muslim community, but in wider society," he added.

Last week a Labour MP and two of the party's peers were among co-signatories with Dr Abdullah of a public statement insisting they did not "condone, encourage or support" killing any human beings or attacks on British soldiers.

Ms Blears said at the time that the statement was a "helpful first step" but that "greater clarity" of Dr Abdullah's views was needed.

She said she stood by what she believed about the declaration.

"Public statements that assert that attacks of this kind are not only acceptable but an 'obligation' cannot go unchallenged," she said.

She denied Dr Abdullah's claims that she was trying to "suppress discussion".

Source