Tag: Political Islam

  • Khan Osman Sulaiman: Rising Islamophobia, Are Muslims In Singapore Walking On A Tightrope?

    Khan Osman Sulaiman: Rising Islamophobia, Are Muslims In Singapore Walking On A Tightrope?

    Ahok got 2 years jail in Indonesia for blasphemy and the world cries foul. Yes its jail time. Not murder.

    When The Rohingyas were persecuted, not many were outrightly denouncing the Myanmar government for its crimes against humanity.

    Islam got slammed instead for bigotry. Clerics are ridiculed. Judges chastised. The press also solidifies the hatred/prejudice some people have for the religion by pushing out articles to make the religion look bad instead of correctly pointing the atrocities of humans, using religion to promote their political agendas.

    Shanmugam recently has called on the United States (and the world) to pay attention to the rise of “political Islam” and radicalism in Southeast.

    Instead, I say we should also pay close attention toward islamophobia.

    With rising islamophobia across the world and Singapore, the Muslims in Singapore are walking on a tightrope. We get scrutinized even for raising fundamental issues.

    The government’s distrust on the Malay/Muslim community dates back to LKY’s era. It has continued with the current administration led by his son Lee Hsien Loong but with a new dimension added to it. ‘Radicalization’

    With radicalization on the rise, and the effort to look into its emergence in Singapore, rightfully, the government may have fail to also give due consideration towards an emerging trend in Singapore. Islamophobia.

    I’d came across many postings on social media to kill the Muslim. To incarcerate anyone with the slightest differences of opinions. To remove citizenships of Singaporean Muslims and ship them ‘back’ to Saudi/Pakistan etc etc.

    It’s a growing trend if left unchecked, may rip apart the delicate social fabric currently maintained.

    Radicalization is a problem. So is Islamophobia. Deal with it concurrently without further aggravating the growing pressure my community faced from the gov and public.

     

    Source: Khan Osman Sulaiman

  • Terrorism Is Political Problem, Not A Religious One

    Terrorism Is Political Problem, Not A Religious One

    Recently, in the aftermath of attacks by the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) in Europe, Singaporean leaders warned against the danger of Islamophobia.

    Mr K. Shanmugam, Home Affairs and Law Minister, expressed his fears that non-Muslims in Singapore could start developing a set of attitudes internally towards Muslims as a reaction to terror attacks elsewhere in the world, and noted that there were signs that this was already happening. He urged non-Muslims to reach out and engage Muslims here so as to maintain the nation’s social cohesion.

    In a similar vein, Dr Yaacob Ibrahim, Minister for Communications and Information, recently stressed the role of religious leaders in promoting understanding about “how Muslims and non-Muslims can live together side by side in peace and harmony”.

    This interfaith approach is not limited to the ministerial level. Teachers in secondary schools and junior colleges that I visit often ask me to include something about the importance of interfaith dialogue in my lectures about the Middle East.

    Interfaith dialogue is aimed at keeping the peace in the wake of all the attacks and should be encouraged, but it is equally important that we help the young to understand and historicise the emergence of terrorism.

    Singaporean students who I visit often ask me to explain the phenomenon of ISIS, or even of Al-Qaeda, which are in essence not a religious problem and cannot be understood using a religious approach. It is a political problem closely associated with the transformations of the role of the United States, as well as the global political landscape, from the Cold War to a post-Cold War era. Hence, we have to move beyond interfaith dialogue, and adopt a political lens to help young Singaporeans understand this political problem.

    An analogy may help illuminate the situation. When, for example, the presumptive Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump quotes from the Bible and portrays himself as an ideal Christian candidate for American evangelical voters, we do not try to understand the problematic phenomenon of Mr Trump only through the lens of Christianity. Rather, the economic problems faced by many working-class Americans and their disillusionment with establishment candidates, Republican or Democrat, are more relevant. Similarly, approaching Al-Qaeda or ISIS only through the lens of Islam misunderstands the nature of the problem completely.

    POLITICAL ALLIANCES MATTER

    Thus, apart from promoting interfaith dialogue, we need to teach students about how US Cold War-era policies and alliances took on new significance in a post-Cold War world.

    For example, US interventions in the Middle East and Central Asia in the Cold War era empowered some parties who consequently turned against US interests in a changed global political context after the fall of the Soviet Union. While these interventions may have made strategic sense during the Cold War, they set in motion other elements that gradually came to acquire a different logic in the post-Cold War world.

    A salient example to illustrate this point is Osama bin Laden, who once fought with US and Saudi aid against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan in the 1980s, only to “turn against” his former patron on Sept 11, 2001.

    In a similar vein, some of the US’ Cold War-era alliances that previously held strategic value against the Soviet Union have transmogrified into strategic liabilities.

    For example, Mr Lawrence Wilkerson, a retired US Army colonel and the former chief of staff to then US Secretary of State Colin Powell, has candidly shared his views in multiple interviews that the close alliance between the US and Israel, which made strategic sense during the Cold War era, was now a strategic burden for the US.

    In his open letter to the US in 2002, Osama stated that Al-Qaeda’s undertaking of the Sept 11 attacks was motivated by the Israeli occupation of Palestine – this was the first reason given in his letter, among a list of others.

    However, Osama previously had few qualms fighting on the side of the US against the Soviet Union during the Cold War in the 1980s. Why, then, was the Israeli- Palestinian issue not a priority for him at that time?

    This shows that the resistance to the US that consciously promotes itself as, and claims to be, “Islamic” is not an eternal fact, but is of a very recent vintage that emerged in a changed post-Cold War world that reinterpreted US Cold War strategy antagonistically.

    TERROR ATTACKS: POLITICAL, NOT RELIGIOUS, AT THEIR CORE

    To understand the emergence of ISIS – an issue experts and specialists are fervently debating over – requires a prior understanding of the background of these developments.

    Ultimately, there is no simple cause or reason for the post-Cold War transformations because every event emerged from a context that itself was constituted by a previous context. Nevertheless, the historical vantage point offered by the political framework sketched out above is needed if one wants to recognise that this new pattern of terrorist attacks – all of which should be condemned, whoever the perpetrator – is not religious at its core, but political.

    What is missing in many pre-tertiary education systems around the world is this political and historical approach in teaching about the post-Cold War world. Such a curriculum should be implemented at a national level.

    European countries and the US have long been models for Singapore, but the recent attacks in Paris and Brussels, not to mention the rise of racism and intolerance in the US, reflect most potently the failure of these societies to integrate their minorities.

    This makes it clear that Singapore has to strike its own path, and take a proactive approach to maintaining racial and religious harmony domestically. Singapore is a small and open society; while we cannot avoid the fact that Western media, with its predominance, overwhelms us with its own Islamophobic biases, we can – we must – train our citizens to be savvy in managing the daily influx of such information.

    Since 2013, I have been making volunteer visits to secondary schools, junior colleges and the National University of Singapore to give lectures precisely on this topic. Over the years, I have collected hundreds of little feedback slips from the students I have lectured to and exchanged e-mails with their teachers, thereby refining my pedagogical approach and presentation content.

    Based on my personal experience lecturing at over a dozen schools in Singapore over the past three years. I would say it is possible to implement this curriculum and for the Ministry of Education to design “just-in-time” resource packages to provide a timely response to this pressing topical issue.

    If we are serious about maintaining racial and religious harmony in Singapore, as Mr Shanmugam and Dr Yaacob have exhorted us to do recently, then we have to start with our young, and proactively shift the paradigm for understanding the terrorist threats to the US-dominated world order from a religious one to a geopolitical one.

    • Koh Choon Hwee is a PhD student in Middle East history at Yale University. Prior to this, she spent two years in the American University of Beirut in Lebanon working on her master’s.

     

    Source: www.straitstimes.com

  • Why “Creeping Islamisation” Is No Joke

    Why “Creeping Islamisation” Is No Joke

    If you were not bingeing on a TV show imagining a world where the Nazis had won, like I did, how did you spend your New Year’s Eve?

    Did you spend it indoors with your loved ones? Or perhaps you were one of the revellers who danced the night away, pausing only to admire the fireworks?

    Or maybe, seeking respite from the drizzle, you were planning to witness the countdown at the historic Dataran Merdeka? Only to bafflingly discover that the place was filled with thousands of men clad in robes and skullcaps chanting in Arabic?

    It would be too easy to dismiss and mock critics who highlight the so-called “creeping Islamisation” in Malaysia. Especially those who cite the event — the recurring Malam Cinta Rasul, or Love the Prophet Night — as a pointed example.

    After all, the notion of “creeping Islamisation” plays right into the narrative of anti-liberal reactionaries, who often speak of concerted attacks to undermine the position of Islam and the Malay race in this country.

    For them, it evokes their favourite caricature of a hysterical Malay-hating Islamophobe strawman who would rant against anything tied to the two topics.

    How could Islamisation creep up on you when Islam has been here for centuries? So, the argument could go.

    Or they would conflate being Islamic and Islamised, claiming that many Muslims were happily drinking the night away on New Year’s Eve, among other vices.

    Fact is, institutionalised Islamisation has been around for so many decades that even those who have not been completely indoctrinated, would have normalised the situation and can see nothing wrong.

    Islamisation has less to do with people becoming more pious or religious, than it is with Islam permeating into institutions and spaces that used to be secular and have no religious value.

    To the clueless, let me start the year right by painting a picture of Islamisation by using Malam Cinta Rasul as an example, and another “creeping faith” that haunts the dreams of paranoid clerics: Star Wars.

    Malam Cinta Rasul might be optional, it is not mandatory for all Malaysians, let alone Muslims. Nonetheless, it has now been held on a grand scale annually since 2013 — mostly on New Year’s Eve — not counting several other events sharing the same name in other states.

    This is only possible with backing from the state, and so it was. The event was organised by the Cheras Education Foundation, a foundation under Cheras Umno, led by influential grassroots chief Syed Ali Alhabshee.

    And the foundation can afford to do so, when it is backed by the state itself. Co-partners included the Federal Territories (FT) Ministry, Communications and Multimedia Ministry, the Kuala Lumpur City Hall, and the FT Islamic Council.

    Present as guests of honour at the event, complete with comfortable lounge seats, were Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, FT minister Tengku Adnan Mansor, Perak Mentri Besar Dr Zambry Kadir, KL Mayor Amin Nordin Abdul Aziz, and Syed Ali himself.

    Essentially, this means Putrajaya has no qualms holding an event that costs hundreds of thousands ringgit (last year’s cost was roughly RM200,000), for something that panders exclusively to Muslims.

    Doesn’t sound too ridiculous? Imagine then, Putrajaya co-organising a massive, costly Star Wars convention, and only Star Wars, year in year out.

    Not to forget, the event was held in a public space, commonly associated with New Year’s Eve celebrations which was completely accessible to people of all backgrounds. Or at least it was, before 2013.

    Drawing on the same analogy, this is akin to a Malaysian coming every week to his pasar malam spot, only to discover that suddenly the lot is used for a Star Warsscreening. For the next month, there has not been any pasar malam on that day of the week. Just Star Wars, week after week.

    Unconsciously, the public is made to perceive that such an Islamic-themed events — regardless of its actual religiosity — is a norm, despite its relatively late introduction to Malaysia.

    Not only that, by endorsing such an event, Putrajaya is promoting it as a “preferred” way to usher in the new year. Which spells good news for conservative killjoys who cannot stand others enjoying their non-Shariah-compliant celebrations.

    Once secular, the new year has now been co-opted as a day to assert Islam’s dominance, by the many Malays who came in droves, over the rest of the public.

    This, insidiously, carries repercussions beyond just ringing in the new year.

    This endorsement of a seemingly Islamic way of life as the only “right” way for a Malay to live will result in an ugly divide and demonisation, especially when Malays have no way of shedding the “Muslim” label in the first place.

    Left unchallenged, it would solidify the position of Islamic dogma as the basis of the country’s governance.

    We see it in Islamic agencies Jakim and Yapeim’s impunity, even in the face of public uproar over its lack of transparency in handling funds.

    We see it in the Langkawi homes where the roofs were painted over simply for resembling a cross at a certain angle.

    We see it in the clergy wing of Islamist party PAS, suggesting that marrying children off is the best way to prevent sexual crimes.

    We see it in Terengganu, which like some other states have banned vaping, but only after the National Fatwa Council deemed it “haram” for Muslims.

    We see it in the civil court handing over the power of child custody in cases of forced Muslim conversions, to the Shariah courts. A decision which PAS Youth has proudly claimed as a “victory” against liberals, although it is more likely a trumping win against non-Muslims.

    Yes, Malaysians are yet to turn more Islamic.

    But slowly and bit by bit, unnoticed by most, there is a shift on imposing Islamist views on matters where religion previously had no place. That surely qualifies as creeping, and does not sound as funny.

    * This is the personal opinion of the columnist, Zurairi AR.

     

    Source: www.themalaymailonline.com