The Muslim News - Labour has achieved a lot for Muslims, says Blair

Issue 191, Friday 25 March 2005 - 14 Safar 1426

Labour has achieved a lot for Muslims, says Blair

Ahmed J Versi: Since September 11, Muslim countries have been invaded - first Afghanistan, then Iraq - what the Muslim community perceives as pretext of ‘war on terror’ and ‘weapons of mass destruction’. Thousands of people have been killed because of that. And now, there is a possibility - the Americans have said it at various occasions - that they might target Iran. They might destabilise Iran by using the MKO (Mujahidine Khalq Organisation) Iranian opposition group, based in Iraq, who used to work with Saddam Hussein. The perception is that the ‘war on terror’ and the war against Saddam Hussein is actually the war on Muslim countries, as there may be war against Iran, Syria and Lebanon. How would you answer to these perceptions?
Tony Blair: The best answer is to be given by the millions of Afghans, millions of Iraqis, that turned out and voted in their first ever free democratic elections. They are all Muslim people who were voting. We will never agree about the war. I have given up trying to persuade people who are fundamentally against it. And I don’t disrespect them at all. I understand that. But I simply ask them to accept that the people who are dying in Iraq now are not dying because of coalition forces. They are dying in terrorist acts. Many thousands of innocent Muslim people died in Iraq, died in Afghanistan under Taliban and under Saddam. So it’s difficult, I know, and I know people who disagree. Sometimes you just have to agree to disagree. But Iran is not Iraq. There are no plans for military invasion of Iran. The whole of international community are saying to Iran, as it is saying to Syria now, abide by your obligations and try and help what is a great process of change happening in the Middle East today. What was interesting about the Palestinian Conference I’ve just been to, is the Palestinian commitment to democracy. Egypt has announced that the next president would be elected, there are democratic moves afoot in Kuwait, in Bahrain, even some in Saudi Arabia, all be it of a limited nature. There is a change going on.
AJV: We are not saying that there is no need of change. Of course, there is a need for change to bring some kind of democracy and freedom for the people in the Middle East and in other parts of the world. But did we have to use war to bring about this change, as we saw in Afghanistan and Iraq, where we used pre emptive war. We did not go into Iraq because of Saddam Hussein but because of ‘weapons of mass destruction’. This is what people are against. People are not against change.
PM: I totally understand that, and that’s why this is not about saying we’re going to impose democracy by force in every country. But that’s not what we are doing. We are actually helping support democracy in other countries. Now truthfully, we would never have got democracy in Afghanistan and Iraq other than by force, but those aren’t the reasons why we went to war. We can go back into the whole WMD issue, but it’s probably best to put that to one side for the moment. I hope whatever people thought about the original conflict they can agree that we should, as the UN resolutions now say, allow the Iraqis to determine their own future. Multinational force is only there because of the security situation being provoked by al-Zarqawi and other people. And if they stopped and there was a peaceful situation in Iraq, we’d leave.
AJV: How would you deter Israel from bombing nuclear facilities in Iran, like it did against Iraq in the past?
PM: The trouble is that if you start entering into all these speculations, you end up just causing alarm to people unnecessarily. I don’t know of anybody planning military action against Iran. But there is a concerted effort by the European countries. France, Germany and the UK are working together, backed by America, to get the Iranians to understand their obligations under the Atomic Energy Authority rules. Let’s just pursue the diplomatic path for the moment. No one is talking about anything else at the moment.
AJV: The ‘war on terror’ has led to the erosion of civil liberties, the lack of due process. Let’s take the example of Guantanamo Bay where we have more than 600 Muslims detained with no rights whatsoever. They do not know why they have been detained. There is no process of law. One of the things that President Bush and you said, when declaring the ‘war on terror’ after September 11, was to preserve respect for domestic and international laws. But at Guantanamo Bay, we haven’t done that. On the contrary, it is against what the ‘war on terror’ is about.
PM: We have had to take extraordinary measures in respect to terrorism. In this country alone, we are applying to a very small number of people. But there are people who want to attack our country. Guantanamo Bay is a different situation. I have always said that’s not normal. We got the British people back.
AJV: But it took three years.
PM: Yes, that’s true. But on the other hand, let’s also not forget they were picked up in the context of a war at which people were trying to kill British troops.
AJV: Some of them were picked up in Pakistan, Africa and other parts of the world.
PM: Let me not enter into the detail of individual cases. I already said there are always two sides to any story. But the thing I would take the issue with is that they were imprisoned in Guantanamo Bay because they were Muslims. You can agree or disagree with Guantanamo Bay but America took the action as a result of the attack on it. I hope we can move to a different phase in international relations where we can re-establish a consensus.
AJV: The same thing is happening in the UK too where foreign nationals have been detained indefinitely without trial, due process of law and not told why they were arrested. All are Muslims. Now the next stage is that we are also going to do the same for British citizens too because of the Law Lords ruling end of last year. Again, this legislation that is going through the Parliament now, British citizens will also not have due process of law, not be able to see the evidence of why they have been arrested or detained, won’t be able to have their own lawyers to defend them. They will be in a limbo. Again, this will threaten the civil liberties. Muslims believe it will be Muslims who will be targeted.
PM: It is happening in a very limited set of circumstances for a very small number of people. But the problem that I have as Prime Minister is that we do know that there are groups of people who are trying to plan terrorist acts in this country. We’ve just had one convicted. And the one who was convicted, incidentally, has shocked many people within the Muslim community. What is the truth in this situation? The truth is that we are under threat. I agree that it’s only the most exceptional circumstances that you suspend the normal process of law. We’re not now detaining these people without trial. The foreign nationals that we have detained are all free to leave the country. But under the new law, we can put restrictions on them, they can’t go to certain places, see certain people. This may be necessary to protect our security. It will be applied to a very limited number of people. And it is not directed at the Muslim community. Now you may well be right because the terrorism that we are facing grows out of the perversion of the true faith of Islam. And that is the truth. Al Qa’idah is a group dedicated to a completely false view of Islam, but nonetheless it is the view that they take. But actually the people who often die as a result of the acts of al-Qa’idah are themselves Muslims. You can see this happening in Iraq now. The people that are dying in these suicide bomb attacks are Muslims.
So it is not directed at the Muslim community. Of course, it is something to do with the Muslim community because the extremism is found in minority elements within the community and that’s what causes a difficult situation for us. It’s difficult for me because we are a government that has fought strongly for equality, for the Muslim community - right to have your own schools, introducing the law against incitement to religious hatred that is very controversial, opposed by the Lib Dems and Conservatives and others. I passionately believe in that principle of equality. But I have to protect the security of my people, because in the end, I am the person who would have to stand up and defend the situation in which our security services were saying ‘these people are a threat, we don’t have enough evidence to prosecute them beyond reasonable doubt but we’re telling you we need to restrict their movements’.
AJV: But it is not just the Muslim community who are concerned about this, civil liberties and human right organisations, both the Conservatives and the Lib Dems are also concerned. Of course all of us and others are concerned about the security. The bombs are not going to distinguish between Muslims and non-Muslims.
PM: Exactly, and that is why it’s important. The point is that it should be exceptional. This is absolutely exceptional. It is going to be overseen by a judge. And it is a restriction on people’s liberties but it is not the same as detention without trial. It’s difficult, I agree, but when the advice from the police and security services is so clear that we need these additional powers and they may be crucial in disrupting the planning of a terrorist act in which many people can die. We have to put the National Security first. The only reason we are having this debate now is that we want to abide by the House of Lords ruling. Otherwise we would have just left the original power in place.
AJV: Last night we met President Mahmoud Abbas and he set out to us what he meant by a Palestinian State. It should be a sovereign state with 1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as the sovereign capital, the right of return of refugees to Israel proper, if they want to, and if they don’t want to return, then they should receive compensation. He was saying the Palestinians were not asking for the original land (including Israel), 95 per cent of which they had owned before the creation of Israel, but the 1967 Palestine, which is only 22 per cent. The Israelis are saying they are withdrawing from the Gaza Strip, which is only 1.3 per cent, but as for the West Bank, which is the most of the 22 per cent of the land, the Israelis are saying they will not withdraw from all of the land, and will not dismantle the Jewish settlements which are illegal under Geneva Convention, as they are in occupied territories. So you have two different interpretation of what a Palestinian State would be like. So what would you consider as a Palestinian State?
PM: We’ve always made it clear that it should be based on the UN resolutions. But I think it is possible to get very close as, indeed, we almost got a few years ago to a deal on the territory. There are difficult issues about Jerusalem and refugees.
AJV: And Jewish settlements.
PM: Yes and the issue of settlements. My point is very simply this. Those would be matters that people would have to negotiate in a final status negotiation. Let’s worry about that when we get there. So let’s take the first steps before we sprint towards the finishing line. Let’s pick ourselves up and start at least to be able to walk. It’s the first step. Whether Israel is sincere or not, we can all have our views about. But we’ll never know unless we take advantage of the prospects now, the new Palestinian leadership and this disengagement, to move forward. Yes, you are right, there would be big differences to resolve in the final status. But let us get there. Then we can start resolving them. And what’s happened, which is important, is that the Americans have made it very clear, that they would support a viable Palestinian State contiguous in its territory. But it has also got to be viable in its institutions, particularly its democratic and security institutions. That’s what we are trying to do by the conference.
AJV: How do you feel the Conference went today? Was it successful?
PM: Yes, it was very successful because we’ve agreed the concrete building blocks of a Palestinian State. And that is vital. As I was saying at the press conference, everyone can talk about a Palestinian State and they can all wish for one and all of us make speeches and pass resolutions about that. None of that matters a damn, unless you’ve actually got an agreement as what it is constituted by. And you got that agreement today and it’s a very important step in this whole process, particularly, with the agreement to have an international co-ordinating group on security, led by an American General there in the region. Now that’s vital because what happens is that, when there is a terrorist attack, the Israelis say the Palestinians haven’t tried hard enough, the Palestinians say we did try. Who knows? So what you need is an objective mechanism there that can monitor the situation.
AJV: Do you think the Israelis will allow that because in the past there were recommendations by the UN to have a neutral force and the Israelis refused to have one.
PM: The co-ordinating group has been recommended by the Conference today, which included the Americans, and everyone understands that and the Israelis know about this and understand it. Otherwise you will never get the confidence between the two sides. Nobody can prevent every terrorist. It is not possible. There will be somebody who decides they are going to something wicked and wrong and foolish. The question is what happens. Do you use this as the excuse to go back to square one? Or do you use that as an excuse to carry on going forward? You’ve got to be in the latter position.
AJV: Would you bring in the religious discrimination legislation on goods and services, you promised during the Labour Party Annual Conference last year and it was in the Queen’s speech as well, soon – before the election or after?
PM: It is a near priority.
AJV: Can you assure the Muslim community that you would fulfil your promise?
PM: The assurance is there and we are taking a lot of flak for it. I happen to think it’s right and I think that the objections to them are misguided. We got incitement to racial hatred, there is no reason why we should not have incitement to religious hatred. People said to me when I first said that Muslims should have their own schools just as Jewish and Christian people can - when will it happen. It has happened.
AJV: When you tried to bring legislation to outlaw incitement to religious hatred in December 2001 under anti-Terrorism Bill, there were objections from the opposition parties and you agreed to drop it because you wanted the anti-Terrorism Bill to pass. This time you are bringing it as part of the Serious & Organised Crime Police Bill and again you are under pressure from the opposition parties and human rights groups not to include this in the legislation. Are you going to assure the Muslim community that you will are not going to drop it (incitement to religious hatred) in a deal with the Conservatives and the Lib Dems in order for the Police Bill to go through. Are you going to change your mind this time again?
PM: No. The circumstances are completely different. There was a very urgent need to get the Terrorism legislation thorough and we thought about it very carefully. We know the opposition is there. I just think it’s misguided, the idea that we are going to make people stop making jokes about religion. This (legislation) is about people who are inciting religious hatred which can spill out into violence in society. It’s nothing to do with stopping comedians or artists making jokes and performing art. This idea that somehow what we are trying to do is stop stand up comedians poking fun at religions is ridiculous.
AJV: Is it going to stop freedom of expression?
PM: Of course not. I believe strongly in the freedom of expression and freedom of religion. But that’s completely different thing from freedom to incite hatred against a religion. The fact is that we’ve had the incitement to racial hatred, but people make jokes about race and there is no problem. Incitement to racial hatred has not led people being unable to implement their art or creativity. But what it has done is that if someone out there was trying to incite people to racism and racial hatred, and then there are laws there for protection.
AJV: There is lack of representation of Muslims in public institutions, including the Parliament. We only have two Muslim MPs, we should have at least 17 to reflect the population of Muslim which is 3 per cent. In the next elections there may two or three elected for the Parliament. Considering that a large number of existing MPs may be standing down, would you consider to place some of the Muslim candidates in these (Labour winnable) seats?
PM: I strongly support Muslim candidates coming forward. The Labour Party has been the first party with Muslim MPs and in the House of Lords. Is it enough? No, we should do more. We are doing more. There are excellent young Muslim candidates who are standing for the next elections who will increase the representation.
AJV: In education, there is underachievement predominantly amongst Muslim pupils, ie, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis. One of the many reasons is that most of the pupils are in the inner cities where schools are under resourced and of low education standard. We therefore are having a proliferation of independent Muslim schools as Muslim parents are concerned about deteriorating education standards in state schools. Independent Muslim schools are doing much better than not only state schools in their area but also national average, according to The Muslim News analysis.
PM: This isn’t a problem just for Muslim children in the inner cities. But if you look at the results in the inner city areas through the Excellence and Cities programmes, they have had an increase in the percentage of people passing their exams. I think there are particular issues in parts of the community that we need to try and address together to lift pupil’s aspirations, to lift the quality of the education they get. The Muslim schools, which are equivalent to Christian state schools, are also doing well.
AJV: Many of the 100 independent Muslim schools are doing well, even though they are under resourced, because the teachers give time to their pupils, pupils are focused, they don’t have the problem of drugs, bullying and also because of the ethos of the school.
PM: These are the lessons that apply to all the good schools - strong discipline, strong ethos, strong commitment to learning and high standards. Sometimes the Government can’t do it all. The community has to be given the power to do it themselves. What the four Muslim schools (who are funded by the Government) have shown is that it is possible to do it within the state system.
AJV: We find that there is no appreciation of what Muslim schools are achieving. For example, the Ofsted Inspector for schools, David Bell, said Muslim schools did not teach citizenship and tolerance. However, we asked the head teachers and pupils in the Muslim schools to respond to Bell. They said citizenship is taught in their schools and it is part of their curriculum and they teach about other faiths and communities. We are not saying that all the Muslim schools may be teaching citizenship or ‘tolerance’. Muslims schools have achieved whereas state schools have failed.
PM: I don’t actually agree with the comment that they are not teaching kids proper discipline or how to integrate into the community. I think they do that. Schools have far greater freedom now and they’ve got an additional budget. Let’s use it, whether it’s in Muslim schools or Church of England or Catholic schools. The powers are there, let’s use it.
AJV: Why should Muslims vote for the Labour Party?
PM: There is a multiracial and multicultural society we believe in that we have done a lot to foster in this country in the past few years. There are not just specific issues like Muslim schools or incitement to religious hatred, but there is also a strong commitment by us to social justice and many those in the Muslim communities who have been deprived of the opportunities need that help and support. Although there have been some disagreements on some of the international issues, and I understand that and do not disrespect them. But I hope in the end people realise we actually have done a lot make progress.
AJV: How much have you done for faith issues as Muslims consider faith as an important part of their identity?
PM: What we’ve done, I hope, is trying to bring about an understanding that the true face of Islam is one that is peaceful, moderate and immensely constructive and progressive. Islam is a powerful and legitimate force contributing to our society and country.
Interview was held at the PM’s offices in Downing Street on March 1.

Back to the front page

Editorial

Messages for
The Muslim News

AddFreeStats.com Free Web Stats in real-time !