Debate On Causes of Radicalization Would Be Test of Free Speech, Says Panel

Community News
Typography

 


In the wake of the terrorist attack in Paris on the offices of the weekly magazine Charlie Hebdo, on January 22, 2015, the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy (CSID) held a panel discussion titled "Muslim Response to Charlie Hebdo: Understanding the Root Causes of Radicalization", at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C.


The French publication known for its satirical approach to many religions has in recent years focused relentlessly on insulting representations of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).


The forum was designed to go beyond condemnations and Islamophobic rhetoric to explore the religious, societal and geopolitical dynamics underlying recent events, moving beyond the superficial binary of Muslim radicals vs. free speech.


Mongi Dhaouadi, CSID Senior Program Officer for Tunisia and North Africa, arranged the event.


"We generally focus on issues of Islam and democracy how it relates to countries in conflict and how it relates to U.S. foreign policy —countries attempting to go through democratic transition, particularly after the Arab Spring: Tunisia, Egypt and Syria,î said William Lawrence, CSID Director of MENA Programs, who moderated the event.


Starting in April 2014, Dhaouadi, at the behest of Congressman Keith Ellison, started work on connecting the Muslim communities in the United States to a set of foreign policy issues.


"We realize that there was a whole range of issues about Muslims in the West and free speech issues that weren't being well addressed. This marries nicely with our international work with the new attempt to connect domestic Muslim constituencies in the US," he said.


Radwan Masmoudi, founding President of the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy (CSID) said the West has allowed Syria to disintegrate and become a factory and hub for extremists by not implementing a no fly zone three years ago. He also mentioned the Western complicity in allowing the military coup in Egypt, the killing of people and the arrest of thousands of people. "Should we be surprised then that thousands of young Egyptians, Syrians and Arabs in general think that peaceful and democratic means will not work and only violence and extremism can change the balance of power in favor of the people against violent and corrupt regime," asked Masmoudi.


Mainstream media did not attend the event as this did not fit the narrative they want to spread to their readers. Zuhdi Jasser and Anjem Choudary are the only representatives of the Muslim community that they want to hear.


Nihad Awad, Executive Director of the Council for American Islamic Relations (CAIR) said he didn't agree with how the media and politicians were framing the issue. "Again Islam has become the issue," he said. He didn't mince words, saying that American Muslim youth are tired of local and national organizations coming on television to condem every terrorist act that takes place as it is undue and unwarranted. American Muslims don't see Christian and Jewish leaders challenged by politicians or media to defend their faith when there are violent acts done in the name of Christianity and Judaism, explained Awad. The discourse is dishonest but it sells more, he said.


"We are tired of being depicted as inherently violent. There is nothing in our faith [that is] more violent than Christianity. Muslim leaders have been condemning [terrorism] for 15 years but the media [has] not [been] interested in broadcasting our positions," he said. He challenged news media who ask where are the moderate Muslims. ìI will ask where is your conscious? They have ignored our emails and statements," said Awad. Speaking about the roots of extremism, he said that the internet is not controlled and that is where many young Muslims are being radicalized, not in the Islamic Centers.


Many extremists cite legitimate grievances: Iraq, Palestine, Syria and other repressive regimes and a lack of democracy in their countries; Islam should not be blamed for radicalized youth, explained Awad. Their grievances should discussed. "An honest debate would be a test for free speech," said Awad.


Challenge and mockery were not new to the Prophet and we have to see how he reacted to the ignorance, explained Awad, encouraging the public to read what the Qur'an says about free speech.


Awad also took offense to the use of the spiritual and legitimate concept of jihad in connection with radicals. "To label terrorists as jihadists is no less than doing the public relations work for them. And the media unwittingly, or unintentionally, [has  been] helping ISIS. Politicians, when they refer to these people as jihadists, are helping recruit people to ISIS."


Dalia Mogahed, Director of Research at the Institute of Social Policy and Understanding (ISPU) challenged conflating of a terrorist act and 'right to offend.'


Mogahed pointed out that the shooting was a calculated act of provocation on the part of terrorist organizations to ignite a clash specifically along religious and cultural lines. "The cartoons did not provoke the attack," she said. We handed the terrorists the rhetorical victory that they desired and alienated Muslims at large by conflating their actions with the community, she said. The world could have alienated them and isolated them but we anointed them 'representatives of the faith.' She asked the audience what would have happened if the response had been to reassert the place of French citizens of Muslim faith in the republic.


Mogahed said when she sees the cartoons, she isn't offended as a Muslim but is offended as an American. "I wish the French would hurry up and join the rest of the world," she said to the audience.  Americans see cartoons that are immoral because they have decided as a society that they will not depict people that way. The correct question isn't, 'can we?'" asked Mogahed, "the correct question is 'should we?'"


She also discussed free speech and the impact of fear on our society.


Imam Talib Shareef, Resident Imam Masjid Muhammad in Washington DC, showed the audience the oldest Muslim newspaper in the country, the Muslim Observer. "Without free speech this newspaper would not exist," he said. He spoke about the desperation, provocation and lack of education and other basic needs, as root causes of radicalization. "Proper attention is not being given to people they are marginalized," he said. He said allies who know need to speak up — those who know the beauty in faith. That will bring change, said the imam.


France is a nation in flux, said James Lesueur, French intellectual, author of Uncivil War, the Decolonization Reader, and Algeria Since 1989 and professor at the University of Nebraska said that the cries for laïcité (Fr. secularism)in the aftermath of the most significant terrorist attack in recent French history are misplaced. "In fact they are illogical. Why? Because it doesn't make any sense to connect the Charlie Hebdo attacks or artwork (if one wants to call it that) to the idea of laïcité; free speech and laïcité do not mean the same thing — in France or anywhere else."


By conflating the discussions about Charlie Hebdo with the issue of laïcité, the French are once again evading the tougher debate about how to address the problems of the distressed banlieue (projects in the suburbs of large cities in France), he said. Alienation and economic disenfranchisement of a large population are causes of radicalization, according to the professor.


Founded in March 1999, the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy (CSID) is a Washington, DC-based organization dedicated to studying Islamic and democratic political thought. The center hopes to improve Americans' understanding of Islam's approach towards these issues.

 

Comments powered by CComment