We have read the report from the House of Commons Home Affairs
Select Committee on ‘radicalisation’ with interest. We note the main media
focus is on whether or not Internet companies are doing enough to tackle the
spread of terrorism.
Yet this is not the main flaw in the report – which purports to
look at things including the causes of ‘radicalisation’ and the Prevent policy.
Regarding the report, Taji Mustafa, media representative of Hizb
ut Tahrir in Britain said, “The primary problems are its omissions,
inconsistencies and contradictions.”
“a) On radicalisation, the report says: there is no
evidence that shows a single path or one single event which draws a young
person to the scourge of extremism: every case is different. Yet they did not
go on to expose the fallacies in this most basic premise (alongside the absence
of definitions of ‘radicalisation’ and ‘extremism’) have underpinned all
counter-extremism policy in the UK and Europe. To have realised this and yet
not made it clear – and then not denounced all policy that is built upon it is
a basic flaw in the report.”
“There is a lie at the heart of the radicalisation narrative that
has been repeated so often that people believe it. It is that ‘the more
Islamic you are, the more of a potential threat you are.’ This has
become the reason why ‘deradicalisation’ policies have been aimed at making
Muslims ‘less Islamic’, and more compliant with liberal norms and government
policies.”
“If ‘radicalisation’ means people becoming agitated and committing
acts of violence, it isn’t because of Islam. Anger is an understandable
emotional response to sensing the injustice of western government foreign, and
(more recently), domestic policies - even though acts of violence against
innocent people are an unacceptable response to such emotions. Sadly, these
unacceptable ‘acts of terror’ show no signs of decreasing whilst there is no
admission that these are blow back from policies generated in London,
Washington and Paris.”
“b) On Prevent, the report calls for a review and
rebranding of this ‘toxic’ brand.
Rebranding or reforming the pernicious Prevent policy is like putting
lipstick on a pig. Prevent needs to be scrapped.”
“Whilst some of the witnesses labelled the policy discriminatory,
and accused the media of fueling Islamophobia, they failed to point
out that political leaders who have driven this policy are the same ones
who initiated and have licensed Islamophobia.”
“They have failed to point out that the UK’s counter-extremism
policy in general has nothing to do with counter-terrorism, but that terrorism
has become an excuse to implement a securitised policy for forced assimilation.
It is more about reforming Islam so Muslims change their views and values, and
silencing political views.”
“This is implicitly recognised in the report which quotes senior
police officers who now recognise they are acting as a ‘thought police’ – a
role now passed on to schools, universities and health services.”
“c) The stifling of debate and speech was raised
by witnesses from the education sector. However, the effect of this policy has
been to silence Muslims from discussing vital issues that others are free to
discuss. The result is a dangerous vacuum in the Muslim community that is all
too easily filled by internet search engines, who are singled out for
criticism. As increasing numbers of prominent Muslims are either too fearful to
address these matters, or argue that they aren’t relevant, we see others
actively changing their views and adopting a liberal standpoint. They call this
a ‘reformation’ whereas it is nothing more than a deformation of Islam.”
“d) Western policy makers are in a dilemma. Either they accept
that many people haven’t been convinced to adopt secular liberal values, and
haven’t been duped about their policies towards the Muslim world – or they
criminalise thoughts and views. Until now, Prevent and counter-extremism
policies have been the latter. They are Britain’s blasphemy laws for those who
are ‘apostates’ from the prevailing political norms, where ‘extremist’ has
become a secular word for ‘heretic’.”
“e) Muslims need to realise that, far from being
bullied into suppressing their Islam, the solution is more Islam, not less. We
are ready for a robust debate about relative beliefs and values. We are ready
for open discussion, though some may feel unable in the atmosphere of a
witch-hunt.”
“However, we need fear none but Allah, trusting in Him alone –
carrying the message of Islam to those with open hearts and exposing the lies
of those who are hostile to Islam and Muslims, and being proud of our global
Islamic identity.”
﴿وَمَنْ أَحْسَنُ قَوْلًا مِّمَّن دَعَا إِلَى اللَّهِ
وَعَمِلَ صَالِحًا وَقَالَ إِنَّنِي مِنَ الْمُسْلِمِينَ﴾
“And who is better in speech than one who invites to Allah and does
righteousness and says, "Indeed, I am of the Muslims."” [Surah
Fussilat 41:33]
Media Office of
Hizb ut Tahrir
in Britain
